Brewton council declines to advance repair or demolition orders for two St. Joseph Street buildings after liability debate

Brewton — The Brewton City Council considered two resolutions asking owners of 123 St. Joseph Street and 0 St. Joseph Street to repair or demolish buildings that staff described as fire-damaged and lacking roofs, but the council did not make a motion and the items "will die," the mayor announced.

Brock Holt, who reported the staff findings, told the mayor and council that notices had been sent to the property owners and that "these two properties, one was Billy Billy Cook's old building that had significant fire damage" and that the resolutions were intended to "ask the property owners not demand anything but to ask them to repair or demolish these two buildings to get them back up to code where they're not a danger to the safety." He said owners had 45 days' notice and staff had returned asking for an extension.

Council members raised immediate safety concerns about missing barricades near the sites and reported seeing bricks on the sidewalk. One councilor asked whether barricades that had been set up earlier were still in place; multiple councilors said they were not present that morning. The absence prompted questions about who would bear liability if debris injured a passerby.

An attorney identified in the discussion as Robert advised the council on legal exposure, saying, "If the city knew about it and we're here today, the city knows about it," and that the city could be sued if it took no steps. He explained that if the city paid to demolish a building under the civil process, "a tax lien would be put on the property owner for the cost of demolishing the building," and that fines would arise only if separate nuisance charges were filed and adjudicated in city court.

Councilors also noted practical constraints: some façades are connected to adjacent buildings, meaning partial demolition may require engineering analysis to protect neighboring structures. Holt said the city had an engineer's findings and that a copy would be provided to Miss Hines, the owner referenced by staff.

Several councilors said they wanted to meet with the property owners and develop a consistent plan that would not place an unfair burden on individual owners. One councilor urged tabling the item for owner meetings and a plan; others worried passing the resolution could trigger court action or fines without sufficient owner engagement. After discussion, no member moved to approve either resolution, and the mayor said the two resolutions would die for lack of motion.

The council did not adopt deadlines or further enforcement steps at the meeting. Councilors asked staff to address missing barricades and reiterated public safety concerns. The meeting then proceeded to other business and adjourned.