Licking County Citizens Alliance

Costs & risk

• Backs $46.8M in general-obligation debt to 2067; if development revenue falls short, Heath taxpayers repay it. Its own municipal advisor (Baker Tilly): “the city will utilize all of its available resources to repay those bonds.”
• Council President Tim Kelley, who intends to vote no: “It just doesn’t make any sense that the city is paying so a developer can make a hell of a lot of money… Let them do the bonds and stuff and pay for the infrastructure.”
• How much money: M/I Homes’ estimated pre-tax profit on Heath Hills is $33 to $70 million (based on the company’s own reported margins), roughly the size of the $46.8M debt Heath would carry for it; the ~$20M of infrastructure the city finances is money a developer normally pays
• Fire station (a comparable new Licking County one cost $7M), police, and road costs; none in the city’s numbers. Council President Pro-Tem Deb Cole: “I just don’t understand the benefit yet for the citizens of Heath.”
• This one project would roughly 3–4x Heath’s existing $13.5M debt; $15.2M of it is just to run water and sewer to this single site, backstopped by Heath residents
• Heath’s own audited books show the strain building before a single home is finished: General Fund spending on police and fire jumped31% in one year, and its dedicated Fire Levy Fund is already spending faster than it takes in
• About 1,260–1,365 new residents (a ~12–13% jump in the city’s population) means more police and fire calls, with no added staffing funded in the plan

Gains (modest, uncertain)

• $13.8M projected lifetime surplus; a gross, speculative figure that assumes the development performs on schedule
• $0.5M–$1.9M/yr municipal income tax; a modest offset against tens of millions in debt exposure
• $5.6M one-time developer utility fees

Direct exposure

• ~$0 direct tax or debt; the homes sit in Heath, outside Granville’s boundaries

Real stakes

• As school-district taxpayers, the levy above falls on them too
• Their share of the schools’ new busing cost to carry students across the district (an added ~$0.3M–$1.1M/yr)
• An estimated ~4,750+ more vehicle trips a day (about 350–515 in each rush hour) funnel onto Canyon and Seminary, two 2-lane roads, and the routes to Granville’s schools
• The impact forced full-length lane widening on both roads, yet the busy Canyon/Seminary intersection gets only a three-way stop, not turn lanes; a roundabout is merely reserved, unfunded
• For ~30 years, the parcel’s county-levy dollars (parks like Indian Mound, the library, career-tech, mental-health) are diverted into Heath’s TIF instead of county services
• The decision is Heath’s; Granville residents bear the school, traffic, and growth effects without a vote on it

New tax revenue

• ~$3.2M/yr; property + school income tax (the district’s own estimate)
• State adds $0; enrollment funding is frozen

Cost of the students

• Up to 1,000 new students, a 33–40% jump over ~2,500 today; $8M–$12M/yr to educate
• The district’s own plan triggers a new building at +400 students; Heath Hills adds 841, more than double its own threshold
• Granville Intermediate is already at 99.8% capacity, before a single Heath Hills home is built
• The district’s own June 2025 Facilities Master Plan tops out at an $86M “rapid growth” scenario, drawn up before Heath Hills was even a confirmed project
• Busing them from the district’s far edge; an added ~$0.3M–$1.1M/yr plus new buses
• Plus $25M–$55M one-time for new buildings; unfunded
• The 30-year TIF keeps the district whole on today’s rates but diverts the land’s rising value, so it cannot tax the growth it must absorb