Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Comments topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Resident raises transparency concerns about planned Washington Mall demolition and sale
Summary
A resident told commissioners he has repeatedly requested documents about the Washington Mall demolition and sale, saying no fully executed documents were produced and alleging taxpayer exposure to up to $6 million in demolition costs; the transcript records a deed dated June 12, 2025 and a recorded sale on July 1, 2025.
During the public-comment period, resident Thomas Lonich (South Shore Bay) told the commissioners he has repeatedly sought documentation about the planned demolition of the Washington Mall and an associated redevelopment transaction. Lonich said county and redevelopment authority staff told him no executed documents responsive to his requests were available and raised concerns about taxpayer exposure.
Why it matters: Lonich alleged the county could use taxpayer funds for mall demolition costs and said deed and recording dates indicate recent ownership transfer activity.
What the resident said: Lonich said the mall’s deterioration resulted from owner decisions not to maintain the property and that demolition could cost “up to $6,000,000.” He said a deed dated June 12, 2025 was recorded in the Washington County Recorder of Deeds on July 1, 2025, and that the ownership entity sold the mall to “79 70 Associates,” described in the transcript as having an affiliation with Chapman Business Properties, for $12,750,000. Lonich told the board he had asked the county and the redevelopment authority for documents and been told “no document currently exists as responsive to your request.”
Response and next steps: A commissioner invited Lonich to attend a planned groundbreaking ceremony. The transcript does not record any county staff presenting an executed contract or demolition agreement during the meeting, nor does it show a formal county financing commitment on the record.
Discussion vs. decision: This item occurred during public comment; it elicited no formal board action in the meeting transcript.
Limitations: The transcript reflects the resident’s claims and the county’s verbal response about document availability; it does not provide independent evidence of the sale terms, demolition contract, or county financial commitments beyond the resident’s statements and the invitation to the ceremony.
