Madison school board deadlocks on property conveyance terms after heated debate over restrictions and commercial flexibility

The Madison County School Board spent more than an hour debating terms for conveying closed school properties to a private buyer, ultimately failing a motion to approve the conveyance without the board’s proposed restrictions.

Public commenter David Russ, who identified himself as chief financial officer for Aware and a business associate of the prospective buyer, told the board the buyer needs commercial flexibility to finance and operate the property. “We have no designs to take a loan on the property,” Russ said, “but if we have a partner that comes in and says we want to put $5,000,000 in, [we] need the ability to do commercial things.” He offered to include written warranties in the purchase agreement about what the buyer will and will not do before closing.

Several board members and members of the public pressed for stronger restrictions, citing past experiences with properties that fell into disrepair and community concern about promised jobs and local benefits. One board member said she “cannot live with those restrictions,” arguing the deed limitations made the site noncommercial and would prevent financing; other members asked for guarantees such as participation or revenue sharing if the property were sold within a set time.

Counsel and staff advised that commercial purchasers often cannot accept broad deed restrictions because those limits make properties hard to finance or lease. A representative for the board summarized a compromise position as approving the contract while retaining only an educational restriction (labeled in the contract as 8.1) and removing other limits; a motion to convey properties removing most restrictions failed on a voice vote. The board voted to continue discussions and asked counsel to rework language and return the item to the next meeting.

The debate covered several practical points: whether the buyer would be allowed to take loans on the property, whether the board could secure a meaningful guarantee from a private owner, the community’s desire for internships and job opportunities, and how insurers and existing contracts (including an Allstate closeout referenced earlier in the meeting) affect the process.

The board did not adopt final conveyance terms; members directed staff and counsel to continue negotiations and bring revised contract language back at a later meeting.