Tensions ran high in the Duck Hill Board of Alderman Meeting Monday night as disagreements arose on how to move forward with the Binford School Restoration Project which has been an ongoing effort for the past few years. The subject of discussion began with Resident Kim Cooley asking the Board about their intentions with the Binford school building moving forward. According to Cooley, a special called meeting was held Friday evening, August 9, at which the topic of the Board’s intentions with the building were tabled, whether the project would be moving forward, and the town would retain ownership of the building.
To begin the lengthy discussion, Mayor Al White asked Cooley about a $10,000 quote regarding the building.
“The $10,000, is that something that MCUP is going to do or is that something y’all are expecting for the city to do?” Mayor White asked.
“Anybody can do it.” Cooley responded, “That $10,000, just for clarity, is for the stabilization of the roof which is approximately $5,000, quoted by Dixie Roofing of Winona. The other five is to board the windows, rekey the building, and secure the building, control access.”
“Right, so my question is, who is going to be responsible for the $10,000?” Mayor White reiterated.
“Like I said, that’s for anybody,” Cooley replied. “And a part of that, y’know, it could be a community effort.”
Mayor White then asked for clarification of the recipient for the Environmental Protection Agency grant which has been in the works for some time. According to Cooley, she had been in communication with an EPA representative earlier that morning who informed her that the town was ineligible to be the recipient of the grant due to stipulations regarding the condition of the building’s roof. Cooley stated that according to the representative, a new owner or third party would be required to take ownership of the building to be eligible to apply for the cleanup grant with the EPA.
Next, Mayor White asked if there was a third party currently interested in taking ownership of the building.
Cooley replied, “There are multiple organizations interested in taking ownership of the building.”
After Mayor White requested specific information regarding the organizations, he sought legal advice from Board Attorney Adam Kirk.
“Well, y’know, this is the reason everything stopped the last time was because there was an issue about transferring the ownership of city property,” Kirk stepped in. “In order for the town to transfer property there’s a whole bunch of framework in place to do that. I mean you have to sell it for an amount of money - if you think it’s like surplus property, property that’s not being used by the town anymore, you can sell it without an auction, but you have to get two appraisals and the buyer has to pay half of the appraisal cost and you can sell it for that. As far as giving it away, I don’t know that you can legally do that.” Attorney Kirk explained.
Attorney Kirk went on to explain that due to all the hazards currently involved with the building it would likely not appraise for very much money. In addition, he stated the only other option for selling the property that he knew of would be to auction it. Finally, he stated that unless they could get guidance from the EPA on how to transfer ownership of the property, he did not know of the legality of that option. After further questioning from Mayor White regarding the transfer of ownership and later reacquiring ownership of the property, Attorney Kirk explained that this had been the issue that had previously stalled the restoration efforts years prior.
“Okay, we can play with legal issues and logistics and draw this thing out, but the facts are, the building as it stands, is in need of immediate repair,” Resident Cooley spoke up.
As Mayor White began to ask a question, Cooley continued.
“Excuse me one second Al, let me finish,” Cooley responded. “Everyone needs to understand what happens. If it continues to go down, because it’s a historic building, the Historic Preservation will come review the property, the town will be fined. If it continues to go down after the time period that they give the town to fix the building, they will fix it themselves and post a lien against the property,” she explained.
“Well hold on just a second,” Mayor White interjected. “It’s town property so if the town decides to tear the building down, we can do that.”
“It’s a historic building Al, we can’t do that,” Cooley responded. “If nothing is done to this school, it crumbles, that’s demolition by neglect. That’s the only way it’s gonna come down. And that’s going to be at the town’s expense,” she reiterated.
Resident Cooley explained that the information she provided could be acquired from the local chapter of the Historic Preservation Society. Attorney Kirk advised that he did not believe that the town could be barred from demolition as an option if the building presented an environmental hazard, as the Binford building does due to asbestos having been used in its construction.
“I don’t think that anybody disagrees that the building needs attention,” Attorney Kirk stated.
Attorney Kirk then read from a packet that was presented to the Board regarding options for handling of the ownership issue. Looking over the packet, he stated that nothing presented advises on giving the property away. Alderman Chris Caldwell then asked Resident Cooley to clarify the involvement of the city for the EPA grant, to which she verified that the city could not hold ownership of the building to qualify for the grant. According to Board Attorney Kirk, the only other option provided would be the sale of the property to a third party.
Following this discussion, Alderwoman Shernell Everett-Brown asked for clarification on the process of selling the property. Attorney Kirk then explained the process required, stating that the town would need to have two appraisals of the property and average the two for the market value at which they could sell it. The buyer would also be required to pay half of the appraisal price in addition to buying the property for the calculated market value. While the buyer would not be required to commit to purchasing the property, they would have to commit to paying half of the cost of appraisal. The other option for selling the property would be to auction it.
“The question is: what is the town’s plan?” Resident Cooley reiterated once again. “Because we want the town to be able to do something. Do you have a plan for the building?” Cooley questioned.
“I will make a motion that we sell the building,” Alderwoman Morgan Eskridge stated.
As the motion was not seconded, it died prior to further discussion. Following the motion, a heated discussion took place between the audience present and the Board regarding the logistics of transferring ownership of the building to avoid selling. Despite a strong interest from community members in the city maintaining ownership of the building, the issue of lack of funding to drive the restoration project persists. In addition to this there is an issue of funding to acquire the building on the nonprofits’ side.
“Legally, according to what you said,” Alderman Chris Caldwell began referring to Resident Cooley, “the EPA said that we couldn’t have control over it anyway so it’s out of our hands. And legally, according to what you said,” he referred to Attorney Kirk, “We can’t just give it away, we have to sell it - That’s the only other option we have.” Alderman Caldwell clarified.
“We don’t have the money to put into it,” Alderwoman Eskridge stated.
“I’m gonna say something that might make some of y’all mad,” Attendee Nannette Laster interjected, addressing the Board. “There was a nice meeting here Friday night to discuss this. You were absent and you were absent,” She pointed to Mayor White and Attorney Kirk respectively. “That could’ve answered any questions you had. I’m going to suggest y’all vote tonight to either find a nonprofit and turn it over or vote to tear it down. Just settle it! No need in going back and back and back and back for weeks!” She finished.
“Well legally, that’s what he just said.” Alderman Caldwell addressed Laster, referring to Attorney Kirk’s advice, “If we can’t give it away, we’ve got to sell it.”
“That’s one opinion,” Laster replied.
“If that’s the law, we’re gonna follow what the law says,” Alderman Caldwell stated.
Attendee Laster and Resident Cooley then restated that Attorney Kirk had not been in attendance at the meeting that had taken place Friday, in which Cooley explained their questions could have been answered. Mayor White explained that as there was not a general item to be voted for on the agenda for the Friday meeting, he was justified in having not attended. Attorney Kirk also explained that his attendance at the meeting would not have changed his perspective regarding the laws that are in place which are preventing the transfer of property ownership.
“So, the question for the Board is: how do you want to do it? Do you want to work with your community to save it or do you want to sell it? Those are the two options,” Mayor White spoke up.
“If we sell it and one of them buys it then they can continue what they’re doing,” Alderwoman Eskridge replied.
Attorney Kirk explained that the only viable option to transfer ownership of the school is for the town to sell the property to a new owner who could then take on the restoration effort and apply for the EPA grant.
The motion to sell the Binford building was then made again by Alderwoman Eskridge and again died due to lack of second.
Following this, the Board went into executive session on an unrelated matter. Upon returning, another motion was made to go into executive session regarding the prospective purchase or sale of land, as reported by Board Attorney Kirk. The result of this executive session was a motion made to sell the school property excluding the gym and park. The motion was made by Alderwoman Eskridge and seconded by Alderwoman Cythia Brown-Kountz with Alderman Caldwell and Alderwoman Linda Bennett in favor. Alderwoman Everette-Brown abstained from the vote. This executive session lasted approximately thirty minutes.
The bulk of the meeting was live streamed on The Winona Times Facebook page in two parts. The first 35 minutes of the meeting prior to the first executive session, then 5 minutes of the meeting after the return of the first executive session before the second. The voting results of the second executive session were not recorded on Facebook live but can be requested from Duck Hill City Hall.
