Essex House collapse poses questions, concerns

Date: 12/19/2014

HOLYOKE – As the demolition equipment is transported to Holyoke, questions remain on why it took city officials so long to demolish the Essex House.

City Council President Kevin Jourdain told Reminder Publications he is considering an ordinance that would standardize the way the city handles abandoned buildings to provide greater transparency moving forward.

Part of the long-vacant building collapsed on Dec. 11, damaging a building that houses a beauty salon and sending nine families living in another building into temporary shelter.

 At a press conference on Dec. 12, Mayor Alex Morse declined to find blame for the collapse, which he called “unfortunate but not unexpected,” and City Councilor Gladys Lebron-Martinez said, “It’s time to move forward – forget the blaming.”

Morse did mention that three city councilors voted against the allocation of funds and added, “Unfortunately, in government everything can be politicized.”

Morse said the top three floors of the eight-floor building would be removed first to prevent any additional collapses and potential damage to adjoining buildings.

The City Council had approved an allocation of $1.4 million for the demolition, but Morse said he is not sure if the manner the demolition must now be handled will add to the cost or not.

Speaking on Dec. 16, Morse’s Chief of Staff Rory Casey said the necessary equipment is still en route to Holyoke. Once it arrives here, demolition will take three to five weeks to complete.

He explained the original plans before the collapse had the contractors build a scaffold around the building and take it down “brick by brick.” The collapse has complicated those plans.

Right now the contractors are preparing for the demolition by placing equipment within the bakery next to the Essex he added.

Jourdain was one of the three councilors who voted against the funding in September, but he didn’t oppose the demolition of the building. He wrote on his Facebook page, “As far as the second vote for funding, I proposed another solution with the goal of holding the out of town owners accountable while at the same time demolishing and securing the building. Everyone on the City Council supported the demolition of the building just like we did in our first unanimous vote in January.”

In speaking with Reminder Publications, Jourdain provided a timeline of the decision making process. In May 2013, the city acquired the property for failure of paying property taxes. Jourdain said in the past the way Holyoke handled such cases was to get a court order to demolish a building and putting a lien on the property keeping the liability to the property owners.

This time, though, the city owns the property and assumes any liability, he added.

The Morse Administration did not approach the City Council to allocate demolition funds until Jan. 7. The Council approved $1.3 million after a presentation about the condition of the building “scared the bejesus out of us.”

The demolition did not happen and the council received a request for additional funds on July 8.

“We understood the demolition was going to be completed prior to the end of June as this was presented as an emergency in January. It was not until Aug. 5 that a request for funding was actually submitted by the mayor that the City Council could vote on. The Council had a hearing on the new proposal, and then the Council reapproved the second funding request for a now higher $1.45 million on Sept. 23,” Jourdain wrote.

A contractor for the demolition job was not hired until Nov. 3, Jourdain added. He questioned why there have been so many lengthy delays in bringing the building down.

Jourdain expressed concern that now the city is liable for damage to the adjoining buildings. He noted that Maria Ferrer, owner of MD Beauty, owes the city $38,000 in back taxes with no valid payment agreement but the city maybe paying her for lost business.

“It seems a political game is going on here,” he said.

Casey maintained the council was aware of the delays. He said in January, a request was made for an unlimited amount of money for the demolition. Instead the council voted for $1.1 million and none of the bids from contractors were at that amount or below.

That necessitated a new round of bids, which had to be thrown out when one of the bidders complained to the Office of Attorney General about a technical mistake in the process. A third round of bids was too close to the end of the fiscal year, which is the deadline for the expenditure of the funds, Casey said.

 Finally in September, the funds were approved and a contractor was selected. There was a 20-day waiting period that followed before the funds were legally in place and a contract was signed Nov. 3. The bakery had to vacate by Nov. 15 and the contractor had to obtain the necessary state certification for the work, Casey added.

“We communicated all of this to the council,” Casey said.