by

Abdul-Hakim Shabazz, Esq.

In Pike Township, the board that oversees taxpayer dollars wants to triple its own pay — from about $7,700 to nearly $22,000 a year, plus full-time benefits like health insurance, retirement, and gym memberships.

The three members leading the effort are Claudette Petersen, Kenya Perkins, and Demetrice Hicks. Petersen has become the ringleader of the proposal, arguing the position deserves full-time pay.

But while Petersen is the only one without personal financial baggage, her two colleagues — Perkins and Hicks — have multiple judgments, defaults, and even bankruptcy filings in the public record.

To be clear: no one is saying their financial history is the reason they’re asking for a raise. What we are saying is that when elected officials decide how much taxpayer money they should get, citizens have every right to take judicial notice of the facts.

What “Judicial Notice” Means (for the Non-Lawyers Among Us)

In legal terms, “judicial notice” means a court can accept certain facts as true because they’re already proven in reliable public records. Courts don’t need to re-prove a law or case record—they simply acknowledge it as fact.

That’s all this is: recognizing verified court filings from Indiana’s online docket system and the federal bankruptcy court. Nothing speculative, nothing secret—just what’s already on the record.

The Record

Board Member Kenya Perkins — Seven Cases:

  • Midland Credit Mgmt., Inc. v. Perkins — 49D01-2407-CC-031961 — Default Judgment $5,957.14 (2024)

  • Portfolio Recovery Assoc., LLC v. Perkins — 49D01-2105-CC-017899 — Dismissed under Trial Rule 41(E) (2023)

  • Portfolio Recovery Assoc., LLC v. Perkins — 49D03-2105-CC-017792 — Dismissed; Refiling Denied (2025)

  • Midland Credit Mgmt., Inc. v. Perkins — 49D13-1912-CC-051902 — Default $4,679.85; Paid (2020)

  • Midland Funding LLC v. Perkins — 49D05-1903-CC-011233 — Default $2,699.88; Paid (2020)

  • Citibank N.A. v. Perkins — 49D13-1809-CC-036271 — Default $2,414.74; Garnished; Paid (2021)

  • In re Kenya Tanganyika Perkins — 05-05805-JKC-13 — Chapter 13 Bankruptcy; ~$20,700 Discharged (2008)

Board Member Demetrice Hicks — Three Cases:

  • Discover Bank v. Hicks — 49D05-2411-CC-053731 — Default Judgment $7,085.50 (2025)

  • Capital One N.A. v. Hicks — 49D04-2411-CC-050576 — Dismissed (2024)

  • Bank of America N.A. v. Hicks — 49D03-2012-CC-043765 — Dismissed (2021)

Board Member Claudette Petersen — No Known Judgments or Bankruptcies

  • No civil or bankruptcy filings found in Indiana public records.

  • Currently leading the pay-raise proposal supported by Perkins and Hicks.

Why It Matters

Under Indiana law, township boards can vote on salary increases, but those raises cannot legally take effect until the next term of office begins. In Pike Township’s case, that means January 1, 2029 — after the current board’s term expires.

Even then, the proposed pay hike couldn’t happen without approval from the Indianapolis City-County Council, which has legal oversight under the UniGov statute.

So not only is the move politically tone-deaf — it’s legally moot for the people voting on it. They’re essentially voting themselves a future raise they may never see to collect — at least not politically.

No one’s accusing anyone of wrongdoing. But when two members are still digging out of past financial holes and the third is leading them toward a raise they can’t legally receive without city approval, the irony writes itself.

Because in Pike Township, the only thing getting inflated faster than salaries is the sense of entitlement.

Editor’s Note: The author is involved in ongoing litigation with the Pike Township Board. This commentary reflects publicly available information and independent opinion, not legal filings.