Commissioners reject request to annex 65-plus acres from Amherst Township to Elyria (UPDATED)

County commissioners voted 2-1 Tuesday to reject a proposed annexation of just over 65 acres of Amherst Township to the city of Elyria. Commissioners Marty Gallagher and David Moore voted no, saying the proposal by Builders & Developers Co. Inc. hadn't met all the requirements under state law. Commissioner Jeff Riddell voted for it. He said the only decision commissioners had to make by Sept. 3 was if the proposal complied with the law. Builders & Developers had asked for the property to be annexed into the city so it can build housing. Its attorney, Jon Clark, said state law gives commissioners the duty to approve the annexation if all legal requirements are met. He said Elyria has already agreed to provide city services to the annexed area. Township trustees Neil Lynch, David Urig and Jeremy Watson attended the meeting to object. Lynch said the township would end up responsible for maintaining one of the roads leading onto the annexed property but wouldn't receive any revenue to offset its future road maintenance costs. Clark believes he and his clients have met all the conditions required by law for the annexation to go forward, Lynch said. "We believe they have not," Lynch said, citing alleged "discrepancies" in both the legal description and a map of the property. He and his fellow trustees officially first objected to the annexation on July 28. Lynch said discussions with the city didn't result in an agreement, and that it would cost the township more money than it would receive in tax revenue. A Type 2 expedited annexation can be done with or without the consent of the township. Under state law, a township can only object to a Type 2 annexation on the basis of the form of the petition, not simply because trustees oppose the action. Moore and Lynch said Tuesday that Elyria plans to create a tax increment financing district, or TIF, on the 65 acres that would eliminate 100 percent of property taxes for 30 years. A TIF provides funding for public improvements within a specific area by eliminating property taxes in that area. Property owners make payments in lieu of taxes instead based on the increase in their property values due to the development. No TIF currently exists. Elyria Mayor Kevin Brubaker said Wednesday that the city had discussed the possibility of a TIF agreement for the property with Builders & Developers, but no offer or specific proposal had been made. "We've talked about TIF'ing our residential and all properties for future infrastructure, but we have made no commitment," Brubaker said. "We have not even gone to Council on what we are going to TIF, how much we are going to TIF for and if we are going to TIF it. It was a discussion that we are having about all different types of developments, which legally we can do to generate revenue for infrastructure needs in the future." "But there is nothing on the table right now for us to TIF this, particularly 100 percent for 30 years," Brubaker said. Clark told commissioners that even if a TIF agreement has been discussed, it wouldn't have any effect on the annexation. Nor does the township have any legal standing in the commissioners' annexation decision. State law says if the seven conditions of a Type 2 expedited annexation are met, commissioners must approve it.Those seven conditions are: The petition meets all the requirements of, and was filed according to what is set by, state law The petition was signed by all the property owners proposing annexation from the township into the city, and only those owners The property proposed for annexation is less than 500 acres. The property shares a contiguous boundary with the city for a specific length of its perimeter The annexation will not create an "island" of township land completely surrounded by newly-annexed city land The city has agreed to provide services to the property to be annexed; and If a street or highway will be divided or segmented by the boundary line between the township and the city, creating a maintenance problem, the city agrees to take on the maintenance of that street or highway "to otherwise correct the problem." Clark said a lot of what was said at Tuesday's meeting wasn't relevant to his client's proposal. "The only issue that (Amherst Township) raised without any evidence of any kind is the accuracy of the map and the legal description that's been reviewed by the county engineer and it's been approved as being accurate," he told commissioners, "so I think all of the matters you need to consider have been satisfied, and your decision is based solely on those factors." The township "could object to it, certainly, but they're not a party to this proceeding," said Clark. He did not return a voicemail message seeking further comment on Wednesday. Riddell said Tuesday it wasn't commissioners' job to decide on the proposal based on what they would like to see happen. "Our job is strictly to determine if the factual seven things have been met for the Type 2 expedited annexation and if there are facts we're not clear on, that's an issue for us to consider," he said. "It's not that we're trying to steer the project one way or another." Moore said he's not a fan of the annexation process. He said it should be handled by judges, not county commissioners. "But statutes are statutes, right?" he said. Opponents of the mega site development in New Russia Township, near the Lorain County Regional Airport south of the proposed 65-acre property, have suggested the proposed annexation is a way to get around community opposition to the mega site. Clark previously said his client's proposal had nothing to do with the mega site. Contact Dave O'Brien at dobrien@chroniclet.com. Contact Owen MacMillan at omacmillan@chroniclet.com.