1851

• State constitution created Indiana’s multi-layered local government system, which is still used today

• One-size-fits-all approach not applicable today

Then and Now

Indiana 1851 2002Population <1 million >6

millionTotal Farms 144,000 63,000Trip to Cty Seat Day on Horseback Minutes

Key Questions

• Why has our local government system not changed with the times?

• What is the proper process for evaluating current local government structure?

• To what extent can property taxpayers benefit from a more efficient local government?

Recent Studies

• 1999 – COMPETE study examined current effectiveness of local government and outlined recommendations for improvement

• 2004 – Follow-up report quantifies original analysis and defines benefits of implementing recommendations

Our Goals

• Deliver blueprint of recommendations and benefits

• Spur local debate and local solutions

• Pass enabling legislation allowing local decisions to be implemented

• Counties1

– Indiana: 92– U.S. Average: 63

• Townships2

– Indiana: 1,008– U.S. Average: 833

• Cities/Towns– Indiana: 566– U.S. Average: 385

(1)Connecticut and Rhode Island do not have counties(2)Only twenty states have townships

Indiana Local Government

Local Government Growth(1997-2002)

Estimated Annual Efficiency Savings

Case 1: Property Assessment

• 1,100 local officials are involved in property assessment

• 15% of townships have elected assessors; trustee is the responsible official in the other townships

• Appropriations for annual operations (not reassessment) were approximately $25 million in 2002

RecommendationConsistency is the key to successful real property assessment. Property assessment should be removed as a township function and assigned to the county. Counties should then have the ability to coordinatewith other counties to have propertyassessment occur on a regional basis.

Potential savings: $11.6-$13.1 million

Case 2: Poor Relief• In 2002, of the $61.6 million appropriated

by townships for poor relief: $32.3 million for direct assistance; $29.2 million for administration

• For every $1 in poor relief assistance at the township level, 90 cents was appropriated for administrative costs

• Indiana is one of three states that administers poor relief at a sub-county level of government

RecommendationThe funding and provision of poor relief services to be shifted to county government. Local ports of deliveryshould be maintained where possible.

Potential savings: $26 million if following a standard of 10% administrative expenses

Case 3: County Government

Typical County Organization

Indiana has the highest number of separately elected county officials in the entire nation

RecommendationCombine recorder, clerk, treasurer and auditor functions.

Potential Savings: $14.1 - $45.1 million

Create Department of Highways &Infrastructure. Potential Savings: $12.2 - $17.4 million

RecommendationProposed County Organization

Case 4: Multi-County Jails• $97 million appropriated for jail operation

in 2002; $22 million appropriated for debt related to such facilities (33 of 93 counties)

• Several counties have overcrowding, while an adjacent county has capacity

RecommendationCounties should be permitted and encouraged to share in the capital andoperating costs of a multi-countycorrectional facility.

Potential savings: $5.4 - $10.5 million (not including joint purchasing and other operational capital expenses)

Case 5: Joint Purchasing

Bulk purchasing has been a proven

practice for many years. Government,

however, has room for substantial

improvement.

RecommendationPolice and fire administration shouldengage in joint purchasing with other fireunits in area. Standards for creation of a Quantity Purchase Award (QPA) program should be developed.

Potential Savings: Sample of six QPA purchases – 18% or $7.64 million statewideMore conservative estimate of 10% - $4.24million

Estimated Annual Efficiency Savings

$64,205,000 - $122,411,000

Recurring Themes• Local government structure should reflect

clear lines of accountability• Where practical, those who benefit from

public services should bear the cost of those services

• Neighboring units of government should work with one another to achieve economies of scale

Recurring Themes• Fiscal responsibility in local government

should be encouraged and rewarded• Elected offices requiring specific skills

should be held by individuals possessing the training and qualifications necessary to carry out the functions of those offices

Key Points• Indiana’s local government structure

needs to be updated. Diversity within state requires the ability to formulate, approve and implement local solutions

• Duplication of services and unproductive operations harm productivity and unnecessarily increase property tax rates

Key Points• Poor relief services are a model of

inefficiency with approximately 90 cents appropriated to deliver $1 of assistance - this must be streamlined

• Centralizing property assessment, establishing multi-county correctional facilities and reorganizing county offices and duties will also improve effectiveness and produce costs savings

2005 Legislative Session

Local Government Efficiency Bills

HB 1435• Indy Works

HB 1193• Number of County

Commissioners

HB 1335• Statistical Information on

Townships

SB 308• Qualification of Assessors

SB 636• Merger of Townships