Annexation: Common Questions Answered

Mayor John Hamilton attended the City Council meeting on April 12 to update council members and the public on annexation. Over the last several weeks, a considerable amount of misinformation has been shared about annexation, including costs, process, and defending city rights. We want to set the record straight on common recurring questions. You can watch the Mayor’s full remarks at: https://bton.in/TqW4i

 

 

What exactly is annexation? 

Annexation is a procedure for bringing unincorporated areas of a county into an adjacent incorporated city or town. In short, annexed properties become “in the city.” State law lets a city expand its boundaries to include existing developed or urban areas and to accommodate future growth opportunities and planning. 

 

The City proposed the overall annexation areas based on a variety of factors, including increases in population and density of development, opportunities for future growth, the I-69 expansion, and the City’s existing services. 

 

 

Why is annexation important?

The proposed annexations allow for the long-term planning necessary to accommodate a growing community and facilitate the planning, budgeting, and delivery of services and infrastructure.

 

Areas annexed into Bloomington receive enhanced services including policing, trash and recycling curbside collection, street and sidewalk/path construction and maintenance, stormwater management, access to Bloomington Transit, safety inspections for rental housing, neighborhood grants, trails, playgrounds and parks, and more. Sewer service may be provided to those not already receiving it. Those receiving sewer services now will experience a reduction in their rates.

 

While all residents of the city are also county residents, not all county residents live within the city limits. There is no prohibition to city and county residents alike employing and enjoying city parks, roads, city-sponsored activities, and a long list of public amenities. However, those living within city boundaries shoulder the burden of developing and supporting those public amenities that all can enjoy. Annexations like the one proposed by the City of Bloomington make distributing the responsibility for the amenities better match up with those benefiting from them by their proximity to the city. And by bringing members of our community who live just outside our borders formally into our city, we give these members a voice in the governance of our city–something they won’t have until they are annexed.

 

How does annexation work?

Indiana Code 36-4-3 sets out the process for annexation, which must be closely followed. One step in the process is the ninety-day “remonstrance” period, where owners who do not wish to be annexed may sign and submit petitions opposing the annexation. Landowners in the annexation areas were mailed notices advising them of the remonstrance period and how to remonstrate. Depending on the number of owners who submit valid remonstrance petitions, an annexation could fail, could succeed, or might become appealable to court.

 

The procedure for annexation that the City of Bloomington followed, as detailed in the Indiana Code, includes: 

• Mail notice to every property owner in the proposed annexation area of the dates and times for six public outreach sessions
• Hold the public outreach sessions
• Introduce the annexation ordinances in a City Council meeting and adopt fiscal plans
• Publish and provide notice to property owners of upcoming public hearings on the ordinances
• Hold the public hearings
• Hold a City Council meeting to consider the adoption of the ordinances
• Publish the adoption of the ordinances and mail information to property owners about the remonstrance process 

 

Why has the annexation process taken so long?  

Bloomington started annexation early in 2017 and would have completed the legal process in 2017. However, the state legislature suspended the annexation through the 2017 budget bill. The City went to court to challenge this suspension as an unconstitutional action by the state. That lawsuit went to the state supreme court and took nearly three years; in 2020, the state supreme court agreed with the City that what the state legislature had done violated our state constitution. The City promptly resumed the annexation process after that ruling.  

 

However, in 2019, while Bloomington was still in court challenging the state’s unlawful suspension of the annexation, the state legislature took advantage of the time it had bought and interfered with annexation again. This time it passed a law retroactively voiding most of the voluntary consents to annexation in Bloomington’s sewer extension contracts. Being able to rely on the enforceability of sewer extension contracts (and contracts generally) is critical to the current annexation and future development. If the General Assembly can retroactively nullify sewer extension contracts, Bloomington can no longer reliably enter into sewer extension contracts with owners outside its boundaries, which means that developments outside the City’s boundaries must now use an alternative wastewater solution that does not involve the City’s sewer infrastructure. Unfortunately, in many cases, alternative wastewater options may not be viable, as they don’t allow dense building or are prohibitively expensive.

 

So, the City has been forced to go back to court to challenge this second unconstitutional interference with annexation by the state.  

 

Why is the 2019 law voiding sewer contracts passed by the Indiana General Assembly unconstitutional?

The 2019 law violates clauses in both the Indiana and federal constitutions that prohibit legislatures from passing laws that retroactively change the terms of contracts that parties have voluntarily entered into (specifically, Article I, Section 24 of the Indiana Constitution and Article I, Section 10 of the US Constitution).  

 

Even if the 2019 law were constitutional, it cannot be applied to Bloomington’s annexations. Bloomington began annexation early in 2017 and would have completed the process in 2017, but the General Assembly unlawfully suspended the annexation. It took Bloomington three years in court to win the fight against that suspension, and while it was in the middle of doing so, the legislature took advantage of the time it had bought and interfered again in 2019, this time voiding most of Bloomington’s sewer contracts. The legislature should not be able to use the 2019 law to scuttle Bloomington’s annexation, which, but for the legislature’s earlier unlawful actions, would have been long over before 2019.  

 

More information about the City’s lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the 2019 law is available at: https://bton.in/FDQUW

 

Why has annexation cost so much?

Many inaccurate figures are being shared about the total cost of annexation. To date, the City’s annexation expenses total $1.35 million. Over $800,000 of this was spent on mailings, communications, surveying, and the development of extremely detailed fiscal plans that hired experts must create, plus updates to those plans required after the Indiana General Assembly’s unlawful suspension of annexation in 2017. The remainder has gone to expert legal counsel who have advised on and are helping us to conduct the process, and who have been helping us fight the General Assembly’s unconstitutional interference with annexation in 2017 and 2019. Some of these expenses would not have been necessary but for that unlawful action by the state legislature. 

 

Halting the current annexation process and starting again later would not save money; rather, the City would spend considerably more on redoing all the procedural steps and on new fiscal plans. 

 

Isn’t the City’s annexation just a land grab?

No, for several reasons.  

 

First, the City is proposed to annex 8,155 acres now only because so much time--nearly 20 years--has passed since the City’s last annexation. The City used to more regularly do smaller annexations as areas became sufficiently developed and populated, but then that halted for almost two decades. As a result, the city’s boundaries no longer correspond to the extent of our community, which has experienced tremendous growth outside the city limits over the last 17 years. Many of the areas currently proposed for annexation have been identified for decades as areas to be annexed; three of the areas proposed for annexation are islands completely surrounded by the city, while others have developed outside the existing boundaries as a part of the Bloomington community. Many of the current or prior property owners agreed to be annexed in the future when they received an extension of City sewer service to their property, enabling its development. 

 

Second, the proposed annexation area reflects significant reductions already made by City Council before it approved the current 8,155 acres. Bloomington originally proposed annexing 9,881 acres contiguous to the city. By cutting out various neighborhoods and parcels, the City Council reduced the total area proposed for annexation by 17.5%.

 

Third, through changes to the annexation statute in 2015, specifically section 4.1(e), the state legislature has discouraged small, piecemeal annexations and encouraged municipalities to annex larger areas and to fast-track annexations before long-standing waivers expire.  

 

Why wasn’t the county government more involved in the annexation process?

Several decades ago, the County and City agreed on a “Two-Mile Fringe” as a planning jurisdiction boundary. At the time, the County did not have a comprehensive development and land use plan. The City and County agreed that the City would be the most appropriate planning authority over these areas that were likely to become part of the City in the future through annexation. Later, as the County began to develop its planning capabilities, the City and County negotiated an agreement granting the City planning jurisdiction over a somewhat smaller unincorporated area, which became known as the “AIFA,” or Areas Intended for Annexation. If you have lived in Monroe County for very long, you are no doubt familiar with the phrase “areas intended for annexation” - a self-explanatory phrase describing areas of land that were mutually agreed upon by City and County officials to be appropriate for annexation into the City at the appropriate time. 

 

The AIFA was intended to be in place for sufficient time to allow the City to annex the areas over a multi-year period. Some portions of the AIFA were annexed. In other portions of the AIFA, planning jurisdiction was turned back over to the County when the agreement expired, and the City had yet to pursue annexations. In 2012, the county released a Comprehensive Plan indicating some portions as "Bloomington Urbanizing Area." Meanwhile, the former AIFA, the original two-mile fringe, and the Bloomington Urbanizing Area have continued to develop as anticipated.

 

More information about annexation is available online at: bloomington.in.gov/annex