Highland County land bank board mulls potential policy changes for grant programs, nonprofit partnerships

Possible changes to land bank policies, including whether to require a match commitment from property owners utilizing state grant funding and how, or whether, nonprofits can use the land bank to clear delinquent taxes, were debated in detail at the Highland County Land Reutilization Corporation’s Thursday, Aug. 21 meeting.

At their July meeting, the board discussed whether they will want to include a provision for property owners to commit to pay a certain percentage of the demolition costs, while board member David Daniels also spoke of the “tremendous amount of money” the land bank has put into privately owned land through the brownfield remediation grant.

Land bank administrator Jason Johansen shared some of his findings from his research through talking to the land bank’s attorney, Todd Book, and reaching out to other land banks in Ohio.

“I had a couple ideas,” he said. “One of the things I kind of liked was asbestos work made up for about 10 percent of the total cost of the last cycle of the program, so two things. One, an idea I had would be to have the property owners pay for all the asbestos work beforehand, get the survey done, if it needs abated, abate it. Then, if you do all that due diligence, that’d kind of buy you a ticket into the demolition program.”

Another option Johansen said he mulled with Book was having “buy-in amount for the program, that would just kind of be a set amount,” to be included.

“When you do just a percentage match, they're going to be in the unknown for probably the better part of a year or more on whether, you know, is it going to be a couple thousand dollars? Is it going to be $10,000?” Johansen said. “It could be a huge range, and I think the issue with just having a match across the board would be, we would submit these applications, and things can change in a year with financials.”

Book agreed, saying that in other areas that have done a percentage match versus a set amount, property owners “have to wait up until we bid the project before they know what their 25 percent is, and they're kind of fluctuating about whether they're willing to pay that amount of money.

“For example, in one county, we had 21 properties that were on the list, but after the 25-percent match was finally determined, we were down to 13,” Book said. “I could see if we had more properties, or a longer list of people than we had money, that I could see where you would want to make that percentage higher or make that more of a situation. I think here, we have more assets that we have people lined up at this point when it comes to the actual demolition program.”

Daniels asked why the land bank couldn’t have property owners “pay for the asbestos survey” as well as paying a set entrance fee. On the other hand, board member Lauren Walker asked about “the purpose of making somebody buy into” participating when the land bank isn’t “even using all the funds.”

“I'm not for having them buy in unless we go over the $500,000 where we have to put in a match for 25 percent,” Walker said. “I know we had talked about, well, there's some people that, financially, could have afforded the demo. OK, well, they can financially afford the $1,000 that we might be having them do the buy in, but on the other hand, you've got all the other people that can't probably afford $200. 

“I’d rather get as many demos as we can done, and if we send an application that's $500,000 or we have people on a waiting list, then we maybe require a match, because that's when it dips into our funding.”

Johansen told the board Thursday that Highland County is expected to receive a $480,000 set-aside for residential properties with the next grant cycle, while they still have “about $131,000 left over” from the current iteration of the Building Demolition and Site Revitalization program. He said currently, the land bank has 14 potential properties in mind for the grant, but there could be “a lot more to come once I start sending out letters, putting out advertisements.

“Essentially, at an $8,800 demolition, you might be able to get all 14 properties done with just our replacement funds that we do have [from the current grant],” Johansen said. “I am confident that I don't think we'll come close to going over our amount to have to have a match from the land bank.”

“I just don't know what the purpose would be for them to have a buy-in when our main goal is to reduce blight,” Walker said. “That would be my question.”

Book responded that having “more money” would “expand our ability to do projects,” while similar policies across Ohio have been successful.

“If people pay a little bit of money, then they're more bought into it, and they work with the program, I think, a little bit better,” Book said. “I think that shows that they're committed to it.”

Walker made a suggestion that if “somebody wants to apply for the commercial side, maybe there's a little bit more of a match there than just the residential side,” as currently the board is “not seeing too much” activity on commercial property demolitions.

“Another thing that could be done that gets a little bit, maybe more discretion than you guys want, is you could have a buy-in fee, but that could be waived if the board so decides,” Book said. “I don't know if you all want to have that. It's a lot easier if there's just a number.”

Board member Vickie Warnock said that would be hard “to justify to one person, saying ‘we're going to charge you, but we're not going to charge’” someone else.

Daniels pointed out that in some cases, blighted properties are the result of property owners “ignoring their responsibilities” and not paying property taxes or keeping their properties maintained.

“I try to keep my eye on who's paying the bill here, and the taxpayers are paying the bill to improve these properties that at the end of the day, somebody, whether they've got $100 or whether they've got $100,000. is going to end up with an asset that's worth more than the day that they started,” Daniels said. “The fact that we won't spend it all, that doesn't mean, in my opinion, that we need to be wasteful with the money we’ve got. 

“At the end of the day, these people end up with more value, or a more valuable piece of property, than what they had to begin with, and who paid for it? The taxpayers paid for it.”

Board president Terry Britton pointed out that there are “two sides of the story.

“To have a place tore down, you’ve got to be up on your taxes,” he said. “If they forfeit it to us, then that's when we wipe it away, so you’ve got two different situations.”

In response to a question from Walker, Johansen clarified that in the current program, “none” are tax-delinquent. 

Referring to Book’s scenario about property owners backing out due to the cost, Walker said she “wouldn’t feel good” about being selective on where to target blight based on ability to pay.

“If we had 30 demolitions lined up, and then we had them pay $1,000, and it came to the point where they were starting to pay and that 30 went to 20 applicants, I guess I just feel wouldn't feel good that we couldn't do those 10 other demolitions,” Walker said. “Ultimately, that's what we're trying to do is reduce the blight in Highland County.

“I understand it's still taxpayer dollars, but it's a grant opportunity for Highland County, and we’re to do with it what we can. Everything that we're putting in the grant application are eligible expenses. It covers the full cost of the demolition. Is there anything that would be outside of the allowable expenses that we could look at?”

Johansen said another idea would be to “put a lien on the property” if participating individuals can’t or won’t pay the taxes.

“That would address Vickie’s issue,” Book said. “We're [telling property owners that don’t buy in] just going to put a lien on the property so whenever you ever sell it in the future, we'll get our money back. That would be that way we're not actually giving anybody anything. Everybody would be treated the same, and that's a good idea to think about that.

“If we decide we want to go down a path of having some kind of a buy-in to it, I would think it needs to be a smaller number and probably as uniform as we can make it.”

Daniels said he would “have no problem doing tax liens” because it could be helpful in the future once “the  funding dries up from the state level.”

Walker also said that they should involve the brownfield sites in the discussion as well, not just the regular commercial and residential properties.

“Some of our sites, if the owner is wanting to and can do the match commitment, they're going to need to get back into the program for for cleanup,” Johansen said. “Definitely, we're going to need to have that conversation too.” 

Britton suggested the board have “a work session” after their September meeting to avoid “dragging the public along” during their regular meeting.

“I agree with both sides of the story here,” Britton said. “I think we just need to catch a time where we can spend a lot more time on discussing it.”

In an unrelated policy debate, Randy Plikerd, a registered architect whom Johansen said works with a nonprofit to “rehabilitate blighted properties by building cottages through a job training program,” spoke to the board about a proposal for the Rocky Fork Lake area.

“There are many blighted and tax-delinquent properties out there, so their organization sent out roughly 50 letters to tax-delinquent properties requesting donation of their property to their nonprofit,” Johansen said. “They received two responses from property owners that are willing to donate.”

Plikerd said that he works with Highland County Church of Christ’s ministry program to help the homeless and those in recovery.

“Our next goal was to try to do job training,” Plikerd said. “We're trying to do a job training program to train men in construction trades. 

“We need low-cost property in order to make this thing happen.”

Plikerd told the board there are a total of three lots whose owners “owe a lot of money in back taxes” that they are interested in acquiring if the land bank can clear the tax delinquency. If they can do that for the ministry program, they would build modest homes on the land, and “the lots would go back to the productive roles instead of unproductive,” he said.

Daniels questioned the idea of clearing the delinquent taxes on the land if the church was going to eventually make a profit on the sale of the homes, while Book said they would need to be careful to avoid abuse of the “superpower of a land bank” to clear taxes.

“We would want to put something in place, probably change the bylaws, that would say we could only take property from someone and then turn it back to that entity if they were a nonprofit that was trying to increase housing opportunities in the county,” Book said. “The entity would then allow the land bank to have a first lien on the property for a certain amount of money so that, if and when you sell that property down the road, then the land bank recoups money that could be given to the county to pay for a portion of the taxes that would be wiping out.”

Daniels suggested another idea would be to “wipe that lien clean once a second house is built” to help “increase the housing stock. However, he said they need a more formal explanation of the ministry program’s plans before making any decisions.

“I’d like to see more of a more of a proposal and what kind of homes would be built, and that sort of thing,” Daniels said.

Book and Johansen also cautioned Plikerd that they would need to complete a title search to see if there are outstanding liens on the parcels that could potentially be donated to the nonprofit.

In other discussion:

• Johansen provided updates on the current Brownfield Remediation Grant projects.

For the East Monroe property in Leesburg, Johansen said he had “good news” to share.

“TetraTech submitted the closure assessment report to BUSTR [Bureau of Underground Storage Tank Regulations], and BUSTR has granted us the NFA letter, or no further action required for the project,” Johansen said. “There's no further assessment work, and the project is complete.”

In reply to a question from Britton, Johansen said that two tanks were removed from that site.

Johansen also said he had “good news” about the Rocky Fork Truck Stop, which has been funded during the past two state brownfield grant cycles.

“The access has been given to TetraTech from the adjacent neighbors,” Johansen said. “They finally have their full arms wrapped around the contamination. That's been something that they've been chasing now for going on probably three years.

“Work is really going to start ramping up this fall for TetraTech as they completed an aquifer characterization test last week, using the existing monitoring wells. An environmental covenant will be placed on the property restriction, restricting the land use for residential purposes and prohibiting the use of groundwater at the property. Commercial property is OK there, but no residential, and that's going to be recorded by the property owner at the recorder's office. That'll be a restriction on that property moving forward, and that's needed for tier two approval from BUSTR. After that, Tetra Tech will begin groundwater remediation.”

Work continues at the site of a former machine shop in Greenfield, where tanks have been filled in.

“TetraTech has submitted the BUSTR closure in place report for the underground storage tanks, and they are in the process of wrapping up work on the assessment grant,” Johansen said. “TetraTech is working with the property owner to have some vapor intrusion testing completed on some adjacent buildings that he owns to just ensure that those vapor levels are safe due to detections of chlorinated solvents in the soil and groundwater. 

“BUSTR has granted our request to move the oversight of the project to the Ohio EPA Voluntary Action Program, and we have been in communication with property owner to make them aware of a possible match commitment that they may be required to do for the Voluntary Action Program.”

For a former gas station in Hillsboro, the state is also asking for “additional work,” according to Johansen, which may be pursued during the next brownfield grant cycle.

“There has been petroleum identified in the soil and the groundwater borings, so the site definitely has contamination,” Johansen said. “TetraTech recommends to seek an additional brownfield remediation grant and clean up the petroleum issue. Similar to the Rocky Fork Truck stop, we would need to go off site, seek access from adjacent owners to do the sampling. There was some vapor intrusion in the building at the site, and a vapor mitigation system would need to be installed into that building to make it safe to be a commercial structure.”

For the other state grant program, Johansen said the only three projects remaining to be demolished as part of the Building Demolition and Site Revitalization program are the ones that were rebid at the end of July, with the three properties in Hillsboro set “to be done by September 19.

“Everything looks good on that end,” Johansen said.

• Johansen also gave an update on several properties on the land bank’s radar.

TetraTech has finished the phase one property assessment on 11470 Spruance Road in Marshall Township, which the land bank owns, confirming it is a brownfield as Johansen suspected. 

“TetraTech's recommendation is to have a phase two property assessment done, as well as a geophysical survey completed, to assess whether any underground storage tanks remain from the former gas station,” Johansen said. “The phase one property assessment gives a very detailed, comprehensive overview of the property's potential for contamination or liability, so essentially, it's a due diligence report that can be used to show potential buyers of the risks that they face when they purchase the property.”

Johansen added “it would be in our best interest to probably put it through this Brownfield Remediation Program.

“We could make it a really nice site,” Johansen said.

Britton asked what the estimated costs would be, and Johansen said it would be in line with the Rocky Fork Truck Stop and Greenfield machine shop properties, which were more than $100,000 each.

“I did speak to Matt [Wagner, environmental consultant from TetraTech yesterday,” Johansen said. “He is very confident that there's not going to be any contamination.”

For 11923 Elmhurst Trail in Paint Township, Johansen said they have located the lienholder of the trailer on that property, with the lien being at least $17,000.

“[The lienholder] has sent over a letter releasing their interest in the mobile home,” Johansen said. “At the time that [the previous property owner] donated us the property, he said he would be willing to help us out with the mobile home in any way that he could. We would need to have a duplicate title made, and then he would donate us the mobile home, and then we would title it into our name.

“We did have a difference of opinion with the property owner, who thought the water bill was going to be cleared in the donation. Of course, we did get rid of the tax liability issues, but we did not get rid of the water bill, which is standing at about $398.”

Still, for the cost of paying the water bill and the title work, Johansen said they “can get this mobile home into our name” for approximately $430. The board voted to approve the acquisition of the property.

For the .1653-acre property at 222 McClain Avenue in Greenfield, which was acquired by the land bank from Fannie Mae in 2024, Johansen asked if the board was ready to seek bids for, or list, the property. He estimated $19,245.49 put into the property thus far, including the clearing of back taxes, an asbestos survey, demolition and mowing. Comparable properties in Greenfield are listed between $20,000 and $29,900, he said.

An interested buyer has reached out, Johansen said, but the buyer also is interested in an adjoining property for which the village of Greenfield is receiver. 

The board voted to list the property on the land bank board’s website of $20,000 as a starting point.

As an update on 21 South Fairfield Street in Leesburg – for which the land bank agreed to become receiver in July 2024, pending court hearings – Book said his “goal is to have the motion and entry filed with the court so that we can get that added to our list of properties that need to be demolished through” the state grant programs.

Book said he is also working to make progress on the seven properties for which the land bank voted to purchase tax lien certificates in March.

For 10635 North Shore Road, a property that was previously donated to the land bank, Johansen said he “did not hear back from” a partial owner of a trailer left on the property.

“We need to get that off there so that we can clear the land,” he said. “The other partial owner is willing to work with us.”

Johansen also reported that a property in the Highland Holiday Association at Rocky Fork Lake will be added to the list of properties to pursue through tax foreclosure.

• The board approved the financial reports as presented by Johansen, who listed a beginning balance of $248,811.47 and ending balance of $278,741.43 for July. They received $213,055.70 in reimbursements for the Building Demolition & Site Revitalization Grant Program during the month, according to his report.

In a separate motion, the board approved the payment of outstanding bills, which included legal fees, advertising, rent, salary/expenses and invoices from various contractors. The bills totaled $107,833.83 altogether.

• Johansen announced that the land bank’s 2024 state audit has been finalized with “no findings.

“The only suggestion that they did have was to have a disaster recovery plan within our policies,” Johansen said. 

Publisher's note: A free press is critical to having well-informed voters and citizens. While some news organizations opt for paid websites or costly paywalls, The Highland County Press has maintained a free newspaper and website for the last 26 years for our community. If you would like to contribute to this service, it would be greatly appreciated. Donations may be made to: The Highland County Press, P.O. Box 849, Hillsboro, Ohio 45133. Please include "for website" on the memo line.