>> MILLEDGEVILLE
The problem surrounding the property at 107-115 S. Wayne St. in Milledgeville likely will be resolved soon, but the question of how remains unanswered.
The city was set to award a contract for the demolition work needed to stabilize the walls of the building and clear the debris when officials were notified that the property had apparently been sold. New owner David Sinclair of Baldwin Investments Group (B.I.G.) appeared before city council recently, requesting that a lien placed on the property be waived. City manager Hank Griffeth confirmed last week that the lien was in the approximate amount of $14,000.
“It was placed on there to recoup legal costs and at least a portion of the cost of the fencing that’s been paid for the last six years,” he said.
According to Griffeth, the city is not going to release the lien. Mayor Mary Parham-Copelan, city council members, and City Attorney Jimmy Jordan addressed the matter in a closed session at the Sept. 26 meeting.
Matt Roessing, attorney for Sinclair, said last Friday that the city’s actions in the meeting violated the Open Meetings law. He said that council and Jordan met in a closed session and that Jordan thereafter sent him an email saying the city was not going to release the lien.
“I don’t understand how they could have done that in a closed session,” Roessing said. “They are allowed to discuss things in closed session, but they are not allowed to vote on anything in closed session.”
Jordan took issue with Roessing’s allegations.
“There was no vote taken on any matter in the closed session,” he said. “... Suffice it to say, that no action was taken in the closed session because no action was necessary.”
The city attorney explained that the lien the city placed on the property was to protect public funds that have been expended.
“If Mayor and Council desire to waive the lien, or any lien in the future where public funds are involved,” Jordan said, “that would require a vote by them in open session.”
Roessing also stated the city is violating historic district rules. The attorney explained that the building is in an area of downtown that has been deemed to be a Historic District. Any demolition of a building in that district must be approved by the Historic Preservation Commission.
Griffeth responded by saying that the city, as a governmental agency, is not subject to the historic commission’s regulations.
“Government entities are not required to follow the requirements of HPC,” he said. “Whether it be county, city, state or a college, HPC has no control over them.”
Jordan concurred with Griffeth and added that the demolition was pursuant to a court order of Municipal Court Judge David McRee when he ruled for the city in its case of the Petition to Abate the Nuisance.
“The Court’s Order does not require any additional approvals of any kind, and the order requires that the city get this nuisance abated in timely fashion once the time period expired for the owner to abate the nuisance.”
Roessing said his client has no desire to take down the front facade, noting that it was his impression the city, in the bid requests, indicated the work would not require that wall to be kept.
“One of the bidders asked for clarification and asked them what they meant. And they responded that this would be a total demolition.” Roessing added that if the work proceeds according to the bid requests, little will remain.
“What they’re going to ask the contractor to do is stabilize the buildings on either side and tear out the entire thing. There will be a big hole left behind.”
Griffeth disagreed with Roessing, saying the cleanup plans call for the facade to be preserved, if possible.
“We asked for demo and cleanup of those two property sites and verbally shared with all the contractors that issued a bid that the expectation and plan if possible was to salvage the facade walls in the demo and cleanup process,” Griffeth said.
Roessing stated that his client simply wants to move forward with the closing without being forced to cover a debt of the seller. Griffeth indicated he does not sense that mayor nor city council will agree to release the lien, and that a bid award for the cleanup project is likely soon forthcoming.
“Unless something happens between now and then, the bid approval will be on the Oct.24 agenda,” he said.