“This one is somewhat old now, but I hadn’t seen it before. That vote was for the Economic development income tax increase that Vincennes was pushing for (Mr. Chattin was their representative, I believe he is the Council President but could be wrong).
This came about when the jail tax was going to be dissolved by the county, since the jail was paid off. Vincennes wanted to keep the extra revenue by increasing EDIT funds coming into the county without adding an extra tax to the individual tax payers. Basically trade the jail tax for additional EDIT.
Bicknell voted to increase EDIT with the plan to use the extra $47,000+ to repair streets and to purchase other city supplies, not to increase payrolls. Whether that’s what it gets used for or not is still to be seen since the Mayor has still yet to amend his 2 year EDIT plan to include that much for street repairs.
The state of Indiana passed shortly after the last election a law prohibiting employees from also holding an elected office. That is why Stremming is not able to run again. He was grandfathered in when the law passed, but was made ineligible for any future terms unless he resigns from his position as a police officer. You were correct in stating that he does not have to abstain from voting even if it poses a conflict of interest, but he has had to file a conflict of interest form yearly with the State Board of Accounts.” (No name provided)
My concern about the jail tax being turned to the EDIT tax was not the tax itself but the way the council voted it into existence; according to Indiana Code the Bicknell City Council can only vote once on any kind of bill and cannot re-vote if the first vote goes the wrong way, which it did.
To pass the thing on the first reading and the first vote it had to be a unanimous vote and in the minutes of that meeting one council member voted ‘NO‘; therefore when the council discussed voting again in order to get the outcome it wanted and came up with the nonsense about they had just voted to vote on the first vote, then illegally voted to pass the tax changing it from jail to EDIT.
According to the Indiana Code and the jail tax did dissolved and for the county to increase the EDIT tax depending on that vote was illegal.
I can see that the Clerk Treasurer was not in the room at the time but the rest of them knew that they were doing something illegal but along with the City Attorney they chose to break the law. The City Attorney should be removed from the Bicknell payroll because he helped guide them to doing something that he should have known was illegal.
John R. Stanczak