Published: May 04, 2008 12:25 am         

Six vie for three GOP council at-large nominations

Six Republican candidates are currently in the running for a chance at one of three Elkhart County Council At-Large nominations up for grabs during the May 6 Primary Election.

Candidates vying for the three seats are: Incumbent John K. Letherman, R-Elkhart; incumbent Dennis E. Sharkey, R-Goshen; David M. Ashe, R-Elkhart; David B. Pixey, R-Elkhart; Trevor A. Wendzonka, R-Goshen.

Candidate Greg Howard, R-Bristol, chose not to participate in the article.

John K. Letherman

“I enjoy the people I’m working with, and after 20 years, I understand pretty much what’s going on. I’m convinced that rather than seeking some other office or simply stopping doing this, I have an obligation to try to take my experience and use it to get us through what’s going to be I think a chaotic financial period,” Letherman said of his primary reason for choosing to run for re-election. “I recognized as soon as the Legislature started the circuit breaker that we really need to keep experienced financial people involved in county government probably for the next four to five years.

“I say that because we had House Bill 1178 last year, and it did the circuit breaker, and everybody was worried about the effects of that, and so they went back and did House Bill 1001 this year, which depending on the font you used when you printed it, was between 800 and 900 pages long,” he said.

The expansive bill, passed by the General Assembly earlier this year, caps property taxes at 1 percent of assessed value for homeowners, 2 percent for rental properties, and 3 percent for businesses while at the same time raising state income taxes by 1 percent as a way to compensate for some of that lost revenue.

In addition to the income tax increase, suggestions for raising revenue have also included the adoption of an additional local option income tax. However, Letherman said he would not support such a move at this time.

“I’m not in favor of any additional local option income tax until we have a clear picture of just exactly what the effects of House Bill 1001 are,” Letherman said. “I think my caveat is to wait and see how this all works, not take on any new major projects until we know we’ll have the money to pay for them, and educate ourselves on the effects of what this 800 to 900 page bill are going to be.”

When asked what he feels is the most pressing issue currently facing the council, Letherman noted fiscal stability as his number one choice.

“Right now, it would be maintaining our fiscal stability in a situation that I think is going to be increasingly chaotic because of the multiple changes in our income stream and the rules on how we do business,” Letherman said. “We have today probably the best group of financial people and experienced people in county government on the council, and I think the goal for this next year, or two or three, is going to be to take that talent and to focus it in such a way that people in Elkhart County get the most return on their money from the taxes they pay.

“We’ve got an outstanding group of commissioners, I think we’ve got an outstanding council, and that team I think is perfectly capable of being very successful in getting the county through this coming period,” he said.

Dennis E. Sharkey

“Elkhart County has been extremely good to me in the past, and I still enjoy giving back,” Sharkey said of his reasons for choosing to run for another term. “It feels as though I have the experience in business, and in leadership, to continue to do an excellent job, or a better job in Elkhart County government.

“The council has been frugal, and fiscally responsible, and I would like to keep it that way,” he said.

As for what issue he sees as currently most pressing for the County Council, Sharkey noted property tax reform and the effects it has had and will have on the county in the coming months.

“We’ve talked about the caps — 1 percent for homeowners, 2 percent for rental property, and 3 percent for business — and how that is going to filter down not only to county government, but also the budgets of township, the budgets of schools — how are they going to be affected? Right now we don’t know. We really don’t know,” Sharkey said. “This year may be a difficult year for county and city governments, and I think experience is the key, whether it be commissioners or councilmen.”

When asked if he would support an additional local option income tax in order to make up for some of the revenue lost due to the new caps, Sharkey also indicated his opposition to such a suggestion, but added that he would agree to consider it in the future if the need proved dire enough.

“Would I support a local option income tax? Not at this time, no,” Sharkey said. “But, if it got down to the point where we had to come up with some kind of funding for our schools and cities and towns, after they’ve cut their budgets to the bare bones, I would support a local option income tax. But only if we could keep the money that was collected by our employers, keep it in the county rather than sending it down to the state level, and just hoping that we get it back.”

David M. Ashe

“The reason I’m running for County Council is because I enjoy public service,” Ashe said of his candidacy. “I used to be on the Elkhart City Council from 2000 to 2003, and was council president from 2002 to 2003. I enjoyed my time of service then, and thought this would be a good opportunity to try again.”

Like both Letherman and Sharkey, Ashe noted property tax reform as the most pressing issue affecting the council at this time.

“With the recent property tax overhaul, I think the biggest will be looking at ways that we can make up the difference in some of the decline in income that we’re going to have coming toward the county,” Ashe said. “That could mean making cuts in government spending, which I would prefer to do.”

As for the passage of an additional local option income tax, Ashe said if elected he would vote against such a suggestion, noting instead his desire to see spending cut at the local and state level.

“I’d have to say I’m opposed to an additional local option income tax,” Ashe said. “I’d rather look at ways to make cuts in our spending, other than just do away with one tax, and then turn around and create a new one in its place.

“Sometimes you don’t have an option, but you know, that’s my view. I’d just as soon not have to do something like that, if we can find ways to make the cuts elsewhere,” he said.

David B. Pixey

“Well I’ve lived in Elkhart County for all my life, born and raised, and in the city of Elkhart I got a little taste of what a councilman can and cannot do. I was on the council for a little over a year, and really enjoyed it after being elected in December of 2006 to replace Steve Bowers, who became judge,” Pixey said. “I see some issues coming before the county that I feel I have the drive and energy to address, those being the property tax issues and the increase in income tax coming into the county.”

According to Pixey, government spending is currently the biggest issue facing Elkhart County, particularly the spending involved in such major projects a new bridge work and rehabilitation, the new jail and plans for a new juvenile detention center.

As for the possibility of an additional local option income tax, Pixey said he is and will remain admittedly opposed to the suggestion.

“I’m against a local option income tax. We already have a tax, the EDIT tax,” Pixey said. “I don’t like more taxes. We need to shore up spending now. You can’t keep going to the people, because the peoples’ income is not going up at the same rate the government spending is going up.

“I think we need to justify every nickel that’s spent, because we’re going to be facing some real interesting times financially county wide, with municipalities facing shortages of income, as well as local government. I think it’s high time we put our heads together collectively — counties, cities, municipalities — and work together to get the most out of the tax payer’s dollar,” he said.

Trevor A. Wendzonka

“About a year ago now, elected officials, co-workers and other friends started asking me if I would consider running for the council,” Wendzonka said of his reasons for throwing his hat in as a candidate. “I always have thought the council can be the most influential piece of county government, since they control the spending and the tax rate. It’s a great responsibility.

“I am prepared for this task, and I have the experience because I’ve witnessed how local government runs for most of the last decade. I bring to the table the knowledge of how these departments work and what they need to improve,” he said.

When asked what he considers the most pressing issue for the council at this time, Wendzonka noted money and its use in county projects as topping his list.

“The county continues to address significant projects, and uses its funds wisely and thoughtfully. Projects are scrutinized to make sure taxpayers receive the best deal,” Wendzonka said. “I strongly believe county government can do more than one thing at a time, especially when the funding sources for projects — Six Span Bridge from major bridge and the juvenile center from the criminal justice income tax, for instance — are clearly identified.”

As for the possibility of approving an additional local option income tax as an alternate form of revenue for the county, Wendzonka said he would not be opposed to such a proposal, but only under specific circumstances.

“I’ve said all along the property tax rate for Elkhart County government is good, but it can be better. I think you get there by giving departments the necessary resources to make operations more efficient,” Wendzonka said. “The council should use its authority to set the goals and expect results.”

Before deciding on support of an additional local option income tax, Wendzonka said he would like to see the council continue its support of the consolidation of the Sheriff’s Department into one location as well as the newly pursued fiber-optic network, both of which he thinks will allow the county to run more efficiently, and as a result, more cost effectively.

“I will support an increase only if the funds generated result in an equal reduction of the property tax rate,” Wendzonka said.