Lafayette City Council approves annexation of Carr property; Dayton claims conspiracy

LAFAYETTE, Ind. — After months of discussions during several Lafayette City Council meetings, the board approved the voluntary annexation of the Carr family property, which sits adjacent to the town of Dayton.

The approval will see the incorporation of approximately 132 acres of Carr’s property, which sits along Interstate 65 and Haggerty Lane, into the City of Lafayette.

The land is within the jurisdiction of the Tippecanoe County government and at the border of both the Lafayette and Dayton incorporated limits.

This decision did not get approved without some resistance from Dayton's local officials, residents and Dayton’s lawyer.

For months, residents of Dayton have been pleading with the city council to reconsider a possible positive vote on this issue, but the city council has pushed forward with the approval.

In their past pleas, Dayton leaders expressed how they believed this annexation would be detrimental to the growth of Dayton; how it showcased a disregard for the contract agreed upon between the two municipalities; and that it would destroy decades of plans the town created to build a new economic development area on the Carr property.

Dayton disputes timeline of negotiations, says road was main issue

But at this meeting, Dayton officials went from offering pleas to making accusations towards the leadership of the city of Lafayette. Specifically, officials claimed local leaders potentially made an agreement about the annexation with the Carr family behind closed doors prior to its proposal in May’s meeting.

“When we came here before, we were made to believe that this came about very recently through nothing of the city of Lafayette’s doing, that this was a property owner decision but letters we’ve seen suggest that this has been going on for quite a while,” Chris Wischer, the attorney for the town of Dayton, said.

During the ordinance’s public comment, Marc Buhrmester, a Dayton council member, and Cindy Marsh, a resident of Dayton, asserted the idea that the City of Lafayette persuaded the Carr family to annex their land to Lafayette with the promise of building a road.

Dayton representatives focused on this idea because, during their negotiations with the Carr family to annex the property into Dayton, one of the main hurdles that they could not get over was the idea of providing a thorough road on the property.

The Town of Dayton said they would accept the industrial zoning of the property and potentially provide the Carr family with utilities. Still, they would not budge on the idea of providing a thorough road on the property.

“They were told that the town would accept I-3. That was fine, but that was not the reason why they are coming to Lafayette. It’s not the I-3 zoning thing. They are coming because Lafayette has promised them a road,” Marsh said to the city council.

“It was said right here, just a couple of meetings ago, that they came to Lafayette because they wanted a road and Lafayette would give it to them.

“Why do they think they’re getting the road? Who told them that? And most importantly what are the details to that?

“It’s obvious that this was all planned way ahead of the petition. Way before the petition was filed, who planned it?”

Lafayette councilors say road was never promised

This statement clearly confused every member of the city council.

“As far as I’m aware, Lafayette has not agreed to provide a road,” said Lauren Ahlersmeyer, councilwoman and president of the Lafayette City Council.

Ahlersmeyer asked Ryan Munden, an attorney with Reiling Teder & Schrier and the legal representative for the Carr Family Farm II LLC, and Dennis Carson, economic development director, if they knew anything about this road that the Dayton residents keep referring to.

“We’re not sure what road they are referring to,” Munden said. “There’s no promise for Lafayette to build a road, there’s been no request for Lafayette to build a road.

“No clue what they are talking about.”

The misconception that Lafayette would be building a road potentially could have stemmed from a statement that Kevin Riley, an attorney from Reiling Teder & Schrier, who is also representing Carr Family Farm LLC, made during the June 2023 meeting.

“The thoroughfare plan, so Yost Road. It’s true, our biggest issue is Yost Road, they were refusing to extend it so that it connects 38 and Haggerty. The thoroughfare plan calls for that road to connect but that plan isn’t as important to them as these other plans that they are talking about that we should file,” Riley said at June’s meeting.

“Bottom line is, we want the Yost Road connection. They didn’t agree to provide that and additionally, they want us to downzone the property. The property is zoned I-3; we have a right to develop it as I-3.

“These are just a few of the reasons there’s been a breakdown. We tried for two years to work through this. That’s why we’re here.”

Beyond the reference to Yost Drive at June’s meeting, this was the first time the Town of Dayton expressed concern about a road being built by Lafayette. They did claim that a road development could be found in the redevelopment commission paperwork, although they did not elaborate further on the matter.

It should be noted that the land currently sits within the jurisdiction of the Tippecanoe County government and at the border of both Lafayette's and Dayton’s corporate limits. If a road were to be built, it would be in the jurisdiction of the county government and not Dayton.

After the board determined that they had no idea of what Dayton was talking about, it moved forward with the vote and unanimously approved the annexation of the Carr property.

Dayton officials plan to sue Lafayette

Outside of the City Council room, Dayton attorney, Wischer, emphasized that the Town of Dayton would be moving forward on filing a lawsuit against the City of Lafayette.

“There are procedural issues with this particular annexation. It’s not a super voluntary, they haven’t included all of the property owners. The State of Indiana owns a pretty sizable piece there, and they have not been included,” Wischer said.

“If you take the State of Indiana parcel out, they don’t have continuity, they touch the City of Lafayette enough.”

Noe Padilla is a reporter for the Journal & Courier. Email him at Npadilla@jconline.com and follow him on Twitter at 1NoePadilla.

This article originally appeared on Lafayette Journal & Courier: Dayton claims conspiracy after Lafayette votes to annex Carr property