Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Land Use topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Commissioners approve release of restrictive covenant on former grammar school with conditional $800,000 repayment

Jefferson County Commission · April 21, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The commission agreed to release a restrictive covenant on property previously transferred to the City of Birmingham; the city guaranteed that if it sells the site within a 10-year period it will pay the county the equivalent of $800,000, described in the meeting as the countys 50% interest.

Jefferson County commissioners approved an agreement to release a restrictive covenant on a former grammar school that the county transferred to the City of Birmingham in 2021.

County counsel explained that when the county sold the property it included a restrictive covenant requiring public use ownership for 10 years. The city now seeks the covenants removal so a developer can proceed with a proposed development. As consideration, the city agreed that if it sells the property before the 10-year period lapses it will pay the county the equivalent of $800,000, which county staff described as the countys 50% interest in the property.

Commissioners were told the arrangement would allow the city to continue development while protecting the county's financial interest if the property is sold prematurely. The county attorney said the proposed payment mechanism would compensate the county if ownership changes in that 10-year window and that proceeds would be credited to District Two.

A motion to release the covenant and accept the city's conditional repayment agreement was moved and seconded and carried by voice vote during the meeting. No formal roll-call tally was recorded in the transcript.

The commission did not record additional restrictions or reporting conditions during the recorded discussion; the agreement was presented as a compromise to enable the developer's project while preserving a path for the county to recoup its interest if the property is sold within the agreed period.