Cherry Street open again

Friday, October 29, 2010

Rusty Murry/Daily Mail

After the building at 306 West Cherry Street was torn down Wednesday evening, city workers put a construction barricade in front of the rubble. Thursday mornng they cleaned the site and reopened the street.

Workers for the Carlini Construction Company of Nevada use a track hoe to demolish the building at 306 W. Cherry St. on Wednesday evening, because "we had to get the building down; we had no way to secure it," said city manager J.D. Kehrman. After the tenant of the building had removed their property and further deterioration of the structure's condition was evident, the building was determined an extreme risk to public safety. City staff began calling contractors who had requested bid packets and asking for a price to demolish the building within 48 hours. Carlini responded and said they could have equipment on site and begin bringing the building down in 45 minutes. Using emergency procurement procededures specified in the city code and approved by Mayor Jayne Novak, Kehrman gave Carlini the go-ahead to tear the building down. The job was completed and barricades were in place by 7 p.m. City workers cleaned the area and removed street barricades and Cherry Street was opened to traffic before noon Thursday.

Comments

View 27 comments

Note: The nature of the Internet makes it impractical for our staff to review every comment. Please note that those who post comments on this website may do so using a screen name, which may or may not reflect a website user's actual name. Readers should be careful not to assign comments to real people who may have names similar to screen names. Refrain from obscenity in your comments, and to keep discussions civil, don't say anything in a way your grandmother would be ashamed to read.

Let's see. The city bought this building 6 weeks ago. Somehow the public didn't know. No one knows why the city bought it. And after 6 weeks it suddenly had to be torn down within 48 hours. It gets curiouser and curiouser. And now no one knows the city's plans for the lot. Don't you love the way the city keeps the taxpayers informed of how they spend OUR money?

-- Posted by TerryB on Fri, Oct 29, 2010, at 6:30 PM
If you want a real shock, ask Mayor Novak how much the city is paying for this "emergency demolition."

-- Posted by resident65 on Fri, Oct 29, 2010, at 7:56 PM
This isn't the only piece of property that was purchased. And remember, they want a new Public Safety building.

-- Posted by gossip64772 on Fri, Oct 29, 2010, at 9:41 PM
The city officials are probably expecting a bit of outrage over this but they think it will pass and we'll soon forget about it. Please, Nevada residents, let's get involved, find out more info on this and other spending of our tax dollars and let's demand more (and better) for OUR TOWN!

Try as hard as I might, I cannot understand how the city could have purchased a building and 6 weeks later, this happens.

As long as we let them do this, they will continue. It's up to the taxpayers to demand accountability.

-- Posted by justawife on Fri, Oct 29, 2010, at 10:23 PM
City Council Meeting November 2 at 7:00 p.m.

-- Posted by justawife on Fri, Oct 29, 2010, at 10:43 PM
We should put on the ballots to change our town's name from Nevada to Mushroom. Because we are all kept in the dark and fed a bunch of bull****. Then we could get some growth in our town. But the city and the paper will do as they please. It doesn't matter what we think as taxpayers in this town.

It just makes me want to sell my house even more, every time they do something like this.

We shoould be able to see the mintues from every meeting that is held. But we don't.

-- Posted by Farmhand on Fri, Oct 29, 2010, at 10:51 PM
I'm not an attorney! Reading back through some of the old minutes, In the minutes from the July 10, 2010 council meeting, they went into Executive Session for reasons in accordance with Section 610.021 RSMo.

Reading that section, in discussing closed meetings, it states closed meetings and closed records are authorized when:

"(2) Leasing, purchase or sale of real estate by a public governmental body where public knowledge of the transaction might adversely affect the legal consideration therefor. However, any minutes, vote or public record approving a contract relating to the leasing, purchase or sale of real estate by a public governmental body shall be made public upon execution of the lease, purchase or sale of the real estate"

If this Cherry Street property was approved and purchased based on this statute, did the City make it public when the purchase/sale was completed? I'm still searching for that info.

-- Posted by justawife on Fri, Oct 29, 2010, at 11:04 PM
The city never made it know until now that they bought the property. Another thing I find interesting is the article states that "City workers cleaned the area and removed street barricades". If JD had got his way early we would also be paying the new public works contractor to clean the area and remove the barricade. As it is the city paid noting for this service.

-- Posted by truthseeker67 on Sat, Oct 30, 2010, at 1:08 AM
TRACK HOE???????/I THINK NOT!!JUST ANOTHER REASON THAT I NO LONGER LIVE IN NEVADA---EVEN THE NEWSPAPER REPORTERS ARE ILLITERATE.I'M GLAD RUSTYS NAME IS SPELLED DIFFERENT THAN MINE.

BOB MURRAY

-- Posted by goldminer38 on Sat, Oct 30, 2010, at 9:47 AM
I don't think the newspaper reporters are illiterate. I'm very thankful they've reported on this incident because otherwise, most of us would know nothing about it. None of us are perfect. I have a good education and sometimes go back and read things I've written and wonder "what was I thinking?" I wouldn't know a track hoe from a bull dozer but I assure you I'm not illiterate.

If we're going to make progress in this town, or any other town, we need to work together.

If you're living somewhere where these things don't happen, I'd like to know where that might be. We can't trash Nevada because of incidents like this. I blame it on the taxpayers/citizens. For too long we've trusted our officials to do what's right and too many of them think they have the authority to do whatever they please because we have not held them accountable and questioned their actions.

We can take back our town/our city hall but it's going to take lots of work. Lots of hard work and lots of working together. There's probably not a single issue on which 100% of us will agree 100% but somehow, we have to work together. Some give, some take but we can do it!

Unless we work together, nothing here will ever change. I'm willing to work with all of you. I'm willing to do whatever I can. I have some ideas. I wish we could get together and discuss this but I don't know how to do it without revealing more than I'm ready to reveal about myself. Any thoughts? A meeting at McDonald's or Hardee's or a park somewhere? I've never attended a council meeting but I will be there this week. Do we need to present a unified front? Is there already a group working for reform that you trust that we could all join?

Thanks for any advice you might have.

-- Posted by justawife on Sat, Oct 30, 2010, at 10:08 AM
Found this in an AG opinion/letter from 2000. This is Opinion #97-2000. The whole opinion can be read here: http://ago.mo.gov/opinions/2000/97-2000.htm

A pertinent part of the opinion is:

"The city council can only close meetings, records or votes as provided in Chapter 610 RSMo. Under the circumstances you have described if the city council can justify that the purchase price of the property it seeks to obtain will be affected by discussions in open sessions, it can go into closed sessions by abiding by the provisions of Section 610.022 RSMo 1999 Supp. Once the city council has decided how it will proceed, it has seventy-two hours to make public its minutes, votes, and public records regarding the leasing, purchase or sale of real estate. Presumedly among the records to be made public within that time period would be the option contract with the price for exercising the option identified thereon."

The minutes may be somewhere on the internet but I have not found them yet.

-- Posted by justawife on Sat, Oct 30, 2010, at 10:51 AM
The owner says that he wanted to fix the building but was told that wasn't an option. Sounds like when they tore down the old Mitchell.

-- Posted by TerryB on Sat, Oct 30, 2010, at 4:46 PM
Lord knows I don't always agree with the paper but I have to this time. Now I'll be the first to admit when I'm wrong but I believe if you look in the middle of the picture way back behind the pile if rubble. I think that is the arm part of a track hoe. It's to big to be the arm of another back hoe like what is setting in the street. I think the reporter had the misfortune of using the wrong picture for his report.

-- Posted by truthseeker67 on Sat, Oct 30, 2010, at 9:08 PM
From what I can tell from the AG the council may be in violation of the sunshine law. Perhaps the AG needs to do an investigation. I admit I don't know who would actually do the investigation so CCMOM don't jump me because I said the AG should.

-- Posted by truthseeker67 on Sat, Oct 30, 2010, at 9:11 PM
I don't know Truth. What's the meaning of "make public"? Does it mean the city has to publish the minutes of the closed meeting like it does regular meetings or does it mean if we request the documents under the Sunshine Law, they have three days to provide them? I'm betting it means the latter but that's kinda crazy because we have no idea what the closed meeting was about. On so many levels, this whole incident doesn't seem right.

-- Posted by justawife on Sat, Oct 30, 2010, at 9:57 PM
Nevada city government has always been corrupt, money dissappearing, back room deals, etc. I know it happens everywhere, but seems to happen a lot more in places like Nevada because the proper authorities never seem to get involved. Good luck to those of you who haven't yet escaped that hell hole, and to those who choose to stay. Maybe someday you'll make it into the ranks of the chosen few who benefit from the shenanigans that go on within the council chambers.

-- Posted by Custom 1911 on Sun, Oct 31, 2010, at 4:30 AM
Hey Bob Murry, I think Rusty is happy that he doesn't have your name. There's a TRACK HOE in the background. It was used to tear down the building. The BACK HOE in the foreground was used to push the debris off the street and sidewalk.

If everyone is so concrened with what the city is doing, show up at the city council meeting on Tuesday and voice your opinion. If you are unwilling to do that, then keep your opinions to yourself.

-- Posted by concerned_nevadian on Sun, Oct 31, 2010, at 11:06 AM
Titanic, I agree. With all the government waste, what's $3k to them? Add in the cost of demolition and removal and that makes it a bit worse but more so, whether things were done correctly or not, it looks like a shady deal and our citizens deserve better.

They want to make us feel small and stupid. We have been dealing with some city employees more than I wish and at least a few of them are impossibly unreasonable. It should not be that way! Taxpayers are paying their salaries!

-- Posted by justawife on Sun, Oct 31, 2010, at 2:40 PM
Where are the council meetings held? At city hall?

-- Posted by justawife on Sun, Oct 31, 2010, at 7:55 PM
Well I hope to see you all at the city council meeting on Tuesday at 7pm in the council chambers located in the public safety building. The public safety building is located on the corner of Ash and Austin. Enter through the double doors off of Ash street. Of course most, if not all of you, will not attend anyways so I'm just wasting time typing this.

-- Posted by concerned_nevadian on Sun, Oct 31, 2010, at 9:30 PM
Chin up Concerned! Those who care and can be there will be there. Maybe we can figure out a way to get others involved. Thanks for the directions. I'm still not sure where the public safety building is but I know I can find the corner of Ash and Austin. I'll be looking for the crowd of concerned citizens! :)

-- Posted by justawife on Sun, Oct 31, 2010, at 9:54 PM
As with this building and probably several more, it was doomed to be demolished in a matter of time anyway. We the public, unfortunately, get to foot the bill but also look around this town and see the restoration of many other buildings for which a few have taken pride to hold onto what little history this town provided in the past.

-- Posted by bub on Mon, Nov 1, 2010, at 10:52 AM
But, bub, why should we pay for the demo.? Let the owner pay. The owner was wanting to fix up the building but was told by the city that wasn't an option. The city bought the building for the sole purpose of tearing it down for the lot. Why did they want the lot? The taxpayers need to know why they are spending our money.

-- Posted by TerryB on Mon, Nov 1, 2010, at 11:22 AM
Maybe J.D. wants executive parking for his out of town "Alliance Water" bosses or maybe extra storage space for the "red lawn signs". With 30% of City budget farmed out to third party maybe he can become really intrusive and use extra space for "cameouflage signs" for too many leaves in yard, "white signs" for taking too long to shovel drives and sidewalks. Anyone interested in organizing a change in City Government stop by Cherry Street Grill anytime. Lee

-- Posted by Lee_ on Mon, Nov 1, 2010, at 12:58 PM
Oh, Lee, you took the WORDS RIGHT OUT OF MY MOUTH!!!

I SECOND that comment!! Couldn't have said it better!!!!!

-- Posted by sabybee on Mon, Nov 1, 2010, at 3:57 PM
Lee, I do not mean this in a bad way as some do when they make this comment. I am serious about my question. Do you live in the city limits of Nevada and would you consider running for council? What is needed on the council is someone that will question everything that the other four get up to. We don't need more yes people that just go along with everything. We need someone that puts them all on notice that they will have to answer for every decision they make. I would run but I don't live in nevada. Some would say move here but I wouldn't wish that on anyone.

-- Posted by truthseeker67 on Tue, Nov 2, 2010, at 12:45 AM
Truth, I do live in town and agree with what's needed. I'm dealing with trying to keep our small business afloat in hard economic times with a council that not only dosen't support small buisness but actually hampers it. Addressing the council is like talking to cardboard cut-outs. Seven o'clock is a diffucult time for me. I'm hoping to support a candidate that is not a rubber stamp for city manager and/or attorney. To this end I've mentioned a coupla of times to use my dining room as venue to get things started and that offer still stands. Lee

-- Posted by Lee_ on Tue, Nov 2, 2010, at 4:34 PM

Respond to this story

Posting a comment requires free registration:

If you already have an account, follow this link to login
Otherwise, follow this link to register