Lake Cnty. Bd. of Comm'rs v. Lake Cnty. Council
Decision Date | 12 July 2022 |
Docket Number | Court of Appeals Case No. 21A-MI-1805 |
Parties | LAKE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS, Appellant-Defendant, v. LAKE COUNTY COUNCIL, Appellee-Plaintiff. |
Court | Indiana Appellate Court |
Attorney for Appellant: Joseph C. Chapelle, Barnes & Thornburg LLP, Indianapolis, Indiana
Attorneys for Appellee: Jenny R. Buchheit, Thomas A. John, Ice Miller LLP, Indianapolis, Indiana, Ray L. Szarmach, Law Office of Ray L. Szarmach, P.C., Merrillville, Indiana
[1] The Lake County Council (the "Council") adopted Ordinance Numbers 1451B and 1451M ("Ordinance No. 1451B" and "Ordinance No. 1451M") in October of 2020. In Ordinance No. 1451B, the Council established itself as the purchasing agency for Lake County. Ordinance No. 1451M created a data-processing agency. The Lake County Board of Commissioners (the "Commissioners") subsequently vetoed these ordinances, and the Council overrode the vetoes.
[2] On November 6, 2020, the Council filed a complaint for declaratory judgment. The parties filed competing summary judgment motions in which they disputed whether the Council or the Commissioners has the statutory authority to act as the purchasing agency and to create a data-processing agency. On April 16, 2021, the trial court granted the Council's motion and denied the Commission's motion. The trial court also denied the Commission's subsequent motion to correct error. On appeal, the Commissioners contend that the trial court abused its discretion by denying their motion to correct error. We affirm.
[3] On October 13, 2020, the Council adopted Ordinance No. 1451B, establishing itself as the purchasing agency of Lake County. Ordinance 1451B provides, in relevant part, as follows:
Appellant's App. Vol. III pp. 120–23.
[4] The Lake County Auditor presented Ordinance 1451B to the Commissioners on October 27, 2020. The Commissioners vetoed Ordinance 1451B on October 30, 2020. The Council voted to override the veto on November 10, 2020.
[5] On October 21, 2020, the Council adopted Ordinance No. 1451M, establishing the Lake County Data Processing Agency. In adopting Ordinance No. 1451M, the Council found "that the establishment of a County government agency and board to coordinate the operations of the various data processing systems in Lake County [was] necessary for the economic welfare of the citizens of Lake County, Indiana." Appellant's App. Vol. III p. 128. Ordinance 1451M provided that the Data Processing Agency "shall be administered by a board known as the Lake County Data Processing Agency Board." Appellant's App. Vol. III p. 129. "The Board shall consist of 15 members appointed by" the Council and "shall include" various county officials. Appellant's App. Vol. III pp. 129, 130.
[6] The Lake County Auditor presented Ordinance 1451M to the Commissioners on October 27, 2020. The Commissioners vetoed Ordinance 1451M on October 30, 2020. The Council voted to override the veto on November 10, 2020.
[7] On November 6, 2020, the Council filed a complaint for declaratory judgment. On November 23, 2020, the Commissioners filed an answer and counterclaim for declaratory and injunctive relief. The Commissioners filed an amended answer on December 23, 2020. The parties subsequently filed competing motions for summary judgment. Following a hearing, on April 16, 2021, the trial court granted the Council's motion for summary judgment and denied the Commissioners’ motion for summary judgment. On May 10, 2021, the Commissioners filed a motion to correct error, which was denied by the trial court on July 23, 2021. At the request of the Commissioners, the trial court stayed implementation of its April 16, 2021 order pending appeal.
[8] The Commissioners contend that "[t]his case concerns whether the [Council] can usurp specific statutory powers expressly granted to the [Commissioners] to enact ordinances relating to a county purchasing agency and data processing agency without violating Home Rule." Appellant's Br. p. 7. The Council contends that Indiana Code section 36-1-3.5-5 "explicitly transferred jurisdiction over the Lake County purchasing agency and the Lake County data processing agency from" the Commissioners to the Council. Appellee's Br. p. 7.
[9] In 1981, the Indiana General Assembly adopted a number of statutes relating to the structure of county government. In outlining the purpose of the new statutes, Indiana Code section 36-1-3.5-1 provides as follows:
The policy of the state is that in all cases where a general law can be made applicable, all laws should be general and of uniform operation throughout the state, as provided by Article 4, Section 23 of the Constitution of Indiana. In addition, the policy of the state is that in local affairs where a general law cannot be made applicable, the applicable laws should be determined by the local legislative authorities under the home rule provisions of this title, particularly IC 36-1-3-6.[1 ] Therefore, the purpose of this chapter is to transfer to the appropriate local authorities jurisdiction over certain local matters that, before the 1981 regular session of the general assembly, have been subjects of statutory concern.
Indiana Code section 36-2-3.5-2 provides that Ind. Code § 36-2-3.5-3.
[10] With respect to the powers of the executive branch, Indiana Code section 36-2-3.5-4 provides as follows:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Lake Cnty. Bd. of Comm'rs v. Martinez
...interpreted I.C. § 36-2-3.5-4 along with I.C. § 36-1-3.5-5, which applies only to Lake County. See Lake Cnty. Bd. of Comm'rs v. Lake Cnty. Council , 192 N.E.3d 936 (Ind. Ct. App. 2022), trans. pending. The court held that although I.C. § 36-2-3.5-4 "generally grants the authority to enter i......