In a recent court ruling, a property owner faced a setback in their quest to have their land classified as agricultural rather than commercial. Zuber Crossing, LLC filed a complaint against the Clark County Board of Revision on December 30, 2025, challenging the tax classification of three parcels of land for the 2020 tax year. The Ohio Court of Appeals upheld the decision of the Ohio Board of Tax Appeals (BTA), affirming that the parcels were correctly classified as “vacant commercial land.”
Zuber Crossing, LLC argued that their property, consisting of three parcels identified by specific parcel numbers, should be classified as agricultural based on its current use for farming hay. However, both the Clark County Board of Revision and the Ohio Board of Tax Appeals disagreed with this assessment. They maintained that under R.C. 5713.041, vacant lots and tracts without structures or improvements should be classified according to their location and highest probable legal use—commercial in this case.
The history of these parcels played a significant role in the court’s decision. Originally part of a larger 26-acre parcel used for hay farming, these parcels were subdivided in 2015 after parts were sold for commercial development including businesses like Hobby Lobby and IHOP. Despite Zuber’s claims that they leased the land for hay farming to John Van Sickle—a part-owner—since acquiring it in December 2018, there was insufficient evidence to support continuous agricultural use prior to this lease.
The Clark County Auditor had classified these parcels as “vacant commercial land” due to their zoning and proximity to other commercial developments. This classification led Zuber to file complaints seeking reclassification as agricultural land with reduced values reflecting this use. However, both local school districts involved opposed this reclassification, arguing that the properties’ highest and best use remained commercial.
During hearings before the BTA in April 2022, testimony from Van Sickle highlighted his limited farming activities on these parcels but also acknowledged elements indicating commercial potential such as signage suggesting availability for development and existing curb cutouts aligned with adjacent commercial properties.
Ultimately, the BTA found no compelling evidence from Zuber proving that agricultural classification was warranted under R.C. 5713.041’s criteria for vacant lands’ highest and best use determination based on location and probable legal utility—upholding earlier decisions by local authorities regarding these classifications being correct given historical context alongside zoning designations favoring commerce over agriculture despite temporary grass-cutting practices conducted therein post-2019 lease initiation date until present day.
Representing Zuber Crossing was attorney Michael W. Sandner while Robert Morrow represented Northeastern Local School District Board along with Karol Fox representing Clark-Shawnee Local School District Board during proceedings presided over by Judges Mary K Huffman (writing opinion), Epley P.J., & Hanseman J., case ID C.A No:2025-CA-53 .
Source: 2025Ohio5871_Zuber_Crossing_LLC_v_Clark_County_Board_of_Revision_Opinion_Ohio_Court_of_Appeals.pdf