Cars and Parts Springfield Swap Meet
Carroll Commencement
Fairborn commencement
Ellen Belcher is the Dayton Daily News opinion pages editor. She writes about state government, education, the environment, higher education and all things Dayton.
Martin Gottlieb is an editorial writer and columnist for the Dayton Daily News opinion pages. He focuses on the political process itself and does such national issues as war, the economy, taxes and Social Security, as well as a hodge-podge of local and state issues.Home > Blogs > A Matter of Opinion > Archives > 2009 > March > 13 > Entry
Editorial: Sugarcreek, Centerville must end war
The battle between Centerville and Sugarcreek Twp. about the land that was once the Dille family farm is risky for both sides. The dispute begs for a settlement.
For one thing, it’s costing a ton. Between them, Centerville and Sugarcreek already have spent close to $500,000 making their legal arguments. The case is still in Greene County Common Pleas Court, but it could go to the next higher court.
Moreover, the case could establish new interpretations of state law for other cities and townships that could throw past and future financing arrangements up in the air.
At issue is the desire by Dille property owners and developers to be annexed by Centerville. A 2001 law was supposed to smooth the annexation process. Instead of having townships and cities fight about tax revenue, the law created an expedited process allowing property taxes from annexed land to stay with the affected township that was losing money, but income and other tax revenue would go to the city getting the new property. The goal was to prevent long, contentious fights that are common in annexation bids.
In this case, the developers also are asking for “tax increment financing” — spending future tax revenues from the developed property to help make the improvements to the land today.
Sugarcreek is balking at that idea. It opposes using its future tax revenues to help finance the project, but the deal may not work otherwise.
The two sides have tried to compromise. With the help of a mediator, they agreed to a framework to settle the dispute, but when they got into the details, negotiations fell apart.
“We just couldn’t get there,” said Barry Tiffany, administrator for Sugarcreek Twp. “Given the scenario and the obligations (Centerville) had made to the developer and the property owners, we just couldn’t get the numbers to work.”
Still, Greene County Magistrate George Reynolds’ recent decision shows the dangers for both sides of pressing a court case. Neither was happy with his ruling, and both are objecting.
Magistrate Reynolds found the Dille annexation was legal, but that Centerville could not use tax increment financing. Centerville City Manager Greg Horn said if the ruling on the financing stands, dozens of so-called TIF agreements for places like The Greene in Beavercreek or Union Centre in West Chester are threatened.
“The potential damage would be staggering statewide,” he said.
Any time a law is challenged in court, there’s a possibility it could be interpreted in ways the fighting parties don’t like. But once a court ruling is made and an appellate court weighs in, the appellate court decision becomes the standard for applying the rules for the area covered by that court.
A lot of interests are indirectly represented at the table in the Dille case. It will take creative thinking and new ideas to break the stalemate. But continuing to fight this case raises the possibility that developers and local governments could both lose an increasingly common financing tool.
Permalink | Comments (0) | Post your comment | Categories: Editorials, Scott Elliott, Suburban Communities
Comments