City of Carmel v. Certain Southwest Clay Township Annexation Territory Landowners

Summary

The Indiana Supreme Court held that a municipality may amend an annexation ordinance and fiscal plan after a remonstrance is filed, including pursuant to a settlement approved by a majority of affected landowners. The court further held that the remaining objectors failed to establish the statutory requirement that at least 65% of landowners continued to oppose the annexation, and it reversed the trial court and directed judgment for Carmel.

Holdings

1. An annexing municipality may amend its annexation ordinance and supporting fiscal plan after a remonstrance has been filed and before the evidentiary hearing; the trial court must consider the amended ordinance, settlement, and revised plan.
2. Carmel's amended ordinance and revised fiscal plan satisfied the statutory fiscal-plan requirements because the plan adequately identified planned services, projected expenditures, funding sources, and the City's commitment and ability to provide comparable services.
3. The remaining landowners did not establish that at least 65 percent of the landowners continued to oppose the annexation after the settlement and referendum; therefore, the statutory conditions required to defeat the annexation were not all satisfied.

Questions Presented

1. Whether an annexing municipality may amend its annexation ordinance and fiscal plan after a remonstrance has been filed but before the statutory evidentiary hearing.
2. Whether Carmel's amended ordinance and revised fiscal plan satisfied the statutory prerequisites for annexation under Indiana Code section 36-4-3-13(d).
3. Whether the remaining landowners established the statutory opposition condition required to defeat an otherwise valid annexation under Indiana Code section 36-4-3-13(e)(2).

Disposition

reversed