IBJOpinion

EDITORIAL: Daniels on target on township reform

 IBJ Staff
January 15, 2011
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint
IBJ Editorial

Most of the media coverage of Gov. Mitch Daniels’ State of the State address focused on his ambitious plans to overhaul and improve education in Indiana.

With his high school chemistry teacher, Bob Watson, watching from the gallery, the Republican governor made another compelling case that the status quo isn’t working. He noted that 99 percent of Indiana teachers are rated “effective,” yet only one of three of the state’s students can pass the national math or reading exams.

But we are pleased that the two-term governor doesn’t intend to expend his considerable political capital on just that one important issue. He also went into surprising detail about his plan to reform local government.

To be sure, it’s a dry topic, not one likely to enrapture many Hoosiers as the legislation wends its way through the General Assembly this spring. But it’s an important one, especially at a time tax caps have forced many units of local government to cut back on essential services.

The topic is far from new, of course. Year after year, many of the state’s more progressive politicians have pushed the General Assembly to enact the reforms proposed as part of the Kernan-Shepard report of 2007. A statistical model run by Mike Hicks, a Ball State economist, estimated $470 million in annual savings statewide from the reforms, about 90 percent of which would come from township consolidation.

Daniels’ speech devoted seven paragraphs to government reform—more than he devoted to any legislative priority other than education (23).

“Some of the changes are so obvious that our failure to make them is a daily embarrassment,” the governor said.

He added: “Today, over 4,000 politicians, few of them known to the voters they represent, run over a thousand township governments. They are sitting on hundreds of millions of dollars in reserves. Some have eight years of spending needs stashed in the bank, yet they keep collecting taxes.”

Daniels drew only polite applause when he called for the elimination of township government—a sharp reminder of the challenges he faces getting lawmakers, many of whom came up through township government, to do the right thing.

But this may be the governor’s last, best chance to get reforms approved. The financial pressures on local government likely will ease as the economy improves, sapping momentum from efforts to bolster efficiency.

And Daniels is operating from a position of strength. He’s popular, and is working with an Indiana General Assembly that has both chambers controlled by the GOP for the first time since 2006.

If the governor succeeds in reforming education, he’ll have one more achievement to tout should he decide to run for president. In contrast, his fight to reform local government isn’t a headline grabber. We’re glad he’s making it a priority, nonetheless.•

__________

To comment on this editorial, write to ibjedit@ibj.com.

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 IBJ 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

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. First, the Athenaeum is going to have to get past the hurdle with the Lockerbie residents and the agreement that the parcel would be residential. Second, and in my opinion, this prime piece of property should include parking, PLUS, a black box theater(s), some market rate and affordable artist housing and a plan to renovate and reconfigure the second story theater. I would negotiate to add the DeHaan property surface parking lot into the development mix, place a one story surface parking garage on the DeHaan lot on the street level (for the Dehaan tenants use during the daytime) and add a second story to the garage that would become an addition to the current second story theater and then change the direction of the theater by moving the stage across the alley and on top of the DeHaan lot parking. You can add all the stage elements that are currently missing from the Athenaeum stage to make it more attractive for use by Ballet, Opera and traveling productions. Plus, the theater changes would probably help solve some of the soundproofing issues. Alas,it does not seem to be a part of the strategic plan to conduct a study to determine best use of the property. Seems like the current plan is a quick and easy move that ignores the property best use/potential and any strategic property planning for the effect on future generations.

  2. I recall that MSA's pilings are still in the ground and hard to remove. It’s not likely any proposal will include significant underground construction/parking because of this. Start adding 2 floors of retail, 8 floors of parking and 5-10 floors of possible hotel, and/or 10-20 floors of residential, and you are at 30 floors already with possible expansion of all the uses. But then again I could be wrong.

  3. Accoriding to their website there is no deadline to the Do Not Call list. What is this article referring to??

  4. On what planet are they entitled to this largesse from the stockholders? These people make multi-million dollar salaries: Pay for your own personal travel.

  5. It matters because they're already paid enormously fat salaries: Pay for your own personal travel. Being "taxed on it" isn't a valid excuse--so what? They're still being gifted a raft of luxury perks from somebody else's money on top of an enormous, lavish salary.

ADVERTISEMENT