Fishers council adopts rental-registration ordinance with 10% cap per subdivision after heated public hearing

Fishers City Council on May 21 adopted an ordinance to create a rental registration and permitting program for long‑term single‑family rentals, including a 10% cap on rentals per subdivision and grandfathering for existing rental units. The council voted in favor on a roll call vote after a 30‑minute public hearing that drew homeowners, realtors, property managers and neighborhood association leaders.

The ordinance, introduced as item 17 on the agenda and discussed extensively by staff and the mayor, establishes a permit process for long‑term single‑family rentals. Mayor Scott Fadness framed the proposal as an effort to preserve homeownership and neighborhood stability, saying, “It’s one thing to build a great city; it’s quite another thing to maintain a great city.”

City staff and the mayor said the city worked on the policy for more than two years to design a streamlined process intended to limit unintended consequences. Jordan Alexander, the mayor’s chief of staff, described two clarifying edits made since the ordinance’s first reading: a requirement that applicants be in compliance with their homeowners association (HOA) covenants, and a clarification of “legacy rental” language so that rentals existing prior to December 30 of this year are grandfathered in and no additional permits will be issued in subdivisions already over the 10% threshold until that total drops below 10%.

The ordinance drew divided public comment during the scheduled 30‑minute hearing. Supporters included homeowners and HOA leaders who said investor purchases had undermined neighborhood upkeep and made homeownership less attainable. Jennifer Brammer, a Royalwood homeowner, said, “Over time, I’ve watched the feel and fabric of the neighborhood slowly begin to unravel. Today, over 25% of the homes in Royalwood are rentals.” Roy Mickish, president of Country Fields Condo Association, said limits had helped restore his association’s condition after institutional purchases.

Business groups and industry representatives opposed the cap. Chris Pryor, chief advocacy officer for the MIBOR (Metropolitan Indianapolis Board of Realtors), told the council, “These measures represent a serious overreach, placing broad restrictions on property owners, directly infringing on private property rights.” Several realtors and property managers warned the cap could reduce housing options and argued the city should better enforce existing property‑maintenance codes instead of placing a cap.

Legal concerns were raised from the podium. Joanne McCandless, who identified herself as an attorney and Fishers homeowner, told councilors she believed the proposed Chapter 163 and the permit structure could conflict with provisions of state law, and she warned the city might face litigation if the ordinance were enacted as written. Her remarks cited Indiana statutory references as read into the record.

Council members acknowledged the range of views and said they had received heavy public input. Several councilors said the policy was intended to protect neighborhoods while leaving in place grandfathering and other exceptions to reduce hardship. Council members asked staff to monitor the ordinance’s effects and consider additional programs such as first‑time homebuyer or down‑payment assistance to complement the new rules.

On the vote, the council approved the ordinance (motion by Councilor Todd Zimmerman; second by Councilor Selena Stoller). The clerk recorded a roll call in which all voting council members answered yes and the motion carried.

What the ordinance does and next steps - Cap: The ordinance establishes a 10% limit on long‑term single‑family rentals per subdivision; subdivisions already above that figure as of the grandfather date keep their existing percentage but will not receive new permits until the percentage drops below 10%. - Grandfathering/legacy rentals: Rentals existing before December 30 of this year (described in the ordinance as “legacy rentals”) are grandfathered and not subject to the new cap for those units. - HOA compliance: Permit applicants must be in compliance with HOA covenants; the city will not issue a permit that would conflict with more restrictive HOA rules. - Public process: The council held a 30‑minute public hearing and limited speakers to three minutes each during introduction; council directed staff to implement the registration/permit program and to return as needed with administrative details.

Community reaction and council rationale Supporters emphasized neighborhood maintenance, declines in buyer interest when rentals concentrate in a subdivision, and property‑value impacts. Opponents argued the ordinance could reduce housing choice, interfere with private property rights and that existing code enforcement channels should be used before adding a permitting layer. Multiple speakers asked the council to consider not just limits but also actions to expand affordable ownership opportunities.

Council members said staff had worked over two years to design the policy and added clarifications to address HOA covenant conflicts and legacy rental language. Several members said the measure could be revisited if unintended consequences appear and asked staff to set metrics for monitoring.

Ending The ordinance takes immediate effect under the council’s adoption process; staff will publish final administrative procedures and the permit application details on the city website. Council members and the mayor said they plan to monitor implementation and report back to the council if further adjustments are required.