Accountability 101: The City Has Itself to Blame for the "305" Fiasco

City and state officials will be on hand to discuss the fate of the former service station at 305 Main Street, at the Sons of Italy, 7;00 p.m.,Tuesday night (4/8), and at North Street School, 7:00 p.m. Wednesday night (4/9). Why should you care about 305?

We’ve posted a fair amount about “305”. In an early post, one year ago, “Putting the 305 Main Street Decision on a Solid Foundation”, we called for fact-based decision making about 305. In a more recent post, just a few days ago, “Fat Cats and Starving Artists,” we discussed the how the building figures into attempts at arts based economic development in the City. Why do we keep posting on 305?

Simply put, 305 is a piece of the larger whole-- the larger whole of how government works, or does not work, in the City of Geneva. 305 is a case study of private interests shaping public policy, and the consequences—and costs, for taxpayers and citizens. In our fact-based point of view, at every turn in the saga of 305, the common good was abandoned in favor of perceived private gain, while the public, many public officials, and the local paper, have not been paying attention.

Let’s go back to the year 2000. A small group of local investors and developers are interested in some sort of large, downtown project, bolstered by lots of taxpayer dollars. A feature article about Phil Beckley, appearing in the local newspaper then headed by Phil Beckley, sets the stage: (Read the whole story by clicking here).

Beckley, the paper reports, spent time “talking and smoking cigars” with Rob Gladden, head of the local Chamber of Commerce. Philanthropist and businessman Carl Fribolin then called upon Beckley “when Smith Opera House officials decided to pursue building an arts and cultural center behind some downtown buildings.” The article describes how Beckley and Fribolin would sometimes discuss the project, and other topics, on the deck at Fribolin’s home, noting they would “drink Absolut and tonics and look down at a pond and pasture on the property.”

Our “Fat Cats and Starving Artists” post explains in great detail the plan that emerged from those and other conversations. Basically, it calls for the restoration of the 305 property which would then serve as the entrance to a new performing arts/convention facility between the Smith and 305. However, the “Hutton Report,” drafted by Hutton and Philip Morris, concluded that Geneva is not ready for the large performing arts/convention facility. (Read the full report here). It appears to us that, despite clear recommendations to the contrary, local developers, pushed on with project, and approached the City about the City’s acquiring the 305 property, rehabilitating it, and eventually transferring it to an arts group for further development.

305 was vacant and deteriorating. But it was also a historically significant structure on Main Street. City Council, rightly, was interested in helping to preserve it. And the plan seemed to have merit. But there was a problem: The City did not, then, own 305. Normally, when a property is behind in its taxes, as 305 was, the City would, by law, take ownership of properties. Not so with 305, for two reasons.

First, there were federal liens on the property, which means that the federal government was first in line to acquire the property. Second, and perhaps most important in the long run, because of the building’s history as a service station, there was a strong likelihood of environmental contamination on the property.

Whoever assumed title to the property (federal government or local government) would also take on any liability for cleaning it up. Because municipal governments are not required, under law, to take responsibility for contaminated private property, it was not only legally difficult but practically unsound for the City to petition for discharge of the federal lien and take ownership.

Unfortunately, the discussions about the City taking possession of 305 and buying into the arts development plan were never public, and the City was went ahead with the plan, with disastrous results. In our view, Open Meetings Law would require a public discussion, and if there had been one, the public likely would have demanded the City not take on the liability, and let developers acquire the property on their own.

In 2004, the City of Geneva’s petition to the federal government to forgive the lien and allow the City to take ownership (and environmental responsibility) of the building was granted. In a strange twist, former Mayor Cass—who voted to take possession of 305 and former mayoral candidate Phil Beckley—who proposed the City take possession of 305, both campaigned to demolish. Where is the accountability?