M/I Homes Withdraws Heath Hills as Annexation Debate Continues

M/I Homes withdrew its Heath Hills residential proposal in Licking County after a dispute involving Heath’s municipal boundary and Granville’s school district. The withdrawal ended that application, but it did not change Ohio annexation law; Senate Bill 173 remains pending in the Senate Education Committee.

What was withdrawn

WSYX reported M/I Homes’ withdrawal after a prolonged local dispute. The proposal had contemplated more than 500 homes on land within Heath but located in the Granville Exempted Village School District.

WOSU’s earlier report on the dispute documented disagreement over added students, tax revenue, infrastructure and the responsibilities of the city and school district.

Enrollment forecasts were contested estimates

Granville officials warned that the project could add hundreds of students. Those figures were projections based on assumed housing and student-generation rates, not students already enrolled.

The original CREN story repeated an estimate of roughly 840 students and described the result as catastrophic through attributed statements. This rewrite preserves the existence of the concern but does not present a forecast as a measured outcome.

What Senate Bill 173 would do

The Ohio Legislature’s official Senate Bill 173 page says the bill concerns school-district territory annexations. The Legislative Service Commission analysis describes an automatic transfer in specified annexations within a county containing a megaproject, subject to several conditions and exceptions.

That scope is narrower than saying every annexed parcel would automatically join the annexing city’s school district. As of CREN’s August 15 check, the bill had been introduced and referred to the Senate Education Committee but had not passed the Senate.

What the withdrawal does not prove

The sources show that the boundary and school-finance dispute was central. They do not prove it was the only reason for the developer’s decision or that market demand played no role unless M/I Homes provides a complete explanation.

The withdrawal also does not prohibit a later owner or developer from submitting a different plan under applicable law.

The next checkpoints

Readers should watch the official bill docket for hearings or amendments and Heath records for any new application on the site. Future coverage should distinguish developer statements, school forecasts, adopted agreements and enacted state law rather than treating them as equivalent.