Voters approve higher taxes for area school districts

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Three cash-strapped Indianapolis-area school districts received voter approval Tuesday for property-tax hikes.

Decatur Township Schools in southwest Marion County sought $27 million in a referendum to help it save two district schools and preserve bus service. About 64 percent of voters approved the measure.

Property tax rates in the district will rise 29 cents per $100 of valuation starting in 2015 and continuing for seven years. Officials said it would raise the tax bill for an average home in the district about $7 per month.

In Hancock County, voters narrowly passed a property-tax hike to raise $2.5 million for Mount Vernon Community Schools. The measure passed by 10 votes.

The three-year hike is expected to raise tax bills by about $40 per year for homes with an assessed value of $100,000, starting in 2015.

In Morgan County, more than 80 percent of voters approved a referendum to raise $4.3 million for Eminence Community Schools. Officials said the system was in danger of closing without the additional funding.

The seven-year hike will raise the property tax rate by 40 cents per $100 of valuation, starting in 2015 and continuing for seven years.


  • Correct Math
    A $140,000 home with a increase of 29 cents per $100 would lead to an increase of $480/year or $34/month. how do you get 7 bucks a month?
  • Be consistent
    What I always find intriguing with the referendums is that the cost that is quoted is always in cents (media, politicians). Even here, the measures are so small to save the children. Is the average home assessment in Decatur Township really $28,995 - correct me if I am wrong but that is the increase for an average $7/month increase in taxes. Imagine my surprise when I get a tax bill that is $290 per year when my house is worth $100,000. (and $400 for seven years in Morgan County - I hope I have kids in the district for an extra $2,800 per $100,000 household)
  • For education
    I'm all for improving our educational system, and if more money is needed then i'm all for that.....BUT show me that this money is actually improving education performance. I'm highly skeptical. I get that improvement need to be made in infastructure, and that doesn't always directly influence classroom performance. However, it seems that lately our only solution to improving our education system is to throw more money at the problem. Not saying that the case here, but its very rarely about the money, yet a certain political party always seems to find the answer is simply increase taxes and throw money at the problem.
  • Voters are Stupid
    Schools have budgets with millions of dollars and assets usually over hundred million or more. Yet they need more money? As far as I can tell they do not disclose full information about the situation but only information to provide the perception necessary to pass a vote with uninformed voters. In searching I could not find MSD budget or financials, Hancock County has an outdated 2011 budget on their website...incidentally, they had a $9.2 M surplus budgeted in 2011...but they need more money...government has hundreds of millions of revenue, billions in assets and still the people keep giving these cretins more money. When are you going to learn, if you want to have government run efficiently you have to turn off the spigot.
  • Referendum vs. Better Performance
    It would be really interesting if the IBJ did a study on voter approved referendums on schools and compare before and after student performance. For example, are the students at recently renovated IPS schools doing any better this year than they were before the $250 million was spent?

Post a comment to this story

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

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. The $104K to CRC would go toward debts service on $486M of existing debt they already have from other things outside this project. Keystone buys the bonds for 3.8M from CRC, and CRC in turn pays for the parking and site work, and some time later CRC buys them back (with interest) from the projected annual property tax revenue from the entire TIF district (est. $415K / yr. from just this property, plus more from all the other property in the TIF district), which in theory would be about a 10-year term, give-or-take. CRC is basically betting on the future, that property values will increase, driving up the tax revenue to the limit of the annual increase cap on commercial property (I think that's 3%). It should be noted that Keystone can't print money (unlike the Federal Treasury) so commercial property tax can only come from consumers, in this case the apartment renters and consumers of the goods and services offered by the ground floor retailers, and employees in the form of lower non-mandatory compensation items, such as bonuses, benefits, 401K match, etc.

  2. $3B would hurt Lilly's bottom line if there were no insurance or Indemnity Agreement, but there is no way that large an award will be upheld on appeal. What's surprising is that the trial judge refused to reduce it. She must have thought there was evidence of a flagrant, unconscionable coverup and wanted to send a message.

  3. As a self-employed individual, I always saw outrageous price increases every year in a health insurance plan with preexisting condition costs -- something most employed groups never had to worry about. With spouse, I saw ALL Indiana "free market answer" plans' premiums raise 25%-45% each year.

  4. It's not who you chose to build it's how they build it. Architects and engineers decide how and what to use to build. builders just do the work. Architects & engineers still think the tarp over the escalators out at airport will hold for third time when it snows, ice storms.

  5. http://www.abcactionnews.com/news/duke-energy-customers-angry-about-money-for-nothing