Will more trees fall? Franklin County judge dismisses disputed Gahanna land case
A Franklin County judge has sided with the city of Gahanna over a land dispute in which residents' objections and legal action were thwarted after City Attorney Ray Mularski settled the case with a developer.
"The court concludes that (City Attorney Ray Mularski) had the legal authority to enter into the settlement, plaintiffs are pursuing this action for their own benefit and do not have standing and that the settlement was made in good faith," Franklin County Common Pleas Court Judge Mark Serrott, wrote June 21 in a 12-page opinion to dismiss the case.
Academy Development had filed plans five years ago for shops and businesses at the southwest corner of North Hamilton and Beecher roads in Gahanna. But not all of the plans were in compliance with the city's zoning code and the variances they sought weren't appropriate for the five-acre site, said Jesse M. Kanitz, the attorney representing the residents in the 81-lot Academy Ridge Community Association.
The association appealed, twice. And in both cases, the city's Board of Zoning and Building Appeals agreed with residents that the planning commission had erred. Residents were hopeful, but suspected that those decisions might not be the end of it.
So when bulldozers and chainsaws began to take out trees and level the ground, the association was surprised.
About a year ago, Academy Development had threatened a federal lawsuit, prompting Mularski to settle the dispute. Residents called Mularski''s actions secretive and inappropriate.
"If you threaten a lawsuit against the city, their (Gahanna's) position is that the city attorney can settle it in any way he sees fit," Kanitz told The Dispatch. "We just think he's exceeded the authority of the city attorney and (negotiated a deal) behind closed doors.
"He's usurped the planning commission's authority and the mayor and city council. He's signed off on this," Kanitz previously said of Mularski.
Serrott disagreed, noting that Gahanna's city charter gives its law "broad power to defend all suits, complaints or controversies."
"If the City Council believed Mularski had to obtain its approval to settle, (council) would have acted to nullify the agreement."
Kanitz did not return calls for comment.
Read More: Gahanna residents file lawsuit over 'secret' settlement with developer
Serrott also noted that case law involving similar taxpayer objections must involve the public good and not just their "personal property interests." He noted that the homeowners threatened to sue only when the trees, which were a buffer to their homes, began to come down.
In a written statement, the city praised the ruling to dismiss the homeowners case.
“The City of Gahanna is pleased that the Court agreed our City Attorney has the authority to resolve cases that could otherwise cost Gahanna taxpayers millions of dollars. The City Attorney made the right decision to resolve a pending action and a threatened lawsuit to protect the best interests of all our taxpayers, while also making every effort to protect neighborhoods and property values. We will continue to keep the homeowners of Academy Ridge at top of mind as this project progresses and will remain a good partner to them throughout the development process.”
It is unclear if the homeowners and Kanitz will appeal Serrott's decision.
dnarciso@dispatch.com
@DeanNarciso
This article originally appeared on The Columbus Dispatch: Judge dismisses disputed Gahanna Academy Ridge land case
