Intracoastal at Geist Being Annexed
Filed Under: Local News
Several Intracoastal at Geist residents have contacted me wondering why they are not part of the East and West Geist incorporation petitions. The Fishers Town Council adopted an involuntary annexation ordinance on September 4, 2007 to pull in over 200 homes in this Centex development. Residents are being offered a 3-year roll-in tax abatement, which means they will receive a 75% abatement in 2009, 50% abatement in 2010, and 25% abatement in 2011. For more information on the annexation, visit this link.
Popularity: 2% [?]
Kurt Desserich | Oct 31, 2007 | Reply
It seems that the above article implies that because the Fishers Town Council had the first reading of the annexation of Intracoastal at Geist on September 4, 2007 and thus they could not be apart of the incorporation petitions. Is that different from the Fishers Town Council’s first reading of the annexation of the other Geist communities on September 17th which also took place before the incorporation petitions were filed on September 21st? After all, it would really be short sighted of GOU to not defend all residents affected by the forced annexation efforts of the Fishers Town Council. Please explain. Thank you.
Tom Britt | Nov 1, 2007 | Reply
Kurt, Intracoastal lacks contiguity with the rest of East and West Geist. thanks to the infamous “Faultless 40′ strip” of land on the west end of Intracoastal and a non-remonstrance clause with the developer, Intracoastal has been on the chopping block for a few years now. GUO was not “short sighted” on this, there was just no way to include Intracoastal, which is still being developed and would have a tough time getting 65% of the signatures.
Kurt Desserich | Nov 2, 2007 | Reply
Thank you for the explanation. It is a real unconscionable that the Fisher Town Council and specifically Faultless continues to push their agenda by using questionable ethics.
Kurt Desserich | Nov 2, 2007 | Reply
Just as an additional follow-up, and correct my if I am wrong, but, in my opinion, the non-remonstrance clause seems to be the real obstacle for Intracoastal becoming apart of the East West Geist Incorporation, as there does not seem to be contiguity between Area 1 and Area 3 and I feel strongly that getting 65% of signatures of Inracoastal’s residence would not be a problem at all. Would there be any way to overturn the non-remonstrance clause?
Gregory A. Purvis | Nov 2, 2007 | Reply
My understanding is that the “no remonstrance” agreement was signed by Centex Homes, the developer. I am not sure if anyone really knows or not if such an agreement is binding on subsequent property owners.
I believe the public hearing required by statute is coming up in November, but I do not know the date. Interested residents of Intracoastal should have gotten letters informing them of this date. Anyone interested should plan on showing up and asking to be heard.
Gregory A. Purvis
Democratic candidate, Fishers Town Council
www.Purvis4Fishers.com