Indiana

Indiana Supreme Court hears arguments in condemnation case against Duke Energy – Indiana Capital Chronicle

Published

2 years ago

May 18, 2023

Indiana Supreme Court hears arguments in condemnation case against Duke Energy – Indiana Capital Chronicle

A Bloomington manufacturer argued before the Indiana Supreme Court Wednesday that it was unfairly forced to modify building plans for a new warehouse, claiming Duke Energy Indiana took part of its land without compensation.

Counsel for the utility pushed back, however, maintaining before the justices that Duke has easement rights to ensure the safe transmission of electricity.

The underlying case — Duke Energy Indiana, LLC v. Bellwether Props. LLC — stems from a disagreement between the parties over whether Bellwether’s claim was an issue of a physical taking or a regulatory taking. In a physical taking, the government acquires private property for a public purpose, as opposed to a regulatory taking, in which the government’s regulation of the property is so intrusive that it effectively takes over the property.

The dispute began nearly a decade ago when Bellwether’s plans to build the warehouse were stymied by Duke Energy’s overhead power lines in a 10-foot-wide easement over the property. Although the proposed structure only abutted the easement, the National Electrical Safety Code (NESC) requires a 25-foot-wide “strike zone” between the lines and nearby buildings. That strike zone required Bellwether to reduce the size of the warehouse.

“They’re informing us what we can and cannot do on our property,” said William Riley, Bellwether’s attorney. “It’s fundamental. It’s our land. We don’t have to change anything.”

Background on Bellwether’s warehouse

Bellwether purchased a 1.17-acre parcel of land in Bloomington in 2004, where a prior owner had already built a warehouse.

Almost 10 years later, Bellwether wanted to build another warehouse.

The company hired an architectural firm to design the 3,200-square-foot structure. But the architect was unaware of the NESC’s horizontal clearance requirements and did not incorporate them into the plan, according to court documents.

When Bellwether met with Duke to discuss the proposed warehouse in July 2013, representatives from the utility said the warehouse could not be built as designed because the building would encroach upon the electrical safety code’s horizontal clearance zone.

The NESC requires that when constructing a new building of a certain size near an electrical transmission line of a given voltage, the builder must ensure there is a 12.5-foot horizontal clearance between the line and the structure. That meant Bellwether could not build within 12.5 feet of the power line, some of which was outside of the 10-foot Duke easement.

Need to get in touch?

Have a news tip?

Instead, Bellwether would have to redesign the building or move it farther away from the zone.

Bellwether ultimately sued Duke for inverse condemnation, claiming the strike zone constitutes a taking that is larger than the easement and that part of its land was taken without “just compensation.”

The Monroe Circuit Court denied Duke’s motion for summary judgment, finding a dispute of material fact as to whether Duke’s directive amounted to a physical taking.

On interlocutory appeal, the Court of Appeals reversed, finding any taking was regulatory and not compensable under the legal standards for regulatory takings.

The court determined the economic impact to the Bellwether property was minimal, noting that the new warehouse had to be resized by only 150 square feet, which reduced the number of storage racks in the building from 30 to 29.

The court also found that the electrical code clearance standard had already been in the Indiana Administrative Code when Bellwether purchased the property — property owners are charged with knowledge of the laws that affect their property, the court said.

The appeals court decision additionally emphasized that the clearance was intended to protect lives and property from being too close to electric transmission lines, which applies to all properties, not just Bellwether’s.

Bellwether then petitioned the Indiana Supreme Court to accept jurisdiction over the case. It’s now up to the justices to decide whether they’ll do so before making any other decisions. There’s no timeline for that decision to be made, however.

Skepticism from justices?

During Wednesday’s hearing, the high court justices lobbed Bellwether’s counsel with critical questions about the manufacturer’s complaint.

Justice Geoffrey Slaughter pressed Riley, Bellwether’s attorney, about whether the case presents a physical invasion on the property.

“If their lines are within their easement, how is that invading your property,” Slaughter asked. “Duke simply followed the regulation from the IURC that it’s subject to — why isn’t the IURC the one who did the taking?”

Riley held that neither the IURC nor Indiana’s electrical code “have any authority over Bellwether’s land.”

“There is nothing in any of these laws that dictates that Bellwether is obligated to listen to Duke,” Riley said. “We are not a regulated entity. There is no police power that applies to Bellwether. There’s no law that allows them to do this.”

Chief Justice Loretta Rush added that she’s “really struggling with shoehorning this case” into a matter of regulatory taking: “It’s a restriction on your client’s use of the way he wants to put his property to use, but they’re not doing any physical invasion themselves.”

Chief Justice Loretta Rush highlighted court accomplishments with lawmakers during the annual State of the Judiciary. (Monroe Bush for Indiana Capital Chronicle)

Maggie Smith, an attorney for Duke Energy, argued that while the warehouse situation did qualify as a regulatory taking, Bellwether is wrongly “trying to shoehorn it into a physical taking.”

“Bellwether had an obligation to maintain the easement in a way that Duke could provide energy safely,” she said.

Smith maintained, too, that Duke “was never given the opportunity” to come up with a compromise. For example, Bellwether could have requested a variance, which Duke would have sought to get from the IURC on the manufacturer’s behalf, Smith said.

But that wasn’t part of the discussion when Bellwether’s builder met with Duke 10 years ago.

“Bellwether never came back and said, ‘Can you work with us?’ Bellwether could have just changed the slope. It didn’t have to cut its property. It could have moved it a little bit. There were many things that could happen here. Duke works with its customers. We work with the customers. We try to do everything we can,” Smith said. “Bellwether just ran off, did what it wanted, took an action that it didn’t have to take, and then turned around and said, ‘Duke, you’re responsible.’ But … that’s just not accurate.”

Smith warned that if justices were to remove the requirement of “an actual physical presence or physical encroachment” to occur, that would open up the definition of physical takings “to virtually every single law that is passed.”

“If there is a constitutional taking here, it is the result of the IURC, and that’s who should have been sued. We do not enact this regulation. We do not enforce it. We didn’t have anything to do with it. We are bound by it,” Smith said, adding that if a change in Indiana constitutional law is necessary, then it should be done in a case “where the largest stakeholders” — like state agencies or local municipal bodies — are parties and are given the opportunity to intervene.

“When you do not step foot on the property, you do not come into contact with it at all,” Smith continued. “They’re trying to put a square peg into a round hole. There’s not a single case that is anywhere close to this, because it just isn’t a physical taking.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX

Source link

Indiana

Foster mom sentenced to prison time in 10-year-old NW Indiana boy's death

Published

6 hours ago

January 17, 2025

Press Room

Foster mom sentenced to prison time in 10-year-old NW Indiana boy's death

Note: The video in the player above is from a previous report.

The northwest Indiana woman who was charged in the death of her 10-year-old foster son was sentenced on Friday, according to authorities.

Jennifer Lee Wilson, 48, was sentenced to six years in the Indiana Department of Correction, with one year suspended to be served on probation, according to the Porter County Prosecutor’s Office.

Wilson was charged with reckless homicide in connection with the death of Dakota Levi Stevens, who died after experiencing a medical emergency in April, authorities said. Wilson was arrested by sheriff’s deputies approximately 25 miles away – more than two months later – after a license plate reader camera detected her vehicle.

The foster mother stated that she laid on his midsection for several minutes during an incident earlier this year, according to court documents.

“Wilson stated that when she attempted to stop him from leaving, she does not know if she tackled Dakota or they fell to the ground however her intention was to hold him,” the court filing stated.

As she held Dakota down, Wilson stated she had one hand holding her phone and the other bracing her, authorities said. Wilson later asked Dakota “Are you faking?” rolled him over and it appeared his eyelids were pale, court documents stated.

Wilson then began CPR and called 911.

Officers made contact with a neighbor who stated that Dakota ran to her house approximately 30 minutes before emergency vehicles arrived. The neighbor stated Dakota asked her to adopt him because his parents hit him in the face and didn’t let him call his caseworker, officials said. The neighbor said she didn’t observe any signs Dakota was injured.

An autopsy revealed the cause of death as mechanical asphyxia and the manner of death as homicide. Dakota was 4 feet 10 inches tall and weighed 91 pounds, filings revealed. Wilson is 4 feet 11 inches tall and weighs 340 pounds, according to driver license records.

Source link

Indiana

A-to-F letter grades likely returning for Indiana schools – Inside INdiana Business

Published

14 hours ago

January 17, 2025

Press Room

A-to-F letter grades likely returning for Indiana schools – Inside INdiana Business

Listen to this story

Loading audio file, please wait.

0.25
0.50
0.75
1.00
1.25
1.50
1.75
2.00

(stock photo courtesy Wokandapix/Pixabay)

Indiana schools will once again be assigned A-to-F letter grades, reinstating an accountability measure that has been paused since the 2020-21 school year.

On Wednesday, state education leaders provided an early look at a new system for evaluating how well schools educate students. However, it remains unclear when schools will begin receiving grades under the updated system.

The overhaul follows years of debate about the future of high school diplomas, addressing a literacy crisis among elementary students, and assessing the pandemic’s impact on student achievement.

Work on a new accountability system has been underway for some time. A 2023 law tasked the State Board of Education with updating the way it evaluates public and state-accredited nonpublic schools.

The board is still required to use the A-to-F grading scale but must align it with metrics in the Indiana Graduates Prepared to Succeed dashboard. The dashboard, launched more than two years ago, allows families to assess school quality.

Metrics include academic performance, such as third-grade reading proficiency, growth in math skills, and earning college credit.

State lawmakers could also push for further changes to the system during the legislative session, similar to recent discussions on high school diplomas.

New system this year

House Bill 1498, authored by Rep. Bob Behning, R-Indianapolis, would strip back some of the older accountability framework so that a new A-F rule can be built up by the board.

However, if passed, developing a new accountability system would be placed on a tight deadline: establishing a new model by the end of 2025.

The bill outlines specific guidelines for measuring school performance. The new system would:

Prioritize students earning diploma seals,
Be based on data from the GPS dashboard,
Include proficiency rates from state assessments, and
Feature a high school “on-track to graduate” indicator.

HB 1498 also calls for null letter grades to continue through the 2024-25 school year.

State Department of Education staff shared potential changes to the system during a presentation Wednesday.

“This framework is to initiate a much broader critical discussion, to take us from a recommended framework to a final model,” said Ron Sandlin, the education department’s deputy chief strategy officer.

The department has spent around 17 months talking with Hoosiers and developing their proposal, Sandlin said. Sandlin said the state cannot rely on older models to measure this next era of education.

In 2011 the A-F system was created to replace more descriptive ratings with letter grades. Then, in 2014, the system was updated to prioritize student’s academic progress.

Under the new proposed priorities, updated ratings would consider more than just academic performance and graduation rates.

For 10th-grade indicators, the system would expand beyond academics to include attendance, advanced coursework, and reduced chronic absenteeism. Schools would also be credited for students who score above 860 on the PSAT — a benchmark achieved by more than 90% of test-takers.

“At 10th grade, where are our students,” Sandlin said. “Is everyone on a path? Does everyone have a plan, and do we have the capacity to support that plan? And our accountability model will incentivize, encourage and celebrate those schools that are effectively doing that, as opposed to now waiting until the very end and saying, ‘Well, you got there or you didn’t’”.

The changes in accountability for high schools would be paired with the state’s diploma model, so success for seniors would be measured by completing a diploma seal, work-based learning experience or credential of value. Students would be on their chosen path for either an education, employment or enlistment seal.

Board members expressed support for the initial themes of the department’s plan. Scott Bess said the older system put a lot of weight on growth, which resulted in leaving students behind.

“If you could get a kid to achieve and grow, you could get 125 points for that student, which means you didn’t have to worry about this other kid over here who’s only going to get 50 points,” Bess said. “Put those two together and it’s still a good grade, right? And so you can see people leaving groups of students behind, because from an accountability system, it didn’t matter.”

Board member B.J. Watts said the system should be kept simple and “a tool for getting better”.

“Are the students in our buildings getting better while they’re there,” Watt said.

The board plans to continue discussions in the coming months, engaging with Hoosier families and educators. The department will also seek public feedback throughout the process before finalizing the system.

The A-to-F accountability system was initially designed to force failing schools to improve. If a school received failing grades for too many consecutive years, the state could sever it from the district and appoint a new manager. In 2011, four schools in Indianapolis and one in Gary were taken over.

However, the years-long intervention was widely seen as a failure by local communities and some lawmakers.

In 2021, a state law ended the state takeover of underperforming public schools.

Rachel Fradette is the WFYI Statehouse education reporter. Contact Rachel at rfradette@wfyi.org.

Story Continues Below

Source link

Indiana

Illinois Basketball Report Card: Grades at Indiana (Game 17)

Published

22 hours ago

January 17, 2025

Press Room

Illinois Basketball Report Card: Grades at Indiana (Game 17)

The beats went on for No. 19 Illinois against Indiana on Tuesday in Bloomington – a 94-69 hammering, to be specific – as guard Kasparas Jakucionis returned to the lineup and, along with him, the Illini’s briefly lost mojo. No one could be certain what team would show up to take on the Hoosiers before the opening tip, and by halftime it was clear that it was the Big Ten favorites.

The leap from excellence to sustained greatness is a chasm that would make Evel Knievel balk, but the Illini (13-4, 5-2 Big Ten) seem to have the springs to make it happen. Let’s take a quick look at the individual performances that lifted Illinois – for one game, at least – head and shoulders over its border rival.

After the USC loss, coach Brad Underwood admitted Ivisic need to not only play more minutes but be more involved. Check and check. Against Indiana, Ivisic was an all-around force (17 points, 11 rebounds and four assists), posting a plus-27 plus-minus in his 25 minutes and setting a tone that all future Illini opponents would do well to heed.

Returning from a two-game injury absence, Jakucionis didn’t skip a single beat. He had 19 points (including three three-pointers), four assists and three rebounds in the first half, leading Illinois to a 60-32 halftime lead. What came after (foul trouble and minimal production) hardly mattered. The damage – at his hands – had already been done.

It’s hard to overstate Boswell’s value to the Illini. He can switch effortlessly between the 1 and 2, whether from game to game or moment to moment, providing playmaking, shooting and penetration on one end while terrorizing opposing ball-handlers on the other. His game-high 22 points, seven rebounds and lockdown D against Indiana were the proof.

Gibbs-Lawhorn has carved out a wonderful niche for himself, attacking the rim in transition, sinking big shots in the halfcourt and providing atomic energy off the bench. He had 12 points (two threes) and a couple rebounds against the Hoosiers, posting a plus-17 plus-minus in 16 minutes of floor time.

Johnson had only five points against Indiana, but he hit all of his free throws (3-for-3) and plucked 10 rebounds – four of them from the offensive glass – in 18 minutes. As usual, he did exactly what the Illini need him to do (which is plenty) and took almost nothing else off the table. It’s uncanny, really.

Humrichous came down off his two-game scoring cloud, but his seven points (3-for-6 field-goal shooting), five rebounds and defense-stretching presence were just fine on an evening when several teammates were cooking. They can’t all be 20-point bangers.

Against Indiana, Riley went without a three for the third time in four games – and still acquitted himself nicely. His plus-24 plus-minus in 10 minutes was a bit of a mirage, but he played within himself on both ends (five points, two rebounds and two assists) and appears to be adjusting with each game.

White focused on creating in the paint against the Hoosiers, which didn’t go so well (2-for-9 shooting). in this instance. No worries. It’s rare when White doesn’t make something happen offensively, and he was again a reliable contributor on the boards (six rebounds).

There isn’t a lot of in between with Davis, a shooting specialist who can be targeted on defense. He missed all four of his shots from the floor against IU, but he did add a couple rebounds (one offensive) and an assist.