Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Mall Demolition Public Comment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Resident questions $6M mall demolition plan and reports denied Right-to-Know request
Summary
At the Washington County commissioners meeting a resident asked about an allegedly approved $6 million demolition project for the Washington Mall and said his Right-to-Know request for related documents was denied.
A Washington County resident told the commissioners he had requested records about the county’s involvement in a plan to demolish the Washington Mall and said his Right‑to‑Know request was denied.
Thomas Lonich of South Germantown spoke during public comment and said the county, in collaboration with the Washington County Redevelopment Authority and Chapman Properties, had committed up to $6,000,000 for demolition of the mall. He asked the board for documentation supporting the project and a formal finding of blight and said his Right‑to‑Know application for meeting notes, agreements, studies, memoranda and ownership documents was denied with the response, “No such document exists.”
Why it matters: Demolition of a major commercial property and use of public funds for redevelopment may affect property rights, potential liens, future tax revenues and local redevelopment plans. A Right‑to‑Know denial for records that a resident expects to exist raises transparency questions that can influence public trust and future decision‑making.
What the speaker asked: Lonich asked whether demolition costs would be repaid by property owners or developers, whether liens would be imposed if developers later sold the property, and requested the records the county used to reach any blight determination and to negotiate demolition terms. He said the media had quoted a county commissioner and a Chapman Properties representative as supporting demolition and development plans and that he intended to return to the board to press those questions further.
What the record shows: The public‑comment segment records Lonich saying he submitted a Right‑to‑Know request for “any and all notes, meeting notes, calendars, agreements, memorandums, agendas, minutes, emails, texts pertaining to the demolition project,” and that the county’s response stated those documents did not exist. The meeting record does not include a formal county response to Lonich’s claims during the session, and the solicitor did not provide a substantive reply in open session other than to note other unrelated items the solicitor was tracking.
Next steps: Lonich said he would return to raise additional questions. The commissioners did not announce any immediate follow‑up or a staff report on the Right‑to‑Know denial during the meeting.
