A group of property owners and developers are taking Jerome Township to federal court, claiming zoning in the area is “broken.”
Stakeholders for three residential developments that were each stalled by referendums are joint plaintiffs in a lawsuit seeking damages from Jerome Township.
Land owners and companies developing The Homestead at Scotts Farm, Rolling Meadows and The Farm at Indian Run claim the township violated their property rights and discriminated against them during the zoning process.
“A few organized and vocal individuals in the township have hijacked the zoning process to stop new homes from being built purportedly to keep the township ‘rural,’” according to the lawsuit filed on July 23. “In reality, they want to keep everyone else’s undeveloped land in the township as green space.”
The Board of Trustees approved applications to rezone the land for each of the three proposed developments from Rural Residential District to Planned Development District.
However, those zoning changes were stricken down by voters following referendum elections.
The lawsuit names the township as a defendant, arguing it is at fault for the damages caused by the residents’ vote.
“It is well established that the township is legally responsible for the deprivation of (the) plaintiff’s constitutional rights whether the deprivation occurs ‘by referendum or otherwise,’” the lawsuit states.
It goes on to claim that consistent legal challenges to development are the result of a “status quo” zoning system in which “no growth is misconstrued as good growth.”
According to the lawsuit, a group of local residents are “misusing” the referendum process to halt all growth in the township, regardless of the size of developments or their compliance with the township’s comprehensive plan.
“The results of the referendum have become inevitable: each time the comprehensive plan is ignored, the status quo is illegally preserved and no new residential development is allowed to occur,” the lawsuit states.
It details a “scheme” that opponents of development have repeatedly used to prevent rezoning.
Plaintiffs argued that a referendum petition is circulated via email immediately after trustees approve any residential development. Then, “an arbitrary and capricious smear campaign” is used to garner the necessary signatures.
The plaintiffs claim that recent referendums have not been based on the merit of proposed developments, but grounded in a desire to ensure undeveloped land remains open space.
The lawsuit argues that this is “at the expense of the landowners’ and developers’ property rights.”
The plaintiffs claim it marks a shift from the way township officials treated developers in the past.
They argue that the trustees previously rezoned numerous properties from Rural Residential to Planned Development District, in accordance with the Jerome Township Comprehensive Plan.
The comprehensive plan, most recently revised in 2015, attempts to balance new development with the rural history of the area by planning for residential communities in specific clusters.
But, because a number of residents desire to restrict growth entirely, the plaintiffs argue township officials have “abandoned” the comprehensive plan.
The lawsuit states only one request “over the last several years” was approved without a referendum attempt. It speculates the “anomaly” was caused by the inability to gather door-to-door signatures during the COVID-19 pandemic.
The plaintiffs believe this trend is likely to continue.
A referendum petition to stop approximately 163 acres being developed by Jerome Village Company, LLC was recently thrown out by the Union County Board of Elections.
“The Fry Property” on the northwestern side of U.S. 42 between Harriott Road and Wells Road would consist of commercial outparcels, a single-family home subdivision and condominium and patio home developments.
In June, the Board of Elections certified the petition, as 296 signatures were submitted and only 262 were needed.
However, the board recently upheld a protest filed on behalf of the property owner and developer claiming the summary of the petition was misleading to those who signed it.
“But for the Union County Board of Elections’ decertification of the referendum petition on July 22, 2021, (the developer) would be in the same position as the plaintiffs,” the lawsuit states.
It notes that a referendum is currently being circulated regarding an application to build an additional subdivision in Jerome Village.
The plaintiffs of the current lawsuit include Craig D. Scott, trustee of The Craig D. Scott Revocable Trust; Jerry L. Scott and Judith E. Scott, co-trustees of The Jerry Lynn Scott Trust; Phillip E. Scott and Mary Susan Scott, co-trustees of The Scott Family Living Trust; Paul C. Haueisen; T-Bill Development Co., LLC; Pulte Homes of Ohio LLC; The Paragon Building Group, Ltd.; Walbonns LLC and Wicked Chicken, LLC.
Together, they claim that their proposed developments met – or exceeded – the standards set forth in the comprehensive plan, but were held back arbitrarily.
The Homestead at Scotts Farm would create 248 single-family homes on a 139.4 acre area on the south side of Brock Road between Hyland-Croy Road and the overpass with U.S. 33.
Likewise, Rolling Meadows would construct 378 units on approximately 211 acres of land along Industrial Parkway and Crottinger Road.
The smallest of the three developments, The Farm at Indian Run, would add 40 single-family homes to 24.74 acres along Industrial Parkway.
Each of the areas in question are designated in the comprehensive plan as “residential conservation districts.”
According to the plan, they are typically designed as planned unit developments that cluster residential areas to preserve large areas of open space. They require at least 40% open space and no more than 2 units/acre.
Since the three developments met those requirements, the lawsuit indicates “the township had no discretion to deny the rezonings” and each application was approved.
The plaintiffs contend that township residents – even through the referendum process – must abide by the same zoning standards as their elected officials.
Based on rights granted by the General Assembly and Ohio Revised Code, both can only impose zoning restrictions when a development is not in the interest of public health and safety or in accordance with the comprehensive plan.
The lawsuit also claims that a referendum is still subject to review, and invalidation, if the results do not reflect those zoning standards.
Through the lawsuit, the plaintiffs are seeking the township to rezone the land affiliated with The Homestead at Scotts Farm, Rolling Meadows and The Farm at Indian Run as Planned Development Districts and approve each of the developments.
They are also seeking two permanent injunctions.
The first would prevent the township from making any of the land in question a Rural Residential District. Another would ensure the township could not stop the plaintiffs from developing the properties.
The plaintiffs are also seeking an undisclosed amount of compensatory damages, though the lawsuit indicates each stakeholder has lost “millions of dollars” due to the township’s actions. Attorney fees and costs are also being sought.
Jerome Township Director of Departments Douglas Stewart said township officials will not make any comments until the lawsuit is thoroughly reviewed by legal counsel.
The lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court, Southern District, Eastern Division by Vorys, Sater, Seymour and Pease LLP, counsel for the plaintiffs.
The plaintiffs requested a trial by jury.