Riverside Local board authorizes challenge to 2025 valuation of commercial parcel near Target

The Riverside Local Board of Education voted 5-0 to authorize filing a complaint asking county officials to raise the 2025 valuation for permanent parcel 11-8-014-0000-004-0, a commercial lot the board discussed as being adjacent to a Target and a Popeyes.

District legal counsel told the board that recent changes in Ohio law require a board-specific resolution before the district may file a valuation-increase complaint in “large” cases. Counsel said the district believes the property’s recent sale and building permits reflect an increase in market value that the county’s three-year appraisal cycle has not yet captured.

"The state of Ohio has taken a very close look in recent history about the practice that school districts have engaged in to file valuation increases," the district legal counsel said, explaining why the legislative change now requires explicit board approval. Counsel also described the district’s review process, which relies on open-market transactions, deeds and conveyance-fee statements and, when warranted, independent appraisals.

At the meeting counsel cited current and prior appraisal figures, saying the property’s current appraised value is $723,920 and that it had earlier been appraised at about $428,000 and roughly $600,000 in 2023. Counsel said the district believes the sale price exceeds $1 million and noted building permits issued during 2025 including one permit the speaker referenced at about $1.5 million and another for roughly $50,000; the speaker characterized those permit values as part of the evidence the district will use in its complaint.

Counsel said the law limits complaints to substantial cases and described a commonly applied threshold of roughly $500,000 in increased value before the district will pursue a complaint. He also described the district’s ability to participate when property owners file counter-complaints to reduce their values and said several cases from the prior year remain on appeal.

Board members asked questions about the parcel’s location and valuation details; counsel confirmed the filing deadline for this cycle was the day of the meeting and said the district could withdraw the complaint or the county board of revision could rule no change if facts at a hearing do not support the requested increase.

The clerk called the roll for the motion. Mrs. Kreninski, Mrs. Grassy, Mr. Adino, Miss Brewster and Mr. Buyers each voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.

Next steps are procedural: the district will file the complaint with the county and the Lake County Board of Revision will review the district’s evidence at a hearing, where nonrealty items reported on the conveyance-fee statement can be excluded and both sides may present appraisals or other proof.

The board announced several committee and board meeting dates in April; the meeting adjourned at 7:48 a.m.