—Local officials in charge of finalizing a plan to consolidate Evansville and Vanderburgh County governments say they are close to to having a proposal to put on the ballot next year.

After a series of public meetings and changes to an initial proposal, some involved in the process appear ready to hand the question over to voters.

"I think the biggest objective of mine, and I suspect most of us, is that we want to get together a plan that we can put on the ballot so that the people can make their decision, and I think we've pretty much got it to that point," county commissioner Marsha Abell said.

Councilman Dan McGinn even said he'd change his vote if it was needed to take the issue to referendum, though the need for that could still be months away.

"I, personally, will not be the deciding vote to keep one body from agreeing with the other, McGinn, who represents Ward 1, said after the last workshop this month. "I will change a vote if that happens. I want it to go to the people.

City Council and County Commissioners have held a series of workshops over the last two months to discuss a draft consolidation plan developed by a citizen committee earlier this year.

Changes they have made to it include delaying the merger of the county's two law enforcement agencies and increasing the size of a combined council from 11 to 15 members.

But the one official who said months ago that he will oppose any plan unless it includes one specific major change seems to have at least one ally since he advocated separate approvals for city and non-city residents.

While Commissioner Stephen Melcher commended his fellow officials efforts, he reiterated last week that he plans to ask for a so-called voter threshold, despite assertions from the two bodies' attorneys that adding the change would restart the entire process and endanger the possibility the referendum could appear on the November 2012 ballot.

"That's the only thing I'm going to support, is a plan with it," Melcher said again last week.

However he said it's still important for him to ensure the proposal is as strong as possible.

As one of three commissioners, Melcher's stance could prove especially important. However, Commissioners President Lloyd Winnecke has spoken out against changing it from anything other than a simple majority of the countywide vote. Abell, the third commissioner, is adamant that the issue go before the voters.

City Council President B.J. Watts, who previously said he believed it was up to the Commissioners to pursue such language, said he would support a threshold requirement. But he stopped short of matching Melcher's pledge that his support hinged on the change. He also said he was unsure if any of his council colleagues shared his viewpoint.

"The county way of life and the city way of life are two different things, and I don't think we want to do anything to disrupt that. I would hope that we created a plan that people in the county can support, and if they can't support it, then I'm not sure that it should pass," Watts said. "If we haven't created something that they're happy with then it's almost like a hostile takeover."

Earlier this year, City Council attorney John Hamilton and Commissioners' attorney Ted Ziemer advised that if the bodies implement separate votes it will require the entire reorganization process to start over. In line with the state law, both bodies unanimously decided to only require a simple majority of voters countywide approve a referendum. But Watts disputed the attorneys' thought that completing a new proposal for the 2012 election is unlikely.

"The process starts over, but all of the work is completed so it's not like you have to have the hearing and go through this again," Watts said. "You're talking about a couple of months here, we're not talking about backing us up several years."

At least one city council member believes separate votes spell automatic doom for the proposal. Councilman John Friend said he believes that a majority of city residents will support consolidation efforts while a majority of non-city residents won't. He noted that most of the most vocal opposition during public meetings has come from non-city residents.

While he understood some of the concerns, he said a threshold is unfair because currently both city and non-city residents are served by county government.

"I still live in Vanderburgh County," Friend said about being a city resident.

Despite spending six weeks coming to an agreement on most major issues, there are still some details to hammer out.

Now that the committee stripped the law enforcement language out of the proposal, questions remain about jurisdictions and when a possible merger might occur. Abell has been one of the most outspoken officials trying to implement a mechanism to require the issue be re-explored.

"I think we still have some serious issues with public safety," she said. "I'm not sure that we're saving much money by doing what we're doing, and I think the people expect this to be a cost savings measure."

Councilwoman Wendy Bredhold said she's still disappointed that the law enforcement part of the plan was stripped out and thinks the public is more open to the idea than some of her colleagues believe. She said she supports the idea that it's looked at in the future but admits there's little chance of the group revisiting an immediate merger under the sheriff's department.

"Some people in law enforcement are obviously opposed to consolidating law enforcement, but I think the public thinks we're kind of weaseling out by not going ahead with that in the plan we're going to put before them," said Bredhold, who represents Ward 3.

Councilwoman Missy Mosby, who represents Ward 2, said some of her constituents were adamantly against immediate consolidation. She said she will take the updated proposal to neighborhood associations and help them determine what else the plan should address.

"I definitely want to run the new proposal by my constituents and let them take time to look at it and get it to my neighborhood associations," she said. "I'm their vote."

There are issues that some hope to re-examine.

Friend, who represents Ward 5, said he hoped the group would reconsider paying members of some boards that officials agreed this month to strip of compensation. Friend also said he hopes to make it more difficult for it to expand the urban services district. Currently the proposal requires a supermajority of the council members to approve such an expansion.

The two bodies will next meet on June 30 for what is technically a continuation of a public hearing held in March. During that meeting, more than 40 people spoke on the issue during a three-hour hearing. Winnecke, who has facilitated the workshop series, said it is unlikely that an official vote will take place that night. Whenever that public hearing is adjourned, the bodies will have 30 days to pass identical proposals.

Abell, Watts and Friend all said one important factor to consolidation is to show how the proposal saves money. At-large Councilman H. Dan Adams said he doesn't just want the voters to know how much a plan will save government but also how affect them individually. During the final workshop he said he'd like another study to show the voters how their property taxes will change under a new government.

Friend and Mosby echoed several of their colleagues by saying it's essential the two boards pass identical proposals. If either board rejects a proposal, there is still a chance a referendum will get onto the ballot. Ten percent of voters who cast a ballot in last year's secretary of state's race — about 5,000 voters — would have to sign a petition supporting it.

"It is very important to come up with a good plan that we can take it to a referendum, Mosby said "If we vote this down all the League of Women Voters (who brought forth the petition that kick-started the process) has to do is get more signatures and they can take that original plan to referendum."

Officials agree that the lengthy series of workshop meetings allowed them to agree on major points. At-large Councilman Curt John called the workshops "good discussions" and said he's comfortable with the current form of the plan.

But at least one official questioned whether the process will remain as fluid as final approval nears.

"I'm surprised at how smooth it's gone, Bredhold said. "But I guess we'll find out whether or not we can all agree when it's time to vote."

© 2024 courierpress.com, All rights reserved.