Board approves resolution seeking direct engagement with developers on tax incentives after heated debate

The Marysville Exempted Village School District Board of Education voted Feb. 20 to approve a resolution that expresses the board’s intent to require direct engagement with developers on real-property tax abatements and compensation agreements that need board approval under Ohio law.

The resolution, introduced by the board, states the board’s intent to disapprove real-property tax abatements and incentives that require its approval unless the board is given an opportunity to engage directly with applicants “without the influence of local governments,” language that generated substantial debate among board members and members of the public.

A motion to postpone the measure until the board’s July 17, 2025 meeting failed for lack of a second. A later vote approved the resolution. Voting recorded on the motion included: Mister Smith — yes; Miss Savage — yes; Mister Ferguson — no; Mister Kelly — yes; Mister Katz — yes. (Transcript shows multiple speakers using last names; the roll call recorded those names at the vote.)

Supporters argued the measure would ensure the board has direct access to companies requesting incentives, said it would put the board’s expectations in writing and offered a path for the board to discuss how proposed incentives affect district finances and students. A board member who supported the resolution said city officials and city council members raised no objections when they were shown the draft; the same board member said the resolution would not cut the city or other partners out of negotiations but would provide the board “an independent opportunity to talk to people.”

Opponents said the language was impractical and risked discouraging companies from locating in the community because developers often prefer to deal with the existing local economic-development process, which includes the city and the county. One board member noted past incentive approvals (including abatements or tax agreements previously approved for entities identified in the meeting) where the board did not negotiate directly with the business and said changing practices now creates uncertainty. Another board member asked for a formal presentation about how the local economic development process operates and how a revised EDIP (Economic Development and Investment Plan) would affect timing and negotiation roles before the board adopts a formal policy.

Before the vote, a motion to postpone to the July meeting was made and explained as a request to allow time for a presentation on the current EDIP and for the board to better understand the multi-party process that typically involves city and county partners; that motion failed for lack of a second. The resolution passed on the subsequent vote.

The resolution does not itself change Ohio law or automatically require changes to any existing incentive agreement; rather, it is a board-level statement of intent about how the board wishes to be engaged in future incentive negotiations. Board members said the district can amend or rescind the resolution later if a formal EDIP is negotiated that meets board expectations.

Board action: motion to approve the resolution was moved and seconded and passed.