The second Wednesday of every month a handful of citizens meet at The North End Community Improvement Collaborative (NECIC) to discuss issues facing Richland County residents, although this week the handful became a crowd. The topic that attracted so much interest was the newly approved Richland County Land Bank.
The land bank was just approved by the Richland County Commissioners last week, and the five member board that will govern it has yet to meet, but area residents are eager to know more about the program so Richland County Treasurer Bart Hamilton was invited to speak about the initiative and answer questions.
“For a lot of citizens I think it’s hard for them to understand what we’re doing,” said Hamilton.
In Ohio, a land bank is a nonprofit corporation under the authority of the Ohio Secretary of State. The Richland County Land Re-utilization Corporation will be the name of the new entity and many aspects of the program are still in development. The prosecutor’s office is currently looking over the legal issues, budgets, training, and governance. Other details are all being evaluated and put into place while the county waits for the official approval from the state.
Although the governing board has yet to meet, according to Hamilton the initial plan is to model after other successful land banks in Ohio such as Cuyahoga, Montgomery, and Lucas counties. In time, he expects that the Richland County program would fine tune what is learned from that benchmark and tailor it to the needs of this community.
Loosely defined, the current thinking is that the land bank will target the sale of identified properties to the adjacent property owners, splitting the land in half if neighbors on both sides wish to purchase the land. Details such as pricing, procedures and other particulars will be clarified once the board meets.
NECIC was packed with concerned citizens seeking to understand the program. Some posed questions about particular properties in their neighborhoods, some wondered what happened to the previous discussions of the “mow to own” concept, and others were concerned about the broader implications of the land bank organization and its possible power and authority.
One such concerned resident was Scott Kyler, a member of the Richland County Common Law Study group. According to Kyler, this group is not affiliated with the Tea Party and is a group of non-partisan constitutionalists. Although the local chapter, which just recently formed, does not have a website, there is a national website: http://nationallibertyalliance.org/default.html
Kyler’s concern is that the local land bank might resemble some that have occurred in other communities and his hope is to prevent similar outcomes. He referenced an article from CAPCON, a blog within the Macinac Center for Public Policy’s website.
While, Kyler agrees that at this point it’s too early to discuss whether or not the issues raised by CAPCON directly apply to the situation in Richland County, he is still concerned. He believes the previous process was adequate and did not require the formation of the land bank.
Additionally, he had this concern, “Just making sure that outside parties don’t come in and try to buy up large tracts of land and convert them into…how shall I say this? Um… cracker box-type apartments, and those kind of things, for the unemployed, homeless, that kind of thing where this is all a part of agenda 21. If you’ve read their white papers and that kind of thing, you have to understand what they’re trying to do with non-governmental organizations, NGOs. And that we’re against,” said Kyler.
According to Hamilton the existing laws are not sufficient. Currently it costs $1,200 to sell a delinquent property, the new process is projected to cost $150. Given the financial situation in Richland County that is a great benefit in his opinion. Furthermore, this is the most efficient way to create a clean title for the new owner of the land.
Assuming that Kyler’s “cracker box” scenario is a reference to Section 8 housing, Hamilton argues that the scenario isn’t even possible. Most of the lots are not large enough for development under current zoning and code regulations, thus the most a new owner could build would be a garage or shed. Most lots are not build-able.
“What we’ll do here is two things. We’ll clean up tax delinquencies, and we’ll increase property value. It’s that simple,” said Hamilton.
“What we’ll do here is two things. We’ll clean up tax delinquencies, and we’ll increase property value. It’s that simple,” said Hamilton.
