No change for City Council on Great Falls

AUBURN — A city direction on the Great Falls Arts Center will have to wait until Dec. 20 at the earliest, councilors said Monday.

Great Falls debate
Amber Waterman/Sun Journal

"I am disgusted by the people that represent me," said Chris Camire as he addressed the Auburn City Council Monday night. Camire is upset over the city's decision to close and raze the Great Falls building.

Councilors heard from arts group supporters, Realtors and former councilors Monday night during open session comment periods. All called the building, home to Community Little Theatre and other community groups, a boon to the community.

But councilors didn't make any move to alter a controversial decision they made on Nov. 15 to move all tenants out of the building and knock it down next June.

"I am disgusted by the people that represent me," said Chris Camire, of 1386 Minot Ave. He criticized councilors for voting to demolish the school without a formal agenda item.

"I feel the citizens have been represented improperly," he said. "We need to be aware of what you are doing. If we don't know, the city can change without us being able to do anything about it."

Former City Councilor Ron Potvin was more practical, warning councilors that their constituents were not happy.

"Everything you've done may be all legal and proper, but what's not being spoken of is the political process," Potvin said. "You can legally suspend your own rules, but remember that the voters can suspend you."

Councilors voted at the Nov. 15 meeting to demolish the building. That item was not on the agenda, but councilors suspended their rules of order to consider it. Councilors voted to demolish 4-3, with Councilors Mike Farrell, Dan Herrick, Ray Berube and Belinda Gerry supporting demolition.

The decision spurred discussion in the community, with Community Little Theatre offering Wednesday to meet with councilors to discuss paying $1 to take over the building. Before that could happen, the theater group needs to know exactly how much work the building needs and what property CLT would get.

None of those questions were on Monday's agenda. The only formal item concerning the building on the agenda was a workshop discussion about the deeds on the land.

The property was granted to the city in 1874 as home to Edward Little High School. That deed required the land be used as long as it's used as home to Edward Little High School. That was updated in 1961, letting the city use the building and grounds for other municipal purposes.

City Manager Glenn Aho said that could mean the city would be unable to sell the building. He won't know for sure until the city hires researchers to review the deeds. He recommended against paying for that research yet, however.

"If I call an attorney to start working on that, it costs $100," Aho said. "But why spend that money if it's not going to become an issue, or if it could be solved in another way."

City Councilor Ray Berube, one of the four councilors who supported demolition, said the city could retain ownership of the building, giving the theater group a long-term lease to cover costs.

"I'm convinced we could work something out with CLT that would make the people in this community very happy," Berube said.

Aho suggested councilors schedule a special meeting on Dec. 13 devoted to the question of the Great Falls building. All but two councilors, Ward 1's Farrell and Ward 4's Herrick, said they could be there.

Councilor Eric Samson said it didn't make sense to meet unless all seven councilors could be present.

"If this is going to happen, we need the consensus of all councilors," he said.

The next possible scheduled meeting is Dec. 20.

staylor@sunjournal.com

Stay informed — Get the news delivered for free in your inbox.

I'm interested in ...

In order to make comments, you must verify your account.

In order to comment on SunJournal.com, you must use your real name and include the town in which you live in your profile. A member of our staff will call you to verify this information. To join in, fill out your user profile completely and check the box "please verify my status." We'll get back to you within one business day to verify your account.

Login or create an account here.

Our policy prohibits comments that are:

  • Defamatory, abusive, obscene, racist, or otherwise hateful
  • Excessively foul and/or vulgar
  • Inappropriately sexual
  • Baseless personal attacks or otherwise threatening
  • Contain illegal material, or material that infringes on the rights of others
  • Commercial postings attempting to sell a product/item
If you violate this policy, your comment will be removed and your account may be banned.

Advertisement

Displaying comments, from newest to oldest

craftydad's picture

AND they are both against

AND they are both against keeping the school. Man up and be there or get rid of their vote. That makes it 3for keeping the school and 2 to tear it down.

craftydad's picture
verified

SURPRISE!!!!!SURPRISE!!!!!SURPRISE!!!!!

The 2 councilors (Herrick and Farrell) who are bullying the hardest to get rid of this wonderful and useful building, CAN'T (or don't want to) make it to a special meeting with this as the sole topic. Color me VERY surprised. TOOOO CONVENIENT. The two of you ought to be ashamed and if you don't have the time to go to a meeting about such a hotly contested topic (like its not important to you), maybe you should consider resigning your post. I applaud Mr. Potvin and Mr. Camire for speaking up. Maybe they should be offered your seat on the council. The way your acting and conducting business, a brick could get voted onto the council over you. Follow the rules of order and stop suspending them everytime its CONVENIENT for you, councilmen.

tron's picture

as much as I disagree with

as much as I disagree with this decision, and believing that at least one of these people have a conflict of interest, I have to defend their attendance record. Council meetings and workshops are dependably routine and they attend most, if not all of them, but to criticize them for NOT being able to attend a special meeting is bogus. The both have lives and they do their best to schedule around their council duties.

angelsx34eva's picture

What The Problem...

Here is the City Councilor's decided to have this meeting...with no public knowledge of it to the City of Auburn, and voted to tear this building down...When this got out, and rightfully so, the public was outraged. It's not CLT's only homeplace, but there are others that call this building home...I mean, can you imagine being a tenant in that building, sitting down to coffee and the newspaper and having this story right in front of you...on the front page?....With no knowledge of it at all? People who are tenants there spend a lot of time there. You can compare it to backing out of your driveway and seeing a FOR SALE sign on your lawn. This was down very privately; I don't know why; and yes, people have a right to be angry. It is not an eyesore in the neighborhood; look around the corner past Florians; the city was about to tear down an apartment building, no one has lived in for years, the back porches were falling into the river and the Historical Society came screaming STOP...this might be considered an historical building for Auburn...Are you kidding me?....Something is still going on b/c that building is still there...Why hasn't the historical society come running after this building?..A gem stone in my book...Our own High School STILL doesn't have it's accreditation back as a high school. What are we doing about that?The City of Auburn has a lot of work to do...Would the councilors care to comment on this?...Just wondering, as I am a taxpayer and I do live in this city.

akuma's picture

Give it to CLT

From someone who uses the building on a bi-weekly basis, that place is a dump. If CLT wants it, then let them have it for $1 and save the money from heating and tearing it down. The problem we will be right back to though is that CLT can't afford the upkeep on a building like that, and the city will be called upon to take care of it again.

mbthedragon's picture

Seeing as a picture is worth

Seeing as a picture is worth a thousand words, and a lot of people have fond memories of the building, give them all a photograph to look at from time to time. AFTER the building is raised!

fixit001's picture

Disgusting

Mike Farrell, Dan Herrick, Ray Berube and Belinda Gerry should all be fully investigated including all bank accts. who is going to use this property after it is razed???? and if you can find who really wants this site I bet you can find a link to those who are behind this action! If there is no one in the shadows then they may be just guilty of bullish and improper behavior however when a group of people espeicaly goverment officals it is normaly graft(opps sorry political donations) that spur thier activity!!

Ginger1's picture

Zip it Aho.

Mr. Aho talks about his courageous effort to save the city that 100$ to call an attorney or whatever; too bad mr Aho wasn't as frugal with the city's money when re-negotiating his own contract with the city. Does Aho Drive a city vehicle at work with free gas ? "why spend THAT money"??.

Gil's picture

Sounds pretty cut and dry.

Seems the city owns the land and buildings and since 1961 can do whatever they please with it, under certain guidelines. I think if the CLT wants to take over the buildings it definitely falls into the category of municipal use. However, I believe they need to actually pay some type of actual rent for the use of the land and building, leaving the city of Auburn as landlord with an income from the building and a responsibility of it's upkeep. The CLT can then rent the space out for other uses in order to keep it while maintaining their familiar space to rehearse and put on performances. The profits of CLT, if any, can go to equipment, costumes, etc. Sounds like a win-win. What it doesn't sound like is that the city of Auburn has the right to destroy the building and not replace it with, as the deed requires, something that falls in the category of "municipal use".

Advertisement