Saint Bernard CIC schedules demolition, updates county tax appeal and addresses purchase-and-sale with Civitas Development

The Saint Bernard Community Improvement Corporation at its April 22 meeting heard that demolition of a shopping-center property is scheduled to start in about two weeks and discussed related utility shutoffs, an ongoing tax-valuation appeal and a purchase-and-sale agreement with Civitas Development.

Jonathan Stuchill, president of the Saint Bernard Community Improvement Corporation, opened the discussion by asking about the demolition schedule and said he had received a message from Scott at O'Rourke indicating the contractor had reviewed the work and planned to start in two weeks. Stuchill said board staff would follow up with utility providers and try to ensure taps were shut off before work begins.

Chris Sauer, a board member, confirmed O'Rourke's outreach to the operations team and said preliminary work could begin only after utilities were coordinated. The board discussed that the demolition will be partial: one building (described in the meeting as the former bank building) will be removed entirely while an adjacent building will be partially demolished and capped to separate it from the Dollar General/Ace tenant area.

Meredith Hughes, a board member, provided an update on the board's appeal to the Hamilton County auditor over the property's 2024 valuation. Hughes said the appeal has been submitted and an appraisal is expected back in May; she said the school board filed a counter complaint seeking a valuation of $2,100,000, while the CIC's appraiser valued the property “around $500,000 or $600,000,” according to discussion recorded at the meeting. Hughes said the county board of revision (the county's hearing body) would consider each side's evidence and set a valuation for the tax year under appeal.

Hughes explained that the appeal covers tax year 2024 (bills payable in 2025) and that a board-of-revision decision could reduce the CIC's 2024 tax liability. She added that if demolition is completed in 2025, the auditor would administratively update the property's assessment for tax year 2025; that administrative update would not require repeating the formal appeal process described for 2024.

The board also discussed removed fixtures and salvage. Stuchill said the historical society had identified filing cabinets they want to keep; the board agreed to repurpose some cabinets for city use and to leave very heavy items in place rather than risk injury during removal. Board members debated holding a short public viewing or sale but expressed reluctance because of liability and the condition/weight of remaining furniture.

After an executive session held to discuss sale of property, the board returned to the public meeting and considered a purchase-and-sale agreement with Civitas Development. The meeting record shows the president asked for a motion to place approval of the purchase-and-sale agreement on the table “as presented” and the group voiced assent; the minutes do not include a roll-call vote or individual vote tallies for that action in the transcript excerpt provided.

The meeting included routine administrative items: the board approved prior minutes (motion by Jeff Edwards, second by Joe Brickler) and received a treasurer's report showing a combined balance of $176,243.52, with $5,328.87 remaining at First State Bank that the treasurer said would be moved into the Fifth Third account.

The board was reminded to complete related-party and fraud questionnaires for the auditors, and the next regular meeting was announced for May 27 at 6 p.m.

Votes at a glance

- Approval of minutes — Motion made by Jeff Edwards, seconded by Joe Brickler; outcome: approved by voice vote (minutes show “Aye”).

- Motion to enter executive session for sale of property — mover/second not specified in transcript; outcome: approved (voice responses recorded).

- Consideration of purchase-and-sale agreement with Civitas Development — the president called for a motion to approve “as presented” and members responded “Yes” on the record; no roll-call vote or individual tallies are shown in the provided transcript excerpt.

(If formal, recorded vote tallies are required for legal or public-record purposes, those appear not to be present in the supplied transcript excerpt and should be obtained from the official minutes.)