IBJNews

UPDATE: Panel proposes tax hikes to add hundreds of officers

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indianapolis officials are considering a proposal for about $29 million a year in tax increases in order to add nearly 300 officers to the city's police force.

The debate comes as the city has already seen more than 50 criminal homicides this year, putting it on pace for the highest tally in seven years.

A City-County Council task force recommended Monday an increase in the income taxes dedicated to public safety. It also backed eliminating a homeowner tax break, a step that Republican Mayor Greg Ballard has previously proposed but has been rejected by the Democratic-controlled council.

The proposal would boost the Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department force from its current level of about 1,500 officers to nearly 1,800 by 2018.

“It would allow IMPD to put those officers out on the streets, more detectives, officers in vice, wherever they’re needed, they could then have the numbers that they need to adequately staff their department,” City-County Council member Mary Moriarty Adams, the chairwoman of the commission, told Fox59.

The homestead credit on property taxes would be phased out over four years, with the owner with a $100,000 home ultimately paying an extra $30 a year, said Bart Brown, the council's chief financial officer. An additional $15 million a year would be generated by an income tax increase that officials said would cost residents making $50,000 a year about $75 more a year.

Ballard has been frustrated over the refusal of council Democrats to end the homeowner tax credits.

"For three consecutive years I have asked the City-County Council to provide more funding to hire additional (police) officers, but they have refused," he said. "I will give serious thought to any proposal that emerges from the council process."

Chris Manolis, who lives just north of downtown Indianapolis, said he was among several neighborhood residents who are paying $150 a year for off-duty police officer patrols. He said he believed the proposed tax increases would be worth it to build up the police force.

"That is the main thing, having the feeling that you're more secure," he told WTHR-TV.

The 10-member police staffing commission was made up of City-Council Council members, residents, representatives of the mayor, the Fraternal Order of Police and the Marion County Sheriff's Office.

Valerie Cunningham, the city's deputy public safety director, said the additional officers would improve morale and efficiency, reduce overtime costs and allow more community policing.

"Because we are short-staffed, many officers go from run to run and don't have time for anything else," she said.

Democratic Council President Maggie Lewis said she was still fundamentally opposed to the elimination of the homestead credit, even with the phase out.

"I know they were looking at some tax options, but I am not there yet," Lewis said. "I haven't changed my view."

ADVERTISEMENT

  • New Idea!
    I am fed up with the property tax process, the assessments are ridiculous. I pay more than a fair share of property taxes and do not ever see a police officer. It is time to place the burden of buying MORE police officers, detectives and staff on the property owners in the areas of Indy where the crimes are being committed. If more police are needed for the high crime areas, the businesses and property owners of those areas should be paying the bills, NOT everyone in the city. I witness many police officers in several downtown districts, pulled off the main streets, out of view, napping or whatever it is that they do, and find it appalling that the council suggests we need more police at our expense. Please consider to have the crime ridden areas of Indy pay for this.
  • David West for Sheriff
    Let's get the Pacers out on the streets for public safety. $16 million a year should get taxpayers something for their money.
  • Another thing
    If I am paying for this, I don't want one dime wasted on traffic cops, meter maids, etc. These new cops need to be in the streets fighting real crime.
  • Lazy
    Because there is nothing in your bloated government that you could cut to pay for this, right? Give me a break.
  • Worst proprosal EVER
    Who will the cops protect when no one wants to live in this city because it's too expensive?
  • Tax hike for what?
    Perspective, the 2007 tax hike was supposedly earmarked for public safety as well. Tax revenues are fungible in this city-county government. More money goes into one account for a dedicated purpose and less money comes out of the general fund to be used for such purposes. The general fund continues to get squeezed as more and more property tax revenues are either diverted into TIF funds or not collected altogether due to abatements. It's a constant shell game that's played to convince poorly-informed residents that new tax dollars will be spent a certain way when the politicians know otherwise. Seriously, have you ever watched a city council meeting? The lady doing all the talking--Mary Moriarty Adams--draws four government paychecks between her and her husband. She gets a city council paycheck and another paycheck for a make-work job in the assessor's office. Her husband retired as a police officer so he could start drawing his pension and then went back on the sheriff's payroll in a higher paid job that shouldn't even exist. You trust her to make these decisions after she lied to you about the 2007 public safety tax increase?
  • homestead
    I don't mind the increase in income tax. It is "the IMPD Staffing Study Commission, also proposed phasing out the homestead tax credit" part that bothers me. This could have significant impact on people with fixed incomes.
  • Don't be so cynical...
    Do you REALLY believe this money will not be used for public safety? The use of these funds is restricted to public safety. If the money were to be used for other purposes, financial audits would catch this misuse. Furthermore, these proposals are coming from a bipartisan commission chaired by a DEMOCRAT. Hint: Mayor is a Republican. This proposal is about ensuring our city has adequate levels of police protection, not cronyism.
  • be specfiic
    who is "THEY" Mikey?
  • more waste
    Put more officers on the streets or give others a free car with all expenses paid? Get rid of the waste in driving family's around on "free" gas in patrol cars. It's old seeing this type of abuse and then hearing about shortfalls. Rid the personal abuse of cats and they can collect far more than any tax. And that includes my family as well that are officers!
  • Ridiculous
    this is absurd! so the good people of this city need to pay more bc the poor ghetto folks cant get it together? not like they will help pay for more police anyways since most are just welfare moochers! and not like they care anyways, you can throw all the resources at them and their culture will not change!!! I know several IMPD officers, and its all the same story....they go get the bad guys, someone gets shot, etc and nobody will cooperate bc the street thing to do is handle it yourself. this is their culture!!! accept it! they haven't changed in decades
    • EXACTLY
      Gary Welsh...precisely. This is absolute garbage...along with our city "leaders." Disgusting...if I could sell my house I would...sickening.
    • Tax hike for what?
      The City approved a public safety tax increase in 2007 after it recorded a record number of homicides in 2006. Our local income tax increased 65% to provide $90 million a year to fund more police officers. Guess what? The Mayor and the Council never used that money to hire the new police officers they promised. Yet the homicide rate dropped in subsequent years to what Mayor Ballard called historic lows without hiring more police officers. In fact, the Mayor still claims that overall crime rates are down since he's been mayor. The idea that this tax increase is being proposed to reduce the homicide rate or crime in this city is ludicrous. These louses use public safety as an excuse to raise taxes and then use the money for their real priorities, which is to divert hundreds of millions of dollars into TIF slush funds to pay for their crony capitalism and to pass out tax breaks to their campaign contributors. Don't believe for one moment this tax increase is about hiring more police officers. What you should be asking is what the real purpose behind this tax increase is.
      • Murder Capital
        Once a city gets a reputation it lasts for years. It will take years, if ever, for Chicago to overcome it's murder statistic and Indianapolis is heading that way. Invest now in more Police as well as community devepolment.
      • If we
        If we want more cops we need to be prepared to pay for them. $75/year sounds pretty reasonable to me. This is how taxes are supposed to work, by the way-- everyone pays a little, and in turn the money collected is used to improve the community.
      • Time To Pay Up Colts & Pacers
        Clearly the Irsay & Simon families need to significantly contribute to the public safty costs considering the hundreds of millions in city/county taxes that subsidizes all of there operating cost without taking any of the profits
      • DUH
        Ever think of using some of the money we blow on the BILLIONAIRE OWNERS of the Colts and Pacers for police protection?

      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. Why not take some time to do some research before traveling to that Indiana town or city, and find the ones that are no smoking either inside, or have a patio? People like yourself are just being selfish, and unnecessarily trying to take away all indoor venues that smokers can enjoy themselves at. Last time I checked, it is still a free country, and businesses do respond to market pressure and will ban smoking, if there's enough demand by customers for it(i.e. Linebacker Lounge in South Bend, and Rack and Helen's in New Haven, IN, outside of Fort Wayne). Indiana law already unnecessarily forced restaurants with a bar area to be no smoking, so why not support those restaurants that were forced to ban smoking against their will? Also, I'm always surprised at the number of bars that chose to ban smoking on their own, in non-ban parts of Indiana I'll sometimes travel into. Whiting, IN(just southeast of Chicago) has at least a few bars that went no smoking on their own accord, and despite no selfish government ban forcing those bars to make that move against their will! I'd much rather have a balance of both smoking and non-smoking bars, rather than a complete bar smoking ban that'll only force more bars to close their doors. And besides IMO, there are much worser things to worry about, than cigarette smoke inside a bar. If you feel a bar is too smoky, then simply walk out and take your business to a different bar!

      2. As other states are realizing the harm in jailing offenders of marijuana...Indiana steps backwards into the script of Reefer Madness. Well...you guys voted for your Gov...up to you to vote him out. Signed, Citizen of Florida...the next state to have medical marijuana.

      3. It's empowering for this niche community to know that they have an advocate on their side in case things go awry. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lrst9VXVKfE

      4. Apparently the settlement over Angie's List "bundling" charges hasn't stopped the practice! My membership is up for renewal, and I'm on my third email trying to get a "basic" membership rather than the "bundled" version they're trying to charge me for. Frustrating!!

      5. Well....as a vendor to both of these builders I guess I have the right to comment. Davis closed his doors with integrity.He paid me every penny he owed me. Estridge,STILL owes me thousands and thousands of dollars. The last few years of my life have been spent working 2 jobs, paying off the suppliers I used to work on Estridge jobs and just struggling to survive. Shame on you Paul...and shame on you IBJ! Maybe you should have contacted the hundreds of vendors that Paul stiffed. I'm sure your "rises from the ashes" spin on reporting would have contained true stories of real people who have struggled to find work and pay of their debts (something that Paul didn't even attempt to do).

      ADVERTISEMENT