Appeal from the Hamilton Superior Court. The Honorable Steven R. Nation, Special Judge. Cause No. 29D01-1308-MI-8547.
ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANT: Stephen C. Unger, Curtis T. Jones, Bose McKinney & Evans LLP, Indianapolis, Indiana.
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLEES: Kent M. Frandsen, Parr Richey Obremskey Frandsen & Patterson LLP, Lebanon, Indiana.
[¶1] In 2013, the Town of Whitestown (" Whitestown" ) adopted an ordinance annexing unincorporated portions of Perry Township adjacent to the town. Rural Perry Township landowners (" the Remonstrators" ) filed a petition to defeat the annexation. The trial court found that the Remonstrators had satisfied statutory conditions required to defeat the annexation and ordered that the annexation not occur. Whitestown now appeals.
[¶2] We reverse and remand for entry of judgment in favor of Whitestown.
[¶3] Whitestown presents three issues for our review. We restate these as two issues:
I. Whether the trial court erred when it found that Whitestown had not satisfied the requirements of Indiana Code subsection 36-4-3-13(c); and
II. Whether the trial court erred when it found that Remonstrators proved the elements of subsection 36-4-3-13(e)(2)(B), concerning the financial impact of annexation.
Facts and Procedural History
[¶4] During the events associated with this case, Whitestown has been one of the fastest-growing municipalities in Indiana. Located in Boone County, Whitestown grew through annexation to encompass portions of several unincorporated townships, including Perry Township. Whitestown's growth has been aided by its presence along the corridor for Interstate 65 (" I-65" ), and Whitestown has actively encouraged businesses to locate their operations within the town. From a population of 471 in the 2000 United States Census, Whitestown's population reached 2,860 in the 2010 Census. At the time of trial in this case, ...