Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Real Estate Disposition topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board authorizes negotiation on downtown Sherry Creek property; sale terms to be finalized later
Summary
After months of community outreach, the Bellbrook-Sugarcreek board voted to authorize a three-person negotiating team to seek terms with the city and its Community Improvement Corporation for the downtown Sherry Creek campus. The board limited the motion to authorization to negotiate; final sale terms will return for board approval.
The Bellbrook‑Sugarcreek Local School District Board of Education on May 5 authorized a team of three district representatives to negotiate terms with the City of Bellbrook — and in particular with the city's Community Improvement Corporation (CIC) — concerning the district’s surplus Sherry Creek downtown property.
Superintendent Dr. Kozad explained the district has engaged stakeholders and held community meetings since October to gather ideas for the multi‑building campus, which includes older structures, a one‑story building rented by a county ESC and third‑party tenants such as community groups. The property sits in a flood plain and carries long‑term maintenance liabilities that the district has been budgeting for but does not currently use for primary education.
Board members had previously narrowed options to two paths: auctioning the property (in whole or in parcels) or negotiating a sale to the city/CIC for redevelopment with community partners. Dr. Kozad said the city indicated it would only accept the liability if terms were favorable to the city, so a sale would require sufficiently advantageous conditions for the city to take on the buildings.
The motion as approved authorized three district representatives to negotiate terms and return to the board with a proposed transaction for final approval. Board Vice President Dorn moved the resolution and Mrs. Anderson seconded it. In the roll call, Mr. Kinsey recorded an abstention; three members voted yes and the motion passed.
Board members discussed community stewardship and identified local groups (including the Lions Club and other civic organizations) that had proposed community‑oriented uses; several trustees said they preferred a solution that keeps the property available for community use rather than simply selling to the highest bidder. Dr. Kozad said the district’s negotiating team would be prepared to seek protections for existing tenants and to discuss reasonable transition timelines during negotiations.
No price was approved in the May 5 action; the board limited the vote to negotiation authority and asked administration and counsel to return with specific terms for a later board vote.
