That is what it means to be in an unincorporated area.
An unincorporated area is a community that is not overseen by a local government, but not all unincorporated areas are the same. Some are hinterlands, hamlets, settlements, and villages that do not border a city and function as independent, informal towns. Others share a county with a city designated as its seat, such as the communities and townships that surround Evansville.
In Vanderburgh County, some residents live as near as seven miles or fewer from the city center, and yet they are unincorporated.
Taken together, the combined population of these county-run communities accounts for some 36% of Vanderburgh County’s total population, according to census data. These townships and communities that are deemed to be outside city limits are subordinate to the county but pay taxes into the city.
The problem with unincorporated townships like these is complex, and despite their designation referring exclusively to their geographical location, it may be an issue better illustrated through the combination of a person and the place they call home.
How living in an unincorporated area affects residents
Donnie Burklow is a U.S. Marine veteran and longtime resident of McCutchanville, an unincorporated community adjacent to the Evansville Regional Airport.
He’s lived in the area since 2006, passionate about local politics but often unable to make his voice heard.
“It’s not right,” Burklow said. “We pay into city taxes but can’t vote in the city elections.”
Evansville’s turnout for mayoral elections is historically low, with just 21% of registered voters participating in the 2023 mayoral contest. This means that only 10% of the county’s total population determines its election results, and it also means that the inability to vote is an even tougher pill to swallow for unincorporated county residents such as Burklow.
To the more than 64,000 unincorporated residents of Vanderburgh County, not having the right to vote in Evansville city elections is an unquestionably negative aspect of their designation, but it's just the beginning.
These residents may not have a say in who runs the city, but they do pay into city services, and many are deeply concerned about who gets elected.
“What’s interesting about Vanderburgh County, similar to some other counties, such as Bartholomew and Marion counties, for example, is that they have a significant amount of shared city-county government services (and) administration,” Indiana Fiscal Policy Institute President Stephanie Wells said.
In Evansville, for example, county taxpayers who reside in unincorporated areas are required to pay countywide such as the Parks & Recreation Fund tax, which supports parks within city limits at the exact same rate of 12.9% as those living within the city.
“I think if I’m paying into it, I should be able to voice my opinion,” Burklow said.
Of the 46 parks that the Department of Parks & Recreation coordinates and oversees, 40 are within city limits, and six are in the remainder of the county.
County residents are also charged a universal 2.67% Levee Authority tax regardless of whether they directly benefit from its city-based services or not.
From bad to worse
Another significant cost burden comes from Evansville Water and Sewer Utility charges. Everyone outside of Evansville’s city limits pays a surcharge of up to 35% on their bill.
“There is an allowance in Indiana Code 8-1.5-3-8.3 for a surcharge of up to 15% on utility service outside of the corporate boundaries to enable the municipal utility to recoup some capital costs associated with the extension to avoid placing those extension costs on their existing rate base,” Accelerate Indiana Municipalities (AIM) Policy Director Campbell Ricci said.
By these accounts, the EWSU’s water surcharge appears to exceed the Indiana General Assembly’s current limit in the Indiana Code.
Ball State Professor Charles Taylor, who formerly worked in local government for 15 years and has conducted research on local government finance for the Strom Thurmond Institute of Government and Public Affairs at Clemson University and Ball State’s Bowen Center for Public Affairs, noted that this could be because the surcharge policy was “grandfathered in” before the limit was added to the Indiana Code.
“It could be that it was implemented at a time when a larger surcharge was allowed, and it got grandfathered in,” Taylor speculated.
Former Mayor Russell Lloyd Jr., who served from 2000 to 2003, implemented the surcharge before the change was made to the Indiana Code on March 31, 2012. Given the nature of its implementation, it likely was never subjected to a financial analysis or study that would justify the premium.
In a 2021 statement to the Indiana Office of Utility Consumer Counselor, former president of the Vanderburgh County Commission Cheryl Musgrave represented the Board of Commissioners to speak on the issue.
“The Board of Commissioners believes this tax for services is without justification and unfairly burdens residential properties in unincorporated Vanderburgh County,” Musgrave said.
In April 2024, Musgrave once again reiterated this issue when asked by the Courier & Press for her thoughts on the current rates paid by county residents for service from Evansville Water and Sewer.
“The current rates paid by county residents for service from Evansville Water and Sewer Utility are undeniably burdensome, particularly for those residing in the unincorporated areas of the county,” Musgrave said. “There exists a significant surcharge for sewer rates that city residents are not subject to, leading to a situation that has been characterized as ‘taxation without representation’ by a former commissioner. The decision regarding these rates was made by the water department board, a body wholly appointed by the mayor of the city of Evansville.”
Additionally, for years, unincorporated county citizens have been footing a significant portion of the bill for city water and sewer projects. One example of this is the perpetual addition to everyone’s utility bills. Starting in 2014, residents found an additional line on their Evansville Water and Sewer Utility bills that read “mandate.”
The mandate, issued to fund sewer line upgrades, resulted in a 59.3% rate increase from 2013 to 2016, in addition to a 35% surcharge for living outside city limits.
Burklow, who has been paying the mandate since its inception, notes that he was entirely unaware of the city’s plans to maintain the mandate.
“The real kicker is that when we first moved out here, they said that the water mandate that we were paying was only going to last for three years, and now we’re still paying it,” Burklow said. “A lot goes on that people don’t realize.”
Burklow’s family, like many others, is still paying this water mandate because the old mandate is consistently replaced with a new one just as the prior mandate expires.
In 2024, a new mandate was issued, and Evansville city documents state that “the fee will remain on the bill for several years, until the bonds for this work have been repaid.”
“Here’s the ridiculous part: a couple of the years that we paid the mandate, the mandate cost more than our water bill,” Burklow explained.
Between 2017 and 2022, residents received another 58% rate hike. From 2022 through 2026, rates will increase by 28.6%, with a $258 million plan currently in place to build a new water treatment plant. This means mandated rate increases are here to stay, and according to page 33 of the Evansville-Vanderburgh County Comprehensive Plan, more unincorporated county citizens have been paying the rate increases in addition to the shared taxes and surcharge from Evansville Water and Sewer Utility due to the fact that “the number of housing units has continued to increase significantly in the unincorporated county, while in the city housing units peaked in 1990 and have stayed just below that level since then.”
Competing interests
Complicating matters further is the perception that the city and county governments are competing with one another over economic development, a dynamic that likely contributes to the consistent failure of consolidation efforts.
In 2007, an alliance was formed through the Economic Development Coalition of Southwest Indiana among city, county, and regional governments, known as the Growth Alliance for Greater Evansville. Prior to the agreement, the city and county had pursued distinctly different economic agendas and strategies, but the partnership effectively mandated cooperation through the organization.
Despite this effort, distinctions between city and county interests persist. One example is the potential for conflict over who controls and benefits from funds provided by entities such as the Our Southern Indiana Regional Development Authority.
Another is the tension that arose from the revised interlocal agreement established in 2024, which updated the governance of the joint Area Plan Commission responsible for zoning and land-use decisions across both jurisdictions. The Vanderburgh County Area Plan Department, another shared entity, has also been a source of conflict — particularly over concerns that the County Commission had “strong armed” the agreement through, in the words of Third Ward City Councilor Zach Heronemus.
Over the years, the city and county have often acted more like rivals than partners. Supporters and opponents of consolidation alike point to this dynamic as evidence of a community working against its own best interests, though each side defines those interests differently.
History of government consolidation attempts
One way the disparities between the incorporated and unincorporated portions of Vanderburgh County can be handled is through city-county government consolidation, and it is an option that Evansville has previously explored. In the past, Evansville has proposed city-county consolidation on no less than four separate occasions.
In Indiana, consolidation requires a public referendum in which both city and county residents vote to approve or reject the proposal. In 1970, Indianapolis successfully merged with Marion County, for example, but Vanderburgh County residents have historically opposed consolidation.
The first proposal was laid out more than 40 years ago in 1974 and was resoundingly rejected by a combination of city and county residents. The 1974 proposal was rejected at a 3-1 margin, and the margins in more recent public referendums were still a long way off from reflecting a positive view in the community towards city-county consolidation. Proposals for consolidation were once again rejected in 1990, 2006 and most recently in 2012, where the idea was rejected at a nearly 2-1 margin.
City-county consolidation, if successful, would lead to numerous changes in relation to many facets of local life, including governmental structure, representation, taxation, and public services. The city and county governments would merge into a single entity, residents in unincorporated areas would be distributed into newly outlined council districts and Evansville departments would start providing municipal services.
In theory, the process of merging city and county governments into a unified entity could streamline services and standardize representation, but it comes with concerns for county residents. Consolidation could unify developmental planning between the city and county, potentially reducing redundancy and waste with one united plan. It could also grow Evansville’s regional presence to attract developmental partners or funding.
It also would likely lead to higher taxes for county residents, township committees being eliminated and major service adjustments.