Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Annexation Hb 2818 topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council debates HB 2818 annexation changes and considers joining legal challenge
Summary
Council members said House Bill 2818 would limit municipalities' annexation authority, reportedly tying the change to federal airport funding for St. Joseph; council discussed litigation as the only apparent remedy and plans to coordinate with other cities.
Council members and city staff spent a substantial portion of the June 22 meeting discussing House Bill 2818 and its possible impact on the city’s annexation authority.
"The House Bill 2818 modifies the way we're able to annex. It basically takes it out of our control and puts it more or less under the county's control," Mr. Rosenbach said during the discussion, summarizing the provision that council members said would limit annexations to a biennial window and introduce new procedures. He and other members said the bill was embedded in a larger financing measure tied to federal airport funds for St. Joseph, which they said made a gubernatorial veto unlikely.
Council members described the change as constraining: one speaker noted the city "couldn't do that, wait two years" if an urgent annexation were needed for a local project. Members said they had met with the governor's policy staff and were told the only practical route to block the provision would be a legal challenge. Council discussed coordinating with other cities and contributing to joint legal action; several cities were reported to be preparing to sign on to a suit and share costs.
Council members framed the problem as both substantive and procedural: they criticized the way the language reached the final bill late in the legislative session and said local governments were not consulted. "The senator never contacted any one of these cities in the county about this language," one member said, arguing the change singled out Jefferson County and raised constitutional concerns.
Council asked staff to gather more specifics on which jurisdictions would participate in litigation and to keep the item on the agenda for further legal and policy updates. No formal legal action was authorized at the June 22 session; members requested additional briefings and coordination with other affected cities before deciding on financial commitments.
Next steps: staff will compile information on the bill’s text and which municipalities intend to join a legal challenge and present options at a follow-up meeting.
