4/2/07 - Health building focus of Legislature meeting

(As published by Cortland Standard, Corey Preston reporting)

It’s been more than three months since the Cortland County Legislature voted to purchase property along south Main Street with the intent of building a county health facility.
It also has been about two months since the Legislature voted to rescind that initial decision, and just over two weeks since the first property owners involved in the aborted deal filed suit against the county.
Tuesday, for the first time since January, the full Legislature is scheduled to publicly discuss the repercussions of its decisions and whether the county should purchase all or some of the property to avoid a legal battle.
At the special meeting, which will be at 6 p.m. Tuesday in legislative chambers, legislators plan to review and discuss the recommendations of the special committee reviewing the land deal and will, presumably, decide how the county should proceed.
“I’m hoping some decision will be made, one way or another, especially now that we have a lawsuit out there,” said Legislature Chairman Marilyn Brown (D-8th Ward).
The Moose Lodge, which owns the property at 157 Main St. that is central to the deal, has filed suit against the county requesting that it go through with purchasing the land at the agreed price of $250,000.
The Moose Lodge claims that the county’s initial decision to purchase the property in December represented a binding agreement, and that the decision in January to overturn the first vote in favor of the purchase was improper.
Three of the other five property owners involved in the $894,000 land deal also have threatened to follow the Moose Lodge in filing suit.
Regarding how the county should respond to legal challenges, the special committee offered a handful of possibilities, including purchasing all or some of the properties to avoid the lawsuit and either reselling them or seeking a scaled-down project, or not purchasing the properties and either battling the lawsuit or trying to negotiate out of the purchase agreements.
Residents of the neighborhoods surrounding the proposed project — whose vocal opposition to the original $5.5 million, 30,000-square-foot building was instrumental in convincing legislators to overturn the deal — have made it clear they do not want any sort of county project.
However, some legislators have said that a scaled-down project is the county’s best option at this point.
“I don’t think we should take the residential properties, but I think the best thing now is to buy it and try to put something a little smaller in there,” said Minority Leader Danny Ross (R-Cortlandville).
Brown said she still supported purchasing the properties.
“I think we have to try to work with the neighbors down there, and come up with something that’s going to be good for the community,” Brown said.
One key recommendation from the special committee — and an issue that persistently has been brought up for discussion — is the desire of many legislators and community members to see a comprehensive master plan that looks at all of the county’s land needs, including needed space for a Motor Vehicles Office and a County Jail.
Such a plan could be discussed at Tuesday’s meeting, along with a number of other recommendations from the special committee, including ways to develop a master plan and other ways the county can improve its land purchasing process in the future.