Both petitions aimed to allow voters to decide on a proposed 167-home subdivision, to be called Riverdale, at 7848 S. Brown School Road.
The initial referendum petition was stalled last year after errors were discovered on petition documents that were distributed by the city, prompting the committee to start the signature collection process over.
Although this most recent petition had amassed the required number of valid signatures for placement on the ballot, and while petition documents were deemed accurate, Vandalia leaders stated this week that approval of the project plan is not subject to referendum.
Vandalia decision
Vandalia City Council said the ordinance approving a final development plan for the housing development is not eligible for referendum under state law.
“The ordinance approved a final development plan for a section of the Riverdale subdivision. The property had already been rezoned to a Planned Unit Development (PUD) earlier in 2025 — a legislative action that was subject to referendum at the time," the statement continued. “The more recent ordinance, however, involved approval of a final plan within the existing PUD.”
Officials said they received two legal opinions, which determined that approval of the final development plan is considered an administrative action under Ohio Supreme Court precedent, and therefore not subject to referendum.
“While we respect the residents who gathered signatures, our responsibility is to follow the law,” said City Manager Kurt Althouse. “The courts have clearly held that this type of action is administrative, and we cannot lawfully place it on the ballot.”
Althouse also stressed that the housing project’s developer told city officials “legal action would be taken” if they allowed the vote to move forward.
“Moving ahead despite clear legal precedent would likely result in costly litigation,” Althouse said. “That means the development would still move forward, but there would also be significant legal expenses for taxpayers and the possibility of paying the developer’s attorney fees as well. We have a duty to protect the city’s financial interests.”
City officials said they remain open to continued dialogue with residents about development and growth in the community.
Committee response
Members of the petition committee behind the referendum effort said Thursday they feel the interests of the developer have been prioritized over the concerns of Vandalia residents.
“From the beginning, local residents attended council meetings, and sent countless emails and letters to council and city staff, expressing their concerns about the density, construction quality and traffic impacts of this development,” said committee member Tanya Brown. “As council approved this development, it appears very little consideration was taken for these concerns.”
Brown said the committee’s goal was never to block the project altogether, but to ensure the development would not adversely affect nearby residents and infrastructure.
“It was never about no development; it was always about the quality of the development,” Brown said.
“I hope the citizens of Vandalia watch this closely and recognize the impact that this development will have on the local property values, the school system, and traffic safety,” she continued. “Councils and city staff come and go, but as we’ve seen over the years, their decisions have a more permanent impact.”
About the Author
