The Indiana Court of Appeals recently ruled that only a city's legislative body has the authority to exercise eminent domain in redevelopment project areas. This decision affects how local governments in Indiana can acquire property for redevelopment and clarifies the limits of power for city officials. The ruling came in the case of Portage Township of St. Joseph County, Indiana v. City of South Bend, under docket number 26A-PL-00711, filed on October 29, 2026.

The case arose when the City of South Bend, acting under the direction of its mayor, filed a complaint to condemn property owned by Argos 316, LLC, which was located in a redevelopment project area. Portage Township had previously contracted to purchase the same property and completed the purchase shortly after the city filed its complaint. Portage Township and 350 Columbia Street, LLC, which held easements on the property, intervened in the case, arguing that the city's action was illegal because it lacked authorization from the South Bend Common Council, the city's legislative body.

The dispute centered on Indiana Code section 36-7-14-20, which outlines the process for exercising eminent domain in redevelopment areas. The Objectors contended that the statute clearly states that only the legislative body can authorize such actions. The trial court disagreed, ruling that the city could proceed without this authorization. This led the Objectors to appeal the decision.

The Indiana Court of Appeals, led by Judge Vaidik, ultimately reversed the trial court's ruling. The court held that Indiana law grants local governments broad eminent-domain power, but specifically limits that power in redevelopment project areas to the legislative body of the unit. The court stated, "Since the property at issue here is in a redevelopment project area, and the City’s legislative body didn’t authorize the condemnation action, the trial court erred by overruling the objection." This interpretation establishes that the legislative body must adopt a resolution to exercise eminent domain in these areas.

The ruling clarifies the process for exercising eminent domain in Indiana, particularly in redevelopment contexts. The court emphasized that while other officials generally have broad eminent-domain powers, the specific statutory framework for redevelopment areas places that authority squarely with the legislative body. This decision reinforces the importance of following established procedures when local governments seek to acquire property through eminent domain.

The impact of this ruling is significant for local governments across Indiana. It means that any future attempts to exercise eminent domain in redevelopment project areas must have the backing of the legislative body, ensuring that local officials cannot bypass this requirement. This ruling may also influence how redevelopment projects are planned and executed, as city officials will need to secure legislative approval before moving forward with property acquisitions.

Looking ahead, the ruling can be appealed, but it is unclear if the City of South Bend plans to take that step. The case sets a precedent for how eminent domain is exercised in Indiana, particularly in redevelopment contexts, and could lead to further clarifications in future cases. Local governments will need to be mindful of this ruling as they navigate property acquisitions for redevelopment projects.