Was the City Council right to vote?

Last night the Woodstock City Council voted 5-1 to approve a Special Use Permit for Woodstock Christian Life Services that includes the demolition of Grace Hall (subject to one condition that probably won't provide much of a hurdle for them).

Should the Council have voted on this matter last night?

There is a nomination for Landmark status of Grace Hall pending before the City Council. The Woodstock Historic Preservation Commission voted unanimously on November 10, 2008, to recommend Landmark status to the City Council. The City Council would not give immediate attention to the HPC recommendation. Instead, it waited until April 21, 2009, and then quickly tabled that nomination. To date, the Landmark nomination has not shown back up on an Agenda for a City Council meeting.

When the Council was about to vote No on the WCLS petition on April 21, the Mayor handed WCLS and Mark Gummerson an invitation to ask the Council to hold off on a vote until a later date.

Last night City Code Section 7.7.3.1 was read to the Council. "Any person ... may submit an application to the (Historic Preservation) commission requesting that a building ... within the city be designated as a landmark." That application was submitted in proper form to the Historic Preservation Commission.

Like it or not, property rights or not, this is the law in Woodstock.

Furthermore, "Upon nomination (emphasis added) or designation of landmark status, such building ...shall be afforded the protection of the historic preservation ordinance."

Some laws people like, some they don't. But this too is the law in Woodstock. Therefore, when the Historic Preservation Commission approved the motion to recommend landmark designation, Grace Hall moved under the protective umbrella of the historic preservation ordinance. In fact, it may have acquired that protection earlier, when it was nominated for landmark status.

The purpose of the protection is to buy breathing room. It is is demolished, it's too late to say, "OK, it's a landmark."

A Memo from the Deputy City Manager with the packet to the City Council informed them that "A simple majority of the Council is required to approve this motion (to approve the WCLS Special Use Permit, which includes the demolition of Grace Hall.)" The DCM's memo was silent about the pending landmark nomination.

The problem with the "simple majority" sentence is City Code Section 7.7.3.4 (F), which reads "To override a recommendation of the (Historic Preservation) Commission, a favorable vote of three-fourths (3/4) of all elected members of the City Council is necessary."

This is called a "super-majority." A super-majority of seven is 5.25. Because 1/4 of a Council person cannot vote, you have to round that up to a full person, making six (6) the required number of votes needed for a super-majority of the Woodstock City Council.

Although that Section was also read to the Council, it proceeded with its vote and announced that the 5-1 vote carried the motion. One Council member was absent from the meeting, and RB Thompson voted against the Motion. As soon as one present member voted against it, it should have been declared defeated.

The City Attorney explained to me after the meeting that I had made an "interesting" legal argument. And he explained that allowing a minority to control a decision is just not the way a society functions. A majority rules.

He also explained that WCLS was first in line; it requested demolition of Grace Hall (as part of its overall Special Use Permit) before the Landmark nomination petition was filed with the Historic Preservation Commission.

While I didn't read every word in the City Code, I suspect it doesn't say that a property owner remains at the head of the line, if he jumps in the door with a request to tear down what could become a Landmark. It was the WCLS move to demolish Grace Hall that triggered the Landmark nomination, and I'll bet that is exactly what the City Council had in mind in the past when it created City Code Sec. 7.7.3.1.

My continuing question is the City Council (and the entire government in Woodstock) is - What about the City Code? Why do you feel that you can play "three blind mice" (okay, well, seven blind mice) with the City Code?

The City Code is the law in Woodstock. Or is it?