Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Local Finance Tax Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
New Carlisle council debates property-tax petition, charter amendment timing and income-tax options
Summary
Council reviewed a charter amendment draft, learned property-tax petition signatures were not submitted for the November ballot, and debated whether to pursue a 0.5% or 0.75% municipal income tax or to pursue property-tax options; a motion to withdraw the charter amendment failed 4–3 and the council will proceed with introduction in July.
At its June 15 meeting the City of New Carlisle City Council discussed a pending charter amendment draft and several revenue options after staff reported that petition signatures to remove a property tax were being held and would not be submitted for the coming November ballot.
City Manager Mr. Ko explained that petition organizers were holding collected signatures to avoid resubmitting a flawed set and that the property-tax change will not appear on the upcoming November ballot; proponents now plan to seek placement in November 2027. Council reviewed the charter amendment draft included in the packet and discussed statutory timing; staff advised that an ordinance introducing the amendment should be placed on the July 1 agenda and voted at the second July meeting to fall within the 60–120 day window required before an election.
Councilwoman Wright moved to withdraw the amendment from consideration; Vice Mayor Shammy seconded. The council then took a roll-call vote: Mayor Lindsay, Councilwoman Ray and Vice Mayor Shammy voted in favor of withdrawal; Councilman Cook, Councilman Bond, Councilwoman Grove and Councilwoman Agelson voted against it. The motion to withdraw failed by a 3–4 margin, and council agreed to proceed with introduction and subsequent readings in July.
The council also debated revenue alternatives to fund core services, especially the fire department. Two income-tax options were discussed: a half-percent (0.5%) municipal income tax that would retain existing perpetual levies and reduce the need to renew certain property-tax levies, and a three-quarter-percent (0.75%) tax that could replace renewals and perpetuities. Council members raised concerns about the distributional effects of income tax versus property tax, timing, the sufficiency of projected revenue, and uncertain ballot timing for citizen-led property-tax changes. “I think even though we might be doing it just for two years, I think that’d be a good thing to do,” Councilwoman Wright said when arguing for a cautious approach with a 0.5% option while the petition effort continues to develop.
Council did not take a final vote on any tax ordinance; members requested formal legislation with precise estimates and legal language to appear at the next council meeting for review before any final action.
