The sign in front of Christopher Roark's quad-styled home says it all: "Losing Home ... Taxes To High ... Need Work."

Roark is so hard-pressed to scrape together enough money to pay a $1,077 monthly house payment by Sept. 1, he shines a light on the sign at night for the off-chance a motorist tooling along nearby Main Street will catch a glimpse of it and understand his plight. He said his payment rose $722 a month because of the 2002 property reassessment in Lake County.

His other option to keep the mortgage at its present $366 (plus a $168 per month line of credit payment), is to pay the entire $5,780 still owed in 2002 taxes.

"All I got at this point is hope," said the tattooed laborer with a GED and two construction accidents on his record. The latest episode broke his back in two places, kept him disabled nearly two years and put him on the dreaded underground "blacklist" with local hiring halls.

"All I want is a job, so I can keep my house," he said.

Daniel Lowery, executive director of Northwest Indiana Quality of Life Council, said he feels Roark's pain.

Lowery is a key player in a consortium studying the impact the reassessment has had on property taxpayers across Lake County, as well as the cost of government.

The consortium includes Indiana Business Research Center, the Center for Sustainable Regional Vitality, a for-profit organization called Partners for Good, and the Local Government Academy. It was formed when taxpayers suffered sticker shock after learning the effect reassessment had on their property taxes.

In places like Gary, Hammond, East Chicago and Whiting, where the industry's share of the tax burden fell from 42 percent down to 18 percent, the property tax burden on homeowners grew from 39 percent to 56 percent.

Individuals popped up with bills that showed taxes rising, in some cases, from $1,200 to more than $20,000.

How would this study speak to a person like Roark?

Lowery said the study, which began four weeks ago and is estimated at $90,000, will determine if the taxes were distributed fairly. It will examine the cost of government services. A 2 percent cap proposed by Gov. Joe Kernan also will be assessed, as will the impact the property tax situation could have on jobs. If the cost of government is too high, than Lowery said one might expect to see a spike in property taxes -- two scenarios acting as a deterrent on economic development and the ability for Roark and others to find jobs.

"We'll be looking at this on the taxing side and also on the economic development side," Lowery said.

Beginning today, Lowery will present weekly articles in The Times on the progress of the study that will appear on the Opinion Page. The weekly articles are expected to continue through the end of the year.

It is the consortium's hope the public will be educated, through these articles, on how taxes and government work.

"We plan to compare costs of various governmental functions across governmental units, like the cost of garbage collection, library services and public education," Lowery said. "At the end of the year, when all is done, we'll compare units of governments: one municipality to another, one school system to another. There will be a report, where all the data will be brought together to set up benchmarks that can be tracked year-to-year."

The ultimate goal, according to Lowery, is to help set a benchmark for the future and publish data that could play a role in future budget sessions.

"There may be some implications for state-level legislation early in the year," he said.

Lowery said the consortium is committed to producing 21 articles.

Meanwhile, Roark said he is combing through closets to collect materials for a rummage sale.

Income from his wife, Dana, helps, Roark said, but her work from waitressing and cleaning averages about $200 a month -- a sum that's not even close to paying their former $366 monthly mortgage on their $96,000 home.

"We can't borrow twice on the house," he said. "But I do have an '89 Camero I now need to sell."

What bothers the Roarks most is they put $35,000 down on their home to keep payments low in case of some kind of accident, or mishap.

"We never banked on this," he said.

Article © Anywhere Communications All Rights Reserved