08/07/2026
Our God is an awesome God!
***BREAKING NEWS***
A Muskingum County Common Pleas Court judge has dismissed the City of Zanesville’s petition to acquire property from The Anchor Church through eminent domain, ruling that municipal officials acted in bad faith during negotiations and failed to establish that taking the land was necessary.
The August 5, 2026 judgment entry by Judge Kelly J. Cottrill concludes a legal dispute over a 3.984-acre parcel located at 2 Beaumont Street.
Key Case Findings
Background and Offers:
The city filed its petition to appropriate the parcel on December 17, 2025, after depositing $350,000 with the clerk of courts. Between January 2024 and August 2025, the city sent four separate notices of intent to acquire the land, with offers ranging from $280,000 to $350,000 based on independent appraisals.
The Anchor Church, which bought the property in June 2023 with plans to construct a sanctuary, lobby, and school, rejected the purchase offers.
Failure to Prove Necessity:
City representatives described the property as a critical "lynchpin" required to join surrounding city-owned parklands along the Licking and Muskingum Rivers. However, the court ruled that the city failed to show the acquisition was necessary for a public park.
In court testimony, city officials acknowledged that Zanesville has no formal park designs, no engineering plans, and no financial agreements in place to build a park on the site.
Determination of Bad Faith:
The court concluded that the city failed to make a required "good faith offer" before filing for eminent domain. Judge Cottrill cited credible testimony from Church Pastor Aaron Bounds, who stated that City Law Director David J. Tarbert threatened an immediate "quick grab" of the land through eminent domain if the church rejected the city's offer.
The court noted that "quick take" authority applies only in very narrow circumstances, such as during wartime or road construction, making the threat improper.
The judge also pointed to conflicting statements by Mayor Donald Mason regarding whether the city genuinely desired the land.
Legal Defenses Addressed:
The ruling rejected two defenses raised by the church.
The court determined that the federal Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA) does not apply to eminent domain proceedings, and that equitable estoppel cannot be asserted against a government entity carrying out an official function.
Because the city failed to meet statutory requirements regarding public necessity and good-faith negotiations, the court dismissed the appropriation petition.