ILNews

Chief Justice on panel to study tax assessing, local government

Michael W. Hoskins
January 1, 2007
Keywords
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
Indiana Chief Justice Randall T. Shepard will co-chair a commission designed to find long-term solutions to the state's property tax crisis, the governor announced today.

Along with former Gov. Joe Kernan, the chief justice will lead the Commission on Local Government Reform beginning in early August. One of the questions the commission will look at is whether the township form of government should be abolished.

Specifically, questions before the commission will be:

- What local government offices might be eliminated to achieve efficiencies and cost savings for Hoosier taxpayers? Specifically, should township/county property tax assessors be abolished in favor of a uniform process managed by the state?

- What local units of government - including schools and libraries - might be successfully consolidated to reduce overhead and administrative expenses?

- What services or functions of local government might be reduced, eliminated, or provided in new ways to achieve savings for Hoosier taxpayers?

- Is a Constitutional Convention necessary or desirable as a means to achieve significant reforms in the structure and organization of Indiana state government?

In late December, the commission will publish a report with recommendations on how local governments can increase the efficiency and effectiveness of their operations to lower taxpayer costs. Their ideas will be available for the Indiana General Assembly to discuss during its next session beginning in January 2008.

Additional members will be appointed to the commission soon, according to the governor's office. The commission will operate under the Center for Urban Policy and the Environment at Indiana University, which will provide staff support and facilities for the examination.

Daniels has pointed to layers of government as a prime reason for skyrocketing tax rates and said he'd asked Kernan - his predecessor as governor - and Chief Justice Shepard last month about participating in the commission. The chief justice, an Evansville native and former Vanderburgh Superior Court judge, said he's interested in the property tax issues affecting local government.

As a part of the commission, the chief justice will study a reassessment that he laid the groundwork for almost a decade ago. In December 1998, the Indiana Supreme Court found the state's tax assessment system unconstitutional and held that property needed to be assessed under a taxing system incorporating an objective reality. Lawmakers eventually passed and ordered that reassessment for 2002, and now the system is under fire again.

Overall, property taxes are expected to increase an average 24 percent across the state - the jump is much higher in Marion County, where some have doubled or tripled and the average is about 35 percent, while some commercial properties saw no increase.

Daniels and state lawmakers are also discussing the possibility of a special session, but a decision hasn't been made. The governor is ordering a full reassessment in Marion County and freezing tax bills at the 2006 amounts.

Unclear is how that will impact an ongoing legal battle over the central Indiana county's taxes. A group of homeowners filed a class action lawsuit July 10 requesting a reassessment, among other things. Hancock Circuit Judge Richard Culver has set an emergency hearing in the suit for Tuesday morning.
ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Hmmmmm ..... How does the good doctor's spells work on tyrants and unelected bureacrats with nearly unchecked power employing in closed hearings employing ad hoc procedures? Just askin'. ... Happy independence day to any and all out there who are "free" ... Unlike me.

  2. Today, I want to use this opportunity to tell everyone about Dr agbuza of agbuzaodera(at)gmail. com, on how he help me reunited with my husband after 2 months of divorce.My husband divorce me because he saw another woman in his office and he said to me that he is no longer in love with me anymore and decide to divorce me.I seek help from the Net and i saw good talk about Dr agbuza and i contact him and explain my problem to him and he cast a spell for me which i use to get my husband back within 2 days.am totally happy because there is no reparations and side-effect. If you need his help Email him at agbuzaodera(at)gmail. com

  3. The practitioners and judges who hail E-filing as the Saviour of the West need to contain their respective excitements. E-filing is federal court requires the practitioner to cram his motion practice into pigeonholes created by IT people. Compound motions or those seeking alternative relief are effectively barred, unless the practitioner wants to receive a tart note from some functionary admonishing about the "problem". E-filing is just another method by which courts and judges transfer their burden to practitioners, who are the really the only powerless components of the system. Of COURSE it is easier for the court to require all of its imput to conform to certain formats, but this imposition does NOT improve the quality of the practice of law and does NOT improve the ability of the practitioner to advocate for his client or to fashion pleadings that exactly conform to his client's best interests. And we should be very wary of the disingenuous pablum about the costs. The courts will find a way to stick it to the practitioner. Lake County is a VERY good example of this rapaciousness. Any one who does not believe this is invited to review the various special fees that system imposes upon practitioners- as practitioners- and upon each case ON TOP of the court costs normal in every case manually filed. Jurisprudence according to Aldous Huxley.

  4. Any attorneys who practice in federal court should be able to say the same as I can ... efiling is great. I have been doing it in fed court since it started way back. Pacer has its drawbacks, but the ability to hit an e-docket and pull up anything and everything onscreen is a huge plus for a litigator, eps the sole practitioner, who lacks a filing clerk and the paralegal support of large firms. Were I an Indiana attorney I would welcome this great step forward.

  5. Can we get full disclosure on lobbyist's payments to legislatures such as Mr Buck? AS long as there are idiots that are disrespectful of neighbors and intent on shooting fireworks every night, some kind of regulations are needed.

ADVERTISEMENT