IBJNews

Indiana officials face deadline on anti-nepotism law

Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

County, city, town and township governments across Indiana are racing to adopt new rules against nepotism ahead of a July 1 deadline.

Gov. Mitch Daniels signed a new law in March that prohibits local officeholders from hiring their relatives or from having public contracts with them without making certain disclosures. The law also prohibits public employees from holding any office that controls money or policies that might benefit them. Under that provision, those employees couldn't run for re-election, though they wouldn't be kicked out of office.

The Anderson City Council will review a proposed anti-nepotism ordinance next week, and Madison County commissioners will vote on a county ordinance June 19.

Alexandria has had a policy in place since 2009, and officials there plan to amend it to conform to the state law at a meeting June 18.

Mayor Jack Woods said the only major difference between Alexandria's ordinance and the state law is that the state law prohibits elected officials from hiring family members.

"When you don't have a nepotism law or policy, it can get out of hand," Woods told The Herald Bulletin. "You can have a city full of family members, and that creates a lot of problems."

During his campaign last year for mayor of Anderson, Kevin Smith criticized the former administration for hiring and promoting too many relatives.

City Attorney Jason Childers began work on a new nepotism policy earlier this year and incorporated language from the new state law when it was passed.

The law means that "individuals are placed in their positions based on their merits, rather than as a favor," Childers said.

Childers said that the statute defines the term "relative" as spouse, parent, stepparent, natural or adopted child, stepchild, brother, half brother, sister, half sister, stepbrother, stepsister, niece, nephew, aunt, uncle, daughter-in-law or son-in-law. The Anderson proposal would also cover grandchildren and first and second cousins.

The Elwood City Council adopted the law Monday, Mayor Ron Arnold said. He said he understands the law's intent, but thinks some of its provisions could be difficult for small communities.

"I would much rather have seen local municipalities have more control," he said. "Our federal government and state government sometimes uses an anvil to kill an ant, and if you don't seriously think through the ramifications, you'll hamper a small community in ways you were never intending to."

ADVERTISEMENT

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. I am not by any means judging whether this is a good or bad project. It's pretty simple, the developers are not showing a hardship or need for this economic incentive. It is a vacant field, the easiest for development, and the developer already has the money to invest $26 million for construction. If they can afford that, they can afford to pay property taxes just like the rest of the residents do. As well, an average of $15/hour is an absolute joke in terms of economic development. Get in high paying jobs and maybe there's a different story. But that's the problem with this ask, it is speculative and users are just not known.

  2. Shouldn't this be a museum

  3. I don't have a problem with higher taxes, since it is obvious that our city is not adequately funded. And Ballard doesn't want to admit it, but he has increased taxes indirectly by 1) selling assets and spending the money, 2) letting now private entities increase user fees which were previously capped, 3) by spending reserves, and 4) by heavy dependence on TIFs. At the end, these are all indirect tax increases since someone will eventually have to pay for them. It's mathematics. You put property tax caps ("tax cut"), but you don't cut expenditures (justifiably so), so you increase taxes indirectly.

  4. Marijuana is the safest natural drug grown. Addiction is never physical. Marijuana health benefits are far more reaching then synthesized drugs. Abbott, Lilly, and the thousands of others create poisons and label them as medication. There is no current manufactured drug on the market that does not pose immediate and long term threat to the human anatomy. Certainly the potency of marijuana has increased by hybrids and growing techniques. However, Alcohol has been proven to destroy more families, relationships, cause more deaths and injuries in addition to the damage done to the body. Many confrontations such as domestic violence and other crimes can be attributed to alcohol. The criminal activities and injustices that surround marijuana exists because it is illegal in much of the world. If legalized throughout the world you would see a dramatic decrease in such activities and a savings to many countries for legal prosecutions, incarceration etc in regards to marijuana. It indeed can create wealth for the government by collecting taxes, creating jobs, etc.... I personally do not partake. I do hope it is legalized throughout the world.

  5. Build the resevoir. If built this will provide jobs and a reason to visit Anderson. The city needs to do something to differentiate itself from other cities in the area. Kudos to people with vision that are backing this project.

ADVERTISEMENT