Interest in purchasing the old Oxford Township hall on W. Burdick St. is still there, but the village council would like $75,000 knocked off the sale price and the old fire hall thrown in the deal before it will agree to fork over any cash.
‘I think it’s important that the village owns this entire complex for a number of reasons,? said Councilman Tony Albensi.
The township’s been negotiating over the village’s potential purchase of the vacant 2,500-square-foot building (vacant since September 2006) and all the parking that goes with it on-and-off since June 2007.
For the longest time, based on council discussions and votes, it appeared the village was planning to purchase it for $262,500, making three payments over a two-year period.
However, council last week voted 5-0 to reject that price for nine reasons including matters related to the title, environmental issues, utility easements, property encroachments, building code violations, the Americans with Disabilities Act, outstanding issues concerning the old fire hall and the condition of the former township office’s exterior and interior.
Village officials then voted 5-0 to make a counter-offer of $187,500 in light of the $75,000 worth of repairs the old township hall requires according to inspections done by Village Building Official Jim Wilson.
If the township board doesn’t wish to discount its sale price, council gave officials the option of paying to have the repairs done themselves and then selling it to the village for the full $262,500.
Either way, council made it clear it wants control of the township’s equity in the old fire hall, a 36-year-old yellow pole barn behind the village offices, included in the deal.
Originally, the old fire hall was going to be included at no extra charge. However, a disagreement over the liability for potential environmental issues concerning the property, should they ever arise in the future, led the township board to take it out of the proposed deal.
Supervisor Bill Dunn was not happy with the fact that it took council so long to ultimately reject the proposed purchase agreement, then come up with a new counteroffer at this late date.
‘I can’t believe we’ve waited a year to do this,? he said. ‘I can’t tell you how disappointed I am. We took this damn long, spent this amount of money on attorneys and whatever to get to this stage.?
Dunn was especially upset because it looked like the whole matter was a done deal prior to the council meeting.
‘Up to about a week ago, we thought everything was fine,? he said.
Ultimately, Dunn blamed both the village and township attorneys for the delays. ‘If we were single businessmen, we’d of had this thing done in a week,? the supervisor said. ‘Why in the world did it take a year??
Village President Chris Bishop noted the ‘level of transparency? required for a transaction of this nature between governments is ‘much higher? than between business people in the private sector.
According to Bishop, a lot of the survey and title work that raised some of the issues which led to council’s rejection of the $262,500 purchase agreement were not done ‘until very recently.?
Councilwoman Stiles defended the village’s cautious approach as safeguarding the interests of the residents.