Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Fiscal Oversight topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents press council over $64,000 design contract and $48,000 payment tied to Crown Bank review
Summary
A resident complained that professional services for design work on the Crown Bank public-safety site proceeded in July and produced billings of roughly $48,000 despite the council later deciding not to buy the building; administrators said due diligence reports were produced and that leadership had been kept informed.
During the public-comment period, resident David Breeden asked why professional service design work—cited at roughly $64,000—had advanced before council completed all due diligence, and why an approximately $48,000 payment appeared on the bill list after the administration decided not to purchase the Crown Bank building.
Breeden said the mayor signed an agreement of sale in July and that contract language and appraisals, some of which were dated months earlier, raised questions about timing and whether staff advanced design work too soon. “This was not the case of an emergency,” Breeden said, arguing that “poor planning, no planning, or half-hazard planning does not constitute an emergency.” He urged greater fiscal caution.
City staff and the mayor replied that the decision not to move forward with the purchase was a joint decision involving council leadership, that professional services were advanced with leadership knowledge, and that due diligence reports (structural, façade, environmental, geotechnical) were generated as part of the assessment. Staff said some reports prompted the owner to install sidewalk protection and that the administration had an out in the agreement of sale if conditions warranted.
The consent agenda, which included payment items, passed on a recorded roll-call vote that night. The council did not reverse previously approved professional services payments during the meeting; staff said they would continue to provide requested documents and explanations to residents and council members who asked for further clarification.
Breeden also raised process concerns about timing and the availability of appraisal and engineering information before votes; staff responded that some appraisals were not finalized for release and that the administration had briefed council leadership during the due-diligence period. No additional enforcement or audit action was taken on the floor that evening.
