Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Ordinance Relinquishment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Drainage board seeks ordinance clarity as Carmel, Westfield consider taking over drains
Summary
Hamilton County staff and counsel told the Drainage Board they are preparing ordinance changes and a third‑party assessment after Carmel and Westfield expressed interest in accepting regulated drains; staff said a written clarification is needed because House Enrolled Act 1037 and IDEM guidance use overlapping terms.
The Hamilton County Drainage Board spent a substantial portion of its July 13 meeting addressing whether the county should revise its drainage ordinance after the cities of Carmel and Westfield indicated interest in accepting (relinquishing) responsibility for certain regulated drains.
Surveyor’s Office staff told the board that Carmel and Westfield have presented ideas in concept and that both cities are preparing written responses. The staff asked the board for direction and said the county’s outside counsel, Jen Baker of Barnes & Thornburg, is assisting with drafting amendments to clarify the county’s authority.
Board counsel David said the topic has broadened from a narrow tree‑root removal ordinance into a larger conversation about relinquishment. Staff and counsel emphasized that any change must distinguish between water quality, which is handled by IDEM, and water quantity (flooding and detention), which the county can regulate. According to staff, the draft ordinance will reflect that distinction rather than providing a legal opinion to outside parties.
Members discussed whether the board should codify a requirement that anyone discharging water that ultimately enters a regulated drain must obtain a permit and justify their design. Staff said that in many cases the county’s regulated drain authority ends at subdivision limits and that downstream permissions or variances remain necessary where county jurisdiction does not reach.
Staff also recommended commissioning a third‑party legal assessment to resolve questions raised by House Enrolled Act 1037 and to reaffirm whether the board retains authority to require detention (capacity) despite similarities in terminology between the Act and IDEM construction stormwater permits. The board signaled support for clarifying the county’s obligations internally and preparing a clear path forward for affected subdivisions.
Board members cautioned against creating confusion for property owners and mortgage carriers if approvals are implied but not final. Staff agreed to prepare written guidance and a report back to the board once Carmel and Westfield submit their written positions and the county’s attorney finalizes suggested ordinance language.
