In the appropriation of property for any of the purposes named in section 719.01 of the Revised Code, the municipal corporation may, when reasonably necessary, acquire property outside the limits of the municipal corporation.
If real property so acquired is removed from the tax duplicate, the municipal corporation shall pay annually to the county treasurer of the county in which such property is located, commencing with the tax year after the removal of such property from the tax duplicate, an amount of money in lieu of taxes equal to the smaller of the following:
(A) The last annual installment of taxes due from the acquired property before removal from the tax duplicate;
(B) An amount equal to the difference between the combined revenue from real estate taxes of all the taxing districts in which such property is located in the tax year immediately prior to the removal of such acquired property from the tax duplicate, and (1) the total revenue which would be produced by the tax rate of each such taxing district in the tax year immediately prior to the removal of such acquired property from the tax duplicate, applied to the real estate tax duplicate of each of such taxing districts in each tax year subsequent to the year of removal, or (2) the combined revenue from real estate taxes of all such taxing districts in each tax year subsequent to the year of removal, whichever is the greater.
The county auditor of each county
in which such property is located shall apportion each such annual payments to each taxing district as if such annual payment had been levied and collected as a tax.
Such annual payments shall never again be made after they have ceased.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 11
cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1961–2025 · leading case: Clifton v. Vill. of Blanchester, 2012 Ohio 780 (Ohio 2012).
Clifton v. Vill. of Blanchester, 2012 Ohio 780 (Ohio 2012). · cites it 2ד{¶ 29} Thus, a municipality has no authority to initiate appropriation proceedings in response to a property owner’s complaint in mandamus alleging a regulatory-taking claim if the affected property lies outside the municipality’s limits.”
State ex rel. Boggs v. Cleveland, 2023 Ohio 3871 (Ohio Ct. App. 2023). · cites it 10דIn so ruling, the trial court looked to R.C. 719.02 and 719.01, which provide municipalities with the ability to acquire property outside of its limits for certain enumerated purposes, and R.”
Bench Billboard Co. v. City of Toledo, 759 F. Supp. 2d 905 (N.D. Ohio 2010). · cites it 2ד” § 719.02(a). The total number of permits which may be issued “shall be at the discretion of the Commissioner” and “[n]o more than one courtesy bench shall be permitted at any bus stop except” when the Commissioner determines that “conditions warrant.”
City of St. Marys v. Dayton Power & Light Co., 607 N.E.2d 881 (Ohio Ct. App. 1992). · cites it 2ד] * * * ” R.C. 719.02 permits a municipality to appropriate property outside the limits of the municipal corporation for any of the purposes identified in R.”
Cairo Vill. Council v. Miller, 699 N.E.2d 571 (Ohio Ct. App. 1997). · cites it 4דThe trial court denied appellants’ motions, finding that Council was acting under the authority granted by R.C. 719.02 and the appropriation sought by Council was reasonably necessary.”
State ex rel. Lillis v. Summit, 2017 Ohio 1539 (Ohio Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 2ד01 of the Revised Code, the municipal corporation may, when reasonably necessary, acquire property outside the limits of the municipal corporation.” The court then quoted the purposes listed in R.”
Bench Billboard Co. v. City of Toledo, 690 F. Supp. 2d 651 (N.D. Ohio 2010). · cites it 6דPlaintiff alleges that three sections of the ordinance give the Commissioner unbridled discretion: § 719.02, § 719.05, and § 719.06. The city points to the words “shall issue” in § 719.”
State ex rel. Boggs v. Cleveland, 2025 Ohio 5094 (Ohio 2025). · cites it 2ד{¶ 34} In addition to the constitutional provisions, the General Assembly has granted municipalities statutory authority to exercise eminent-domain powers beyond their borders “when reasonably necessary,” R.C. 719.02, but only for certain enumerated public purposes, R.”
McDonald v. City of Columbus, 231 N.E.2d 319 (Ohio Ct. App. 1967). · cites it 3ד01 (B), Revised Code, and for the same purposes, “outside the limits of the municipal corporation” under Section 719.02, and broad possibilities of operation are provided in Section 755.”
Vill. of Blue Ash v. City of Cincinnati, 173 Ohio St. (N.S.) 345 (Ohio 1962). · cites it 2ד” Again, in Section 719.02, Revised Code, the Legislature has provided for the appropriation of property outside the municipal corporation limits for airport purposes.”
Sterkel v. Mansfield Bd. of Educ., 172 Ohio St. (N.S.) 231 (Ohio 1961). “, Sections 719.02 and 5519.01, Revised Code, and in the latter statute specifically distinguished the words, “purchase” and “appropriate.”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 719.02(a) — 2 cases
Bench Billboard Co. v. City of Toledo, 759 F. Supp. 2d 905 (N.D. Ohio 2010). “” § 719.02(a). The total number of permits which may be issued “shall be at the discretion of the Commissioner” and “[n]o more than one courtesy bench shall be permitted at any bus stop except” when the Commissioner determines that “conditions warrant.”
Bench Billboard Co. v. City of Toledo, 690 F. Supp. 2d 651 (N.D. Ohio 2010). “Plaintiff alleges that three sections of the ordinance give the Commissioner unbridled discretion: § 719.02, § 719.05, and § 719.06. The city points to the words “shall issue” in § 719.”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 719.02(b) — 2 cases
Bench Billboard Co. v. City of Toledo, 759 F. Supp. 2d 905 (N.D. Ohio 2010). “” § 719.02(a). The total number of permits which may be issued “shall be at the discretion of the Commissioner” and “[n]o more than one courtesy bench shall be permitted at any bus stop except” when the Commissioner determines that “conditions warrant.”
Bench Billboard Co. v. City of Toledo, 690 F. Supp. 2d 651 (N.D. Ohio 2010). “Plaintiff alleges that three sections of the ordinance give the Commissioner unbridled discretion: § 719.02, § 719.05, and § 719.06. The city points to the words “shall issue” in § 719.”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 719.02(c) — 1 case
Bench Billboard Co. v. City of Toledo, 690 F. Supp. 2d 651 (N.D. Ohio 2010). “Plaintiff alleges that three sections of the ordinance give the Commissioner unbridled discretion: § 719.02, § 719.05, and § 719.06. The city points to the words “shall issue” in § 719.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.