The Johnson County Courthouse rises above South Main Street Bridge on Tuesday in Franklin. County officials voted in December not to fund further culvert and bridge repairs in Johnson County cities and towns.
Noah Crenshaw | Daily Journal
City and town leaders in Johnson County say they feel blindsided by county officials’ decision to cease funding bridge repairs. Some officials are considering legal action.
The Johnson County Board of Commissioners and the Johnson County Council voted to dissolve the county’s cumulative bridge fund in December. This stopped the flow of bridge and culvert repair funding for towns and cities beginning Jan. 1. For years, the county had been responsible for all bridges and culverts in the county, even those within city or town limits.
County officials will continue to fund repairs in unincorporated areas of Johnson County, said Luke Mastin, county highway director.
The fund was eliminated because of the inflated cost of materials for repairs. Material costs are outpacing the amount of money the county is pulling in from property taxes, and if the bridge fund were to continue, county officials would have to look at budget cuts in the county’s general fund, Mastin said. A cut of the general fund could mean a budget cut for virtually any county department, such as the sheriff’s office or health department.
At the cumulative bridge fund tax rate in effect for 2021, it generated about $660,000 in revenue in 2021, and in 2022, it generated about $715,000.
“Ultimately, it came down to a pretty simple math equation,” Mastin said. “… Realistically, if the county was going to keep the fund in place, the rate would need to be raised significantly.”
The county couldn’t raise the tax rate for the fund because of property tax caps imposed by state law, Mastin said.
Lack of notice
Leaders in the municipalities affected didn’t receive a letter about the decision to dissolve the fund until early February, more than a month after it took effect, and months after it was up for a vote by the county’s governing bodies, they said.
With 86 culverts and 18 bridges, Greenwood will take the biggest hit from this action by Johnson County.
“Financially, it would be just horrible, because we already have everything else and the other roads to take care of,” Greenwood Mayor Mark Myers said. “We had to do two bridges they should’ve done but we turned them back over just to get those projects done.”
The decision will make it difficult for the city to make repairs next year to the Smith Valley Road bridge over the Louisville & Indiana Railroad and a bridge on Fry Road just west of State Road 135, also slated for 2024, said Mark St. John, Greenwood city engineer.
The Smith Valley Road bridge project is already $3.6 million over the original estimated cost, and Greenwood officials would have to budget for that plus 20% of the original $2.4 million construction cost and $337,299 construction inspection, with the rest paid for by the Indianapolis Metropolitan Planning Organization, he said.
“We were blindsided on that,” St. John said. “I think if Johnson County thinks Greenwood is now responsible for bridges and culverts there would have to be interlocal (agreements) in place. I think more conversations about bridge conditions, inspections and responsibilities could’ve led up to that instead of having it all dropped on our laps via letter in early February.”
The town of Bargersville has its bridges and culverts covered under an interlocal agreement, separate from the bridge fund. If that agreement dissolves, however, the town would be financially responsible for 30 culverts and six bridges within its borders, Town Manager Dan Cartwright said during a Feb. 14 town council meeting.
“They know municipalities are upset about it. They did something really sneaky,” Cartwright said. “We had no notice, Greenwood had no notice, Franklin had no notice and Whiteland had no notice.”
Potential legal action
Officials in Greenwood and Franklin have questioned the legality of the decision, highlighting Allen County as the only other county without a cumulative bridge fund. And when the fund was dissolved Allen County and Fort Wayne entered an interlocal agreement to help cover those repairs, Myers said.
Allen County dissolved its bridge fund via a vote by the Indiana General Assembly in 2002, and some local officials believe that is the route Johnson County should take, too.
With talk of potential legal action, Whiteland may join other towns and cities in pursuing potential litigation, Town Council President Joe Sayler said during a Feb. 15 town council meeting. Sayler is also a member of Greenwood’s legal department.
“I would certainly think that we should keep an eye on what the other municipalities are doing,” he said. “I would imagine that with the scope of what (the county is) pushing off on other municipalities, which includes half-completed or projects that they’re abandoning, that this will likely go that direction.”
Also at that meeting, Whiteland Town Manager Jim Lowhorn said he was “not allowed a seat at the table” when county officials were talking about potentially eliminating the bridge fund.
Johnson County Attorney Adam Gadberry said he is confident county officials followed the proper legal procedures.
“Any response to any threats of possible litigation would just be speculative at this point,” Gadberry said in an email. “However, Johnson County followed all statutory requirements in the rescission of the Cumulative Bridge levy at the Johnson County Board of Commissioner’s Dec. 5, 2022 meeting.”
Under Indiana law, the governing body that implements a tax levy may reduce or rescind the annual levy if “a political subdivision considers it advisable.”
EDIT revenue
In August, the Johnson County Council approved a 0.2% Economic Development Income Tax, or an EDIT. The tax will generate money for the county government and Johnson County cities and towns starting this year.
The county government is set to receive an additional $4.4 million a year, while another $6.7 million goes to cities and towns. Greenwood gets $2.8 million of that money annually, and Franklin $2.5 million.
“They have been gracious enough to tell us that we get that portion of the EDIT tax that they passed last year. So we should be grateful,” Sayler said at the Whiteland meeting. “I don’t think any municipality in the county is particularly satisfied.”
The EDIT revenue is much more than what was used to cover bridge and culvert repairs under the cumulative bridge fund, Mastin said.
“In reality, they’re being blindsided with a bag of money to help take care of the infrastructure within those communities,” Mastin said. “It doesn’t seem like a terrible deal,”
He added the county did consider the financial impact on the cities and towns, and officials believe the EDIT fund supplements that.
“It’s not as if the county had not considered the impact on the cities and towns, and this change occurred at a time everyone is set to receive additional revenue of nine to 10 times the amount they were able to generate with the bridge fund,” Mastin said.
City and town officials already had plans on how to use the EDIT money before the bridge fund dissolved. Franklin officials planned to use some of the funds on other road repairs, Franklin Mayor Steve Barnett said.
Franklin officials plan to spend up to $2.5 million to repair streets across the city as part of the annual road maintenance program. With the cumulative bridge fund gone, they will assume responsibility of paying for 20 culverts and 13 bridges, which will make funding those projects more difficult, Barnett said.
“It’s going to hurt our bottom line by the county taking away these funds,” he said. “When we go to replace culverts, we’re looking at $500,000 to $1 million, depending on permitting.”
Even with the EDIT generating more than $2 million for Franklin this year, the total cost of repairs might exceed that, negating any advantage, Barnett said.
The 2023 Greenwood budget allocated funding for six new full-time firefighting positions. The original plan was to add three, but with the EDIT, they doubled it.
It’s unreasonable for county officials to expect cities and towns to use the money they had already budgeted for other priorities for bridge and culvert repairs, St. John said.
“Greenwood already has intentions for other uses for the money,” St. John said. “To say the EDIT tax can be used to cover bridges is like me telling my employees how to spend their paycheck.”
Daily Journal Multimedia News Editor Emily Ketterer, reporter Noah Crenshaw and Editor Leeann Doerflein contributed to this article.
Bridges and culverts in Johnson County
Greenwood: 86 culverts, 18 bridges
Franklin: 20 culverts, 13 bridges
Bargersville: 30 culverts, six bridges. All covered under interlocal agreement except one culvert.
Edinburgh: Four culverts, no bridges
New Whiteland: No culverts, two bridges
Princes Lakes: Six culverts, no bridges
Trafalgar: Nine culverts, no bridges
Whiteland: Five culverts, three bridges
Unincorporated Johnson County: 558 culverts, 115 bridges
BY THE NUMBERS
Estimated EDIT revenue
County government: $4,423,802
Greenwood: $2,840,028
Franklin: $2,549,816
Bargersville: $439,208
Edinburgh: $409,085
New Whiteland: $180,141
Whiteland: $161,733
Trafalgar: $62,273
Princes Lakes: $66,751
Total: $11,132,837
Source: Luke Mastin, Johnson County Highway Director
