ACTION LINES
INDIANA ASSOCIATION OF CITIES AND TOWNS MAGAZINE
Taking Aim
CONTENTS NOVEMBER / DECEMBER 2016 VOLUME 19 / ISSUE 6
ACTION LINES IACT OFFICERS Greg Goodnight President Kokomo Mayor Lloyd Winnecke First Vice President Evansville Mayor Brenda Young Second Vice President Clerk-Treasurer, Nashville Matthew Greller Executive Director & CEO REGULAR STAFF CONTRIBUTORS Rhonda Cook Deputy Director and Chief Federal and State Policy Officer Brian Gould Government Affairs Director
Natalie Hurt Special Events & Conferences Director Erin JamisonKoenig Communications Coordinator Jennifer Simmons Deputy Director & COO Jodie Woods General Counsel ADVERTISING Anne Trobaugh Corporate Relations Director
10
14
DEPARTMENTS IN PLACE
IN ACTION 4
MUNICIPAL DEADLINES
7
QUESTION OF THE MONTH
14 CYBERSECURITY
What is a “data breach” under Indiana law and if there is a data breach, do the data breach laws apply to municipalities?
IN WRITING 10 FROM THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR Our Aim: Help Build Quality Communities through Grassroots Advocacy and Telling Your Stories
20 BODY CAMERA LAW / PUBLIC RECORDS REQUEST IN MEMBERS 23
MEMBER NEWS
24
MEMBER Q&A Mayor Ted Ellis, Bluffton
26
CALENDAR & WEBINARS
IN BRIEF 30 TIMELINE 125 Years of IACT History
Indiana Association of Cities and Towns | 125 W. Market St. Suite 240 Indianapolis, IN 46204 | Phone (317) 237-6200 | Fax (317) 237-6206 | www.citiesandtowns.org Actionlines (ISSN 1092-6259) is published by the Indiana Association of Cities and Towns. Statements of fact and opinion are the responsibility of the authors alone and do not imply an official opinion on the part of the officers, staff or membership of IACT. Indiana elected municipal officials receive an annual subscription to this publication through payment of their municipality’s membership dues. IACT Associate Members receive an annual subscription to this publication through payment of their annual membership dues. The annual subscription rate is $50. POSTMASTER: Send address changes to Actionlines, 125 W. Market St., Suite 240, Indianapolis, IN 46204.
NOVEMBER / DECEMBER 2016
ACTIONLINES
3
IN ACTION INSIDE • •
Municipal Deadlines Question of the Month
MUNICIPAL DEADLINES NOVEMBER 10
Due date for second installment of 2015 pay 2016 property tax bills. IC 6-1.1-22-9
20
Last day to report and make payment of state and county income tax withheld during October to the Department of State Revenue, Indianapolis.
DECEMBER 1
Last day to certify names of persons who have money due them for salaries, wages or other reasons to the County Treasurer for determining if such persons owe delinquent taxes. IC 6-1.1-22-14
20
Last day to report and make payment of state and county income tax withheld during November to the Department of State Revenue, Indianapolis.
30
Deadline for units to file shortfall excess levy appeals with the Department. IC 6-1.1- 18.5-12(a)(2) Deadline for towns to adopt salary ordinance for 2017. IC 36-5-3-2. Note that the ordinance must be adopted the year before it is effective. Deadline for counties other than Marion County to adopt salary ordinance for 2017. IC 36-2-5-3 Last day for a new civil taxing unit to become established in order to qualify for property taxes payable in 2018. IC 6-1.1-18.5-7
JANUARY 2017 1
Effective date for local income tax rate changes adopted by ordinance after August 31 and before November 1. IC 6-3.6-3-3 Assessment and valuation date for all tangible property, including annually assessed mobile homes under IC 6-1.1-7 (2017 pay 2018 tax bills for real property; 2017 pay 2017 tax bills for annually assessed mobile homes under IC 6-1.1-7). IC 6-1.1-1-2; IC 6-1.1-1-19; IC 6-1.1-2-1.5 Date by which annexation must become effective so that reorganized unit can seek adjusted max levy for 2018.
20
Last date to report and make payment of state and county income tax withheld during December to Department of Revenue, Indianapolis.
31
Units file 2016 Annual Salary Report (100R) with SBOA. The 100R must be filed before the Department can approve a 2018 budget or additional appropriations for a taxing unit. IC 5-11-13-1 Last day to make report and complete the payment of federal tax and F.I.C.A. (Social Security Tax) tax withheld in the fourth quarter of the preceding year to the District Director of Internal Revenue. Each employee shall be furnished Form W-2 in duplicate, showing compensation paid during the preceding year, federal tax withheld and social security tax withheld. Last day to provide each employee with Form WH-2 in duplicate or copy of W-2 for state and local income tax withheld. Last day to file Form 100-R, Report of Names and Compensation of Officers and Employees on Gateway.
4
ACTIONLINES
NOVEMBER / DECEMBER 2016
This feature should not be considered a complete list of deadlines. If you know of an important deadline, please submit it to Erin Jamison-Koenig at ejamisonkoenig@citiesandtowns.org.
IN ACTION
?OTM
QUESTION OF THE MONTH What is a “data breach” under Indiana law and if there is a data breach, do the data breach laws apply to municipalities?
ANSWER: Like most states, Indiana has a general “breach notification law” found at IC 24-4.9. A general breach notification law is different from one of several specific federal laws that have rules regarding data security and breaches such as HIPAA (Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act), HITECH (Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act), COPPA (Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act) and the Driver’s Privacy Protection Act. It is clear that IC 24-4.9 does not apply to state government. The Indiana law does apply to “any legal entity” that owns or licenses computerized data that includes personal information. Presumably this includes a municipality having such information. “Personal information” is defined as a social security number with more than 5 digits shown or a driver’s license number, a state identification card number and a credit card number or a financial account number or debit card number (in combination with a security code, password, or access code that would permit access to the person’s account) when more than 4 digits shown. If the data base owner discovers, or is notified that there has been an unauthorized acquisition of computerized data that compromises the security, confidentiality or integrity of personal information as defined above (whether in electronic format or transferred to another media e.g. paper when lost, stolen or copied with limited exceptions), the data base owner must notify the Indiana resident of the breach if it could result in identity deception, theft or fraud involving the Indiana resident. It does not matter if such deception, theft or fraud is unlikely, only if it is possible. Also, if an entity has personal information about out-of-state residents, out-of-state data breach notification laws may be triggered.
The Indiana breach notification law also preempts the authority of a local government unit from making any enactment dealing with the same subject matter as this article.
NOVEMBER / DECEMBER 2016
ACTIONLINES
7
IN WRITING FROM THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR & CEO MATTHEW C. GRELLER
Our Aim: Help Build Quality Communities through Grassroots Advocacy and Telling Your Stories IACT has been in existence for 125 years. 125 years of advocating, educating, convening and strengthening cities and towns. I couldn’t be more proud of the work we have done and continue to do. However, like all organizations it’s important to take time for reflection and get a little introspective. So, that’s what we’ve been doing – taking a long hard look in the mirror and developing a plan for how we can improve. Last month, at the extremely successful 2016 IACT Annual Conference & Exhibition, the Board of Directors approved and I unveiled to the membership a plan to reimagine IACT. The exciting undertaking is a reflection of the revolution taking shape in cities and towns across Indiana. This revolution is driven by the need to create quality places and attract workforce talent. As a result of our work we envision a more vibrant, engaged, relevant, modern, collaborative and innovative organization. This vision represents the qualities Hoosier communities strive to embody and the qualities IACT needs to be bold advocates on your behalf. To ensure these qualities aren’t just words on a page, we have created a Statement of Purpose to service as a guiding force. A reimagined IACT, under this new Statement of Purpose, means a comprehensive modernization of how we function. New legislative governance model. A smaller legislative committee with increased responsibilities will allow the association to be more nimble, forward thinking and strategic. And, a three-tiered legislative agenda will foster collaboration, focus on both quality of place and government efficiency measures, and include both short and long-term solutions.
10
ACTIONLINES
NOVEMBER / DECEMBER 2016
Statement of Purpose To foster, promote and advocate for the success of Hoosier municipalities as laboratories of innovation, hubs of talent and engines driving our state’s economy.
Grassroots Advocates. Our staff is going to hit the road to help foster relationships between municipal officials and lawmakers. Making strong connections will allow for greater collaboration on meaningful pieces of legislation. Storytelling. We are going to be in your community, gathering stories of innovation and creativity, and helping you tell those stories. Sharing your successes and linking legislators with the positive work they do is also on the storytelling to-do list. Building Partnerships. Digging deeper and thinking broader will become the norm. Following this modernization process we want to emerge as thought leaders on municipal issues and forge new alliances to help accomplish our goals. Laboratories for Innovation. Cities and towns are hubs of innovation. IACT needs to follow suite. We will identify opportunities for research and drive municipal policy discussions in Indiana.
IN WRITING Education and Events. We will still provide the same education services our members need, want and expect. However, we’ll examine how we provide these services to ensure that our delivery matches your expectations. Communication. This modernization needs to stretch beyond how IACT provides services to its members. If we are going to act more modern, we need to look more modern and function that way, too. A new logo, a rebuilt website, and a highly functional mobile app with a digital municipal directory are all in store. Finally, and most notably, we want a name that reflects our
reimagined organization. Therefore, in 2017, IACT will become AIM. Accelerate Indiana Municipalities. There is no cause for fear. We will still be the same people you rely heavily upon for advocacy, education, communication and the Medical Trust. Those core functions will not change. The plan, however, is to do them better and evolve into a more relevant, bold organization. I hope you are as energized as we are. In the coming weeks you’ll be hearing more about this reinvention. I look forward to sharing it with you and celebrating in what will surely be a very successful, exciting New Year.
IN PLACE
CYBERCRIME @ CITY OR TOWN HALL Discussions of prevention and response can protect your community GERALD CLIFF, PH.D., RESEARCH DIRECTOR, NATIONAL WHITE COLLAR CRIME CENTER As local governments embrace technology and use such financial instruments as credit and debit cards and digital currencies to accept payment for taxes, utility fees, traffic fines, parking fees, and more, the likely result will be increased exposure to personally identifiable information (PII) being compromised, which is part of the reason that identity theft is the nation’s fastest growing category of crime. Local governments of all population sizes maintain records containing names, addresses, ages, and Social Security numbers of employees, taxpayers, contractors, and volunteers. It is a rare entity that does not maintain these records in an electronic format. It might seem illogical to the local government manager of a small community to envision that the Chinese military, a Russian cybercrime gang, or the Syrian Electronic Army would target his or her community’s computers when they could be trying—and in many cases succeeding—to hack into the U.S. State Department, the White House, or the CIA. While a local database of taxpayers may not yield the millions
14
ACTIONLINES
NOVEMBER / DECEMBER 2016
of records that hacking Target stores, Chase Bank, or some other national chain will, hitting several such smaller and softer targets can yield results that can still bring significant return to identity thieves. Unfortunately for the owner of those records, it can also bring tremendous cost in dealing with the incident. Major corporations typically have a large reserve with which to address data breaches. Local governments, however, might be bound to a more narrowly constructed budget and perhaps do not have the luxury of a financial reserve with which to prevent—or effectively respond to—a data breach. Believing that your locality’s IT system is too insignificant a target for a hacker tends to ignore some of the reasons, other than identity theft, that hackers will break into your system. Remember, data breach is not limited to someone hacking into your IT system. A data breach can be the result of lost or stolen paper documents, an insider abusing his or her employment-related access to the system, a lost or stolen laptop or portable electronic storage media, or improper disposal of such electronic devices as
IN PLACE copiers and computers capable of retaining information on their internal memory. Then there is the activist hacker who simply wants to disrupt the business of the government entity that somehow offended or disadvantaged him or her, or the political activist who wants to make a statement in support of a favorite agenda. Citing a report by the National Association of State Chief Information Officers (NASCIO), Governing magazine noted in 2011 that 50 percent of states NASCIO surveyed reported spending less than 3 percent of their IT budgets on security. The private sector by comparison spends 5 percent or more, often of a substantially larger pool of resources. Local governments that have not been victimized tend to ignore the potential threat and may be less likely to allocate sufficient funding to a problem that hasn’t happened.
THREATS ABOUND Recent events in a number of communities, including Ferguson, Missouri, provide ample illustration of the damage “hactivism” can do to a city’s computer system. Hactivism refers to the use of computer technology to promote political goals (e.g., free speech, human rights). Government Technology magazine reported in August 2014 that following the high-profile incidents in Ferguson, the city’s IT system was compromised, the Internet crashed, the city’s website went down, and phones ceased working at city hall. The hacker group Anonymous claimed responsibility and left warnings like this: “If you abuse, harass, or harm the protesters in Ferguson, we will take every Web-based asset of your departments and federal agencies off-line.” Since that time PII of the chief of police and photos of his home, his wife, and daughter have been released on the Internet. In March 2014, the Albuquerque, New Mexico, police department was bracing for a potential cyberattack by an Internet hacktivist group in response to the March 16 fatal police shooting of James M. Boyd; however, a brief interruption in website availability was all that was reported. In November 2014, Anonymous did shut down the Cleveland, Ohio, website in response to a police shooting of a juvenile armed with a replica handgun. An additional threat is the disgruntled employee who has just been disciplined or terminated and decides to take revenge on the employer. In July 2008, ABC News reported on a disgruntled IT employee of the city of San Francisco, who took measures that gave him access to areas of the network that he was not authorized to access. The employee created a secret password that gave him exclusive access to most of the city’s data, enabling him to prevent other authorized users from gaining access to the system. Costs of a data breach can be devastating to an already tight local budget. The Ponemon Institute produces an annual survey on the cost of data breaches. The Institute found in its “2016 Cost of Data Breach: Global Analysis,” that “the average cost paid for each lost or stolen record containing sensitive and confidential information increased from $154 in 2015 to $158 in this year’s study.”
INTRUSION COSTS The true cost of cyber intrusion is difficult to estimate. There is no one repository for reported incidents of cyber intrusions. The Privacy Rights Clearinghouse (https://www. privacyrights.org) maintains a database that is updated frequently and houses reported incidents dating back to 2005. The Identity Theft Resource Center (http://www. idtheftcenter.org) began generating a yearly breach report for 2013 and continues into 2014. The Breach Level Index (http://breachlevelindex.com) is a third source that provides reports for tracking data breaches. The National White Collar Crime Center (NW3C; www. nw3c.org) recently examined a total of some 5,000 reported data breach reports obtained from the above three sources. The incidents were categorized into several broad categories, including business, retail, education, governmental, and nonprofit organizations. From that information, a total of 629 incidents of data breaches at the state, county, and municipal levels accounted for the exposure of more than 54.5 million records of individuals’ PII since 2005. For the financial implications of this, recall the previously mentioned average of $158 cost per lost record noted above.
Percentage of total government data breaches since 2005:
23.8%
19.3%
19.2%
17.7%
Disclosure
Physical
Portable
Hacking
14.0%
3.1%
Insider
1.7%
Unknown
Stationary
Source: National White Collar Crime Center. Sample Size of 629 is the number of cyber intrusion cases reported by local and state government entities.
NOVEMBER / DECEMBER 2016
ACTIONLINES
15
IN PLACE
COMPROMISED PERSONAL INFORMATION It is important to remember that confidential PII can be compromised in a number of ways that do not involve hacking. The analysis by NW3C, indicated in Figure 1, found that unintended disclosure was the most frequent cause of data breach encountered by governmental entities, accounting for 23.8 percent of the total. A good example of such an incident was noted when one local government mistakenly used the wrong-sized window envelopes to send out income tax forms to its employees, unintentionally exposing Social Security numbers along with their names and addresses. Physical loss or stolen non-electronic physical records represented the second highest category of data breach, accounting for 19.3 percent of the total. This category could include documents containing PII that were left in vehicles and in briefcases or other carrying devices that were reported as either lost or stolen. Hacking came in third, accounting for 18.2 percent, indicating that as a security threat, it still ranks quite high as an issue that needs to be taken seriously. Lost or stolen portable electronic devices, including laptops, CDs, and such portable electronic media storage devices as external hard drives, USB flash drives, and secure digital (SD) memory cards accounted for 17.7 percent of the sample. Malicious insider activity accounted for 14 percent of the total. When compared with the overall sample of almost 4,500 entities surveyed in which insiders accounted for 12.4 percent, it appears that the insider threat in governmental entities is only
16
ACTIONLINES
NOVEMBER / DECEMBER 2016
slightly higher than in the overall sample covering multiple types of businesses and the education sector. The potential ramifications of a malicious insider activity where such confidential law-enforcement-only information as investigative case files, witness names, or other information is accessed could significantly magnify the overall impact of this type of data breach. Of the remaining causes of data breaches, lost or stolen stationary devices and unknown taken together only accounted for less than 5 percent of the total. Lost or stolen stationary devices consisted of desktop computers, copiers, and fax machines that contained digital memories. It may be that rather than being lost or stolen, these devices are being improperly disposed of without having their memories properly cleared of confidential information. The marginally good news appears to be that data breaches due to malicious outside intrusion into government IT systems, excluding federal, accounts for only 18.2 percent of the 629 number of incidents analyzed. The rest of the loss of confidential information causes could potentially be addressed by policy through: • Rigorous employee education. • More stringent rules regarding access and use of confidential records. • A rigorously followed policy regarding proper disposal of used or leased equipment. • A strong policy of investigation and corrective action to dissuade carelessness and unauthorized access of confidential governmental records.
IN PLACE The civil liability attached to a data breach is also a concern when discussing the potential cost of an incident. When the question is asked—“Can a governmental entity be sued for damage resulting from a data breach?”—the answer is: You can be sued for anything. The likelihood that the plaintiff will succeed may be a different matter. To shed some light on this issue, NW3C’s research attorney assembled an in-depth analysis on this issue, and a white paper is available at the research section of www.nw3c.org. If local government managers need more information, the NW3C research attorney can provide complimentary consultation on the legal analysis.
REDUCING THE IMPACT
on antivirus software and anti-intrusion measures. Also be sure that IT professionals in charge of systems are regularly staying on top of the latest developments in malware and intrusion methodologies as they evolve. Look for suspicious activity on the network. Daily use of any system will typically yield some form of identifiable standard or pattern. Knowing what is normal will make it easier to identify and deal with any anomalies. Periodic audits of activity and looking for anomalies that stand out from otherwise normalized traffic patterns can help avoid a data breach before it happens. Restrict IT system use to business only. Prohibit surfing the Internet, social media, or anything that is not work related on worksite computers. Depending on the position of the employee, there may need to be limited exceptions, but to the greatest extent possible, restrictions should be established and enforced. Have an effective incident response plan in place before the data breach. The plan should require periodic assessment and modification as technology and system intrusion methodology evolves. Complete support of top management is necessary to maintain an effective defense against data breach so management needs to be continually briefed on the status of the plan, its required modifications, the results of periodic reviews, and newly emerging threats. Conduct “fire drills.” Stage simulated data breach events to rehearse and evaluate response to a data breach incident. Maintain a plan for effective customer notification and remedial action if a breach occurs. When PII is compromised, it is essential to have a plan to notify those affected by the breach. If possible, provide identity theft prevention instruction and counseling and identity theft monitoring services by a recognized provider. Establish a hotline for dealing with reported identity theft incidents that may be the result of the breach. Having an effective response plan in place could help mitigate civil claims of negligence as well as the inevitable political fallout from such an event. Investigate cyber intrusion insurance. Insurance policies are available to cover data breaches; evaluate your needs to see which might make sense for your community. Always report incidents. Make sure that all data breaches are reported as required to the appropriate law enforcement authority.
In short, the NW3C’s conclusion was that in most cases, maintaining an accurate, reliable criminal information system stocked with legal and complete information carries no greater exposure to civil or criminal liability than other governmentrelated activities. Absent a handful of (presumably) uncommon fact patterns discussed in the above-referenced white paper, the only real danger to the governmental entity is negligence, which is hardly a new area of risk. For government administrators interested in minimizing costs or a data breach, however, reading the white paper is recommended. The obvious question that remains is: How does an organization mitigate the threat and reduce any potential financial impact of a data breach? A review of the available literature by NW3C on the issue of data breaches revealed that several sources agree on the course of action to take that should at least reduce the likelihood of a data breach and potentially reduce the cost of recovery, when and if one occurs. The list was further reviewed by NW3C’s Computer Crimes Section so as to ensure the most complete list of procedures possible. Here is a synopsis of those recommendations: Strictly enforce password policies. Maintain a policy that requires users to regularly select and change satisfactorily strong passwords. Also maintain clearly written, understandable policies regarding access and use of the IT system; educate users; monitor adherence to policies; and most of all, enforce violations of those policies. Policies are of little use if they are not enforced with appropriate corrective action when violations are identified. Restrict remote access. Closely monitor remote access by employees who may use portable computers during workrelated travel. Also limit and closely monitor any remote access into your system by outside vendors, contractors, and service providers. Where it is necessary for a third-party vendor or service provider to have access to a government’s IT system, be sure that the process is carefully vetted and appropriate safeguards are in place on the third party’s IT system. Also engage in periodic monitoring. Deploy effective antivirus software. Make sure IT profession- This article was originally printed in the September 2015 Issue of Public Management als have knowledge of and adhere to current industry standards magazine, a publication of the International City/County Management Association.
18
ACTIONLINES
NOVEMBER / DECEMBER 2016
IN PLACE
Body Camera Law/Public Records Requests LINDSEY MOSS, IACT ASSISTANT GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS DIRECTOR AND LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL
Effective July 1, 2016, there is a new framework under Indiana’s Access to Public Records Act for certain law enforcement recordings. For municipalities who already have or are considering implementing body-worn camera programs for their police officers, it is important to understand the full ramifications of this new law. Now, all recordings of a law enforcement activity captured by a police officer’s body-worn or vehicle-attached camera must be retained for a minimum of 190 days. In some circumstances, the recording will have to be retained for longer – for example, if a complaint is filed regarding activity depicted in the recording, if a requestor asks in writing that the recording be retained, or the recording is being used in an ongoing proceeding. In addition, there are mandatory obscuring requirements before a recording may be released to a member of the public. Under this new framework, body camera programs may be quite expensive. To help offset the cost, municipalities are allowed to charge a fee, uniform to all purchasers, of up to $150 for the direct cost of supplying the recording for release. “Direct cost” is defined in Ind Code 5-14-3-2 as 105% of the sum of the cost of: 1) the initial development of a program; 2) the labor required to retrieve electronically stored data; and 3) any medium used for electronic output for providing a copy of the electronically stored data. So long as $150 in direct costs for every copy is justified, the municipality is legally entitled to adopt a policy setting a uniform fee of $150. However, as a word of caution, in a recent conver-
20
ACTIONLINES
NOVEMBER / DECEMBER 2016
sation with the author of the legislation, doubts were expressed that a “carte blanche” policy to charge $150 for all recordings is appropriate in every circumstance. The example was given of a request for footage taken by one officer over a short period of time in response to a theft of a local gas station. If your municipality has or is considering adopting a policy setting the fee at the maximum $150, it will be important for you to be prepared to fully justify that amount. Apart from the minimum 190-day retention requirement, the bill also contains provisions that detail when a person must be allowed to inspect a recording and establishes the burden of proof that must be met in court by a plaintiff before a judge can order a local department to release a copy of a recording. As with any new legal framework introduced into law, there will be implementation questions and challenges. Leading into the 2017 session, it would be helpful for IACT to hear about these issues from attorneys and other city employees or law enforcement professionals who are practicing everyday under this new framework. In particular, IACT needs data showing the expense of compliance so we can give legislators definitive examples of how expensive it is to prepare and supply recordings for release to the public. If you have data to share or general questions/comments about public access to law enforcement recordings, please direct your message to IACT’S Assistant Government Affairs Director and Legislative Counsel Lindsey Moss at: lmoss@ citiesandtowns.org.
IN
INSIDE • • • •
Member News Member Q&A Calendar & Webinars Upcoming Events
MEMBERS MEMBER NEWS Lt. Governor Holcomb and the Office of Community and Rural Affairs announced Shipshewana as the newest member of the Indiana Main Street Program. The program encourages economic development, redevelopment and improvement to the downtown areas in Indiana cities and towns.
Flaherty & Collins Properties broke ground on a $32 million mixed-use development in Kokomo. The project will turn the former Apperson Brothers factory and surrounding property into a luxury apartment community with nearly 200 units and retail space.
Ventra Angola, an automotive industry parts manufacturer, will expand its operations in Angola, creating up to 88 new jobs by 2019. The company will invest $8.1 million to increase manufacturing capacity at its 128,000-square-foot facility.
The Town of Speedway’s Main Street revitalization earned the top honor at the Monumental Awards gala. The Indy Chamber event honors individuals and businesses in areas including architecture, real estate development and neighborhood revitalization.
The Downtown Enhancement Grant program awarded Madison, Tipton, Bremen, Mooresville and Newburgh grants funds ranging from $5,000 to $10,000 to improve the local quality of life, spur economic development and advance avenues for increasing private investment and employment to their downtown areas.
Evansville has unveiled plans for a major development in the city’s downtown. Mayor Lloyd Winnecke says construction has begun on an $18 million Hyatt Place Hotel and is expected to be complete in early 2018.
Outstanding Tradeshow Exhibit Services Inc. is planning to move operations from Illinois to North Judson. The company’s $1.2 million investment is expected to include 15 new jobs in the Town by 2019.
The Town of Highland and the City of Vincennes were awarded $50,000 for quality of place initiatives through the Place Based Investment Fund.
The state’s latest coworking space opened in Greencastle. Officials cut the ribbon in October to Launch Putnam County, which was established by three entrepreneurs in the area. The City of Whiting has broken ground on the Mascot Hall of Fame. Mayor Joe Stahura and mascots from throughout the country marked the beginning of construction on the $8 million facility slated to open in late 2017.
NOVEMBER / DECEMBER 2016
ACTIONLINES
23
IN MEMBERS
MEMBER Q&A
TED ELLIS BLUFFTON MAYOR
The Indiana Association of Cities will become Aim in 2017. Aim represents our transformation into a more modern, vibrant and relevant organization. Ted Ellis is a native of Bluffton and was elected Mayor in 1995 after serving nine years on the Wells County Council. Mayor Ellis has served as President of the National League of Cities and the treasurer of United Cities and Local Governments. He was the recipient of a John J. McCloy fellowship in Urban Affairs to study city issues in Germany. The mayor is also past president of IACT and was named a “Sagamore of the Wabash” by the Governor of Indiana. Mayor Ellis has been a strong supporter of IACT and we asked him to share his thoughts on the modernization of the organization. The modernization is a monumental change for the organization. Why do you think this is necessary when looking ahead to the next 125 years? One hundred and twenty-five years is a long time and I’m not certain that anyone can predict how changes effected today will impact cities and towns over a century in the future. Consider what was happening when IACT was founded in 1891: • • • •
Abroad, the European economy was weak and already in a recession. The U.S. was less than 2 years from it’s deepest-ever depression; In my city, the public was clamoring for an end to the open ditch carrying human and animal waste along the south side of the city and into a major river. They demanded that new streets be constructed to replace the muddy ones, but their demands exceeded their ability to pay for them.
Later, the mayor would bluntly describe the city’s finances as follows: “The city treasurer files his final report, [showing]….the general fund overdrawn. This of course is occasioned by the extensive street improvements … and when we consider the extent of these improvements we are only surprised that the treasury is in as good condition as it now is.” The citizenry was still restless over the immigrants—the Germans—who did not speak the language and yet, they said, took jobs away from the locals. And the Irish, who—while speaking their own brand of English—were reputed to drink,
24
ACTIONLINES
NOVEMBER / DECEMBER 2016
avoid work and take advantage of law-abiding citizens. Then there was the crime problem: In those days when communication was slow at best, horse thieves and swindlers found it easy to slither into the city, commit their criminal acts, and scurry out of town. All this to say that the basic challenges: the economy, the environment, streets, finances, immigration, intolerance and crime are still with us today, although they manifest themselves in slightly different ways. Over the years, horse thievery fell from the list of cities’ and towns’ major concerns and was replaced by others. Over the next 125 years, I’m sure that city officials’ specific issues will change while the underlying core concerns remain the same. One of the worst mistakes we can make going forward is to keep using old solutions to address new situations. That’s why the modernization is critical. The transformation started as a legislative change. How does the fresh vision and grassroots approach encourage engagement? First, it will allow us city and town officials to make more efficient and effective use of our time. One thing that has changed dramatically over the last century is our ability to communicate with our constituents as well as our lawmakers. All of us are subjected to floods of communications, which has the effect of diluting our message. We all spend a lot of time trying to be good advocates for our people, but our message can easily get lost in the mountain of other communications. To be heard, we will need to deepen our relationships with our legislators and focus on fewer issues. We all get bombarded with bulk mail pieces from our legislators, touting their support for motherhood, apple pie and the like. Most of us pay little attention to these mailings. Imagine, though, if your legislator, instead of a mailing, called you personally on the phone and (1) first asked how your son was enjoying his first year of college; (2) wished your spouse a happy birthday next week; and (3) concluded by saying: “There are a couple of bills that are very important to me this session and I need your help on them. I’ll be checking in with you every week to see what I can do to help. Is there anything you need from me?” CONTINUED ON PAGE 27
IN MEMBERS
CALENDAR & WEBINARS A
IACT CALENDAR
AFFILIATE CALENDAR
NOVEMBER
DECEMBER
30-1
Ball State – ICI/IACT Mayors Institute, Indianapolis
DECEMBER 6
Webinar – Watching Your Back: A Look at Cyber Security and Local Government
B
12
IACT Board of Directors Meeting, Indianapolis
C
12
IACT Legislative Committee Meeting, Indianapolis
13
Webinar – 2017 IACT Legislative Session Preview
E
D
8
Southern Mayors Roundtable, Charlestown
E
15
Northern Mayors Roundtable, Columbia City
UPCOMING WEBINARS
Watching Your Back: A Look at Cyber Security and Local Government DECEMBER 6, 2016 Increasingly, local governments are faced with cyber security challenges that span from protection of critical infrastructure, to wire fraud, to safeguarding personal information of citizens. Although the threats may seem daunting, many cyber-attacks can be prevented or mitigated by education and preparation. During this webinar, we will discuss the threat landscape, how those threats can be mitigated and, ultimately, how to respond to an event. whether enforcement is warranted in difficult situations.
A
2017 IACT Legislative Session Preview DECEMBER 13, 2016
B,C
D
26
ACTIONLINES
NOVEMBER / DECEMBER 2016
The upcoming legislative session is fast approaching and you need to know what lawmakers are talking about before the clock starts ticking in Indianapolis. Participants in this free webinar will hear about IACT’s expectations for this budget-writing session and our strategy for passing positive legislation to help cities and towns function more efficiently and create quality places.
IACT webinars qualify for one credit through the IACT Municipal Management Institute, sponsored by Wessler Engineering.
IN MEMBERS UPCOMING EVENTS Ball State – ICI/IACT Mayors Institute November 30 - December 1, 2016
This high-level learning experience, designed exclusively for mayors, has been an incredible success. By participating in the Institute, mayors will gain practical tools that can be applied to the real-life challenges public officials face on a daily basis. During this day and a half program Ball State faculty, guest speakers and IACT staff will present an agenda of highly substantive sessions that will lead mayors through unique leadership and problem solving exercises with their colleagues from across the state. This next session of Mayors Institute will cover important topics, including using crowdfunding to finance quality of place projects, exploring liability issues surrounding public safety cameras, and social media transparency concerns and legal dilemmas. Featuring many opportunities for the sharing of innovative, effective strategies to run city government, Mayors Institute sessions are timely, relevant and essential.
MEMBER Q&A: ELLIS CONTINUED FROM PAGE 24 The relationship would change dramatically. Now, use the same scenario with you as the caller and your legislator on the receiving end. That approach, which might only take ten minutes a week, is much easier and more effective than using the “buckshot” approach. What excites you the most about Aim and the impact on members? In a relatively short time, I believe that Aim will be a much more effective voice in Indianapolis. By focusing our efforts, we can effect significant changes that will allow us to be better leaders of our cities and towns. Better leaders make for better communities and that’s the reason that we hold these offices. Do you have any concerns about the transition period? One concern is that we let the perfect be the enemy of the good. The transformation from IACT to AIM is the result of a lot of thought and work, but it’s not the perfect plan. As one old general said, “The battle plan changes once the first shot is fired.” There will necessarily be some course corrections along the way, but those should not stop our forward progress. The second is a great temptation to sacrifice the future for the familiar. I’ll tell you a story about that another time, but change can make us all a little nervous and I’m no exception. What I do know is that fear can paralyze us or motivate us and it’s our choice how to react. The choice could not be clearer.
NOVEMBER / DECEMBER 2016
ACTIONLINES
27
30