Committee advances unsolicited proposal for old police headquarters, sending plan to full council

A Homewood City Council committee voted to forward an unsolicited proposal to the full City Council to convert the city-owned former police headquarters into a restaurant with adjoining public green space.

The committee voted to advance the proposal by a 3-1-1 tally, with one "no" vote and one abstention, and the item will be considered by the full council at a later meeting. The motion was moved by Mr. Waltney and seconded by Mr. Brandt, and the committee chair recorded the vote as "3 to 1 to 1."

The proposal, presented by Mike Milan, would have the buyer pay the agreed purchase price for the property and use those funds to design and install the park; if construction costs exceed the purchase price, the proposer would cover the overage, Milan said. "Whatever work is done comes out of that purchase price. If it is less than the purchase price, then we get the difference. If it is more than the purchase price, he pays the overage," Milan said during the meeting. He told the committee the design would prioritize green space—he estimated 60 to 65% of the site would be park.

Supporters on the committee said the plan matched long-standing public preference for a modest, nonresidential use and a downtown green space. "That chamber was full" during earlier meetings that advocated for downtown green space, one councilor said, noting prior public hearings and long-running community interest. Several council members said a restaurant would generate sales tax revenue for the city and could be paired with a well-maintained park without a large up-front city capital outlay.

Committee members pressed for specifics about parking and public access. During discussion staff and the proposer provided counts and options: the project would remove parking currently adjacent to the police station and a fueling bay, and committee members and staff worked through differing tallies. At one point staff stated the total spaces associated with the property are "13" for the on-property parking and "21" when including the fueling bay and adjacent lot; another committee speaker summarized the net loss as "21 spots." Committee members asked staff and the proposer to clarify where replacement parking could be located and whether nearby public parking, hotel spaces and alley configurations could offset losses.

On the question of maintenance and ownership, Milan said the park would be city property, but the proposer sought an agreement to maintain portions of the park for a negotiated fee tied to tax receipts. "The park that ... the money we pay for the land is gonna be used to design and install. We would it's city property, but it's so important to the success of the restaurant that we would like to maintain for a negotiated fee," Milan said. City staff indicated the city could include the park in existing downtown maintenance contracts or add it to contracts already in place.

The committee debated whether to solicit other proposals. Some members argued a broader solicitation could result in a taller office or mixed-use project that the public has previously opposed; others said more time and information would be appropriate before committing to the proposer's plan. After discussion, the committee voted to forward the unsolicited proposal for consideration by the full City Council.

Next steps noted in the meeting record: staff will prepare materials for the full council, refine parking counts and property boundaries, and survey the precise acreage that would transfer to a private restaurant operator. The committee did not adopt final sale terms or an agreement during the meeting; it advanced the proposal to the council for further review and possible future approvals.

Ending: The committee's action sends the unsolicited proposal to the City Council for formal consideration; staff will return with clarified parking numbers, parcel surveys and draft terms before any final sale or maintenance agreements are executed.