HOPE – Without discussion, Hope Town Council members voted to deny petitions from two Hope couples to deannex their property from the town.
The vote came during a scheduled “public hearing” on the petitions from David and Kelly Ellis of 15241 E. Jackson Road and Dr. John and Barbara Harker, who own 33.78 acres of undeveloped pasture land that nearly surrounds the Ellis residence.
The couples claim they pay stormwater management and assessment fees to the town without receiving any town services because they are in a special taxing unit described by a local ordinance as “all of the territory within the corporate boundaries of the town.”
Not only do the Harkers claim they receive no benefits, but according to John Harker, his property on the northeast corner of Hope has been damaged by considerable discharges of water from adjacent properties. Harker, a retired dentist and farmer, began requesting a stop to the stormwater fees as far back as 2013.
In their petitions, the two families state they want their property removed from being subjected to Hope’s property taxes. They also are seeking a refund of previously paid stormwater fees to the greatest extent permitted by law, the petitions states.
A two-hour public hearing on Feb. 13 ended with board president Ohmer Miller requesting a closed door executive session “to hash this out.” In response, acting town attorney Alex Whitted said that type of discussion can only be done during a public hearing.
A closed-door session was canceled late last month after The Republic asked for written proof to back up stated reasons for a legal executive session.
When the notice of Wednesday’s meeting concerning the disannexation petitions were sent out, the event was twice described as a public hearing.
Instead, council president Ohmer Miller declared all evidence had been heard and that he was not going to allow the public to speak during what had been legally advertised as a public hearing.
With no elaboration, the council president immediately called for separate votes on each petition. After he received a motion and a second to deny a petition, Miller asked the council if there was discussion. But no specifics were brought up by the council before they voted unanimously to deny both requests.
And with that, the meeting was closed.
The attorney for the two petitioners, Andrew M. Sumerford of Indianapolis, said “we will evaluate our next step from here, including the appellate process.” Sumerford then passed on a request from Dr. Harker, who asked for the council to articulate their reasons for voting down the petitions.
“I don’t feel like I want to open up that can of worms right now,” Miller said.
Council member Shannon Pittman said the decision was based on evidence presented, adding that the council made their decision based on what is best for the town. The discussion within the council chambers ended after Whitted pointed out the meeting had already been adjourned.
After the meeting, David Ellis was reminded that the council was not supposed to discuss the merits of the petitions between the Feb. 13 public hearing and Wednesday’s meeting.
“Then, how did they all know to vote against the petitions?” Ellis asked.
In his petition, Dr. Harker claimed he had paid $20,737 in stormwater assessment fees since 2011, while other agricultural land owners within the town limits only pay $36 per parcel annually. Following Wednesday’s meeting, Ellis said he was being forced to pay $400 a month in property taxes.
