Legislators return to longtime debate over Indiana townships

Hundreds of Indiana township governments could be forced into consolidation under a renewed attempt in the Legislature for streamlining the 1,000-plus such bodies across the state.

A House committee on Tuesday advanced a proposal that would require many townships to merge with other townships, with others being taken over by city or county governments.

Rep. Alaina Shonkwiler, the author of House Bill 1315, said Indiana’s township government structure was developed for a “different era” when the state was more rural in the 1800s.

The proposal would require consolidations by township units that don’t operate fire departments, have fewer than 6,700 residents and don’t meet a minimum level of emergency financial assistance distribution.

A township with at least 80% of its territory and half of its population living within city limits would have its functions assumed by the city unless the township operates a fire department.

“If you’re fully engulfed, or 80% engulfed, within another local unit of government as a township, there’s a redundancy in services,” said Shonkwiler, R-Noblesville. “If you’re not operating the fire department, my question is, why do we need another layer of government to do those other services?”

Long debate over townships

Indiana’s township officials have long argued for the importance of the services they provide. That work includes providing emergency aid for expenses such as utilities and housing to low-income residents, with some townships also operating fire departments or parks and maintaining old cemeteries.

Critics believe townships are inefficient and that those functions could be better operated by cities or counties. But numerous attempts in the Legislature for major reorganization of Indiana’s 1,008 townships have failed — dating back to a 2007 report on local government reform headed by former Gov. Joe Kernan and then-Chief Justice Randall Shepard.

A legislative analysis estimated about 650 townships could be forced into a consolidation under Shonkwiler’s bill.

The House Local Government Committee voted 9-3 in favor of the bill, which now goes to the House Ways and Means Committee for a review of its financial impact before possibly advancing to the full House for action in the coming weeks.

A Senate committee is scheduled to consider a differing township reorganization proposal, Senate Bill 270, on Thursday.

Townships argue for different approach

Dan Shackle, a lobbyist for Indiana Township Association, told the House committee that the group considered the Senate bill a “better solution” as it does not rely on a population level to force consolidations.

“But (it) rather uses performance metrics to distinguish efficient townships from underperforming ones, a solution which clearly guarantees continuity of important township services and a solution which does not allow for a requirement for taxpayers to pay taxes to an entity in which they have no representation,” Shackle said.

Several business organizations and city and county government groups spoke in favor of Shonkwiler’s proposal during Tuesday’s committee hearing.

Shonkwiler said after the meeting that she was concerned about efficiency and accountability for township government.

“I think we’ve seen too many media stories about townships, township trustees that have had some fraud or some embezzlement or mishandling of funds, or aren’t live streaming their meetings, or don’t have a (board) quorum for a budget,” Shonkwiler told the Indiana Capital Chronicle. “That’s a concern.”