Township opposes annexation
City of Xenia, Central State face objection over intended move.
The city of Xenia and Central State University have run into a roadblock in their petition to annex the campus into the city.
Xenia Twp. filed an official objection with the Greene County Board of Commissioners, and commissioners are expected to decide at their meeting next week whether the Type II annexation can move forward.
The township and the city will each have an opportunity to address the commission before the vote, according to Greene County Administrator Brandon Huddleson.
“If it is approved, the area in question will become part of the city of Xenia. If it is denied, it will simply remain as is,” Huddleson said.
There are seven criteria set forth by Ohio law that such an annexation has to meet. Huddleson said if the commission determines that all criteria were met, “the board must approve the annexation.”
“If they were to deny an annexation petition, they would be required to enumerate the specific criteria they believe to be insufficiently met,” he said.
The township objected on four key points:
1. The territory sought in the annexation is “shaped as a balloon on a string” and is not contiguous, as defined by the Ohio Supreme Court, to the city’s boundary;
2. Insufficient evidence that the map and legal description in the annexation petition is accurate;
3. Insufficient evidence the map and legal description in the petition satisfies the state’s legal requirement that the municipality be contiguous with the territory sought for a continuous length of at least 5 percent;
4. The proposed annexation creates a road maintenance problem because it divides a street or highway between the township and the city, which does not align with state requirements.
According to the township’s objection, this annexation attempt is “remarkably similar” to the 1988 benchmark case Middletown vs. McGee, in which the Ohio Supreme Court ruled against the city of Franklin’s attempt to annex a portion of the township because the targeted strip of land was not sufficiently contiguous to the larger portion of land that was sought.
“First the string — then the balloon,” the township’s objection reads. “What the city appears to ignore is that not only is a narrow strip continuing outward from a city ... not contiguous, but neither would be a string with a later attachment of a larger balloon to that string.”
City Spokesman Lee Warren said the annexation is a “win-win” and an important move for the future of both the city and CSU.
“The city of Xenia, like any progressive community, is looking at ways to create partnerships that will foster things like economic growth, job development, workforce development, sustainability and certainly economic and education expansion,” Warren said.
Central State University officials declined to comment for this story.
Speaking as a concerned citizen, Mike Gormley, professor and director of CSU’s journalism program, said he does not like the city’s push to annex the campus, in-part because he will have to pay city taxes as an employee working within city limits, but he will not benefit from city services at his home.
“Once the annexation occurs, I will be expected to pay city income tax, though I will not be able to vote in city elections, and I will not receive city services at my home,” Gormley said. “Taxation without representation is always wrong, and I am deeply disappointed that the state permits what colonists revolted against more than two hundred years ago.”
A request for comment from Xenia Twp. Administrator Alan Stock was not returned for this story.