Pickerington Area Taxpayers Alliance

GRANVILLE
School district agrees to land swap
Tuesday, March 22, 2005
Seth Seymour
FOR THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH



GRANVILLE, Ohio ?— Granville school officials agreed to swap 300 acres last night with the ailing Newark City Schools, a move that could generate more money for the two districts.

But for the developer planning to build 142 homes on the land, it could mean big losses.

A frustrated Rockford Homes had urged the Granville school board to keep the land in its district, where property values are significantly higher than in the neighboring Newark.

''We bought the land based on Granville schools, not another school district,'' said Mike King, Rockford?’s vice president of operations.

Granville?’s schools, however, can?’t hold more students. School officials voted unanimously for the transfer, which they hope will reduce development in the district. More housing, they say, would drain finances and spark higher taxes.

''It?’s not the total solution,'' Granville school board President Lynn Straker said. ''We will not stop growing, but this should be a step in the right direction.''

Newark school officials want the land, which includes a portion already in the city, to offset declining enrollment and generate more state funding.

''We think it?’s a good thing,'' Newark Superintendent Keith Richards said.

The Newark school board still must approve the transfer, which will be discussed at its next meeting March 31. The swap, if approved, could take effect July 1.

''Luckily no children would be involved in the transfer'' because the 300 acres are undeveloped, Straker said.

Rockford, one of eight owners of the 300 acres, bought 76 acres in December, planning to build homes beginning at $275,000 each. Now the Columbus-based developer promises legal action.

''Whenever you do something like this, somebody isn?’t going to be happy,'' Granville Township Trustee Wes Sargent told school board members.

That was the case here in the late 1990s, when a bitter annexation dispute erupted between Newark and Granville.

M/I Homes wanted to annex 281 acres from Granville Township to Newark.

Newark eventually annexed the site in 1998, but village and township officials had put up a two-year fight that led to the Ohio Supreme Court.

The situation pitted residents of the Granville school district against Newark and M/I Homes, and sometimes degenerated into name-calling, which portrayed the developer as greedy and Granville residents as elitists.

This time, cooperation is prevailing, despite the Rockford quarrel.

''You should be commended for bringing us back together,'' Granville resident Dan Bellman told the school board.

seymou_s@denison.edu



By In disbelief

The builder's way or noway.

I wanted to pull out the comments of the Rockford Homes representative from the previous posting:

''A frustrated Rockford Homes had urged the Granville school board to keep the land in its district, where property values are significantly higher than in the neighboring Newark.

''We bought the land based on Granville schools, not another school district,'' said Mike King, Rockford?’s vice president of operations.

Granville?’s schools, however, can?’t hold more students. School officials voted unanimously for the transfer, which they hope will reduce development in the district. More housing, they say, would drain finances and spark higher taxes.''


WELL MR. KING YOU LOSE!!!

It is not the responsibility of the Granville or Pickerington schools districts to make decisions on whether or not you and your builder associations are going to make a profit. You contribute nothing to the district so you should not expect to receive a dime back in value. Mr. King it is called risk. It is not the responsibility of the taxpayers to reduce your risk factors to ZERO or even to 50%. It should be you and your builder associates that calculate that uncontrolled building will one day led to the bankruptcy of the very profit center (school district) you are exploiting.

To have you builders whine each time you hit a bump in the road and look to the courts for relief is a waste of the court's time in my opinion. It should be your responsibility to factor in these risks prior to buying the lands. Clearly your admission here is that the value of those land purchases are directly related to the quality of the school district.

I would think to help improve that quality would be in your best interests not the taxpayers.

If the schools are so damn important to you build your own.

Ship Diley off to Columbus

Hmmmmm.... think we could ship off a bunch of those undeveloped lots along Diley Rd to the folks in the Columbus district?

Adjacent District

Doesn't the district you trade land with need to be ADJACENT?

Maybe Canal Winchester or Groveport?

Since one is in split sessions & the other is fast approaching I'm not sure they will want our growth!