Arguments begin at 1 p.m. in City of Carmel v. Certain Home Place Annexation Territory Landowners, 29A04-0510-CV-578.
The court had planned to consider the case a year ago, but delayed arguments until the Indiana Supreme Court could make a decision on a similar case also stemming from Carmel. That happened June 27 with the potentially landmark decision in City of Carmel, Indiana v. Certain Southwest Clay Township Annexation Territory Landowners, 29S00-0608-CV-300.
That ruling held that municipalities wanting to annex property could settle with landowners and, for the first time ever, interpreted the difference between signing a remonstrance and opposing an annexation.
In Home Place, landowners within the proposed Home Place Annexation Territory successfully challenged an annexation attempt by the city. Hamilton Superior Judge William Hughes ruled against Carmel because he did not believe the city showed how it could afford to annex the 1.6-square mile area centered at 106th Street and College Avenue. Carmel appealed, complaining that the trial court improperly engaged in an audit of its fiscal plan for annexation when it found that Carmel failed to sufficiently and specifically set forth the methods by which it planned to finance the services to be provided to Home Place following annexation.
The three-judge panel consisting of Judges Patricia Riley, Nancy Vaidik, and Michael Barnes will hear arguments, which can be viewed live online at the Indiana Court of Appeals website.