A bill allowing for a ballot question to amend the state constitution to change residency requirements for city and town court judges passed out of the House Tuesday.
House Bill 1019, authored by State Rep. Michael Aylesworth, R-Hebron, proposes a constitutional amendment ballot question regarding the residency of a city of town court judge.
According to the bill, the ballot question will state: “Shall the Constitution of the state of Indiana be amended to permit the judge of a city or town court to reside in: (1) the county in which the court is located; or (2) the bordering county closest to the city or town in which the court is located? (This question concerns Article 6, Section 6 of the Constitution of the state of Indiana.)”
“This is an effort to expand the pool of qualified candidates for city and town court judges because in rural America, in our small communities, there are less and less qualified people willing to serve as judges,” Aylesworth said.
When the bill was heard on second reading Monday, State Rep. Carey Hamilton, D-Indianapolis, proposed an amendment to place a question on the November ballot asking voters if the Indiana Department of Transportation should spend money on the multi-billion dollar Mid-States Corridor Project.
The Mid-States Corridor Project has been proposed to improve roads in the southwest portion of Indiana, but the Indiana Department of Transportation has either canceled or postponed 340 road projects, Hamilton said.
“I believe we need to make investments that will lead to strong, economic growth for our state,” Hamilton said. “In light of the news that this project is imminent, let’s pause and ask the taxpayers directly. Let’s give them a voice with this investment.”
State Rep. Ben Smaltz, R-Auburn, made a point of order that the amendment violated the House germaneness rule. After deliberation during a brief recess in proceedings, House Speaker Todd Huston, R-Fishers, said the point was “valid.”
The ruling was appealed by Democratic members, but it was upheld in a vote by the chamber.
The bill was heard on third and final reading by the House Tuesday, and it passed 92-1. State Rep. Ryan Dvorak, D-South Bend, voted against the bill.
State Rep. Mike Aylesworth, R-Hebron, said the impetus for the ballot question occurred about 7 years ago when he met with then-Lowell Town Judge Christopher Buckley.
During that discussion, Aylesworth said Buckley mentioned that he and his wife lived in Valparaiso, but he had been renting an apartment in Lowell to establish residency there because of a state statute that requires city and town officers to live in their jurisdiction.
“I thought, this is sort of silly. I didn’t pay much more attention to it, but then the more I got into it, the more I found out,” Aylesworth said.
Article 6, Section 6 of the Indiana constitution states that “all county, township, and town officers, shall reside within their respective counties, townships and towns and shall keep their respective offices at such places therein, and perform such duties, as may be directed by law.”
In Indiana, there are around 50 city and town court judges, said Kathryn Dolan, Indiana Supreme Court Chief Public Information Officer. The state has more than 700 judicial officers, including superior court judges, senior judges and magistrates, she said.
Aylesworth later met with Indiana Supreme Court Chief Justice Loretta Rush, who told him that a constitutional amendment would be needed to change the state statute about where city and town judges have to live.
To amend the state constitution, the two separately elected state legislatures have to approve a joint resolution. Then, the state legislature has to pass a piece of legislation with the constitutional amendment ballot question, Aylesworth said.
In the 2023 session, Aylesworth filed House Joint Resolution 6, which stated that the judge of a city or town shall reside in the county in which the city or town court is located or the bordering Indiana county that is the closest Indiana county to the city or town in which the court is located.
The resolution passed both chambers of the statehouse and was signed into law.
Two years later, during the 2025 session, Ayleworth filed House Joint Resolution 1, which had the same language as the 2023 House Joint Resolution 6. The resolution passed the state legislature and was signed into law.
For the 2026 session, Aylesworth has filed House Bill 1019, which proposes a constitutional amendment ballot question regarding the residency of a city or town court judge.
House Bill 1019 passed out of the House Court and Criminal Code Committee in a 12-0 vote last week. The committee members didn’t ask any questions or discuss the bill, and no one from the public testified ahead of the vote.
“It’s a fairly simple concept, expanding the area in which an attorney may live, because they have to be an attorney to be a city or town court judge. It expands that area so it can encourage more people to be eligible to sit as a judge,” Aylesworth said.
The bill moves forward for consideration by the Senate.
