Historic Springfield Demolition COA signed today: 1647 Pearl

[JaxByDefault]

Well, first, I think the City is one of the largest land holders in the City, so I think they are already in the real estate business.  But they don't have to be in the historic homes real estate business.  They can take the house and sell it to someone for $1, or auction it, with a rider that requires a COA and a performance bond for the work completion.  If the work is not completed as agreed, they take the house back and sell it again.  Better than allowing people to let the house rot, and then tear it down.  Probably cheaper for taxpapers too since it costs thousands of dollars to demolish a house, and they already have real estate lawyers that could handle the paperwork for the take and sell idea, and the legal authority to do it.

+1

I too have heard this "we're not in the real estate business" schtick from city employees. It doesn't make any sense! Let me see if I understand this. Rather than auction the property and apply the proceeds to the existing liens, the city would rather pay $7000 to demo the house and then remain responsible for maintenance (mowing, etc) and liability on the lot?

It's obvious that the city is not in the real estate "business." Anyone with that business plan would have gone out of business long ago.

[Timkin]

Well, first, I think the City is one of the largest land holders in the City, so I think they are already in the real estate business.  But they don't have to be in the historic homes real estate business.  They can take the house and sell it to someone for $1, or auction it, with a rider that requires a COA and a performance bond for the work completion.  If the work is not completed as agreed, they take the house back and sell it again.  Better than allowing people to let the house rot, and then tear it down.  Probably cheaper for taxpapers too since it costs thousands of dollars to demolish a house, and they already have real estate lawyers that could handle the paperwork for the take and sell idea, and the legal authority to do it.

+1

I too have heard this "we're not in the real estate business" schtick from city employees. It doesn't make any sense! Let me see if I understand this. Rather than auction the property and apply the proceeds to the existing liens, the city would rather pay $7000 to demo the house and then remain responsible for maintenance (mowing, etc) and liability on the lot?

It's obvious that the city is not in the real estate "business." Anyone with that business plan would have gone out of business long ago.

Thing is , the City is not on the hook for the demolition costs.  We are.  That is wrong.

[strider]

Yes, Timkin, it is the tax payers who foot the bill in the end.  The empty lot will sit unwanted and collect more MCCD fines and liens until the city ends up with it because no one bought it at a tax sale.  A funny thing;  Mothballing these houses in partnership with a local non-profit would save the tax payers thousands of dollars and still allow MCCD to justify its existence.   Rather than embrace that fact, it seems the chief would rather demolish and waste more tax payer money.  Of course, that tax payer money is often filtered through programs like Jacksonville Journey and NSP funding, which I thought were supposed to help communities not destroy them. 

Come on Jacksonville and MCCD, isn't it time the we started helping rather than hindering our communities?

[Timkin]

Yes, Timkin, it is the tax payers who foot the bill in the end.  The empty lot will sit unwanted and collect more MCCD fines and liens until the city ends up with it because no one bought it at a tax sale.  A funny thing;  Mothballing these houses in partnership with a local non-profit would save the tax payers thousands of dollars and still allow MCCD to justify its existence.   Rather than embrace that fact, it seems the chief would rather demolish and waste more tax payer money.  Of course, that tax payer money is often filtered through programs like Jacksonville Journey and NSP funding, which I thought were supposed to help communities not destroy them. 

Come on Jacksonville and MCCD, isn't it time the we started helping rather than hindering our communities?

We need the people behind these demolitions OUT . Period.   This mentality is destroying our community at our expense, and WE should be calling the shots.

[ChriswUfGator]

Yes, Timkin, it is the tax payers who foot the bill in the end.  The empty lot will sit unwanted and collect more MCCD fines and liens until the city ends up with it because no one bought it at a tax sale.  A funny thing;  Mothballing these houses in partnership with a local non-profit would save the tax payers thousands of dollars and still allow MCCD to justify its existence.   Rather than embrace that fact, it seems the chief would rather demolish and waste more tax payer money.  Of course, that tax payer money is often filtered through programs like Jacksonville Journey and NSP funding, which I thought were supposed to help communities not destroy them. 

Come on Jacksonville and MCCD, isn't it time the we started helping rather than hindering our communities?

We need the people behind these demolitions OUT . Period.   This mentality is destroying our community at our expense, and WE should be calling the shots.

That person would be Kim Scott.

[Dog Walker]

And she is one tough lady!

[Timkin]

How can we oust her?

[Bativac]

I still don't understand why they are so eager to demolish these houses. Is public safety really the issue? Do they need to tear structures down to justify their jobs? Was someone's family member the victim of a crumbling historic building as a child and this is their way of exacting revenge?

[Debbie Thompson]

I have heard, but don't know for sure, that MCCD is graded on how many cases they close.  Unfortunately, that puts open cases at risk. So there needs to be an exception of some kind for historic districts, a major change in how MCCD is judged, or a way to suspend as opposed to closing or keeping a case active. 

That last one should be a simple fix.  Come up with an option to code unusual and/or historic district cases for suspense so you can track them, but not be judged badly for not closing them. 

[strider]

Try this:  We know that at least more recently, funding for demolitions comes from places like the Jacksonville Journey and NSP.  What if the department that gets to use this funding also gets some amount of funds that helps cover their cost of the admin side of the demolitions?  What if the funding is like 10K , the actual cost is 7K and the department gets to keep the rest?  I don't know if this is true or not, but there is more to this wanting to demo historic houses or any house within the targeted areas of the urban core than just clearing cases and an unrealistic idea of what public safety means.  When things like this do not seem to make sense, it normally means there is money involved somehow.

[movedsouth]

Just got this from CM Lumb:
"
The demolition of 1647 North Pearl St has been stayed. 

You will be receiving information concerning Councilman Lumb's Town Hall meeting in regard to Springfield preservation shortly.

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me.
"

[Timkin]

Just got this from CM Lumb:
"
The demolition of 1647 North Pearl St has been stayed. 

You will be receiving information concerning Councilman Lumb's Town Hall meeting in regard to Springfield preservation shortly.

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me.
"

Stayed means stopped I presume?  Sure hope so.

[movedsouth]

"stayed" means "stopped for now"

[Timkin]

We really need the culprits behind the express demolitions  "removed"  .. That means FIRED.   We do not need this sort of mentality representing our City, which has lost far more history than it ever should have.

[Dog Walker]

Thank you Councilman Lumb!