Grace Hall - what's up?

With the clock ticking on Grace Hall, residents have to wonder what's going on with efforts to obtain Landmark status and halt demolition and what will happen on April 6. Not on April 21, the drop-dead date for City Council action on a demolition permit, but on April 6.

A very interesting thing happened back on October 7, 2007. The Woodstock City Council adopted Ordinance 08-O-62 that contains very explicit language setting forth conditions on private residents of Woodstock who had no knowledge of those conditions before the City Council imposed them.

The City Council really went easy on Woodstock Christian Life Services (WCLS) and, at the same time, imposed conditions on Dan and Caryl Lemanski that were impossible to meet - then or ever, and certainly not within seven months.

What the City Council needs to explain to the public is exactly where did those conditions that showed up in this Ordinance come from? They certainly didn't come out of the marathon City Council meeting on October 7, 2008! I was there, from start to finish.

One condition (C) is that WCLS "shall consult with the Lemanskis ... to work out a compromise to demolition of Grace Hall."

OK, this one is not so hard to measure but, when you look at the wordsmithing, it really doesn't say anything at all. It doesn't say that they "shall compromise"; it says that they shall "consult" to compromise. There is no requirement to do other than "consult". There is no requirement to reach a compromise! Very careful lawyer wording. You just beat around the point, without every making the point.

The second condition (D)? WCLS "shall review and consider implementing alternative site plans and adaptive reuse alternatives which would preserve Grace Hall."

Just more of the same languaging that forces no conclusion. WCLS "shall review and consider..." OK, so they can sit there and go through motions, knowing all the time that their goal is, and remains, to demolish Grace Hall.

And now the kicker, the condition that kills the deal right from the start. E: "The Lemanskis shall produce a contract for the purchase of Grace Hall and its removal from its current location" and present said contract to the City by April 6, 2009. Closing must occur by May 21, 2009.

I filed a FOIA request with the City on November 12, 2008, asking for documentation that would explain where these conditions came from, since they were not discussed at the open City Council meeting.

The response from the City was written on November 17, 2008: "A review of the City's files reveals no documents responsive to this request."

Oh, really? So who directed the City Attorney to draft what would become Ordinance 08-O-62 with the impossible-to-meet conditions on the Lemanskis? These conditions guarantee the failure of the Lemanskis to perform.

Why would the City impose such a burden on two residents by name? What precedent is the City creating?

Somebody directed the City Attorney to draft the Ordinance as he did. Who did? The City Manager? The Mayor?

The City Council should repeal Ordinance 08-O-62 as unfair and unconscionable.

Furthermore, the City Council should provide an adequate explanation to the public as to why it has dragged its heels on considering the approval by the Woodstock Historic Preservation Commission regarding Landmark status for Grace Hall.

According to Minutes of the October 7, 2008, City Council meeting, "Councilman Turner said he does not like the Historic Preservation Commission feeling as though they are unappreciated."

Wow! If he thinks they felt unappreciated up until that point, he ought to check with them now!