05/23/1977 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e Mr. Lieuallen questioned the nature of the difficulty in making the Palace Hotel a good housing situation, and what the problem was in maintaining permanent occupancy. Ms. Johnson replied that a number of things had to be completed before the Palace Hotel would be suitable for occupancy, primarily fire safety items and making the kitchen operable for serving meals. The rehabilitation took a great deal longer than had been anticipated and the work that had been done could not actually be seen. She said it is still not an attractive place, although it is safer; and it is hoped that the new grant funds will make it more livable and better looking. If the rehabilitation were continued to make the Palace Hotel more attractive, it would attract and hold permanent tenants. Mr. Obie noted there was considerable testimony given before the Joint Housing Committee, and the Committee was very concer~ed in not locking the City into a permanent subsidy for the Palace Hotel. He said the four-month deadline was set to try to bring some point of finality to the problem. e Mr. Delay asked if, after the 120-period was over, the JHC would come back to the City Council with alternatives, if it would be necessary to shut down the Palace Hotel, or if a request for more money would be made. Mr. Obie replied the last two might be the only two alternatives available, but that with the $9,000 amount requested, other alternatives would be explored. Mr. Haws expressed concern about the City recouping the $9,000 that was being requested at this time. Mr. Hamel arrived at the meeting. Mr. Haws wondered if the property were sold, would the City recoup its money. ~fu. Johnson replied it depended on the terms of the sale, noting that in the original contract, the staff and City Council both were opposed to ever owning the Palace Hotel. She said the contract included a penalty default clause in which the City had the option to take over managment or hire additional management to take over the hotel, but the City would never be in a position of owning it. She continued that if the Palace Hotel were sold to a buyer who was not interested in continuing it as a housing unit, there would be some opportunity for the City to recoup some of its money. However, if the buyer wanted to contlnlll! the hOlltllnv. I'r".\~r:t., tho r:lty m11',111 \1nntc t" ,riOt-Inlle the hOI1RinR proRram and would not Kc>t f.tR moony hnc.k. Hr. HnwH a~ain questioned if the City spent $9,000 at this time, how it 1of,,,.1<1 h.. f".,....lhle t." "O'.'1ro IhQI ~'l,I)I)(). e Charles Kupper, BCe direclor, HlllIl at the prelH:!I\l lltn., tilt! <:lty has no licn on the property. If the property were sold, it would be a matter of the C1.ty llnn Hr. Sor!l,enfri deciding on how to rHvftlp ~n., '1Illrlll nvpr "lnr! hpynnrl thp mortg"lBP rppAvment. He felt it did not make any sense to place a city lien on the property 4-/1. 5/23/77--17