Several area residents attended both the Miami Township Trustees and Village Council meetings on Monday, June 2. (Video still)
Neighbors sound off on proposed 84-acre annexation
- Published: June 12, 2025
At regular meetings of both the Miami Township Board of Trustees and Village Council on Monday, June 2, a group of residents who live on and near the section of East Enon Road south of the high school came before the public bodies to express their concerns about potential annexation of nearby land into the Village of Yellow Springs.
As the News reported last month, on May 5, Village Council authorized a resolution allowing Village Manager Johnnie Burns to enter into a development agreement with property owners Matthew and Julie Jones, whose 84-acre property is located within Miami Township, just outside the southwestern corner of Yellow Springs.
Under the terms of the development agreement, the Joneses will work with the Village to annex their land into the Village within one year.
Public discussion of the possibility of annexing the 84 acres into the Village began early this year.
In January, the Joneses agreed to donate 3.6 acres of their land to YS Schools for the potential relocation of the Morgan soccer fields in the event that a low-income housing tax credit application for an affordable housing complex on the fields was approved. That application was denied last month.
Map: Greene County GIS
The pursuit of a possible annexation agreement was part of a list of contingencies outlined between the Joneses and the school district. However, as Village Manager Burns stated at a Jan. 17 special meeting of the school board, annexation of the land was not guaranteed as part of the list of contingencies.
“Staff … is on board to help get the annexation through, but we’re not guaranteeing anything,” Burns said in January. “They can submit an annexation [petition] if they want to.”
Neighbors whose properties abut or are very near to the 84 acres in question said Monday they fear annexation would lead to a large development. Such a development, the group said, could impact property values, infrastructure, traffic in and out and the character of the currently rural area.
Resident Rosemary Shaw, representing eight neighbors of the 84-acre property in question, read a statement in opposition to the possible annexation. The statement noted that annexing the 84 acres into the Village would create an “isthmus of unincorporated land, including enclosing our homes on multiple sides by the Village boundaries and altering the rural nature of and the value of our land.”
The statement went on to note that if the 84 acres are annexed into the Village, according to local zoning code, it will automatically be rezoned as R-C high-density residential. At that point, the statement puts forth, the land’s owners could pursue a planned unit development, or PUD, which could allow a mix of residential, commercial and industrial uses. These expanded uses of the land, neighbors believe, would be “incompatible with the surrounding rural area,” according to the statement.
Kami Berkey, whose land is contiguous with the 84 acres, said at the trustees meeting that the only access point to the 84-acre parcel from East Enon Road is next to her home.
“We’re very disturbed that we are right next to the only way in and out of that area,” Berkey said.
Shaw told Township Trustees that she and her neighbors are also concerned about the expedited nature of the potential annexation.
“Why are we fast-tracking something right now, when there’s no rush except to not let us have an opportunity for discussion?” Shaw said.
The group of residents asked both Council and the Township Trustees to put a pause on the annexation process, to directly discuss the issue with neighbors to the 84-acre parcel and their legal representation, and to bring the matter of annexation to a public vote.
“The process demands transparency, community engagement and accountability — especially when it threatens the quality of life, the property values and the rural identity of our entire neighborhood,” Shaw said before the Township Trustees.
Neither Village Council nor the Township Trustees made any decisions about the annexation Monday night, as the matter was not part of either bodies’ agendas.
The News will continue to follow the potential annexation in its future coverage.
The Yellow Springs News encourages respectful discussion of this article.
You must login to post a comment.
Don't have a login? Register for a free YSNews.com account.
No comments yet for this article.