A new Indiana bill could change how many homes can be used as rental properties in Fishers and Carmel. The proposed legislation would prevent local governments from creating rules that limit a homeowner’s ability to rent out a property. That could put local rental limits passed by Fishers and Carmel at risk.
The issue has created a debate over property rights, rental housing, and the growing number of homes purchased by investors. Supporters of local limits say the rules can help protect neighborhoods, while opponents argue homeowners should have the right to rent their properties.
Fishers and Carmel Already Have Rental Limits
Fishers and Carmel adopted rules in 2024 that limit the number of rental homes in a subdivision to 10% of the total properties. The rules were created as communities looked for ways to manage the number of rental properties in residential neighborhoods.
The local rules have become part of a larger discussion about who owns homes in the area and how those properties are used. If House Bill 1210 becomes law, those local restrictions could be overturned because the bill would prevent government bodies from passing rules that stop homeowners from renting their properties.
House Bill 1210 Could Change Local Rules
House Bill 1210 would limit the ability of local governments to restrict homeowners from renting their properties. The bill could therefore affect the rules Fishers and Carmel created. Instead of allowing cities to decide how many homes in a neighborhood can become rentals, the state could set a broader rule protecting a homeowner’s ability to rent. The bill’s author was not available for an interview with WRTV during the legislative session.
Fishers Mayor Supports the Local Cap
Fishers Mayor Scott Fadness said he supports the city’s existing rental limits. Fadness said Fishers spent about two years discussing the issue before the city approved its rules. He pointed to the unanimous, bipartisan support the measure received from the city council.
He also said the city understands and respects property rights but believes the rental rules are designed to protect local neighborhoods.
The debate shows the conflict between two different views: protecting an owner’s right to rent a home and allowing local communities to create rules based on their own housing needs.
Investors and Corporate Homeowners Are Part of the Debate
The debate also involves homes purchased by investors and companies from outside the area. Fishers residents Russ and Sally Abarr, who participate in eviction court watching, told WRTV that out-of-state landlords have become a concern in the community.
Sally Abarr said she believes outside investment has contributed to higher eviction rates in Hamilton County.
At the same time, Russ Abarr said he could understand both sides of the issue. He said limiting investment companies from buying homes could make it easier for families to purchase homes, but renting can also give people a way to live in Fishers without having to buy a property.
Realtors See Changes in Investor Activity
Carmel-based realtor Kate Smith said corporate home buying has slowed compared with previous years. She pointed to higher interest rates as one reason investors are not buying homes at the same pace they did when borrowing costs were lower. She also suggested that the local communities may have acted early in addressing the issue.
The slowdown in investor purchases could affect the debate over whether rental limits are still necessary or whether homeowners should have more freedom to rent their properties.
For now, the future of Fishers and Carmel’s 10% rental limits depends on what happens with House Bill 1210. The proposed law could give homeowners more freedom to rent their properties while reducing the ability of local governments to set their own rental restrictions.
