Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Redevelopment Fund Sears Building topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council approves $324,925 appropriation from redevelopment fund to cover Sears Building costs
Summary
City Council approved a $324,925 additional appropriation from the Columbus Redevelopment Fund (Fund 4451) to pay operational and maintenance costs associated with the city‑owned Sears Building; council discussed insurance and future strategy for vacant properties.
The Columbus City Council on May 20 approved the second reading of an ordinance to appropriate $324,925 from the Columbus Redevelopment Fund (Fund 4451) to cover operational and maintenance expenses tied to the city‑owned Sears Building.
City staff said Fund 4451 is supported by interest income and rental revenue and has sufficient budget capacity to support the request; they emphasized the fund is not a tax increment financing (TIF) fund. The appropriation includes money to cover an additional insurance deductible of $25,000 and a $25,000 repair contingency, among other operating needs.
A member of the public, Carrie Synovaldi, asked whether insurance claims had been fully resolved and questioned appropriating funds for items that might be reimbursed by insurance. Staff replied that the deductible and contingency are included in the appropriation request and that the fund’s operating budget can support the expense.
Council members repeatedly said they prefer the city to reduce its footprint in real‑estate ownership over time. One councilmember noted the downtown plan is nearing completion and said that plan will guide future decisions about city‑owned properties downtown, including the Sears Building.
The ordinance passed its second reading by a unanimous recorded vote. The council asked administration to continue to consider strategies—such as private partnerships or disposition options—for reducing long‑term city exposure to vacant commercial properties.
No additional public hearings were conducted during the second reading. A written comment from a resident, Brian John Slater, urged seeking private partners or selling the building rather than continuing to appropriate city funds for its upkeep.
