Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Commercial Lease topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Hopewell council approves one-year lease of former warming-shelter space to City of Refuge
Summary
The Hopewell City Council approved a one-year lease of a 2,160-square-foot portion of city property at 102 10th Street to the nonprofit City of Refuge for $1,250 per month; council took a brief recess while staff located the correct lease resolution and no members of the public spoke.
The Hopewell City Council voted to approve a one-year lease of city-owned property at 102 10th Street to the nonprofit City of Refuge, permitting the group to operate the space as a Hope Center, council members said during a special meeting.
City staffer Mister Bennett told the council the leased portion would be about 2,160 square feet and had been used previously as a warming shelter. "In 102 10th Street, Hopewell, Virginia, this will be a portion of the property, which is, 2,160 square feet that was previously utilized by the city of Hopewell as a warming shelter," Bennett said, and said the proposed rental amount was $1,250 per month for a one-year term.
The council opened a public hearing on the disposition of city property but had no speakers signed up. Bennett and council members noted the packet contained the wrong resolution text for the lease; Bennett said, "it appears there was an error in what was emailed," and the council recessed so staff could locate the correct resolution text before proceeding. The public hearing remained open during that process and was closed with no public comment.
After the recess, Vice Mayor Joyner moved to approve the resolution to lease the emergency crew building at 102 10th Street to the City of Refuge under the form lease, and Councilor Ellis seconded. A roll-call recorded six 'yes' votes by Vice Mayor Joyner, Councilor Harris, the mayor (name unclear in the transcript), Councilor Ellis, Councilor Day and Councilor Raffoli; the mayor announced the motion had passed. The council then adjourned.
The lease approved by the council was described by staff as the form lease prepared by the city attorney's office; the agenda packet contained an attachment identified as the form lease but, according to staff, the resolution text accompanying that attachment in the packet was incorrect. The council did not specify a resolution number in the meeting record. The agenda item was described as a disposition through lease of city-owned property and the lease term, area and monthly rent were stated on the record as noted above.
The council did not take additional votes, and no public commenters addressed the lease during the public hearing. The meeting concluded immediately after the approved action.
