Join us at our brand new blog - Blue Country Gazette - created for those who think "BLUE." Go to www.bluecountrygazette.blogspot.com

YOUR SOURCE FOR TRUTH

Saturday, April 10, 2010

SV purchase of SRJ property stirs controversy

Photo by Matt Brabb
The Star Valley Town Hall has already moved across the street to the SRJ property pictured here.

Star Valley Town Hall has already moved

By Matt Brabb
Connection Editor

In an apparent about-face, the Star Valley Town Council voted 4-1 to authorize Town Manager Timothy Grier to enter into a purchase agreement for the SRJ property at 3655 East Arizona Highway 260 to become the new town hall.

As recently as the last regular council meeting, council members voted overwhelmingly in favor of sending a letter of intent to a bankruptcy judge informing the court that the town was interested in purchasing the property that the current town hall sits on.

Though several council members spoke highly of the amenities the current site offered at the previous meeting, the potential purchase of that property apparently ended when Kyle and Lanette Parker took possession from Ray Lyons and Barbara Hartwell. Hartwell is a member of the Star Valley Town Council, and recused herself from participating in discussion and voting on the matter.

The council apparently feared that because new ownership meant that its current lease had been abolished, the town could have been without a place to conduct business as early as April 1. Grier claimed that he had tried to get an address at which he could send an April rent check, but was rebuffed.

It appears very little communication took place between representatives for the Parkers and Star Valley. The Parkers took control on March 19, and sent an e-mail to Grier on March 26 that stated, “All liens - including any lease agreements - were eliminated. As a result, the Town is currently without any property rights to the Town Hall property.”

Ominous to be sure, but in the same email, they also wrote, “If the town wishes to keep its current location, it must enter into a new agreement with the Parkers. Fortunately, the Parkers are more than happy to work with the Town to work out a mutually agreeable arrangement. And my understanding is that the Town may be interested in purchasing the Town Hall property rather than leasing. That is something that can be discussed as well.”

Still, because members of the council could not get a commitment from the Parkers that they would not be evicted on April 1, the council apparently felt it had to act quickly.

Kacy Parker, the son of Kyle and Lanette Parker, was at the meeting and spoke in the interests of the new owners. He said that the offer to let the council lease the existing building for another year at a 10 percent rent increase was beneficial to both parties.

“We’re not trying to be overbearing,” he said. “One year gives the council an opportunity to make a rational decision, and if you buy it at any time, you don’t have to fulfill the lease,” he added.

Grier appeared unconvinced, and questioned Parker as to why he hadn’t been given an address to send an April rent check to. He also wanted to know what the Parkers’ plans were at the end of the month.

“What is your intent as to a time frame to negotiate an extension of our lease; what are your intentions as of April 1?” he asked.

Parker declined to answer that question.

Grier outlined a number of options available to the council, including purchasing the Haught property behind Circle K, the Horton property, or the Floyd property, but there was little discussion about these. Most need major work, or are bare pieces of land. Only the purchase of the SRJ property was discussed in detail, and it was in fact the only property mentioned by name on the council agenda.

The council also briefly discussed acquiring Forest Service land through the Federal Government by way of the Township Act. However, that option would clearly take more time than the town has at this time, though council members pledged to look into that option in the future.

Most council members were clearly sold on the idea of purchasing the SRJ property. Mayor Bill Rappaport called it a “smokin’ deal" at $235,000. The town has a reserve fund at this point of some $2.7 million dollars.

“I’ve purchased more property than anyone in this room,” said Councilor Del Newland, “and I can promise you that in the end it’s always better to buy than to rent.”

Councilor Gary Coon was unconvinced.

He said that there had clearly been a lack of communication between the interested parties, and that the council was making a “kneejerk” decision by choosing to buy the property before many members of the council had even been inside of it.

“We didn’t even know the price of the building before tonight, and now we’re making a decision to buy it tonight?” he asked.

“I cannot believe that this council is going to make the decision to purchase a property without getting an appraisal,” he added.

“The time-frame is not by our own doing,” responded Grier.

Coon also lamented the fact that the new building would be too small to conduct town council meetings, but Grier said that there were several options available for meetings, the first being the meeting room at the Lamplighter RV Park. Coon also criticized the new building for its lack of parking and inadequate space in which to conduct committee meetings.

Nonetheless, the council voted 4-1 in favor of the move.

Several members in attendance at the meeting were angered about not getting a chance to speak to the council before the vote was taken.

Angie Lecher, who formerly worked in the SRJ building when the Hellsgate Fire Department used it, expressed her displeasure.

“I wish you would have opened public comment before voting,” she said. “The building has issues you don’t see. It has electrical problems. You can’t drink the water. The smell of the hot water will chase you out of the building. There are only seven parking spaces in the front, with three in the back. Without an appraisal the town shouldn’t have acted.”

Star Valley resident Karen Carlen agreed.

“Your main consideration seemed to be to serve yourselves, with no interest of providing access to the public,” she said. “I’ve always heard you should measure twice, and cut once, but you didn’t even measure once.”

No comments: