Subscriber Benefit
As a subscriber you can listen to articles at work, in the car, or while you work out. Subscribe Now
A court case dictating the outcome of whether two areas will become a part of the city of Bloomington is moving to trial after a judge lifted a hold on the case Wednesday in response to the city dropping two different suits debating the constitutionality of a state law related to its annexation attempts.
Special Judge Nathan Nikirk lifted the stay after the city said it dropped the constitutionality suits directly dealing with the two areas as a reason to move forward with the case.
“We’re just we’re relieved and looking forward to a trial that will at least cover the west side of Bloomington to let this orderly annexation proceed,” Mayor John Hamilton told Inside INdiana Business. “Cities have to grow. The boundaries need to adjust to reflect where density is happening. We’ve been doing that for 200 years and then we got stopped, so I’m looking forward to being able to continue that with a trial upcoming soon.”
The city said it appreciates the decision to expedite wrapping up the case. While annexation opponents wanted the measure so all areas are on the same constitutional ground, County Residents Against Annexation President Margaret Clements, said their confidence in all cases is unshaken.
“We feel that we’re in the moral right and that the law is on our side,” Clements said. “The judge, I think, had no other choice but to lift the stay, and we respect the judge’s decision.”
Clements said a supermajority of residents oppose what she says is an involuntary annexation in some areas, and they don’t think the move is in their best interest. The primary reason many oppose annexation is the increase in taxes because the outside perimeter’s population includes many elderly people on fixed incomes. Several people in previous public comments said the tax hikes will force them to move.
“Since the city is exercising its muscle, the people are exercising theirs,” she said. “And we feel that the residents will prevail.”
The city announced plans in 2017 to annex several areas around the perimeter of the city as it hoped to bring more land into the fold as the city grew. That effort has now amounted to about 8,155 acres and around 15,000 residents in seven areas: 1A, 1B, 1C, 2, 3, 4 and 5.
What makes Areas 1A and 1B different is the percentage of landowner signatures collected to oppose annexation. In those two areas, they sit in a purgatory of sorts: not enough signatures to outright vote down the annexation attempt and too many to be ignored. They sit between 50% and 65% opposition, meaning the matter heads before a judge to be decided. The other areas did not meet these thresholds.
The case was initially heading to trial in November when the judge ordered a pause in early September. This was after CRAA made a motion to hold off on trial until the constitutionality of the annexation is first decided — meaning they want to wait until the seven other legal matters all dealing with that subject are settled because it could have an impact on this case.
The court will likely schedule a new trial date when the parties meet next Monday.
Marathon in the courts
The city of Bloomington filed seven lawsuits, one for each annexation area, in 2022 to challenge a 2019 Indiana law having bearing on the validity of its annexation attempts. The law says sewer contracts over 15 years old that allow nonmunicipal residents to connect to those systems in exchange for not protesting if their area was annexed in the future are void.
The county auditor, who is the defendant in the cases, allowed for petition waivers to be signed and submitted by those covered under such contracts because she was following the current state law, which retroactively nullified those contracts. Those waivers are important because if enough are received in a 90-day period, the annexation attempt could be squashed or hashed out in court.
If the state law holds up in court, Bloomington will fail to annex those areas. However, if the city wins its case and the law is declared unconstitutional, the annexation of those areas is back on.
The city then said in September it would drop areas 1A and 1B from its court push “in light of the potential years-long constitutional litigation involved” and “in order to facilitate a more timely resolution of that annexation.” The city’s corporation counsel previously told Inside INdiana Business it did so in hopes of continuing forward with the other paused case.
Please enable JavaScript to view this content.