[Southsider2k12]

http://thenewsdispatch.com/main.asp?Sectio...ArticleID=25801

County will not pay for special election
Entire region must vote on regional transit authority

Craig Davison
For The News-Dispatch

LA PORTE - What happens if there's an election but no money to pay for it?

That's the dilemma for the La Porte County Election Board, who unanimously voted Monday to hold the Nov. 3 special election to see if the county will join a regional transit authority.

But the La Porte County Commission isn't planning on paying for it.

Clerk of the Circuit Court Bette Conroy said the state attorney general's office told the board it was decided by law and there must be an election.

Commission President Barbara Huston said, "We're not planning (on approving money for it)."

Elections are funded through the commissioners' budget, so they have to approve it before the La Porte County Council can vote on whether to appropriate the money.

Huston said she knows the law states they "shall" hold an election, but there is no penalty clause in the legislation if they do not.

She cited the costs involved in putting up an election for just one ballot item - setting up the voting machines, paying poll workers and providing security.

"There's a large cost associated with this," Huston said. "What possible rush is there to find out if they want to join the regional transit authority?"

The ballot item is asking voters of La Porte, St. Joseph, Porter and Lake counties if they want to join a regional transportation district that would provide a rail system. It would also allow La Porte and St. Joseph counties to join the regional bus system district in Lake and Porter counties.

Conroy said they voted in the emergency meeting to cut the normal 74 precincts to eight precincts for the special election. There would also be two days of in-person absentee voting for both Michigan City and La Porte.

She said she is waiting for response from the state and the other two election board members, Robert Szilagyi and Ralph Howes, but until then, the item is in limbo.

Huston said the county wants to have the referendum on the ballots of the normal May election, when it can be held at no additional cost. She said that election would have a larger turnout of voters and be a better representation of what voters want.

[Southsider2k12]

Now I have gone back and studied the language in the actual statute, and I think this might be a big step towards killing this RTA. It looks like Lake County might also be not holding an election. With the wording actually saying...

If a majority of those voting on the public question in at least two (2) counties vote in favor of the creation of the district, the northern Indiana regional transportation district with a rail service division and a bus service division is established.

It sounds like a no vote is the same as a not vote. It specifically has the wording about voting for it.

I am not a lawyer, but I bet we see a lawsuit from either NICTD, or someone who is involved on the RTAs side of things.

The full statute is here

http://www.in.gov/legislative/ic/code/title8/ar24/ch2.html

[Southsider2k12]

http://thenewsdispatch.com/main.asp?Sectio...ArticleID=25827

County won't have special election

Craig Davison
For The News-Dispatch

LA PORTE - There won't be a November election after all on a regional transit authority ... at least, not in La Porte County.

The county Election Board issued a statement Wednesday that after being informed by two county boards there will be no funds for an election, no such process can be held.

"An election cannot take place without the necessary appropriations and funding," the statement read. "The Election Board cannot take any further action regarding the special election."

By state law, a November special election is set for La Porte, Lake, Porter and St. Joseph counties about the formation of a regional transit authority. If approved, the four counties would be part of a regional transit authority that includes a rail system. It also would allow La Porte and St. Joseph counties to join in the regional bus system in Lake and Porter counties.

"At this point, we have no choice," Election Board member Robert Szilagyi said. "The Election Board can't go any further."

On Monday, the board voted to have the election, as mandated by law. Later that day, the County Commission informed the board it was not going to approve any funds for it.

On Tuesday, County Councilman Earl Cunningham told the commissioners he represented a majority of the council when saying they were not going to fund any appropriations for an election.

State Sen. Jim Arnold, D-La Porte, previously has stated the law requiring the election did not include a penalty clause for not having it.

The May referendum by the Michigan City Area Schools cost $60,000. That election had two polling locations. The planned November election would have a minimum of eight, requiring more staff, security and voting machines.

[Dave]

Gee, kind of a shame that all that money from the sale lease of the tollway isn't available for this big public transit program, which incidentally would serve mainly the area where the tollway exists.

Thanks a lot, Gov. Mitch. At least screwing over primarily Democratic NW Indiana got you reelected.

[mcstumper]

Gee, kind of a shame that all that money from the sale lease of the tollway isn't available for this big public transit program, which incidentally would serve mainly the area where the tollway exists.

Thanks a lot, Gov. Mitch. At least screwing over primarily Democratic NW Indiana got you reelected.

Hmmm. I live in LaPorte county and I am thrilled about the I-69 extention and the U.S. 31 improvement projects... both of which will positively impact my quality of life. A regional bus system? I could not care less.

[southyards]

Mitch would no doubt be happy to respond to any concerns we may have, but he’s most likely still busy (with the other 57 Hoosier “delegates”) on his junket to China. Wonder what the price tag on that is? Not to mention the return on the dollar. . . . . .

[Southsider2k12]

Now I have gone back and studied the language in the actual statute, and I think this might be a big step towards killing this RTA. It looks like Lake County might also be not holding an election. With the wording actually saying...
It sounds like a no vote is the same as a not vote. It specifically has the wording about voting for it.

I am not a lawyer, but I bet we see a lawsuit from either NICTD, or someone who is involved on the RTAs side of things.

The full statute is here

http://www.in.gov/legislative/ic/code/title8/ar24/ch2.html

So I decided to do some investigating on my own and contacted some of our legistlators. I got a very quick answer from Scott Pelath that if we do not vote it is the same as voting no, to the direct contradiction of what some people are saying. Canceling the election does NOT mean we have voted for the RTA, it means we have effectively voted against it.

[kharris]

So I decided to do some investigating on my own and contacted some of our legistlators. I got a very quick answer from Scott Pelath that if we do not vote it is the same as voting no, to the direct contradiction of what some people are saying. Canceling the election does NOT mean we have voted for the RTA, it means we have effectively voted against it.

The two arguments put forth by the board of commissioners in not holding this election were first, there is no money to hold the election, and secondly (as I am sure you noticed by reading the legislation) there are no repercussions for not holding the elction. I have to say that it made no sense to me when this legislation was passed that the referndum vote was to be held this year during a non-election year. If this election were to be held, the plan was to have 8 polling places in the county. These 8 would act as voting centers so that everyone in the county had the opportunity to vote. It would have been setup much like the vote we had in the spring. Considering that last springs referendum cost around $60,000, I would have to assume that to hold this one would probably be somewhere around $100,000 minimum. Compare that cost to virtually a cost of $0 if the referendum were attached to next year's primary. No brainer to me. As far as a law suit ... certainaly a possibility ... what I think will happen is this legislation will end up being re-written in January in order to add the question in May.

[Southsider2k12]

http://thenewsdispatch.com/main.asp?Sectio...amp;TM=55386.67

The Issue:

County officials say RTA referendum would cost quarter million dollars.

Our Opinion:

The county needs to cut the cost. Referendums are part of democracy and the cost shouldn't stop them.
Referendum
Cost said to be prohibitive

Editorial

La Porte County officials have canceled participation in a Nov. 3 referendum on a regional transit authority, citing the cost of a special election. The three-member county commission said the county simply doesn't have the money to conduct the special election.

The whole referendum on a four-county RTA has been a mess, thanks first to the Indiana General Assembly. While it was right for the Legislature to call for a referendum, it should not have been called for this November, the one November in four years without a regularly scheduled election. As we've said, it should have been set for next May, to coincide with the primary election. Polling places already would have been staffed, and adding a referendum could have been accomplished with minimal added expense.

Or, if the General Assembly felt the election had to be this year, it should have provided funds to La Porte, Porter, Lake and St. Joseph counties to conduct the referendum.

Instead, La Porte County is putting the public in an intolerable situation - not being able to participate in a referendum on a major public issue.

Which leads to the question of cost. While the election board decided it would use eight polling places instead of 74, one in each of the county's precincts, county officials have said the referendum would cost the county a quarter million dollars. An earlier MCAS referendum, with two polling places, cost $60,000.

These cost figures seem very high. The election board and other county officials need to find ways to trim the figure. The county employees who handle voting already are on salary, and polling place workers don't get very much pay.

Public participation has a cost, but it's worth it in a democracy. It shouldn't be prohibitively expensive, however.