Tit For Tat Council Politics

Republicans on the City-County Council are blaming Democrats for killing an opportunity to hear Proposal 326 at tonight's council meeting, which would have allowed taxpayers to pay their 2007 reconciliation bill in installment payments. An expedited hearing before the full council, according to Councilor Ryan Vaughn, was necessary in order to beat the due date for the reconciliation bill. Minority Leader Joanne Sanders and other Democrats insisted the proposal was unnecessary because there is already a statutory procedure in place for taxpayers who have incurred large increases in their property taxes to make application with the county treasurer to make installment payments. Republicans think all taxpayers should be afforded the installment option, not just those limited by the current statute. Marion Co. GOP Chairman had this criticism for Democrats who blocked a hearing tonight on Proposal 326:

"Tonight's vote against hearing discussion on Proposal 326 is yet another example of a woefully disturbing trend we've seen in council democrats: they are always ready to raise a tax, but will stifle a discussion on property tax relief at every turn. Last year, Council Democrats locked taxpayers out of council meetings and halted debate to steam roll the way for the largest income tax increase in Marion County history. Tonight, the Council Democrats continued their unwillingness to hear meaningful proposals on property tax relief: relief that helps all Indianapolis residents, not just a select few. Tonight, Democrats chose to protect insiders like Treasurer Mike Rodman and Beth White, rather than help taxpayers. I wish I could say I am shocked or surprised, but we have seen this sad act before."

The Democrats caught the Republicans asleep at the switch early in the meeting when Councilor Vernon Brown moved to add to tonight's calendar a proposal he introduced to reduce last year's county option income tax increase by one-third, or approximately $30 million. That proposal had earlier been tabled by Republicans in committee, who argued there wasn't enough information known about the proposal's fiscal impact to consider it at this time. Without hearing any objections, Council President Robert Cochrum gaveled Brown's motion approved and placed it on tonight's calendar. When Republican members figured out what had just happened, they moved for a divided vote on the question. Brown objected and Council President Cochrum agreed the vote had already been taken. Later in the meeting when the proposal came up for action, Republicans moved to send it back to committee without action.

Again, Republicans insisted that there were too many unanswered questions about the fiscal impact of Brown's proposal. Brown reminded Republican councilors that they had voted against last year's increase, and that the portion of the tax used for debt service on the pension liability was no longer needed after the state agreed to pick up the state's unfunded pension liability. The Republicans' argument of too much uncertainty rings hollow with me. I'm getting the distinct impression that their appetite for spending is greater than their appetite for reducing taxes and government spending. The Council's Counsel, Bob Elrod, noted there was a conflict in the Indiana Code, with one section seeming to allow a rollback of the tax while another section seemed to prohibit it. Assuming the Council approved a rollback, who is going to take the City to court to oppose the tax reduction? Councilor Marilyn Pfisterer said she intended to hear Brown's proposal but declined to offer any assurances on a specific date for a hearing on it.