Annexations can be messy transactions in Indiana.
In the last decade, there have been changes to the state's codes on annexations, mostly due to the bickering of municipalities that want to take over land and, of course, tax revenue. Some are so area-specific and technical that they don't apply to other sections of the state. Some favor residents who might face annexation; others favor the towns or cities seeking to grow.
The issue is so complex that an interim Statehouse panel is meeting this summer to study at least 16 issues ranging from a moratorium to a proposal that 100 percent of landowners have to file for an annexation.
Annexation is not always an evil action. A voluntary annexation is intended to provide better government services for the area being annexed. If involuntary, or forced on homeowners, then property owners can often remonstrate against the process.
Unless you live in a subdivision, such as Summerlake near Ingalls, where covenants don't allow remonstrance. In fact, the subdivision's covenants, to which homeowners agree when they move in, specifically note that an annexation might someday come their way from Ingalls.
That seems unfair. Granted, home buyers should thoroughly read the covenants they sign, but with so many contracts and papers being thrown their way at the time of purchase, who could be blamed for failing to read some of the fine print.
Throughout Indiana, many developers will sign waivers of rights to remonstrate as part of agreements to obtain services. In turn, those waivers are passed along as property covenants. Years later, new homebuyers may learn they can't protest annexation into a city or town. By no fault of the homeowners, they're stuck with new taxes.
In 2012, the Indiana Court of Appeals upheld a southern Indiana case involving covenants and remonstrance restrictions saying the homeowners had notice when they purchased their property, and were bound by those provisions. The restrictions had been a condition for that subdivision to hook up to a city sewer system.
The summer panel isn't set to take on this sticky topic. Though many residents in this county — namely those living near Lapel, Pendleton, Ingalls and southwest Anderson — would be justified in wanting to see rights strengthened in protesting forced annexations.
Instead, it's up to homeowners to fight a battle if they see fit. It is also up to municipalities and elected officials to listen to property owners facing annexation, even if those owners don't live inside municipal limits or vote for those officials.
Elected officials seem to always be willing to listen to homeowners if those property owners desire to be annexed. Officials should also listen if property owners don't want to be part of their municipality.