New Albany Violated Public Access Law
The Indiana Public Access Counselor determined the city of New Albany violated the Indiana Access to Public Records Act on at least three occasions in the past year by missing deadlines on records requests made by residents. Property owners along a road that is undergoing restoration said they weren’t able to get information in enough time to present educated counter-offers to buyers through the process of eminent domain. However, as noted by the News and Tribune, “Indiana’s public access law doesn’t offer much recourse for violations. Oftentimes an official violation declared by the public access counselor is enough to motivate governments to comply. But if that doesn’t happen, the next course of action is to sue.” Notably, HB 1523 would allow certain state or local government agencies to charge up to $20 per hour to fulfill requests for public records that take more than two hours to find. HB 1523 passed the Senate with amendments on April 6th and has been returned to the House.
Appeals Court Rules On Sewer Connection Requirements
Late last week the Indiana Court of Appeals issued a ruling interpreting an Indiana law which gives cities and towns the authority to compel residents to connect to the municipal sewer system. In Town of Clear Lake v. Hoagland, the court found Indiana Code section 36-9-23-30(a) permits a municipality operating a sewage system to require connection to the system and to order the discontinuance of the use of any private sewage system so long as an available sanitary sewer is within 300 feet of the property line of the affected property and the municipality gives the property owner ninety days’ notice. However, nothing in the statute or the ruling compels the municipality to require connection if it chooses not to exercise that power.
The court also addressed the power of municipalities to enforce “reasonable penalties†against a person failing to make a connection. Because that issue was not before the court, it could not rule on what penalty would qualify as “reasonable,†but it had “little difficulty” saying that a penalty of $2.9 million “is nowhere near it. Such a penalty is confiscatory, most likely unconstitutional, and will not be countenanced.”
2017 Jackson Kelly Municipal Law Seminar
On May 11th, from 3:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m., Jackson Kelly will host a Municipal Law Seminar at Tropicana Evansville where you can learn about the latest municipal and government legislative and case law changes. The topics are designed to make the role of the local government attorney easier and should be useful to both attorneys and government officials. Topics this year include:
Consolidation of Local Income Taxes
Dealing with Blight and the Unsafe Building Law
Recent Planning and Zoning Issues
Free Speech Issues with Government Employment
Municipal Legislation Update
The seminar is approved for up to 1.7 hours of CLE. Afterward you are welcome to enjoy hors d’oeuvres and drinks where you can meet, network, and exchange ideas with your peers. Space is limited. Please confirm your attendance with Kimberly Van Camp at Kimberly.vancamp@jacksonkelly.com or by calling (859) 288-2809.
Political Group Takes ‘Robocall’ Law Challenge To Supreme Court
A political advocacy group that wants to strike down Indiana’s ban on robocalls has asked the Supreme Court of the United States to overturn the state law it calls the most restrictive in the nation. “Who is a court to tell us how we have First Amendment rights to communicate with people?†asked Paul Caprio, President of Patriotic Veterans Inc., which is challenging the state law banning political groups from using automatic dialing technology to call Hoosiers. The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against Patriotic Veterans and upheld I.C. §24-5-14-5 in January, holding that the state had a legitimate interest in blocking unwanted automatically dialed phone calls. The court wrote, “Preventing automated messages to persons who don’t want their peace and quiet disturbed is a valid time, place, and manner restriction.†Under Indiana’s statute, a caller using automatic-dialing technology must first gain the consent of the recipient of the call using a live person.
Footnote: This article was submitted to the City County Observer  by local attorney Joshua Claybourn. Joshua is Counsel in Jackson Kelly’s Evansville office. He advises clients in matters of business and corporate law, governmental services, and public finance. Learn more here.
