THIS STORY IS COPIED FROM THE GREENE COUNTY DAILY WORLD http://gcdailyworld.com/story/1305868.html Crouch wants keep being voice of taxpayer Tuesday, January 22, 2008 By Timberly Ferree, Staff Writer Republican Kathy Crouch is seeking re-election to a second term. Greene County District 1 Commissioner Kathy Crouch has announced that she will seek the Republican nomination for a second term in May's upcoming primary. "I wish to continue to be the voice of the taxpayer for fiscal responsibility and wise and justifiable decisions for the actions of local government in Greene County," Crouch said. "Greene County can do better. Local government in Greene County can be better and if re-elected, I will continue to represent the taxpayer to stop the waste of their tax dollar, stop the diminishing services and stop the current lax approach to solving the problems that drive it." Crouch will also continue to work toward better roadways and bridges in the county. "If re-elected I shall continue to hard-surface an average of 6.5 miles of roads each year," she said. "I will continue to fight for proper maintenance of our roads and bridges." She will also continue her political involvement at the state level. Couch explained, "I will continue to be involved at the state level regarding new legislation and its affect on the people of Greene County." The proposed legislation being reviewed in the current session is the main issue facing Greene Countians now, she added. "Lowering or eliminating property tax is long over due, but not every aspect of the proposed legislation is desirable," Crouch explained. "Proposed legislation for local government reform, in it's current form, also has some problems." No matter what the legislative changes are, Greene County's elected officials will have a lot of hard work to do in the next few years, she said. "As always, I will be one elected official that will roll up my sleeves and get dirty making certain that Greene County makes lemonade out of the lemons," she added. Another important issue currently facing Greene County is land-use planning, she noted. "I have said the same thing for four years; it is time that Greene County looks at land-use and I believe it must be done in baby-steps," she explained. "And I wish to assure the taxpayer that as long as I am on board, Greene County will look nothing like Monroe County. Do we need to research and contemplate land-use planning? I believe so." Crouch also believes that she has accomplished much in her three years of service to Greene County. "The wheel-tax dollar in my district is being used more efficiently and physical re-addressing is finally happening," she explained. "I am proud to have been part of the wave of change for the (Greene County) Economic Development Corporation that brought us a new director and is breathing new life into the most important aspect of the future of Greene County." She also worked adamantly against the issue of I-69 becoming a toll-road, she noted. "I was very vocal at the state-level regarding Toll-69 and that idea's demise," Crouch explained. " A toll road through Greene County will not help us at all." Another issue Crouch worked toward is a wellness plan for Greene County employees. "After two years of talking, employees of Greene County are now covered by a wellness plan that includes preventative testing that may find health issues such as breast cancer and prostrate cancer early," Crouch said. "Other coverage changes were made that will save the taxpayer money. As a matter of fact, I learned just this week, that the county saved 20 percent in health insurance costs in 2007 alone." Crouch currently resides in southeastern Greene County with her husband of 21 years -- Chuck Crouch. She is currently employed at MLE Enterprises, Inc. as Director of Business Development. "I believe the taxpayer should vote for me if they see the need for increased communication, increased accountability and the voice of reason in their local representation," Crouch added.

THIS STORY IS COPIED FROM THE
GREENE COUNTY DAILY WORLD
http://gcdailyworld.com/story/1300025.html

Company claims county out of line on 2007 asphalt material bid

Wednesday, December 26, 2007
By Nick Schneider, Assistant Editor

The Greene County Commissioners are expected to formally award annual bids next week for a variety of contracted products, including asphalt emulsion materials, a component used on chip and seal and "cold patch" asphalt road repair jobs by the highway department.
The bids for 2008 were submitted at the Dec. 18 meeting and taken under advisement. They will be formally awarded at the next commissioner's meeting Jan. 2.

However, one Indianapolis firm that was the successful low bidder for the asphalt emulsion product in 2007 didn't submit a bid to the county for next year because none of their product was purchased under last year's bid contract.

Marathon Oil did respond to the request for bids for 2008 and submitted a bid at the Dec. 18 meeting, but left all of the bid price amounts blank as a symbolic gesture of their disappointment with the way their low bid was handled for the calendar year 2007.

For the current year the commissioners in January accepted bids from Marathon Oil and Asphalt Materials, Inc. of Lawrenceville, Ill.

Both bids were accepted because there is an escalator clause in the contract that allows for movement in the price during the year depending on the base asphalt price.

Walter S. Quate. Senior Territory Manager, Marathon Petroleum Company, LLC, of Indianapolis, told the Greene County Daily World on Wednesday that he is disappointed that the county failed to live up to its end of the deal with his company.

"It's extremely frustrating and it's disappointing. I can't for the life of me figure out why a county advertises for competitive bids and then doesn't honor the low bid," he said.

Further he says his firm will not bid for business with Greene County in the future unless written assurance is received that Marathon's asphalt emulsions will be purchased if they are the successful low bidder, as they were in 2007.

Quate said he had several conversations with highway supervisor Basil Shepherd questioning his firm had received no product orders. There was no satisfactory response about when he planned on purchasing any materials from Marathon.

"He told me on a couple of occasions that he was currently buying material from one of our direct competitors," Quate said. "When it became obvious that we were not going to supply material through any verbal communications I had with the highway supervisor, I sent the letter to the commissioners."

Quate pointed out that he waited six months before formally mailing any letters that asked county officials why they were not buying any of his firm's products.

He first mailed a letter to county auditor David Bailey and highway superintendent Basil Shepherd on July 10 and inquired about the situation.

In the letter, he wrote, "Our bid was accepted and it was our understanding that the county would be purchasing their requirements from us. Unfortunately it has come to my attention that purchases have been and are continuing to be made from another vendor."

Quote continued, "The Indiana Code section IC 5-22-17-10 requires that the purchasing agent purchase materials from the lowest responsive bidder. If the county receives written notice of any price changes the purchasing agent is required to notify all other vendors within five business days and ask for a current quote. To date, we have not received any notification of price change."

The oil company representative also wrote: "Our bid was submitted in good faith and complied with all of the requirements set forth in the bid proposal. We are requesting an explanation of why the county is not purchasing from the low bidder. If this situation remains unresolved, we will be forced to take additional action which could result in the retraction of our bid."

Quate noted, "The first letter received no response."

Before he sent a second letter, Quate called auditor Bailey to just make sure that they had received his earlier letter. Bailey told him they had received the letter and would check out the matter and get back with Quate.

Quate alleged that three or four weeks passed with no response, so he sent a second letter Aug. 23 and retracted the earlier bid.

In the Aug. 23 letter to Bailey, Shepherd and each of the county commissioners -- Bart Beard, Kathy Crouch and Larry Hasler -- Quate reiterated that in his view the county was violating Indiana Code by following the practice of purchasing its asphalt emulsion material from only one vendor.

Quate informed the county officials that his firm was withdrawing their 2007 bid.

"We regret having to take this action because, in our opinion, it is not in the best interest of the highway department or the resident taxpayers of Greene County to have only one bidder for liquid asphalt supply. But it appears that there is no intent on your part to abide by The Indiana Code section IC 5-22-17-10 which requires that the purchasing agent purchase materials from the lowest responsive bidder. Therefore, until the Board of Commissioners can assure Marathon Petroleum Company, in writing, of their intent to purchase the county's requirements for asphalt emulsions from the low bidder, we will not submit future bids," he wrote.

Quate says his company traditionally does business with a large number of counties in the state, including Owen, Martin, Orange, Morgan and Putnam in the area, and has never had a similar problem in the nine years he's been associated in this state.

According to Quate, his company could seek legal action against the county, but doesn't plan that route at this point.

"We just don't plan on submitting future bids until and unless we can receive some kind of written guarantee that our bid will be honored," he said. "We'd like some time in the future to have the opportunity to bid in Greene County again, but under the current circumstances, we are not in a position to do that."

Beard said he was aware of the dispute with Marathon Oil, but referred questions to commissioner's attorney Hartman, whom he said was more abreast about what transpired.

Shepherd, when contacted by the Greene County Daily World, called the situation with Marathon's bid a "misunderstanding" and said he thought everything was worked out.

Shepherd acknowledged he had received the two letters from Quate. He said two of the commissioners -- Beard and Hasler -- were aware of the letters along with Hartman.

"I never received any instructions so I just assumed it was taken care of," he stated.

Shepherd said he was unsure exactly how much product had been purchased during 2007 from Asphalt Materials, but he said it is a product that is used frequently.

The highway department superintendent said Asphalt Materials has been a long-time vendor for the county and has given the county very good service.

That's the primary reason he chose to use their services over Marathon.

"Asphalt Materials has been an awful good vendor for years and years -- they are very easy to work with," Shepherd concluded.

Here is my clarification and comments to this story

I feel that some clarification of the low-bid story published by the GCDW is necessary:

The July 10 letter was sent to the Board of Commissioners at the courthouse address which is in the care of the County Auditor. The letter copied David Bailey, Auditor and Basil Sheppard, Highway Supervisor.

I personally was never made aware of this original communication.

On the morning of August 20, I received a phone call at my residence from the vendor rep, Walter Quate. He wanted to know if I was aware of the July 10 communication and their concerns? I was not.

At 9:30 that same morning, I received a copy of the July 10 letter via electronic mail from Mr. Quate.

The August 23 Bid-Retraction communication from this vendor was addressed again to the Board of Commissioners at the courthouse address. The auditor and the highway supervisor were again copied. I received a copy of this retraction only via electronic mail from the vendor and a hard-copy mailed to my home address by the vendor. I have never received copy of the communication(s) sent to the Board in care of the Auditor.

The 2008 Bid proposal from this vendor actually noted "NO BID" for each product.

This "NO BID" proposal was the topic of much discussion during the Dec. 18 public commissioner's meeting, during which it was noted that a) I had not been made aware of the communications until the vendor contacted me directly and b) Beard, Hasler and Sheppard admitted that they were fully aware of the vendor's concerns from the initial July 10 communication.

The vendor letters are made available to you on this website. Please click on the highlighted links.

LETTERS TO THE COMMISSIONERS

BID OFFER OR PROPOSAL

FROM Marathon
WORD DOCUMENT HERE "2008"
WORD DOCUMENT HERE "2007"

FROM Asphalt Materials
WORD DOCUMENT HERE "2008"
WORD DOCUMENT HERE "2007"

Tax reform rests on reduced local spending
My view: Rex C. Early

Local spending in Indiana has increased from $2.1 billion in 1984 to $7.9 billion last year. These massive increases are neither fair, nor sustainable to the property taxpayers of Indiana.

That's why I support Gov. Mitch Daniels' proposal to cut property taxes for every Hoosier homeowner, capping them forever at a maximum of 1 percent of a home's value.

Make no mistake: This plan is a big change. It will provide real and permanent property tax relief that homeowners need and deserve.

First, it's appropriate that the state assume the costs of child welfare and the remaining school funding. We can pay for this with a one-cent increase in the state sales tax, gaming revenue already earmarked for property tax relief, and a portion of the state's surplus, which Daniels achieved by controlling state spending the last three years.

I do not support tax increases, and this isn't one. I support the governor's plan because it shifts the tax burden away from property taxes, but remains revenue neutral.

Permanently capping property taxes at 1 percent of assessed value will give homeowners stability and prevent massive property tax increases. We should demand that this cap be permanent.

I have read that 55 percent of Hoosiers pay more than 1 percent of their home's assessed value in property taxes every year. But it is important to remember that the 1 percent cap is a maximum. Even those homeowners who currently pay less than 1 percent of their home's value will receive a property tax cut under Daniels' plan.

Perhaps the more critical components of the governor's plan are those that limit the growth of local government spending.

Indiana's 2,400 taxing units have far too much authority and far too little oversight in the way they raise property taxes. Much of the increases in our property taxes come from major construction projects and debt service.

Under the current system, each of Indiana's 2,400 taxing units sets its budget and you get the bill. At no point are those costs added together until they reach the taxpayer.

Daniels' plan would end this practice and mandate that tax boards in each county review all local spending plans to keep budgets in check and protect homeowners from overspending.

Hoosier taxpayers deserve this extra level of accountability, and a more significant role in determining local spending. The governor's call for replacing the burdensome remonstrance process with a more direct referendum process only makes sense.

In Indiana, new school construction and the necessary borrowing to pay for it has been the single largest factor in rising property taxes. A referendum process not only gives taxpayers a say on the validity of major construction process, but also will serve to directly involve homeowners in these decisions.

When the General Assembly reconvenes, property taxes will be the most significant issue. There will be competing property tax plans and every legislator will have opportunities to bring ideas to the table.

Rightly, much of the focus will go toward Daniels' proposals to cut property taxes and cap them forever.

It is equally important that any plan adopted by the legislature also include the governor's proposals to limit local government spending. Hoosiers should demand nothing less.