HomeMy WebLinkAboutMIN JUN 21 1988 REGULAR SESSION
CITY COUNCIL - CITY OF BEAUMONT
HELD JUNE 21 , 1988 - 1 : 15 P.M.
BE IT REMEMBERED that the City Council of the city of Beaumont, Texas ,
met in regular session this the 21st day of June, 1988 , with the
following present :
HONORABLE : Maurice Meyers Mayor
Bob Lee , Jr. Councilman At Large
Andrew P. Cokinos Councilman At Large
Lulu L. Smith Councilman, Ward I
Mike Brumley Councilman, Ward II
Audwin Samuel Mayor Pro Tem and
Councilman, Ward III
David W. Moore Councilman, Ward IV
Albert E . Haines City Manager
Lane Nichols City Attorney
Rosemarie Ch-Jappetta City Clerk
-000-
The Invocation was given by Brother Bonnie Dowden, Tyrrell Park
Baptist Church.
The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Councilman Brumley.
-000-
Mayor Meyers called an Executive Session, pursuant to Section IIe of
the Texas Open Meetings Act, to discuss pending or contemplative
litigation, to be held immediately following the city Council Workshop
Session .
-000-
MAYOR MEYERS in passing a memorandum to the City Manager:
Attached is a copy of a preparedness test from May 12th of 1987 and
the guidelines that we used at that time . I would reread, "If we were
to suggest that we had just been advised of an emergency requiring
accountability of all funds, we would like to know that the
information is immediately available. " And, for the sake of this
test, let us assume that such has occurred and we would ask that you
provide us with the location and amounts that currently available in
all accounts and if documentation is required to support the accounts,
this should also be provided and we would like this information prior
to completion of today' s workshop. Thank you.
-000-
-151- June 21 , 1388
Public comment was called on Agenda Items A through D. No one wished
to address City Council on this items .
-000-
The following Consent Agenda items were considered:
Approval of the Minutes of the regular City Council session held June
7 , 1988;
Resolution 88-126 authorizing the pledge of $100 , 0-00 in securities
and the release of $500, 000 in securities held as collateral for city
deposits by M Bank;
Resolution 88-127 appointing Alex Ogunmuyiwa and Richard Chappell to
the Senior Citizens Advisory Commission, terms to September 30 , 1990;
Irene Sheehan and 011ie Kent to the Martin Luther King, Jr. , Parkway,
terms to January 1 , 1990; Hester Bell to the Housing Rehabilitation
Loan Board, term to May 31 , 1990 and Ed Sigee, Raymond Chaison, The
Reverend Amos Landry, Rette Browning, Olivia Gonzales and David
Haysley to the Community Development Block Grant Citizens Advisory
Commission, terms to May 31 , 1990;
Resolution 88-128 authorizing a License to Encroach agreement with the
Sisters of Charity of the Incarnate Word for a communications cable
crossing Calder Avenue between Thirteenth and Fourteenth Streets at a
one-time license fee of $:500 . 00;
Resolution 88-129 approving the sale of a 50 by 140 foot vacant lot at
975 Forsythe Street ' and- described as Lot 8, Block 11 , Van Wormer
Addition, acquired through foreclosure for delinquent taxes , to Alice
Pat-illo at an amount of $1 , 500 . 00; and
Resolution 88-130 increasing the social services facilities
rehabilitation grants approved for The Red Cross by $6 ,600 to $24 , 600
and Family services Association by $6 , 000 to $11 , 000 under the
Community Development Block Grant Program.
The consent Agenda was approved on a motion made by Councilman Moore
and seconded by Councilman Brumley.
Question: Ayes : All Nayes : None
-000-
A public hearing was called to consider an application filed by Ronald
B . Conner, 1280 Highway 96 , Silsbee, operator of City Cab, Silsbee,
for a permit to operate a taxicab within the Beaumont city limits .
Mr . Ronald B . Conner, City Cab, Silsbee, addressed Council to request
the permit to allow him to transport senior citizens of Silsbee to and
from doctors and hospitals in Beaumont, as well as participants of the
START Program of Hardin County, etc . , and stated that this would meet
the need and necessity requirements of the City of Beaumont Code .
-162- June 21 , 1988
There being no one else to address City Council , the public hearing
was closed.
Resolution 88-131 approving the permit to allow Ronald B . Conner a
permit to operate a taxicab service within the city limits of Beaumont
was approved on a motion made by Councilman Moore and seconded by
Councilman Lee .
Question: Ayes : All Nayes : None
-000-
Resolution 88-132 accepting the work performed by Cutler Repaving,
Inc . under a contract for the recycling and repaving element of the
1988 Street Rehabilitation Program (project completed for a total of
$195 , 142 . 64 including Change order No. 2 , a reduction of $7 , 157 . 36
adjusting actual quantities used - original contract amount $216 ,400
less Change order No. 1 at $14 , 000) and authorizing final payment to
the Contractor in the amount of $9 , 757 . 13 was approved or, a motion
made by Councilman Lee and seconded by Councilman Moore .
Question: Ayes : All Nayes : None
-000-
Resolution 88-133 authorizing a contract with Perkins Roofing Company,
Inc . for roof repairs for the Police Building at an amount of
$98 , 350 . 0✓ was approved on a motion made by Councilman Brumley and
seconded by Councilman Samuel .
Question: Ayes : All Nayes : None
-000-
Resolution 88-134 authorizing a one-year contract with J. R. Parsley
Company, Inc . for custodial services for the Health Department at an
amount of $25 , 336 . 10 (daily maintenance at $1 , 754 . 00 per month or
$21 , 048 . 00 annually, carpet shampooing at $0 . 075 per square foot,
floor stripping and waxing at $0. 09 per square foot and window
cleaning - inside only, at $440) was approved on a motion made by
Councilman Moore and seconded by Councilman Smith.
Question: Ayes : All Nayes : None
-000-
A public hearing was called to consider five ( 5 ) below-listed
structures found to be in violation of the City of Beaumont ' s
Dangerous Structures ordinance, Article III, Section 14-50 :
800 PEARL - Ric Warchol , owner ( 13 violations ) , recommendation to raze
or repair within 30 days; 1122 HAZEL - Juliana Herbst et al , owner ( 16
violations ) , to raze or repair within 30 days; 3125 MAGNOLIA - LeRoy
Thibodeaux, owner ( 12 violations) , to raze or repair within 30 days;
2470 CONCORD - Carl D. Levy/Kenn Furlow, owners c/o Kenneth Furlow ( 17
violations ) , to raze or repair within 30 days and 4015 WILLIE MAE -
Joe Denley, owner ( 18 violations) , raze within 30 days .
-163- June 21 , 1988
The six ( 6 ) structures listed below have been condemned by City
Council and the owners ordered to either raze or repair them within
specified time frames . Reinspection of these structures have revealed
non-compliance with the Council ' s order. The community Development
Department, Code Enforcement Housing Division, is requesting
authorization from the City Council to demolish these structures in
accordance with the Dangerous Structures Ordinance and charge the
property owners with the cost of demolition :
1095 Isla, , 4*365 Steelton , 1177 Avenue A, 1015 Avenue D, 2015 Joachimi
and 2715 Glenwood.
Mr. Ric Warchol , 1155 Interstate 10 South, owner of the structure
located at 800 Pearl , formerly the LaSalle Hotel (later renamed King
Edward Hotel and named Water-ford Hotel by Mr. Warchol) addressed
Council to complain of poor communications with the City about the
building. He told Council there was no electricity or plumbing to
the building and that boarding of the structure had proved
ineffective . Mr. Warchol offered no answer to Mayor Meyers ' questions
about abatement of the "ugly, unsightly and unsafe" conditions of the
structure .
Mr. Ben Rogers , 2030 Thomas Road, addressed Council to urge that no
action be taken on the structure located at 800 Pearl assuring Council
that he would make certain that the building would be secured and that
the area would be cleaned.
Mr. Marvin Benoit, 9395 Mapes , addressed Council to urge open
communications between the City and Mr. Warchol .
There being no one else to address Council , the public hearing was
closed.
Ordinance No. 88-57 declaring certain dilapidated structures to be
public nuisances and ordering their repair or removal and authorizing
the Community Development Department to cause to be removed certain
other dilapidated structures whose owners failed to comply with
previously issued condemnation orders was considered:
ORDINANCE NO. 88-57
ENTITLED AN ORDINANCE FINDING CERTAIN
STRUCTURES TO BE PUBLIC NUISANCES AND
ORDERING THEIR REPAIR OR DEMOLITION;
PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY AND PROVIDING
FOR A PENALTY.
It was agreed that action for the structure located at 800 Pearl would
be considered separately. councilman Samuel made a motion to approve
the ordinance and staff recommendations for the other four- (4)
structures; motion was seconded by Councilman Moore.
Question: Ayes : All Nayes : None
-164- June 21 , 1988
After a discussion, a motion to accept the recommendation to raze or
repair the structure located at 800 Pearl was made by Councilman Lee
and seconded by Councilman Brumley.
After further discussion by all parties, the motion and second were
withdrawn. It was decided that no action would be taken concerning
the structure located at 800 Pearl to allow Mr. Rogers opportunity to
secure the property and clean the debris but Staff was instructed to
report to Council the status of the structure in thirty ( 330 ) days .
-000-
Mayo.- Meyers reported that the financial information sought earlier by
the preparedness test had been received and complimented the process .
-000-
Councilman Brumley reminded all that the next Concerts on the Move
program would be held Thursday, June 23 , 1988 , at 7 : 00 p.m. in Rogers
Park; entertainment to be furnished by Jimmy Simmons Jazz Band,
Travelers and a surprise guest.
In addition, Councilman Brumley reported the poor condition of the
railroad crossing near the entrance to downtown at the Delia
Harrington Welcome to Beaumont Park.
Councilman Lee invited all to attend the Sunday in the Park activities
to be hosted by Fashion Showcase, Sunday, June 26 , 1988 , 2 : 00 to 4 : 00
p.m.
Councilman Lee also suggested that some method for funding the removal
of building materials , etc . , not now handled by the Sanitation
Department, be sought through the budget process for the elimination
of this unsightly debris . In addition, Councilman Lee requested that
the discussion of a proposed handbill ordinance be pulled from the
Workshop agenda for one week, saying Mrs . Maree Calcote, Chairman of
the Clean Community Commission, is out of the country and would like
to be present for this discussion.
Councilman Moore reported public nuisance conditions with a
dilapidated structure and high grass and weeds at 4000 Congress .
In addition, Councilman Moore again mentioned encouraging citizens to
use the 'Landfill by eliminating the fee charged after the specified
number of free visits per month.
Councilman Smith complimented City staff for the renovation of the
Tyrrell Park Stables .
Mayor Meyers reported a burned structure in the 2400 or 2500 block of
Neches Street.
-165- June 21 , 1988
In addition , Mayor Meyers spoke of a request received from Amoco
Production Co. , requesting a 4-way traffic signal to replace the 3-way
signal that is located at Dowlen and Delaware to allow safer exit from
their property.
Councilman Lee mentioned a request he had received from BUILD
concerning the waiving of parking fees , both on-street and off-street,
during a downtown promotional activity. It was stated that the issue
of parking fees will be discussed in a future Workshop Session.
-000-
Mr . Bob Gracey, 570 Weatherford, addressed Council concerning the
Telecommunications , Inc . (TCI) Cablevision' s decision to cut a
channel , 20-vision, from it ' s viewing schedule . Mr. Gracey told
Council TCT planned to drop this channel because of its cost rather
than pass a "substantial" rate increase to subscribers . Mr. Gracey
said that this increase was reported to be $1 . 00 . He told Council
that he was circulating a petition of signatures of cable subscribers
to be presented to TCI urging that this channel not be dropped because
of its telecasting of Astros and Rockets sports events as well as
quality programming for children and good old movies .
Mr . Wayne Sherman, 3215 Bradford, addressed Council , first to
compliment the "action letters" provided to those in attendance and
giving a summary of action to be considered by Council , and second to
urge that no implementation of any area of the comprehensive
management study for the Beaumont Police Department be made until a
complete review of the program can be made. ,
Mr. Henry Dannenbaum, 1567 Wall , addressed Council to speak on many
matters .
-000-
There being no further business , the meeting was recessed before
continuing with the City Council Workshop session.
-000-
I , Rosemarie Chiappetta, City Clerk of the City of Beaumont, Texas,
certify that the above is a true copy of the Minutes of the regular
City Council session held June 21 , 1988 .
Rosemarie Chiappe-'Cta
City Clerk
_166- June 21 , 1988
EXCERPT FROM REGULAR CITY COUNCIL
SESSION HELD JUNE 21 , 1988
Requested by Councilman Cokinos
MR. WAYNE SHERMAN:
Good afternoon, Mayor and members of Council . My name is Wayne
Sherman . I live at 325 Bradford Drive . First, I ' d like to commend
Council for providing these Action Letters . These are really nice .
They sure help us , you know, follow the Council meeting. we appreciate
it .
Mayor and members of Council . I am here this evening to comment on the
curl-ent, comprehensive management study of the Beaumont Police Department
now under consideration. It' s my understanding that action has already
been taken by the Resource management Director' s Office to begin
implementation of some parts of this program . I am referring to the
hiring freeze that ' s been ordered for the Beaumont Police Department in
order to begin the civilian dispatcher' s program and I understand the
first steps have already been taken to implement the take home car
program . I recognize the fact the City Manager has the authority to
take these steps but I am urging that we take extreme caution on this
issue . I believe many parts of the program has merit but before putting
any of it into motion, I think the citizens have the right to look at
it . 1 think the Police Chief has the right to look at it. The
Department should study it and by all means City Council take a great
deal of time to study this program . Lei- Is not shoot from the hip on'
this one . Rather than try to rush this program through as I ' ve seen
other issues appeared to be rushed through Council , let ' s take the time
to really study it and implement the bett6r parts of it in a spirit of
cooperation with the Police Department and let ' s antagonize the 'Least
number of city employees and citizens that we can get away with. What I
am here today for and respectfully asking the Council , ask the City
Manager, to implement no part of this program until the entire program
has time to be studied. Thank you,
CITY MAN AGEP :
Could I set the record straight on that? I think it ' s important, Mr.
Sherman, that I got back into town last night. I have had no discussion
with the Chief of Police. I 've had no discussion with any City employee
relative to that study. As you know and I am sure the Council is aware ,
our chief if spending some time in the hospital recuperating and I
talked to him over the phone this morning. He' s going to be discharged
tomorrow, by the way. our position has not changed from what I
represented to Council when it was presented to Council and that
position is that we have received a study. We are going to ask that the
Chief, management staff of the Police Department, as well as myself,
review that study and if there are any components of that study that are
deserving of implementation, they will be made a consideration of the
budget process and not before . You are referring to a couple of letters
I think that Mr . Patterson sent to the Chief relative to questions
regarding the civilization of the dispatch area. I can assure you that
we have made no efforts and no decisions relative to any element of that
study.
EXCERPT FROM REGULAR CITY COUNCIL
SESSION HELIE-) JUNE 21 , 1968 Page .2
MR. SHERMAN:
Okay, the . . . the hiring freeze has been . . . is effective, is it not'
CITY MANAGER:
That hiring freeze was implemented in October 1 , 1987 .
MR . SHERMAN:
Okay, well , the letter I believe was dated June 15 , 1988 .
CITY MANAGER:
No, there has been a vacancy factor in the Police Department that has
been in place since the fiscal year started.
MR. SHERMAN:
I understand that. The Plan heretofore was to fill it with twelve of
the officers but that now has been changed to fill it with civilian
personnel .
CITY MANAGER:
No. my decision is that we are not filling any positions . The Chief is
fully aware of our decision that we are not filling any positions in the
Police Department until such time as we have had opportunity to review
the study.
MR. SHERMAN:
I find no fault with what you are doing, Mr. City Manager. As a matter
of fact, I happened to agree with a lot of this program, as I said. The
civilian dispatchers are something that I do agree with but I 'm awfully
concerned that if this is tried to rush . . . If we try to rush through
this in any way, it ' s going to create a lot of hostility among some of
the citizens . I think we need to give everybody a chance to put their
input into it and then move forward on parts of the program. But, I
think it is something that should really be taken a step at a time .
CITY MANAGER:
That ' s happening. I can assure you of that and I have a lot of
confidence in the ability of our Chief and his staff to be able to
digest that study and to respond appropriately.
EXCERPT FROM REGULAR CITY COUNCIL
SESSION HELD D JUNE 21 , 1988
L Page 3
MR . SHERM.AN: Thank you very much.
COUNCILMAN COKINOS :
By whose authority, Mr. City Manager, that Mr. Patterson wrote that memo
to the chief of Police when he ' s flat on his back in the hospital with a
by-pass? By whose authority does he have that . . . ?
CITY MANAGER:
Mr. Patterson was instructed by myself to begin discussion with the
Chief relative to the civilization issue . And, . . .
COUNCILMAN COKINOS : That' s wasn' t my question . . . . . .
CITY MANAGER: . . . May I finish, sir?
COUNCILMAN COKINOS : No , but that wasn' t my question.
CITY MANAGER: You asked me a quest-ion . I want to answer it .
COUNCILMAN COKINOS:
Yes , but that wasn' t my question. My question by whose authority does
he have to send out a memo such as what he did on June the 15th?
CITY MANAGER: He has my authority, sir.
COUNCILMAN COKINOS: Your authority?
CITY MANAGER: Yes , sir.
COUNCILMAN COKINOS :
As Resource Manager Director? To be sending out a memo to the Police
Department like that?
CITY MANAGER: Maybe we are talking about two different memos .
COUNCILMAN COKINOS : I 'm talking about the memo of June the 155th to the
Chief of Police when he was up in the hospital .
EXCERPT FROM REGULAR CITY COUNCIL
SESSION HELD JUNE 21 , 1988 Page 4
MAYOR MEYERS : Well , you've raised it . You want to say what it says?
COUNCILMAN COKINOS :
I ' d like to know . . . I ' d like to know about what authority does Mr.
Patterson have to write such a memo to the Chief of Police?
CITY MANAGER:
I just answered your question, Mr. Cokinos .
COUNCILMAN COKINOS : What was that?
CITY MANAGER:
He has authority to write a letter to the Chief of Police .
COUNCILMAN COKINOS : Did he have your authority?
CITY MANAGER:
Yes, he did.
COUNCILMAN COKINOS : . . . to write this memo?
CITY MANAGER:
I prefer that you show me the memo, sir.
MAYOR MEYERS :
This is a memo to the chief from Max civilianizing dispatch hiring
freeze dated June 1511--h.
CITY MANAGER:
Before I left town, Mr. Cokinos , I directed Mr. Patterson to make
contact with the Chief to at least begin discussion relative to the
civilianization . . .
COUNCILMAN COKINOS : That' s not a discussion. That ' s a directive
EXCERPT FROM REGULAR CITY COUNCIL
SESSION HELD JUNE 21 , 1988 Page 5
CITY MANAGER:
He has authority as Director of Resource Management, Mr. Cokinos , to
draft his memorandums how he will . I wasn' t in town. I didn' t see the
memo but I did direct him to go ahead and begin discussion with the
Chief . I1-- Is appropriate .
COUNCILMAN COKINOS :
But ,
Mr. City Manager, that' s not a discussion to write a memo like
that . Do you think . . . do you think that' s a discussion?
CITY MANAGER:
I haven' t read the memo, Sir. I ' ll read it when I meet with Mr.
Patterson.
MAYOR MEYERS:
I think the question' s answered. It was by the Manager' s authority.
COUNCILMAN COKINOS :
That he has to send . . . that he . . . he ' s got that authority by you to
send out memos like that? Is that what you said?
CITY MANAGER: I answered your question.
COUNCILMAN COKINOS : Is that what you said?
CITY MANAGER: I answered your question.
COUNCILMAN COKINOS: Was it yes or no?
CITY MANAGER: I a'-ready answered it .
COUNCILMAN COKINOS: What is it?
MAYOR MEYERS : What is your question?
COUNCILMAN COKINOS : L� I
d like to know whether or not he had Mr. Haines '
authority to send out memos like that? He won' t even answer me.
EXCERPT FROM REGULAR CITY COUNCIL
SESSION HELD VTU14E 21 , 1988 Page 6
MAYOR MEYERS : Well , I think he answered the question this way, and not
to speak for him, but that he gave authority and was gone and has not
seen the memo . . .
COUNCILMAN COKINOS:
But . . . but, Mayor, that was . . . he said to discuss . He didn' t say
write memos . There ' s a lot of difference between . . .
MAYOR MEYERS: Well . . I understand
COUNCILMAN COKINOS :
. . . a discussion and writing a directive memo as that.
MAYOR MEYERS :
I understand. The question was that he gave the authority and you are
saying the memo was not appropriately written.
COUNCILMAN COKINOS :
That' s right. At the same time . . .
MAYOR MEYERS : Very good.
COUNCILMAN COKINOS :
. . . at the same time, 44--hat' s not a discussion. That' s a direct
memorandum to implement . Did you give him that authority to do that?
CITY MANAGER: I answered you question, Mr. Cokinos .
COUNCILMAN COKINOS :
Did you give him the authority? It ' s a simple question . . to do . . . to
do that?
CITY MANAGER: And, I gave you a simple answer.
COUNCILMAN COKINOS : Simpleton answer.
EXCERPT FROM REGULAR CITY COUNCIL
SESSION HELD JUNE 21 , 1988 Page 7
CITY MANAGER: Probably.
MAYOR MEYERS : That' s awful . That ' s awful . What ' s Mr. Benoit going to
think coming from Atlanta and listening . . . did you ever attend Andrew
Young' s meeting? Do they have any of this kind of action.
MR. MARVIN BENOIT: Not this kind of action, no.
MAYOR MEYERS :
We ' ll curtail the discussion, then, and I don' t know what else to say.
I 'm not briefed on the memo, either.
END OF EXCERPT.
EXCERPT FROM REGULAR CITY COUNCIL
SESSION HELD JUNE 21 , 1988
Requested by Councilman Cokinos
CITY MANAGER ALBERT E . HAINES:
The next item, Item E . 5 , before going to the item, there is a public
hearing. A condemnation has been scheduled for today' s meeting for
consideration of five vacant buildings which were found on inspection to
be in violation of the City' s dangerous structures ordinance . They
include a facility at 800 Pearl, a fire-damaged facility at 2470 Concord
Road, and three wood framed dwellings at 1122 Hazel , 3125 Magnolia and
4015 Willie Mae. After the hearing, the Council will be asked to
consider an ordinance declaring the buildings to be public nuisances and
ordering the owners to take the steps necessary for abatement. The
ordinance also would provide the authorization for the City to caused to
be removed six ( 6 ) other structures whose owners have failed to comply
with earlier condemnation orders . The six (6 ) structures were
considered at an earlier condemnation hearing and are not in the group
scheduled for consideration at the hearing today. with that, mayor, in
keeping with the former practice, we' d request that you open the hearing
if there are specific areas to be looked at .
MAYOR MAURICE MEYERS:
very well , we would now declare this public hearing opened considering
the condemnation of the five structures as outlined by the Manager. In
a moment we will offer opportunity for Sherell Cockrell and Nick
Toparcean to allow those property owners present who would care to
respond or perhaps address Council relative to their properties . I
guess I would want to get out of the way the one first who took
opportunity and visited with you, Nick. Would you share that with
Council so that they can be aware? She had to go back to work but I
thought we ' d do that first.
SHERELL COCKRELL, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR:
Yes, the property that is located at 2470 Concord, the owner is Kenneth
Furlow. Mr. Furlow has submitted a letter to the Department today
indicating that he' s requesting . . he had to be present in Court today
VISO I will be unable to attend your meeting. I would appreciate you
rescheduling the meeting for two weeks before taking any action and
allow us the opportunity to start the restoration process . " I would
like to indicate to Council that we were requesting that the property be
condemned and we were requesting that the order by razed or repair so he
would still have that opportunity. Thank you.
MAYOR MEYERS :
Very good, then. Would you want to leave that as planned?
MS . COCKRELL: Yes, sir.
EXCERPT FROM REGULAR CITY COUNCIL
SESSION HELD JUNE 21 , 1988 Page 2
MAYOR MEYERS :
Fine . It won' t impact what you are saying. Did the woman understand
that? She knew that Council would be proceeding with its plan but that
it would not impact what she was going to do and are they to get back to
you to show evidence of what they are doing?
NICKTOPARCEAN, CODE ENFORCEMENT SUPERVISOR:
I told her, Mayor, that we would go ahead with the proceeding and we
would forward her a copy of the hearing and that this would not effect
the abatement of it.
MAYOR MEYERS :
Okay, but relative to the evidence that they are doing something, are
they supposed to get back with you?
MR. TOPARCEAN: Right.
MAYOR MEYERS :
Thank you. Okay, Sherell, would you want to initiate now some
conversation about the five properties and that way we can offer any
citizens present opportunity to speak if they choose . Is your mike on?
MS . COCKRELL:
I think SO. The Community Development Department is requesting
authorization from the City Council to raze or repair the five
structures in accordance with the City' s Code and charge the property
owners with the cost of the demolition. The properties are located at
800 Pearl, 1122 Hazel , 3125 Magnolia, 2470 Concord, 4015 Willie Mae. We
have pictures of all of the structures available for Council if you' d
like . I would like to address the first one because I think we have the
property owner present and he is the only one that is present today.
MAYOR MEYERS:
very well, is the property owner present and would he care to make any
comments relative to the property at 800 Pearl .
MR. RIC WARCHOL, owner of structure located at 800 Pearl :
I would like to hear the City' s side of it first.
EXCERPT FROM REGULAR CITY COUNCIL
SESSION HELD JUNE 21 , 1988 Page 3
MAYOR MEYERS : I ' m sorry?
MR . WARCHOL:
If I could, I ' d like to hear the City' s presentation first . . .
MAYOR MEYERS : Fine, we' ll be doing that and putting it up on camera.
MS_. -COIC.-KRELL:
Okay, the first structure is located at 800 Pearl . The owner of the
property is Ric Warchol . The action requested is that the structure
located at 800 Pearl be declared a public nuisance and ordered razed or
repaired. Corrective measures must be taken to abate the thirteen ( 13 )
Lode violations . The structures has at least 50 percent or more damage
or deterioration and the structure has at least 33 percent or more
damage deterioration to its non-supporting members . A reinspection of
the property was made on May the 25th, 1988, which revealed that the
structure has not been repaired, removed or demolished in accordance
with the City' s standards . Staff recommends to raze or repair the
structure within 30 days . , At least two notifications have been mailed
to the property owner.
MAYOR MEYERS :
Very well , then. I would offer opportunity now for public comment by
the property owner or anybody else that would see fit to make any
comment during this hearing portion. Just ask that you first identify
yourself with name and address .
MR. RIC WARCHOL:
Ric Warchol, 1155 Interstate 10 South. First off, the notice that the
City staff is referencing dated January 27th, I notice that they didn' t
reference a meeting we held February 3rd at 2 : 00 p.m. in City Hall here
of which only three staff members were able to attend and I asked for
everybody including any Councilmembers that would like to attend be
present at that meeting. Of which that meeting concluded with disregard
this notice that I received. That notice states, let' s keep in mind
this is a vacant structure, vacant building. There is no electrical ,
there is no plumbing. It states to repair interior flooring - they are
concrete floors; repair interior ceilings , repair interior walls , repair
interior doors , replace broken windows, provide an adequate ventilation
system, maintain or repair heating system to operate properly and or
provide a heating system or appliance whereas dwelling may be heated to
70 degrees Fahrenheit, provide plumbing to comply with the city of
Beaumont Plumbing Code . There is no plumbing, I 'm not sure how to
comply. Electrical to comply with the City of Beaumont' s Code. There
is none, I ' m not sure how to comply.
EXCERPT FROM REGULAR CITY COUNCIL
SESSION HELD JUNE 21 , 1988 Page 4
MR . WARCHOL continued:
Anyway, we met and as I say it was disregarded as we went through some
of the problems that had arisen, some of the things we have done and
haven ' t done, the things we have complied with that the City has asked,
going back to when I spent around $7 , 000 to fence in that entire
structure and it was this City Council - not exact members - that asked
me to remove the fence because it looked too much like a prison. And,
when we removed that fence, that ' s when the problems began. I put up
another fence that was in agreement with the Fire Department that was
handling the citations and that fence has been trampled by not only
people but by the construction work being done on the sewer work out
front .
We have tried to comply with the City' s demands numerous times which I
noticed are not referenced in any of this conversation on the City' s
side, including a meeting just on May 27th that I had with Al (Haines ) .
He came out to my office . We visited. we had lunch, talked about
keeping open communications , talked about that we were both on the same
track to obtain the same goal and that' s renovating the structure . The
structure is on the National Register of Historical Places . This City
did designate * it, not at my request, on their own doings a Historical
Cultural designation. - we had a nice long conversation and I find it
hard to believe that the City Manager on May 27th had absolutely no idea
that on May 31st a letter was going to go out to state that the City
wants to tear this building down. Three days later. That one floored
me.
At . the same time the City is saying let ' s tear it down, the City' s other
Department Housing Authority is applying for money to renovate it . As
recently as June 7th, our Congressman, Jack Brooks , sent a letter to the
Secretary of Housing and Urban Development that states : "Dear Secretary
Pierce, I am pleased to write on behalf of an application for Section 8
Moderate Rehabilitation Housing Units for an important city in my
district, Beaumont , Texas . Their project will provide 110 new housing
units in a vacated hotel . The residents will be centrally located
closed to commercial, recreational and public facilities , only two
blocks away from a major municipal bus route. As I am sure you are
aware, the City of Beaumont has experienced severe economic problems in
the last several years . This project will help to revitalize an area
greatly in need of our assistance and provide opportunities for economic
development in the area as well . As new residents move in, so will new
businesses catering to their needs . The Housing Authority has
established an excellent record of providing quality affordable housing
to the City' s low and moderate income residents . It is my understanding
that both the City and a private bank have expressed their interest in
financing rehabilitation costs and long-term . . . of the project. With
your assistance, this project can be a great success . I appreciate your
attention to Beaumont' s application. There' s a worthy project" so on
and so forth, Thank you. . . .
That ' s as recently as June 7th. I 'm not quite sure our Congressman
knows that we' re here today because of a letter I received May 31st,
seven days prior to his , saying that the City wants to condemn the
building. I 'm not sure where we ' re at.
EXCERPT FROM REGULAR CITY COUNCIL
SESSION HELD JUNE 21 , 1988 Page 5
MR. WARCHOL continued:
Does the Housing Authority want to try and get these grants to renovate
the structure or do we want to tear the building down? Are we wasting
time applying for grants if we want to tear it down or if we tear it
down are we going to tear it down and then say oh there was money to
renovate this historic structure?
Also, on may 27th, the meeting with Mr. Haines , I showed Mr. Haines the
first positive piece of business that I ' d received on that property
since I got involved with it. It was an offer from an out-of-town
company dated May 24th, I ' d just received it . I can' t quite comprehend
that maybe this Council wasn ' t made aware of that either because this is
an offer to bring in or for a company in Dallas to move into Beaumont
and renovate it into some corporate office space as well as some
assembly space for their product and renovate the rest of the structure
for rental space .
for
kind of hard to sell a structure when you've got a condemnation
hearing pending and again we go back. You know, I met with Mr .• Haines
on May 27th. Not one word was mentioned about condemnation or
dilapidated structures and three days later a letter comes out stating
it. I think we are lacking some great communication within this City.
Maybe this is why the building still sits like it does . I don' t have
the answers but, boy, we' ve got some problems . Thank you.
MAYOR MEYERS : Thank you. Any other comments, please.
MR. BEN ROGERS, 2030 Thomas Road:
Mayor and members of the Council, members of the City staff . Ben
Rogers . I ' m here not at the request of Ric Warchol . I heard that there
was going to be this hearing on the condemnation and I called Ric and
asked him if what I heard was correct and he said it was and he related
some of those things that he reviewed with the Council here today. And,
so, I am really at a loss to understand what' s happening. I know the
inner-personal relationship between Ric and the council and the Mayor
may not be at the best but let ' s set that aside and let' s assume that
somebody else came into the City other than Ric and his partner was here
- not his partner, but some third party and we had this project here
which, A. , it ' s on the National Record. It' s an historical building and
I don' t know if anyone has the right to destroy that building, to
demolish it without getting an Act of Congress because I know the
problems T had with one building when we went to raze it .
And, so let' s put Ric aside for a moment and talk about another building
that' s here in Beaumont at the corner of Forrest and Broadway which is
the old St. Theresa Hospital Building. And, I say the photograph. I
look at this building on a daily basis because it' s right out of my
office window and I can' t help but see it and my heart goes bad every
time . . . you know, I really hurt when I think what Ric has tried to do
and what money has been put into that building and the need to create a
more beautiful atmosphere in the area - what can you do? And, thinking
about getting this letter to demolish that building.
EXCERPT PROD REGULAR CITY COUNCIL
SESSION HELD JUNE 21 , 1988 Page 6
MR . ROGERS continued:
Then I drive to the Temple . It ' s right across from the Temple and you
look at a building there that is far worse , weeds growing up all over
it. You don' t know, you know, who has priority over there, but if you
are going to talk about a demolition and try to clean up, I think the
City needs to take a good look at the old St. Theresa Hospital building
if you haven' t already done so and then tell the citizens what we are
going to do over there .
It hasn' t been too long ago, I think it was a year ago last December,
when I , Suzy Juncker and one of my brothers visited every savings and
loan institution in this area and every bank and we had commitments to
do the Waterford Hotel project and were committed with the banks and
savings and loans in excess of $3 . 0 million. we went after $3 . 0 because
that ' s what Ric said it would take. We exceeded that goal . We did it
only as individual citizens, had no monetary involvement , had no real
estate involvement, but were trying to do it because the City needs that
building. The City needs a downtown suite hotel and that' s what Ric
wanted to do and we came to Ric with the list of the banks and he was
grateful and he appreciated it, ,got information off and missed the time
table that they had allotted Ric by one week I believe, somewhere in
that neighborhood.. And, so, we sat back saying what ' s going to happen
now. Nothing really happened because I think Ric has lost his heart to
do anything, you know, to move forward. You reach that point . I know
sometimes for someone to understand it but when you've put in all that
energy, time, effort, sweat and money and there' s no one helping, you
take that sort of attitude .
To make that even a little more serious to him is when the City came
forward and said we ' ve got a do-able project. We ' ll do the Stedman
Building and I thank the Lord and I thank you all for the work you' ve
done on that job because that ' s going to be very creative and it ' s going
to work and it' s going to be great; but, why that got priority over the
Waterford Hotel , I don' t know. But, if that ' s a do-able Job, this one
certainly was a do-able. The Housing Authority talks about using it for
a housing project. They' ve got the wherewithal , they' ve got the funds ,
they've . . . I understand it ' s locally been approved. They are willing
to go with it but they need the City of Beaumont to say we can lend our
support with the income that you have from the federal income on those
various Block Grants , et cetera, but it doesn' t look like it' s going
that direction and, then, Ric turns up with a letter . . . these people
have been here with a group out of Dallas who give him an actual bona
fide offer to do something with that building subject to getting other
government approvals . You know, all this happening within a matter
of. . .May 27th is the day I heard, so just a matter of a few weeks .
If the order is to . . goes into demolish and do away with that building,
that kills every opportunity that he has . The letter from Jack Brooks
was probably solicited by the Housing Authority. I don' t know who else
would have done it to get Jack Brooks to move forward. So I am glad
Jack is doing that.
EXCERPT FROM REGULAR CITY COUNCIL
SESSION HELD JUNE 21 , 1988 Page 7
MR. ROGERS continued:
So, I recognize the fact that it is not a quality building as it is
right now and it does have some hazards to the public and creates that
public nuisance as you called it but if you can defer any action as
though it never happened and let Ric run his route with it or better
yet, call Ric in at one of the Planning meetings and see what the City
can do to put that building into use for the suite hotel, the 100-unit
suite hotel .
My brothers and I were committed at one time, to Ric said if you can do
it, we ' ll put some money in to that project. We are not looking for a
return . We ' ll do it as a community involvement . We' ll do it as
something to help spark it to give you some more credibility so that
others then may follow. We are still open to that same involvement with
Ric . No partnetship, no return, just because it would be good for the
area and good for the City.
I ask. all of you to reconsider and don' t take any action on this; file
it away in one of those drawers like you filed away the need for a light
somewhere because nothing has ever happened and just let it go away.
Ric will work on it if he can get your cooperation. Thank you.
MAYOR MEYERS.:
Are there any other comments? Very well, does Council have any
questions or do you want to move right on into the others and then come
back to each?
COUNCILMAN COKINOS:
I have a question, Mayor. When a building is designated as a historical
building, what ' s the procedure as far as the protection of this building
is concerned?
MS . COCKRELL:
First of all you try to make sure if there' s any source of funds
available at all to restore it. You try to get those funds from the
Historical Trust of the State of Texas and those funds are appropriated
from the federal government; however, to my knowledge, there isn ' t any
monies available for rehabilitation. There are some planning grants
that have been available in the past towards that effort. I am aware
that even with the Tyrrell Library, we ' ve gone forward to attempt to
secure those types of funding. Now, that structure I believe is on the
National Register of Historic Places . If there isn' t any monies
available to restore the structure and we can' t rebuild or use the
structure in a manner then and the structure is creating a hazard to
health and safety and welfare, does not mean that the City can' t tear it
down. It does mean that we would have to notify the State, we would
have to justify why we are going forward with that procedure but those
are the procedures that we would have to follow.
EXCERPT FROM REGULAR CITY COUNCIL
SESSION HELD JUNE 21 , 1988 Page 8
COUNCILMAN COKINOS:
It would have to be the National Registry and the State. They would
have to be notified before we you' d take any action, is that not
correct?
MS . COCKRELL:
They would have to be should be notified at the time prior to our
demolishing the structure . What we are coming before Council today to
do is to condemn the structure as a public nuisance. We are requesting
that that order be razed or repaired. we are aware of the fact that
some efforts being made towards trying to renovate the property.
COUNCILMAN COKINOS :
It says here that the structure has 50 percent or more damage or
deterioration but back on your slip as a substandard building inspection
report, it says "does the structure have 50 percent or more damage or
deterioration" and you say "no" . Then, what is correct?
MS . COCKRELL:
Let me get that particular report, just a minute. We said for that
specific structure, that there are at least 13 Code violations . We
identified what those Code violations , that' s a part of the City' s Code
of ordinances, before a dangerous structure can be declared a dangerous
structure to fit into that definition, the structure either has at least
50 percent damage or deterioration or the structure has at least 33
percent or more damage or deterioration to non-supporting members . It
may fall under both categories or one or the other of those categories .
It doesn' t always have to be both.
COUNCILMAN COKINOS : It doesn' t have to be both?
MS. COCKRELL: It doesn' t always have to be both.
COUNCILMAN COKINOS:
And, so, when you say 50 percent or more damage, it just says the
corrective measures , is that not correct?
MS. COCKRELL:
Yes, what you have in your inspection report, those detailed things that
Ric went over with you, those are the things that we are identifying
that needs to be done in order to bring the structure up to the City' s
minimum housing code standards in order for that structure to be viable
to be utilized for occupancy. . . . . .
COUNCILMAN COKINOS: And, that . . . go ahead, excuse me.
EXCERPT FROM REGULAR CITY COUNCIL
SESSION HELD JUNE 21 , 1988 Page 9
MS. COCKRELL:
And, that' s what we do on all our vacant structures . We don' t want them
to just sit there and just be boarded up. Council changed the Code to
require if any money or investment is made into the property to bring up
it into certain standards so that the structure can be occupied.
COUNCILMAN COKINOS:
Were you aware of the letter that Mr. Warchol mentioned about our astute
Congressman Jack Brooks making efforts to . . to get some financing for
Mr. Warchol?
MS. COCKRELL:
I 'm aware that the Beaumont Housing Authority has requested and sent
forward to the Department of Housing and Urban Development a letter
requesting financial assistance in trying to renovate the property.
This City department itself wrote a letter in support of that and we are
certainly still in support of that.
COUNCILMAN COKINOS:
Do you feel that we should wait until . . let this take the course that
Jack . . Congressman Jack Brooks is taking to see if we can get the money
to rehabilitate this building?
MS . COCKRELL:
I feel that we should treat this property as we are treating all of the
properties that are substandard. I think that it should be condemned by
Council . We will pursue with the property owner and Jack Brooks and
anyone else that' s interested in renovating the property. We are not
talking about tearing it down. We are talking about the beginning of
initiating the process of condemning the building, though.
COUNCILMAN COKINOS :
If you do that then . . . then . . . the chances to proceed of getting any
money would be nil , would it not?
MS. COCKRELL: No, sir.
COUNCILMAN COKINOS: If you condemned the building?
MS . COCKRELL: It wouldn' t have any impact on it whatsoever, not as far
as securing the federal grants for it.
EXCERPT FROM REGULAR CITY COUNCIL
SESSION HELD JUNE 21 , 1988 Page 10
COUNCILMAN COKINOS : Wouldn' t it help if we just leave it alone?
MS . COCKRELL: No, sir.
COUNCILMAN COKINOS :
Would it help Mr. Warchol if we leave it alone and let it take its
course?
MS . COCKRELL:
No, sir . It' s in violation of the City' s Code and we are to enforce
those Codes and I am not handling this structure any differently from
what we are handling all structures .
COUNCILMAN COKINOS :
Most of the damage has been done because of practice there in the
building, has it not?
MS . COCKRELL: No, sir.
COUNCILMAN LEE: What practice do you mean?
COUNCILMAN COKINOS: SWAT Team.
COUNCILMAN LEE: SWAT Team?
COUNCILMAN COKINOS: Yes , haven' t they been using that building?
MS. COCKRELL:
I think perhaps our Legal counsel can address that issue. I believe,
based on some information that Mr. Warchol had indicated previously,
that they had been using the building. Since that, though, I had
support and sent documentation to the Police Department and our chief
indicating that that is a dangerous structure and it should not be used
for that purpose. Lane . . .
CITY ATTORNEY LANE NICHOLS:
I don' t know whether they are using it or not. They had . . . we had
provided them with or obtained from them a release . . . I mean, we gave
them a release that allowed the SWAT Team to practice in the structure .
I don' t know whether it ever occurred or not of my own knowledge.
COUNCILMAN COKINOS:
Well, then, maybe Mr. Warchol can answer that or Mr. Rogers can answer
that question.
EXCERPT FROM REGULAR CITY COUNCIL
SESSION HELD JUNE 21 , 1988 Page 11
MR. WARCHOL: The SWAT Team used to use it. It was fine with me . I
received the letter Sherell sent the Chief of Police dated April 29th or
so telling them not to use the structure anymore. They' ve been using it
for years . . . . . . . a very good training facility for them. If you are
talking about dangerous structures, that building is structurally
sound. It is not going anywhere . It is solid, more solid than city
Hall . I ' ve got engineering four inches thick on that building. I had
that thing checked out before I ever put a dollar into it. When we are
talking about dangerous structures, what are we talking about. The
windows are broken out. I noticed they were big on showing in the video
the College Street side, but did anybody look . . . I mean the Pearl
Street side but if you look at the College Street side, there' s not a
broken window in that building on the College Street side. Why the
windows are all broken on this side, I don' t know, but, you know, we
keep talking about dangerous structures . Is it a dangerous structure
because it doesn' t have a heating system that maintains 70 degrees
temperature in that facility? That' s almost ludicrous . The list I went
down which this City and its staff members told me to forget about when
I met with them on that notice within the time frame, February 3rd, of
which nobody on this Council or the City manager' s Department felt the
emergency or the importance to even attend that meeting. They said
ignore it . There' s $4 . 0 or $5 . 0 million dollars worth of work on that
slip and you get thirty days to do it? I mean, I don' t even think we
are talking in realistic terms . I 'm not sure if anybody understands is
what is being said about this . . . . . .
MAYOR MEYERS:
Let me ask a question that we ask at all hearings, Mr. Warchol . And,
let me come back to an inference relative to personal side. I have
absolutely no personal interest in this property or in Mr . Warchol .
would you tell us a little bit about what you plan to do to remedy the
fact that the building is unsafe, the building is unsightly. Stop
telling us all about what' s wrong and tell us about what you might
intend to do to correct it. We are trying to do what we are trying to
do through our entire City and that' s make it better. That is an ugly,
unsightly, unsafe property and we' d like to hear something about what
you intend to do to improve that. You are not speaking at all about
that. You are talking about everything that somebody is doing or isn' t
doing. The purpose of the hearing today is not to come down on you or
anyone else but to address problems throughout our community as we will
address that property on Forrest Street as Mr. Rogers mentioned. It' s a
difficult task but would you tell us what you intend to do, if you care
to, to make that property safe.
MR. WARCHOL: Well, the first thing we have to decide what' s safe?
MAYOR MEYERS:
Well, I think the beginning starts with removal of all broken glass ,
closing up the property so that people cannot get in and out of it and
whatever else is required.
EXCERPT FROM REGULAR CITY COUNCIL
SESSION HELD JUNE 21 , 1988 Page 12
MR. WARCHOL:
See, this is where you have to come from . . . the developer spend some
money. When I did that and had that facility secured, it was this City
that told me to please remove it. It looked too much like a prison and
I did it at this City' s request and since that time we 've had nothing
but problems and then after I took the fencing down, the City said well
the parking garage is exposed. I said I knew that, that' s why the fence
was up.
MAYOR MEYERS: Well, relative to the decisions that this City, it' s our
City . . . . . .
MR. WARCHOL:
. . . . . . dirt in there. I 'm not sure I 'm going to spend any money on
that project today. I say that but yes we did get an offer on that
facility, a bona fide offer, that I showed the City Manager when we met
on May 27th and no, nobody is going to buy a facility that is under
condemnation . . . . . .
MAYOR MEYERS : t.
Sir, I would contradict you because I am thoroughly familiar with the
investors and the condemnation or not had nothing at all to do with
their interest in that property. They have, I understand . . . . . . again,
I would come back because I think it is in your interest if I 'm or
anyone else is to do what ' s in your best interest, I would like to hear
what you propose to do from this point forward.
MR. WARCHOL:
Well, I think one of the best shots that we have going for us on the
facility at this kind is with the Housing Authority and I have
absolutely no knowledge other than a letter I received here and there
what the Housing Authority is doing, is it even a realistic goal to look
at, should I be doing something for them? Nobody has contacted me .
Like I say, I get a letter here and there, I 've got the letter from
Brooks , a letter that Sherell sent out saying they were applying for
money. Is that happening today, tomorrow? Or is it for five years?
MAYOR MEYERS :
Anything like that that would occur again I think you have to recognize
would only be motivated by the fact that we have a strenuous effort to
improve the appearance of our entire City and if the Housing Authority
might be fortunate enough to be able to secure some assistance to turn
that property into something desireable then that would only be
beneficial to you or to whoever owns it and them but, in the meantime,
somebody give me some assistance. Are there some immediate remedies .
that Mr. Warchol would be expected to acknowledge to help Council in
what they are looking at today?
EXCERPT FROM REGULAR CITY COUNCIL
SESSION HELD JUNE 21 , 1988 Page 13
MR. WARCHOL:
I ' ll tell you. This is what should have happened on May 27th when the
City Manager came out there when we could sit down at an open table and
discuss the types of remedies but nothing was mentioned. If you ask me,
we' re wasting time . That' s what we should be doing . . . saying, Ric,
come on down . . . . . .
MAYOR MEYERS :
My questions . . . my questions are based purely in your interests and, if
you choose not to respond, I can only assume that your intent is to do
nothing. Yes . . .
COUNCILMAN SAMUEL:
I ' d like to make a comment. Many times we come to situations like this
and we have to make decisions on what we feel is best for the City.
Now, I do understand some of the problems that you' ve had in the past,
Mr . Warchol , but, at the same time, I understand he has made efforts to
try and take 'Care of the problems . I know what you are up against in
trying to get financing in this area. That' s a problem, but I think the
efforts should not go unnoted. Now, that is the purpose of the City
Council . If we didn' t need situations where there was opportunity to
make amenities there would be need for council . Then, you could just go
by the law and enforce it strictly that way. * Now, based upon the
information that I have and what I 've seen of your efforts in the past,
sure, if he had the location secured, the City asked him to take it
down, then I have problems in saying well , this is unsecure because of
whatever the reasons are - if the city told him to take it down. That' s
the first thing I want to find out. if we did ask him to take down the
fence because of slightly appearance . That' s the first question. If
that is so, regardless of what has happened in the past, we cannot
continue to go on without any kind of indication of what' s going happen
in the future . I don' t think 30 days is fair in stating that because I
too have received a letter from the Congressman and if he is making
attempts to do something for that structure, I think that is
significant. We are trying to do things to enhance the downtown area,
bring about economic development area so we have on one hand an
unsightly location, but also we have on the other hand that same
opportunity to bring about development in the City. So I think at this
point we need to forget about what ' s happened in the past, quit talking
about it and we need to determine what common ground can we meet on to
move forward in the future . I think that is what the Mayor' s asking.
That' s what I want to know, Ric . The first thing I would say . . . any
time any condemnations come up before the Council , the first thing we
have to do is make sure it is secure . okay, regardless of whether we
told you to do that in the past, if we asked you to take it down, Ric,
and now we are telling you to pick it up, board it back up, then, that' s
wrong on the City' s part; but, it needs to be boarded up. It needs to
be where no one can get in and what I want to hear is do you intend to
address that particular issue, Ric?
EXCERPT FROM REGULAR CITY COUNCIL
SESSION HELD JUNE 21 , 1968 Page 14
MR. WARCHOL:
Let me tell you, you are absolutely right and that' s what I was saying.
Through all this . . . . . .
COUNCILMAN COKINOS: Could you come to the microphone, Mr. Warchol, up
here?
MR. WARCHOL:
. . . brought us here today is the simple fact I get a certified letter
that wants to tear the building down. I don' t think I 'm unreachable. I
don' t think there' s anybody here that wouldn' t know how to reach me .
Councilman Brumley, it was a few Council meetings back, where you
addressed the City Manager in that, you know, to do whatever they could
to get this building taken care of . You know where to reach me. we see
each other at Convention Bureau. Why couldn' t you come to me and say,
Ric , let' s sit down and talk about this . Nobody has called me. That ' s
what I am saying. Let ' s sit down and talk about - it and come to some
remedy to bring this building into some shape until we can get something
done . I just think it should be torn down.
CITY MANAGER:
Mayor, I think it' s . . . and I hesitated to make this statement, but I
think it' s important that I do relative to communication. When I met
with Mr. Warchol , it was at my request on May 27th. I believe that was
the date you referenced, Ric. In that meeting, and the purpose of that
meeting was clearly single-purpose and we discussed that from the outset
and I hope I made that clear to Ric, that our interest was . . . my
interest in meeting with Ric was essentially to find out what if any
disposition plans he had with that facility and to also review with him
the fact that there was in process between the Fire Marshall and the
Building Department movement to identify that, from the provisions of
the Code, that there were distinct and serious violations of that
facility. I explained to Mr. Warchol that my purpose was not to discuss
those violations, that they needed to run their course, but rather to
make a determination as to what kind of disposition there may be if any
to that facility. We discussed the interest that we had both heard
about of the Housing Authority and the letter from an out-of-town
investor or developer and I think we concluded the meeting, Ric, by both
. . . essentially, my impression in our discussion was that you really had
no idea as to any short term resolution of the problem of that
building. And, I think I left the meeting with a clear understand that
that was indeed the case but that in any event our City Departments ,
particularly our Fire Department and our Community Development
Department had a responsibility in recognizing that there were
distinctive problems with that facility to bring those out and to play
them out. Mr. Warchol and I did not discuss that dimension of it and I
think that needs to be stated very clearly to this Council and in this
public hearing. He was aware of it and I was aware that there was a
process going on in the City long before our meeting of May 27th and I
don' t think it should come as a surprise to him or to me that in fact he
was served with that notice. He was advised that he was in violation of
the Code.
EXCERPT FROM REGULAR CITY COUNCIL
SESSION HELD JUNE 21 , 1988 Page 15
MR. WARCHOL:
You are exactly right, Al, and I did come down within . . . that' s was
January 27th. I left the file in back . . . and I scheduled the meeting
within the time frame. I think it gave me like February 11th to meet
with this City and I called and set up the appointment. I met with
Stanley Kidd, Sherell Cockrell and Nick (Toparcean) Nick was there .
This was the only three that attended that meeting and we sat and we
went down this list . I mean, first off, .I was flabbergasted by this
list, you know, $4 . 0 or $5 . 0 million worth of work to a vacant structure
and anyway that meeting was left with Sherell was going to look to see
what kind of grants might be available out there. I mean we were making
some progress but they basically we said okay forget this and let' s see
what we can do positive and that' s what I am saying. I 'm willing to sit
down with anyone, this Council at a Workshop Session, anything and let' s
look at what can be done to short term . . to secure this building if
that' s what it is . It is not a structurally unsound facility. . . . . . .
CITY MANAGER: I guess , Mayor, that' s what I 'm trying to represent . . .
MR. WARCHOL: . . . and if we want to have communication and conversation,
I am more than willing but nobody has wanted that.
CITY MANAGER:
To this Council, I am trying to state that that communication has been
ongoing. Had Mr. Warchol represented in any of the previous meetings
either prior to or subsequent to the January meeting that in fact he was
intending to do whatever it took to provide a protection relative to the
very serious violations , particularly Fire Code and Building Code
violations, in the form of barricading or putting up some kind of
structure to prevent further deterioration of that facility and access
by the public. He would not have been serviced that letter. We have no
other choice but to bring it to this Council in this process and request
that the Council act on it this way.
MAYOR MEYERS:
Let me mention something, and you' ve probably been in attendance at
other hearings and you are probably familiar to know that I really don' t
know of one instance that I can remember, now going on nine years of
service to the City, with this Council or others , where, at this point
in time , a citizen came before this Council and then stated that they
would meet with our City staff and be able to sit down and work out the
necessary arrangements to show good faith in securing a property, et
cetera. The actions taken by this Council are, quite frankly and
hopefully, to bring that about.
I do not, however, personally offer any apologies for the action that is
being brought forward today because I say very clearly that if we as a
City are going to address this element of what I think is a dramatic
concern for us to really be a finer city then we are just going to have
to take the necessary steps to bring it about. The most desireable,
without question, is to assist the property owner which we are trying to
do.
EXCERPT FROM REGULAR CITY COUNCIL
SESSION HELD JUNE 21 , 1988 Page 16
MAYOR MEYERS continued:
I don' t know why you keep bringing up the Housing Authority. If
something were to materialize there, I assume you would be the
benefactor of a Christmas present so that would probably be the most
wonderful thing that could happen but beyond that if it happens - I
realize it, beyond that, what we are talking about today is what we
should get a message out to every citizen in this community - We are
serious about making this place really look good and if properties
across the city need to be addressed to get the attention of property
owners so that they will do what ' s necessary, that' s what we want .
MR. WARC-HOL:
Well, I ' d just like to throw in my recommendation that I think when that
process begins it should begin with calling that property owner saying
why don' t you come on down, let' s go over this facility, let' s look at
it, let ' s talk about it. I think that . . . and that' s what I 'm saying.
It doesn' t start with a certified letter out of the clear blue sky that
we are going to tear the building down. I think communication is number
one . . .
MAYOR MEYERS:
Well , this would be . . . this would be I guess a question . . .
MR. WARCHOL: That' s what I 'm offering council . I 'm saying, I 'm stating
it. If somebody wants to communicate, I 'm more than happy. I ' ll meet
with the whole Council , one of the Council, the City manager, anybody,
but I 'm not sure what this City Council wants me to do or the City staff
wants me to do with that facility and until I am, I 'm not going to do
anything; but I have to know what they want to do and $5 . 0 million worth
of work, no, I 'm not going to do $5 . 0 million worth of work.
MAYOR MEYERS:
Well, let me ask you a question preliminarily of some of the things I
think it will be very important for Council to know and then Mr. Warchol
might be able to respond. some of the things that we might anticipate
being done following say council ' s actions today. What might they be?
MR. TOPARCEAN:
Okay, Mayor, I' d - like to clarify first of all conditions or what a
substandard building may be. Structural integrity is not always a
condition that determines if a building is substandard or dangerous , in
this case, a dangerous structure. We are looking at a building that is
multi-storied here with open exposed elevator shafts . we are looking at
a building that' s got excessive amounts of debris . There' s structural
members that possibly could fall and injure people.
EXCERPT FROM REGULAR CITY COUNCIL
SESSION HELD JUNE 21 , 1988 Page 17
MR. TOPARCEAN continued:
The integrity of the building I would have to say the structure is a
fairly sound building and I think it doesn' t take an architect or
engineer to make that determination but our concern is safe-guarding the
building even for Ric ' s best interest because ultimately his liability
as owner could fall upon his shoulders if anything would occur in this
building such as an injury by a pedestrian or a transient who may be
sheltering himself in that location and that' s evidenced by the fact
that there are bedding materials and that there are clothes stored in
that building by transients . That' s a concern of the City.
The other concern is that the issues of the Fire Code about a lot of
debris being scattered about that could present itself as a threat to
any firefighter that may have to in turn respond to any call at that
location. On May 6 , 1988 , a letter was sent to Mr. Warchol from the
Fire Marshall ' s office and it sited a section of the Fire Code which
stated that the building needed to be secured and it needed to . . . well,
in lieu . . . there' s a section here . . . this is from Captain Joe
Tumbleson and it said,
"On November 26 , 1986 , 1 gave permission for you to have .the fire lines
serving the building disconnected due to extensive. damage of the
sprinkler system. At that time, you were working toward keeping the
building secured. These efforts have been to no little or to no avail .
Therefore tinder provisions of the City of Beaumont Fire Code, Section 13-
27 . 42x, copy attached, I must by law require you to take any and all
steps necessary to permanently secure the above-referenced structure.
By law, you are allowed 48 hours upon receipt of this letter to
accomplish this task. "
The point we are trying to make, Mayor and Councilmembers , is that we
are willing to work with Ric but we are at our means right now. We
really have got to do something before this becomes a tragedy.
MR. WARCHOL:
Are you aware that after I received that letter I met with Chief Shelton
and Tumbleson?
MR. TOPARCEAN:
In continuation of the 'Letter, "The senior building official, Mr.
Stanley Kidd, is requested to advise this office when in his opinion the
structure is secured on a permanent basis . This requirement also
extends to the elevated parking garage adjacent to the hotel . You are
requested to advise Mr. Kidd for an inspection at 838-0656 . If at the
end of the 48-hour period no action has been taken, I will have no
choice but to take further legal action as prescribed by law. "
EXCERPT FROM REGULAR CITY COUNCIL
�4
SESSION HELD JUNE 21 , 1988 Page 18
MR. WARCHOL :
I was Just asking, are you aware that we did meet on that after that
letter was . . . . . .
MS. COCKRELL:
To my knowledge, Mr. Kidd did not have the opportunity to meet with
you. The reason why we requested that everyone . . . . . .
MR. WARCHOL: . . . I wasn' t saying any thing about Stanley
MS . COCKRELL:
. . . wait just a moment, Chief Shelton . . . everyone be a part of that
meeting is because I think the question that we had as far as the
discussion was what would be safe? What would secure? What kind of
necessary action should take place in order to secure the building so
that transients would not continue to pull the boards that you put on
the building off and so forth? And, that was one of the reasons we had
asked that all of us be present in that meeting so that we could give
that and provide that information to you.
MR. WARCHOL: You didn' t ask that in the letter. It said to contact
Stanley Kidd . . . Stanley Kidd would do a final inspection.
MAYOR MEYERS : Let me come back to the point in question, Ric .
MR. WARCHOL:
But then reference these letters, Mayor. What I am saying, you see, when
we would get these letters, we would respond to them and we would take
action. These letters . . . . . .
MAYOR MEYERS : Well, respond, yes . Action, no. . . . . . .
MR. WARCHOL:
Action, yes . Let me start with, you know, we took down the big fence.
Then the boards kept getting knocked down. We had people down there
almost on a daily basis putting those boards back up, almost daily
putting them back up. Finally, I met with the chief again after another
letter and the Chief is the one that said let' s just fence in these
windows that the boards keep coming down and then you don' t have to
worry about putting the boards back up so we fenced it in and we put
barbed wire around the fence and you see what' s happened to that fence.
That fence is less than a year old. You know, we keep working at it.
We do keep making the efforts but we haven' t found something that is
totally full proof to the transients that go into that facility. If we
could house our transients someplace, maybe we would have a lot easier
situations securing the facilities but that has been the problem and I
don' t have the answers to it. That' s why I ' ve said and I will state one
more time, if somebody wants to sit down and visit, I ' d be more than
happy to because we . . . . . .
EXCERPT FROM REGULAR CITY 'COUNCIL
SESSION HELD JUNE 21 , 1988 Page 19
MAYOR MEYERS :
Well , we are visiting today and we are in the process that I don' t think
is unreasonable and as I mentioned earlier it is a process that
historically people come before the Council and they speak to their
desire to remedy problems with their properties, justified problems , and
express an intent to correct them. This is exactly what I think should
be done today. I think also Council has shown historically that rather
than hard nosed, leniency is far more the case and so in speaking to you
I guess honestly the responsibility to indicate a willingness to remedy
the problem is really what this is all about.
MR. WARCHOL: I certainly think we' ve expressed that.
MR. ROGERS :
I can' t help but come back and ask you to bear with me. one, I know
what the book says and I know that the action that you are taking is the
legal, lawful positiSn that you must take but you also understand that
when the signed gels up there "condemned" , he may as well go home
because that really puts the question marks in the mind of anybody who
is going to look at that property. That ' s the practical approach.
I don' t think any of you were on the Council when I fought the battle
for Charlton Pollard to try to save that structure but it would be well
to go back historically and look and see what happened and I believe
that you ultimately . . . That was a property of the school district but
I think ultimately what happened is that the City wound up demolishing
that property, paying for the demolition and I think you still have it
as one of your receivables as a judgment against that land out there,
somewhere in excess of $150,000.
Now, if someone is going to condemn that building, say, if you don' t
demolish it, we will . This City better get ready to spend $400, 000 to
demolish and then how it down to the ground.
I haven' t talked to my brothers since I ' ve been sitting here but I' ll
tell you what I will personally undertake to do and I think they' ll give
me their blessings to say that we all recognize what transpired here and
that something has to be done and that the City hasn' t got the funds
with which to do it and put the lien against the property and I don' t
know whether it would be safer to take out all of the glass that' s still
in there and say that the glass element is now removed and then either
fence in or board in that board floor. Certainly, as I stand here, the
very day that you reglaze it, that night you are going to have the
breakage, you know, unless you have full-time guards around there; but,
whatever the practical approach is, I will tell this Council and the
Mayor and the members of the staff, given some time, I will get a cost
estimate of what it will take to preserve that property so that Ric can
continue to pursue the best avenues to make that a useable building.
EXCERPT FROM REGULAR CITY COUNCIL
SESSION HELD JUNE 21 , 1988 Page 20
MR. ROGERS continued:
I also must call attention to the Council that you have some sort of
right in there and I don' t know if it was done while you were all on the
Council but I recall where you took back an easement of the front of
those buildings and nothing can be touched without your approval and I
don' t know whether . . how that would work.
But, regarding all of that background, I ask you now to put the burden
on Ben Rogers or Ben Rogers and brothers and we will see what we can do
to assist to remove the immediate problem of anybody getting hurt. I
think that ' s . . . and secondary to improve the visual , esthetic
appearance of that property and I don' t know how much longer the City is
going to be fooling out there with their underground work, but , mayor, I
don' t know who has charge of that job, but it looks like the cost is
running, running, and running and I hope it was on a fixed contract
because somebody is running out of money. I thank you for your
consideration.
MAYOR MEYERS :
Thank you very much for your interest and your offer. Does Council have
any other questions of Mr. Warchol or staff relative to this property?
Any other discussion?
COUNCILMAN BRUMLEY:
The only discussion I would have relates to what Mr. Warchol said
concerning the meetings to discuss or do, I would never nor would I want
staff to ever think they would represent or speak for the council nor
would I ever speak on such a matter to tell someone forget about what
the ordinance is, forget about what you' ve gotten. You know, I 'm a
member of Council, I couldn' t do that.
And, I think it has reached the point where the intent or the interest
of the Council is for the safety and security of the building period.
At the same time, there are Council members that are working toward
making this a viable housing project but the intent is not to have a
building open as a health hazard.
And, I could never go and tell someone if you tell me that then don' t
worry about the council , everything' s fine. That' s not . . . nor could
any other Councilmember do that nor could any staff member or Fire Chief
or City Manager or anyone else. A City manager couldn' t say forget
about the rules and regulations concerning safe and unsafe buildings .
That' s something that is very clear and they are charged with the
responsibility of seeing not this building but every building meets
those requirements .
EXCERPT FROM REGULAR CITY COUNCIL
SESSION HELD JUNE 21 , 1988 Page 21
COUNCILMAN BRUMLEY continued:
We ' ve got people here today in addition to this structure and we can' t
say forget here but we can' t do to you what we've done here on this
other piece of property because we have to be a consistency. There' s a
fairness to it and there ' s people that . . . it may not be a $4 . 0 or $5 . 0
million building, it may be a $4 , 000 building but that $4, 000 is just
like $4 . 0 million to them. But, most of all , their property is just as
important to them and they sit down and, just like Maury said, they say
this building is important to us and we want to put together a work
program to make sure the building is secured and that ' s the greatest
news we could hear because it tells us or tells me that there' s a pride
not only in them and their property but also in the City to make sure
the building doesn' t look or the house or whatever it might be.
And I think that' s one of the intentions that we have here today is to
secure the building . to make sure that none of these thousands and
thousands of people that we are trying to get to come downtown whether
it' s with boat races or Kaleidescope or whatever it is that they' re not
going to be involved in a situation where their children are not going
to be involved in a situation to where there ' s some type of danger inn
them coming downtown•because of a building is not secured. I think you
have to Provide that environment and at the same time you are providing
that environment you are making it a very successful building whether
it,-Is a housing unit or some other successful project . But , that' s my
personal interest and I think that that' s what I would like to see come
Out Of ' it if, it' s Mr. Rogers securing it, fine; if it ' s Mr. Warchol
securing it, fine; but whatevek it takes to secure it, at the same time
we are working along other avenues that' s what ' s the most important
thing.
MAYOR MEYERS : Thank you, Mike. Are there any other questions or
comments? Yes, sir.
MR. MARVIN BENOIT:
Mayor and Councilmen, my name is Marvin Benoit, fairly new resident of
here; been here since June of last year; came from Atlanta, Georgia;
grew up in the local area, attended Lamar before I left. But, I 'm in
here because it' s hot.
And, I ' ve just been listening to what' s going on but just from my
observation, it seems that the City staff is putting on an unfair burden
and I think that we need to work together and to come to some
compromises because I believe this man could make the commitment for
whatever he' s been spending putting fences up and taking fences down,
that he could cosmetically make that building look good.
If you the Council could give him a commitment that the Police
Department will keep the glass from being broken. I heard Mr. Rogers
saying that it will do no good to replace the glaze because that night
it' s going to all be broken. well , I just don' t think that should be
when it' s less than one mile away from the Police Department .
EXCERPT FROM REGULAR CITY COUNCIL
SESSION HELD JUNE 21 , 1968 Page 22
MR. BENOIT continued:
But I think cosmetically, if he was to repair it cosmetically, there ' s
no way, if he' s worried about heating and cooling and all that, I think
that yaIll are being unfair to him. And, like I said, I don' t even know
the man, this is just an observation; but, I feel that we should be
trying to compromise in some and like I say I think the burden is too
much. You see people all the time that have a nice looking home on the
outside . It could be a wreck inside but when you drive by it looks nice
and I think that ' s what we should try to do, that as people drive by the
downtown it looks nice .
If he was to repair the first floor, replace all the glass , put good
doors , lock it up, there ' s no way . . . You know, we should be able to
provide police protection to save that . It doesn' t matter that the
inside is all dilapidated. I do believe he should repair the sprinkler
system because we don' t want the fire but for all the money he' s
spending putting fences up, taking fences down, the fence is not going
to solve the problem. The fence looks unsightly; but if he was to take
that money and invest it on the cosmetic outside appearance of that
building then I think we could both be happy. The Council would be
happy, the City would..be happy. It looks nice. The gentleman would be
happy because, you know, he ' s got time to regroup, try to sell the
building, put in housing, anything else.
And, I would just like to ask that yaIll do try to compromise with the
man, you know, because now I think we have stopped negotiation. YaIll
are coming hard on him, he' s backing off-, saying look "I 'm not doing
anything else'! and like I said maybe if yaIll could get together, come
up with some kind of compromise then we can both win - a win/win type
situation. Appreciate the time. Like I said it was just a comment, an
observation.
MAYOR MEYERS: Thank you. Yes . . .
COUNCILMAN SAMUEL:
Sherell, did we ask that the fencing and boarding be taken down at one
town?
MS. COCKRELL:
Yes , let me clarify what the purpose of the fence was in the very
beginning. When there were efforts made to restore that building, that
was the fence for the construction efforts and that' s the type of fence
that was put up. That fence was put up in the City' s right-of-way.
Once that action wasn' t any longer going to take place, the request was
to remove that fence but that was the type of fence and that' s the
reason the fence was up, to my knowledge .
EXCERPT FROM REGULAR CITY COUNCIL
SESSION HELD JUNE 21 , 1988 Page 23
MR. WARCHOL: It was a chain link fence with three strands of barbed
wire on top. The same thing that is up now.
MAYOR MEYERS:
You moved from a wonderful city, Mr. Benoit, Atlanta is a beautiful city
and I ' ve been there several times and we are pleased that you' re here
and just to be sure that you understand in the interest of I guess
equity, it is our intent to try and work with property owners . That' s
how it gets done and I think in every instance, that' s Council ' s wish.
Are there any other questions or comments relative to this item. I
think it ' s safe to say without speaking for you, Mr. Warchol , but if in
fact your silence indicates nothing, Mr. Rogers has indicated to Council
that he has a willingness and desire to meet with staff relatively soon
and work with them to secure the property, make it safe , and, God
forbid, avoid the kind of thing like Mike indicated when we bring 25 or
30, 000 people downtown because somebody wanders into an open building
and then we try to put out the fire after instead of trying to figure
"out how we can, avoid it before which is really what this is all about .
But, Ben,lis that a correct assumption?
MR . ROGERS : Yes .
MAYOR MEYERS: okay. I wanted Council to -know exactly what they would
be dealing with.
COUNCILMAN LEE :
Well , we, generally in these situations , ask the property owner to
develop a plan of work and that ' s essentially what we are doing at this
point and, regardless of whether you call it condemnation or not, the
purpose is to suggest a time frame in which to agree on some plan of
action. And, that' s essentially what we are talking about here .
MR. ROGERS :
Give me thirty days . I 'm not going to be able to do the 11 points that
were listed in that deal . I 'm just talking about as the gentleman said
cosmetically to create the protective area and Ric, whoever takes that
building is going to have to change every window, not only windows,
frames, casings and the whole bit so putting new glass in it is not the
answer at this time; but, from that point of view, I recall and I am
sure you all have seen and probably didn' t note too closely, but that
Stedman Building, it didn' t have one glass window that was in tact . Not
a glass . Every one had been broken out and I guess the kids took
potshots to see, you know, how close they could come to doing it.
That' s the way of life; but, yes , you have a commitment from me,
Sherell , whoever I need to talk with, maybe we will start before we even
have the first meeting and then they can go look at it.
EXCERPT FROM REGULAR CITY COUNCIL
SESSION HELD JUNE 21 , 1988 Page 24
COUNCILMAN COKINOS :
Well , I 'm encouraged to know that Mr. Rogers is taking this step forward
and also with Jack Brooks ' efforts to get funding, I think in all
fairness also that I think that we ought to give them a little time and
see what they can work out and let this positive position take place and
I certainly would agree to give you as much time as you think is
proper . And, I think this City Council should do it .
MAYOR MEYERS :
Are there any other questions or comments? Does Council choose to act
on all of these upon completion and let them go on or take them
individually. what have we been doing on this? Do you want to go on
through?
COUNCILMAN LEE: . . . all together . . .
MAYOR MEYERS : Very good. Next . . .
MS . COCKRELL:
The next set of structures have been condemned by Council . The next six
structures have been condemned by City .Council and the owners were
ordered to either repair or . . . . . .
MAYOR MEYERS :
Let me back up. on the other four condemnations . . . are any of those
people present?
MS. COCKRELL: Not to my knowledge.
MAYOR MEYERS: Because we haven' t discussed that. I want to be sure.
That would be the property at 1122 Hazel , 3125 Magnolia, 2470 Concord
has been present, and 4015 Willie Mae . Okay.
MS . COCKRELL:
Mayor, would you like me to give those individual reports? I thought
unless there were some comments, we weren' t going to go through the
detailed reports.
MAYOR MEYERS: Okay. I just wanted to be sure no one was here.
EXCERPT FROM REGULAR CITY COUNCIL
SESSION HELD JUNE 21 , 1988 Page 25
CITY MANAGER: I think, Mayor, close the hearing.
MAYOR MEYERS :
Close the hearing? If there are no other comments then on those five
properties as discussed including that at 800 Pearl, we would declare
this hearing portion of that condemnation of the five structures
closed. Sherell . . .
CITY MANAGER: Mayor, then, and council , the action being requested is
an ordinance . . . Council consider for adoption an ordinance "entitled an
ordinance finding certain structures to be public nuisances and ordering
their repair or demolition; providing for severability and providing for
a penalty. "
MAYOR MEYERS : Does Council have any questions .
COUNCILMAN COKINOS:
Since we ' ve only got about four of these, Mayor, I ' d like to vote on
them individually because . . . . . .
MAYOR MEYERS:
. . .have no objection. Does anyone have an objection? No objection.
We ' ll vote on them individually
CITY CLERK: Excuse me, please, mayor. Will this be a vote on the
recommen cations or individual votes on the ordinance .
MAYOR MEYERS :
Well, the recommendation as read by the Manager is applicable to each of
the four. We ' ve excluded 2470 Concord but the Councilman obviously
prefers and wants to be able to have some individual . . . . . .
CITY MANAGER:
Mayor, we have not . . . 2470 Concord does not need to be excluded in
order for them to be able to meet the timetable.
MAYOR MEYERS: Oh, that' s correct. That' s correct. Very well .
COUNCILMAN LEE:
Which is essentially the same thing we are talking about 800 Pearl .
EXCERPT FROM REGULAR CITY COUNCIL
SESSION HELD JUNE 21 , 1988 Page 26
MAYOR MEYERS : Yes, I understand but I forgot. I thought we had
determined at first we would exclude it but then we spoke to her and
told her that we would move on but . . . okay, very well .
CITY MANAGER:
Again, we are talking about a thirty day time period for the owner to
come forward to outline to the City what steps they would be willing to
take to resolve the nuisances .
MAYOR MEYERS : Very well, the first property, 800 Pearl .
COUNCILMAN COKINOS :
Now, are we talking about razing or repair or are we talking about
giving Mr. Rogers and Mr. Warchol an opportunity to come forward with
something positive?
CITY MANAGER:
I think it would be helpful to perhaps identify both Sections I and 2 of
the ordinance that' s in your legal instruments section of the agenda.
Section 1 references the five properties 800 Pearl , 3125 Magnolia, 4015
Willie Mae , 1122 Hazel and 21470 Concord as being a . . each building
being a public nuisance and in violation of the Code and Section 2 is an
order that the owner or owners of the following buildings - being those
same five properties - be ordered to either repair or demolish and
remove said structures within 30 days . If such action is not taken, a
request will be made that Council authorize the appropriate demolition
and removal of structures . Now, the process is under Sections 1 and 2
the owners can come forward and identify a program to the city that
would resolve the specific concerns that the City has relative to these
facilities . if they fail to do so then we would have to come back to
the City Council to get authorization from Council to either demolish or
pursue other action so this is the first step to a potential demolition
but not necessarily. It' s up to the owner.
COUNCILMAN COKINOS:
May I ask a question. What effect, Mr. Warchol or Mr. Rogers , would
this have on the motives and plans of Congressman Brooks or the Housing
Authority by coming and asking you to do this within 30 days . You need
more time than that.
MR. ROGERS :
I ' ll let Ric respond to that . I 'm just going to say that maybe we don' t
understand what I 've said. If action is taken to move forward in this
condemnation proceeding, my bets are off.
EXCERPT FROM REGULAR CITY COUNCIL
SESSION HELD JUNE 21 , 1988 Page 27
COUNCILMAN COKINOS : Well , that' s what I thought you meant.
MR. ROGERS:
Yes . I asked for time to set this aside and vote no on this one
ordinance . Give us some time, whatever you think is reasonable just to
do that phase of it and if I succeed, nothing has been lost . If I fail,
you go right back, but I think . . I want to be sure everybody
understands that. If that condemnation proceeding moves forward on that
property today, my bets are off. I wouldn' t do one thing. But, if
given some time, set this aside or vote it no, I walk over there now and
we go to work. . . . . . .
COUNCILMAN LEE : What sort of time frame are you . . . . . .
COUNCILMAN COKINOS :
well , you need more than 30 days for all of this , would you not? I
don' t see why not . . . is there any. . . (Mr. Rogers : 60 days . . . j at
least . . . why should we take action until . . today on this matter until
you can move forward and give us something positive.
MAYOR MEYERS :
As the property owner, Mr. Warchol , do you have any comments relative to
your interest or 'desire to respond to the discussion today? Very simply
put, what . . . what are your plans? What do you plan to do?
MR. WARCHOL:
I already stated, Mayor, that I ' d be more than happy to sit down and
visit with the staff to see what we can work out.
MAYOR MEYERS : I don' t know what that means .
MR. WARCHOL: I don' t know what that is either. I don' t . . . . . . . . .
MAYOR MEYERS : We want a safe, secure building . . . . . .
MR. WARCHOL: I don' t know if that' s a fence or boards or what. I am
not going to continue to run these courses that don' t get us any where.
.I want to do something positive . . . . . . . the City staff sit down and
throw some ideas on the table, you know, because I don' t have any
ideas . I 've tried the boards , I ' ve tried the fences . We tried the
Secret Service when the vice President was here and they couldn' t secure
it, so we 've got to sit down and talk about it . . . . . . I don' t have the
answers , I 've stated that. Willing to do something - yes , I am. I
stated that, too. You' re missing that point .
EXCERPT FROM REGULAR CITY COUNCIL
SESSION HELD JUNE 21 , 1988 Page 28
MAYOR MEYERS : Are there any other questions? Any other comments ,
discussion?
COUNCILMAN COKINOS :
I ' ve got one more comment to make. I think it would be a . . . be a slap
in the face to Congressman Brooks making these efforts up in Washington
and for us to take such an action today. I don' t think . . . you are
talking about a lack of communication, boy, you' ve got it right here .
And, here ' s our Congressman trying to do something to save our . . . the
building . . .
MAYOR MEYERS :
For the benefit of this maybe happening, mention the fact that Senator
Gramm has been working on it, too. We wouldn' t want the media to only
speak to Congressman Brooks .
COUNCILMAN COKINOS :
Well , I didn' t know that . I 'm glad you advised me of that so you' ve got
everybody working on it . Give the person time. I don' t think he wants
special treatment .
MAYOR MEYERS:
The reason they are working on it, Councilman, is they have seen the
building. They understand the desperatness of the situation and any
action today will have no bearing whatsoever on their desire. It would
accelerate their efforts . . . . . .
COUNCILMAN COKINOS :
If you live in Beaumont, everybody' s seen it.
MAYOR MEYERS:
It would accelerate their efforts in my judgment because I think they
would have a deeper appreciation for the severity of the situation.
That ' s my personal opinion. But, I can understand what you are saying.
I just don' t happen to agree .
COUNCILMAN COKINOS:
Thank you. And, I still think . . . I still think we ought to delay
taking action ' til we see what kind of course we are going to take to
help Mr . Warchol out . And, it' s a slap in the face to Congressman
Brooks for us to take action today. You may laugh . . . . . .
EXCERPT FROM REGULAR CITY COUNCIL
SESSION HELD JUNE 21 , 1968 Page 29
MAYOR MEYERS : It' s not a slap in the face to congressman Brooks .
COUNCILMAN COKINOS : Well, this is my personal feelings .
MAYOR MEYERS : Yes, sir.
COUNCILMAN SAMUEL:
Sherell , if today, Council took the action of condemning the place, it
would be another 30 days and then it would move to . . . come back to
Council for demolition, correct .
MS . COCKRELL:
It would be much longer than that . What we are requesting today . . .
COUNCILMAN SAMUEL About how long.
MS. COCKRELL:
L:
. . . is just declare this building a public .nuisance so that we can work
with the property owner in establishing a work program or plan to assist
in renovating that building.
MAYOR MEYERS : And, there would be no condemnation sign posted.
MS . COCKRELL: No condemnation sign posted.
COUNCILMAN SAMUEL:
Okay, about how long would the process be to tearing the building down?
MS . COCKRELL :
It would certainly depend upon the property owner. If he responded to
us within that 30 day frame of preparing a work program and that work
program included making that building non-accessible to the public. If
be Just indicates to us how he plans on securing it and go forward and
tell us about any outstanding proposals or projects that he has in
reference to trying to renovate that property. It depends upon him as
to how long it would be before it would come back to council . we are
willing to work with him as flexible as we possibly can.
EXCERPT FROM REGULAR CITY COUNCIL
SESSION HELD JUNE 21 , 1988 Page 30
COUNCILMAN SAMUEL:
okay, so it could be . . . it' s definitely going to be thirty days before
anything will be done . Following that thirty days , it would be
dependent upon the plan that he brings to the City, City staff, and the
recommendation. okay, if nothing is done at that point, there would be
an additional thirty days before demolition began, so that' s sixty days
if nothing is done .
MS. COCKRELL:
It would be an additional thirty days before we sent out another letter
setting another hearing for Council to act on it. After that, before we
would pursue it, we would then try to pursue - if he doesn' t do anything
or if he hasn ' t prepared a work program and• we bring it back to you and
you - actually condemn the building, we would pursue then to go forward in
the Courts to try to abate the building.
COUNCILMAN SAMUEL:
So, we are talking about possibly ninety days before it would be torn
down .
MS . COCKRELL: . . . or longer before any action . . .
CITY MANAGER:
Councilman, I don' t think we . . . I don' t think you have seen any
previous building brought back to Council before 3 or 4 months for
approval to go ahead and destroy . . . . . .
COUNCILMAN SAMUEL: okay,
CITY MANAGER:
It' s been generally a six-month time frame from the date that this kind
of action is taken until the date we come back to Council . . . . . .
COUNCILMAN SAMUEL: Six months? Okay . . . . . .
CITY MANAGER:
Sure, I think these you have on section 4 are at least six months old.
EXCERPT FROM REGULAR CITY COUNCIL
SESSION HELD JUNE 21 , 1988 Page 31
COUNCILMAN SAMUEL:
Okay, what I am getting at is if nothing were done, that would be
another ninety days before anything would happen, before the building
would be boarded up. If the Council were to not take action today, at
least there' s a commitment to board up the building. So, what happens
between today and those ninety days? It ' s going to remain open,
accessible, and if we don' t take action today, there' s a commitment to
board the building up so . . . . . .
CITY MANAGER:
If council does not take action one or more of these today, then we
would assume they would go ahead and bring the property into
compliance . If they do not, then we would come back to Council with a
new Section I and a Section 2 to start the process again. And, again, I
think it is important to note that the action under Sections 1 and 2 are
not to condemn a building but to notify the property owner that there
has been a identified public nuisance on the building and that they have
a responsibility within a* ,thirty-day time frame to come to the City and
tell them what they intend to do fix it. That ' s all we are asking.
That' s all we ' ve asked Mr. Warchol for some time. Mayor, I was going to
mention procedurally what you' vegenera'lly done if you wanted to act on
individual ones is to have .Counc�,.imembers motion by motion of adopting
the ordinance delete certain addresses .
COUNCILMAN COKINOS : Let me ask you. How long has that building been
vacant?
CITY MANAGER: I don' t know.
COUNCILMAN COKINOS : Anybody know?
MAYOR MEYERS: Mr. Warchol knows .
MR. WARCHOL: Thirteen years .
COUNCILMAN COKINOS :
Thirteen years. Now, what in the world would thirty or sixty more days
to give him where we' d be able to work something out? It' s been empty
for all of these years . What will happen in the next thirty days or
sixty days to give these people an opportunity to come up with a plan
for the City? And, I think it' s . . . I think it' s ridiculous .
COUNCILMAN LEE: The possibility of somebody getting killed.
EXCERPT FROM REGULAR CITY COUNCIL
SESSION HELD JUNE 21 , 1988 Page 32
COUNCILMAN COKINOS :
Well . . . there' s a possibility you walk across the street and get
killed.
COUNCILMA14 LEE : There you go.
COUNCILMAN COKINOS :
And, I think . . I think we ought to delay just . . . delay this thing for
sixty days and see what kind of plan that Mr. Rogers and Mr. Warchol
comes up with.
MR. ROGERS : I 'm not going to have a plan. I 'm going to have it done .
MAYOR MEYERS: Let me make a suggestion . . . . . .
COUNCILMAN COKINOS: To have it done. There you are so why are we going
through this?
MAYOR MEYERS:
Let me make a suggestion in the interim, Councilman. Is there any other
property that Council would like to delete from one motion? . I think
that' s where you are trying to steer me so then we can come back to the
800 Pearl question, that being the other four properties . Does council
care to discuss any of those individually? If not then, do we have a
motion?
COUNCILMAN SAMUEL made the motion to approve; COUNCILMAN MOORE seconded
�the motion.
MAYOR MEYERS :
And a second, thank you. Any further discussion on those four
properties . Those in favor, signify by saying Aye? (All responded
Aye) Opposed? (None) Very well , we will continue the discussion now
on the other, 800 Pearl property. Any Councilmembers comments . . . . . .
COUNCILMAN COKINOS:
well, I 'd still like to see us delay this . . taking action on 800 Pearl
until about sixty days or ninety days, whatever days that Mr. Warchol
and Mr. 'Rogers would like to have . . . . . .
EXCERPT FROM REGULAR CITY COUNCIL
SESSION HELD JUNE 21 , 1988 Page 33
MR. ROGERS : Ric is not involved in this .
COUNCILMAN COKINOS :
Okay, Mr. Rogers, then, and I think we ought to wait and see what . . .
what can be done instead of us going through this condemnation cases and
so forth on 800 Pearl Street.
MAYOR MEYERS : We would entertain a motion.
COUNCILMAN LEE : I would move for approval .
COUNCILMAN BRUMLEY: Second. .
MAYOR MEYERS :
Have a motion and a second for approval . I would now ask for any
further discussion .
COUNCILMAN MOORE : Just one comment.
MAYOR MEYERS: Yes , sir.
COUNCILMAN MOORE :
Mr. Rogers made it perfectly clear that he' s going to be responsible and
it ' s going to be done in thirty. So, it really doesn' t' present a
problem. Mr. Rogers, that was you statement that . . . ?
MR. ROGERS :
Yes, a reasonable time, thirty or sixty days . We' ll get action on this
COUNCILMAN MOORE :
Okay, fine. If that be the case, then we don' t have a problem here
then.
COUNCILMAN SAMUEL: Question.
EXCERPT FROM REGULAR CITY COUNCIL
SESSION HELD JUNE 21 , 1988 Page 34
COUNCILMAN LEE :
But he said if we suggest that we are going to pass this ordinance that
he would not in fact do anything.
COUNCILMA14 MOORE : This is public nuisance . This is not condemnation.
COUNCILMAN SAMUEL: Question.
COUNCILMAN LEE :
I know it' s a public nuisance but he has said . . . he has gone on record
saying that if we suggest this being a public nuisance and vote that
something has to be done within thirty days, he would not come forward
with his assistance, isn' t that . . . am I correct or incorrect?
MR. ROGERS:
I 'm not good at all that mumbo gumbo. . . . If you take action and condemn
that property or move forward to give notice that it is going to be
condemned, I ' ll have no part of it. If you let everything remain as it
is as of right now, I ' ll .gb *-right over there and we' ll go to work and we
will correct the things that• need•; correcting to make it safe. Now,
that ' s as plainly stated as I can state it. So, if you take action to
move forward on this and give us six months or whatever that is , I don' t
need six months . ' I need to be able to walk away from this Council
saying, go ahead, Ben Rogers , we trust you. Get that place fixed up. I
am not involved with Ric . Ric has no bearing on what I am going to do.
I 've got his approval safeguard it and that is what we are going to do.
COUNCILMAN COKINOS :
Let' s give Mr. Rogers a chance. Let' s give him a chance . . .
CITY MANAGER: I ' ve got to . . . . . .
COUNCILMAN SAMUEL: Question. There' s a motion on the floor . I 'd like
to now what that motion is?
COUNCILMAN LEE: The motion is to raze or repair within thirty days.
COUNCILMAN COKINOS: Raze or . . . no.
COUNCILMAN SAMUEL: Raze or repair within thirty days .
EXCERPT FROM REGULAR CITY COUNCIL
SESSION HELD JUNE 21 , 1988 Page 35
COUNCILMAN LEE : Essentially it is to come forward with a plan . . . a
work plan . . .
COUNCILMAN COKINOS:
No, well , this is not what the Mayor . . . . . .
MAYOR MEYERS : Hold it. Let one person talk at a time, everybody' ll get
there . . . everybody will get their questions answered.
COUNCILMAN LEE :
'Let me let me ask the Manager to respond to make the comment he was
going to be making.
CITY MANAGER:
I think it was more of a question. First of all , the definition of
safety relative to this process . has got to be defined, not by the
property owner, but by the City, specifically the Fire Marshall and the
Chief Building Inspector. And, I guess the question is, is Mr. Warchol
either through Mr. Rogers or Mr. Rogers representing the property owner
willing to do that . Secondly, the City' s cause of action is not to Mr.
Rogers . It is to the property owner and 1 think that' s perhaps not in
the form of a 'question but in the form of a comment that we must make
sure is very clear. It is the property owner who is responsible and it
only through the property owner that we have cause or we have action.
MR. ROGERS :
Mr. Haines , I am not invited to do this by any person. There is a need
for something to be done now and I am responding to that need. If
someone was drowning out in that pool , I ' d probably go through that
glass window to try to save them. I wouldn' t go round and round and
round and get there 10 minutes too late. I see the need now. I want to
respond to it. You can either give me that time to do it if you are
really concerned about the City' s . . . . . .
MAYOR MEYERS :
Well , let me . . . let me inject this thought . In the interest of
achieving what we want and recognizing that probably because it' s you,
because I think you can understand that when you are faced with so many
situations like this . . .
MR. ROGERS: I understand that . . .
EXCERPT FROM REGULAR CITY COUNCIL
SESSION HELD JUNE 21 , 1988 Page 36
MAYOR MEYERS:
. . . we have to deal with the property owners . My feeling is we would
probably do well to give Mr. Rogers thirty days to show what he is going
to do and schedule this for another look at that time and our interest
is to get that building safe and secure and if you are saying to us that
you are going to do it, I . . . It' s not my business to ask why. . . . . . .
COUNCILMAN COKINOS : So, therefore, we need a motion to . . . . . .
MAYOR MEYERS :
Well , no, right now we have a motion . . . . . .
COUNCILMAN LEE : I made the motion and I can withdraw that motion.
COUNCILMAN COKINOS : Well, can I ask you to withdraw it?
COUNCILMAN LEE : You don' t have to, I just said that I would.
COUNCILMAN BRUMLEY: I withdraw the second.
MAYOR MEYERS:
The second' s withdrawn and I don' t think we need a motion. we need no
action . We' re dealing here in good faith.
MR. ROGERS: Thank you, very much.
MAYOR MEYERS: Thank you.
COUNCILMAN LEE: Today is the 21st, that meaning on July 21st
MAYOR MEYERS : . . . 21st or thereabouts . . .
COUNCILMAN BRUMLEY: It' ll come back on . . . . . .
MS . COCKRELL: Well , I think . . . let me clarify something and I . . . . . .
EXCERPT FROM REGULAR CITY COUNCIL
SESSION HELD JUNE 21 , 1988 Page 37
MAYOR MEYERS :
We are taking no action on that property and we would like to have it
brought to our attention one month from today.
MS . COCKRELL:
If I 'm correct and Lane needs to help me out here. Legally, we would be
required to begin our whole process all over again. . .
MAYOR MEYERS: Then, do it .
MS . COCKRELL:
. . . as far as notification. Then, that ' s what we' ll do. I just wanted
to clarify that.
MAYOR MEYERS: In view of the offer to achieve what we want, I think we
have to respect that, even though I am dismayed that Mr. Warchol chose
to do nothing or say nothing. It' s not my business to understand it
but: nevertheless, I think that ' s our ultimate goal . I appreciate
everybody concurring. I hope everybody concurred.
END OF EXCERPT.