Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Code Enforcement Demolition topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents raise concerns over demolition, asbestos testing and code enforcement at Sedalia council meeting
Summary
Multiple residents urged the City Council to pause or revise demolition practices, demanded clearer asbestos testing and abatement protocols, and criticized the city's code-enforcement process and legal costs during public comments.
Several residents used the public-comment portions of the March 17 Sedalia City Council meeting to press the council on demolition procedures, asbestos and lead testing, and broader code-enforcement practices.
At the budget hearing, Debbie Covington, who gave her address as 2601 East 12th Street, asked the council to remove demolition funding from the budget or delay demolitions until the city implements better environmental testing protocols. “In recent events with DNR stepping in and stopping the home demolitions because you all don't properly test for asbestos and lead, I ask that that be completely taken out of the budget for this year and maybe reevaluated at a later time,” Covington said during the public hearing.
Other members of the public repeated similar concerns during the Good and Welfare segment. Mike Fisher said he had not received a clear explanation for why asbestos testing was not completed before some demolitions and suggested possible motives ranging from cost savings to negligence. “Why was the asbestos testing not done?” Fisher asked the council.
Residents also criticized code-enforcement practices and urged changes to complaint and enforcement procedures. Several speakers asked for a stronger shelter system for people experiencing homelessness, more consistent enforcement timelines, and a reconsideration of heavy legal spending in favor of infrastructure repairs. One speaker requested the city provide clearer written codes or manuals so property owners know the specific requirements that can lead to enforcement actions or loss of occupancy.
City staff and councilors responded during the meeting that demolition and enforcement actions typically follow long processes, that individual properties receive notices and opportunities to comply and that certain projects had extended case histories. Staff also said the Department of Natural Resources had been involved in review of environmental concerns and that additional costs associated with more thorough testing would need to be calculated.
The comments prompted councilors to flag the issue for staff follow-up; council members said they would review demolition procedures, verify environmental-testing protocols and consider whether additional community communication or policy changes are needed.
