Printer-Friendly
Email this Story
Post a Comment (0)
Sparks fly as Haymarket Town Council debates $2.3M property deal
Members of the Haymarket Town Council turned into actors in the great American drama on Monday night as they yelled, cussed, pointed fingers, threatened resignation, became red in the face and ultimately reached a cliffhanger ending during their debate about a potential $2.3 million land deal.
The decision directly impacts everything from the meals tax to how many new small businesses may come to town.
At the heart of the debate was whether the council would follow its typical, though unwritten policy of not voting on a topic immediately after a public hearing or whether that policy should be ignored in special circumstances.
The twist in this case is that developer Gerry Kennedy and his company have agreed to reach a settlement with the town by Jan. 3, four days before the council's next regular meeting.
Ultimately, the council decided not to hold a special session before then to accommodate Kennedy because of the holidays and because the members did not want to treat him differently than they treat any other applicant.
Whether that will break the deal is the unanswered question.
Kennedy has asked to buy the Town Center property and to relocate and restore four buildings while developing commercial retail space for 16 to 18 small businesses.
He set a September 2008 goal for construction to be complete.
None of the 40-plus town citizens in attendance at the Monday public hearing at town hall directly opposed the deal, though some raised concerns.
Dottie Leonard, a commercial Realtor, said she thought Kennedy had done an “awesome” job with other projects in town but thought the council was underselling the property, which includes the current town hall, by at least $1 million.
“If you base the sale of this property upon the comparable values around this property, that is high,” vice mayor John Cole responded.
Town attorney John Bennett mentioned that the property has been on the market for more than six months, starting at more than $3 million and decreasing until Kennedy made his offer.
“This is a free-cash deal,” Cole said. “We walk away with $2.3 million.”
Other citizens addressed future parking and whether a new $1.11 million town hall at the Harrover property on the east end of town is acceptable.
Once most of the standing-room only crowd dispersed after the public hearing, debates heated up.
“But I thought when we discussed this earlier, we were not going to step on procedure or move mountains to make this happen just because it's convenient or the applicant potentially requires that,” Weir said.
“(If) you guys push this forward, you guys want to have a meeting this month to vote on it, you'll have my resignation tomorrow,” he declared. “I cannot ethically abide this crap.”
Shortly afterward, council member Ozzie Vazquez asked if the council is technically allowed to vote on an issue on the same night as a public hearing. He found out that it is allowable but the council generally waits a month.
Vazquez then supported a December vote “because we're not violating anything ethically.”
“Except our own policy,” interjected Weir, who opposes the deal.
Vazquez claimed the Haymarket citizens wanted the deal to go through and their will should be the deciding factor for the early vote.
“I could care less about (Kennedy's) risk and I could care less about the bankers' risk. The risk I'm concerned about is the majority of the people want to sell this property and develop this,” said Vazquez.
“You have a procedure in place that you either follow or you don't,” Weir later said.
“Yeah that's true ... for the next 15 properties we sell, we need to make sure we do it exactly the same way every single time,” Vazquez countered sarcastically.
Then, the political theater reached its climax.
“If (Kennedy) pulls the plug because the normal January vote isn't to his liking,” Weir began. But Vazquez stood up, put on his black fedora and finished Weir's thought, saying, “It's because we're being obstructionist!”
Vazquez began to leave the hall, a noticeably livid Weir slammed his fist and then Cole stepped in.
“Every council member needs to have the opportunities to present their data and their case,” he said, attempting to moderate the dispute.
The vice mayor clearly leaned toward the Jan. 7 vote date, saying he wanted to call Kennedy first to find out how that decision would impact him.
“This thing could fall apart if that lease didn't work out,” added Cole. “So there's other issues here.”
Vazquez, having returned to his seat, displayed his sense of sarcasm on the town's behalf again.
“That's why it's important for us to continue to try to obstruct as much as we can,” he said.
Weir stood up, leaned over his desk, pounded his fist yet again and declared, “Obstruct my ass! (Kennedy) came with the other property and I demanded he come in here with proof that he had the deeds to those properties or at least the contract purchasers. That wasn't being obstructionist; that was fulling my fiduciary responsibilities to this town!”
Mayor Pamela Stutz ended the back and forth, declaring the vote would be on Jan. 7 as regularly scheduled. Stutz would not allow an earlier date in January because she wants the full council present and member Shelia Jarboe would be on vacation until Jan.7.
The rest of the meeting was postponed until Dec. 10, when the council will discuss issues such as pay raises for employees. However, the Town Center will not be discussed then.
“I want people to understand that, yes, emotions are high here. This is probably the biggest decision this board has faced and will face,” said vice mayor Cole.
You must be logged in to post a comment.