City of Boonville v. American Cold Storage
950 N.E.2d 764
| Ind. Ct. App. | 2011Background
- Boonville annexed 1,165 acres west of its limits via Ordinance 2008-2 on July 7, 2008.
- Public highways border portions of the proposed annexation, and landowners oppose the annexation.
- Landowners filed a remonstrance and a declaratory judgment action on October 3, 2008.
- Remonstrance required signatures from 65% of landowners in the annexed territory under I.C. § 36-4-3-11(a)(1).
- Booneville moved to dismiss arguing (i) tax-exempt parcels should be counted, (ii) waivers and non-territorial parcels should be excluded, and (iii) owners abutting roadways lack standing; trial court split rulings in Landowners’ favor on tax-exempt parcels and standing, but against them on abutting-roadways.
- Interlocutory appeal granted; court affirms in part, reverses in part, and remands.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether tax-exempt parcels count toward the 65% rule | Landowners | Boonville | Tax-exempt parcels must be counted |
| Whether Landowners have standing to seek declaratory relief | Landowners | Boonville | Landowners lack standing; declaratory judgment action dismissed |
| Whether parcels abutting public roadways should be counted in the 65% calculation | Landowners | Boonville | Parcels abutting highways not counted; adjacent owners lack standing |
Key Cases Cited
- Matter of Annexation of Certain Territory to the City of Princeton, 339 N.E.2d 807 (Ind. App. 1976) (tax-exempt property may be counted toward remonstrance standing)
- Arnold v. City of Terre Haute, 725 N.E.2d 869 (Ind. 2000) (one-parcel-one-vote counting regime for remonstrances)
- Reafsnyder v. City of Warsaw, 293 N.E.2d 540 (Ind. Ct. App. 1973) (declaratory relief exceptions when challenge attacks jurisdiction or procedural rights)
- Langbehn v. Town of Merrillville, 413 N.E.2d 680 (Ind. Ct. App. 1980) (standards for standing and declaratory relief in annexation)
- Bradley v. City of New Castle, 764 N.E.2d 212 (Ind. 2002) (remonstrance review is limited to Sections 11-13 absent fraud or rights violations)
- Matter of the Annexation Proposed by Ordinance No. X-01-95, 774 N.E.2d 58 (Ind. Ct. App. 2002) (review limits for non-remonstrance annexation issues)
- Matter of the Annexation Proposed by Ordinance No. X-02-93, 652 N.E.2d 878 (Ind. Ct. App. 1995) (remonstrance-centric judicial review framework)