Conneaut SD board authorizes solicitor to pursue appeal after county assessment notice for district building

The Conneaut SD Board of Directors on June 10 authorized the district solicitor to pursue legal action after a county assessment notice placed a $145,270.29 tax charge on a district-owned building. The authorization was part of a larger package of items the board approved that included item 14U, described by the solicitor as a tax-assessment and declaratory-judgment filing should the county not withdraw the charge.

The district solicitor told the board the county had sent a bill for a school building and characterized the action as improper. "This is as simple as a stop sign red," the solicitor said, adding that "all school buildings belonging to any municipality or school district are exempt from taxation." He said the district had sent a May 14 letter to the county solicitor (Mr. Button) and recommended sending a preservation letter and, if the county does not withdraw the assessment, authorizing an appeal and a declaratory-judgment action that could include a request for attorney-fee reimbursement.

During public comment, Eric Henry, who introduced himself as chairman of the Carver County Board of Commissioners, disputed the district's characterization. Henry said the district received a "notice of change," not a bill, and said the board had not filed an appeal within the 40-day window the statute requires. "What you didn't do was file an appeal," Henry said, urging the district to resolve the matter by direct contact.

The solicitor responded forcefully on the record, saying the county's action could expose the county to discovery and potential punitive damages if the tax notice was improper. He argued the county's mailing of a bill (identified in the record as tax bill 791) for $145,270.29 left the district no option but to seek judicial clarification and preserve evidence.

Board members had approved the package motion that included 14U earlier in the meeting; an amendment pulled two contract items (14H-1 and 14H-2) for separate votes but left 14U in the approved package. The board's formal vote on the package carried before the extended public exchange.

Why it matters: If the county's reassessment of a district building is allowed to stand, it could set a precedent for taxing certain district-owned property and potentially shift costs to local taxpayers. The solicitor said the district's fund balance and taxpayers could be affected by litigation fees if the county does not withdraw the charge. The matter may proceed to filings in county court if the county maintains its position.

What’s next: The board moved the package that included item 14U and announced it would proceed as recommended if the county does not withdraw the assessment. The district also said it would seek preservation of relevant county communications. The board adjourned into an executive session afterward; no further public action on 14U was recorded at the meeting.