Alderman Thanks Commissioners Siding With YMCA in Waukesha
Duane Paulson says the four commissioners who voted to rescind former gas station's landmarks status were following the law. Paulson is a Waukesha alderman.
Letters to the editor can be emailed to erik.wander@patch.com
Patch
Photos (1)
Photos
On Wednesday, Oct. 5, 2011, the Landmarks Commission of the City of Waukesha met at City Hall. One of the items on the agenda was a petition from the YMCA to rescind the local landmark designation for the former Bartles-Maguire service station at 422 E. Broadway.
The short recent history of this property is: It had been on the market for 170 days when it was sold to the Waukesha Family YMCA in May of 2010. In July of 2010 it was designated a Waukesha Landmark by the Landmarks Commission over the objections of the YMCA.
At no time during over five months it was for sale, did anyone attempt to put a landmark designation on it. Only after the YMCA purchased it did that happen. Chapter 28 of the Waukesha City Ordinances, allows the owner of a landmark property to make a good faith effort to sell it. If unable to sell it, because of it being a landmark, the owner may petition to have the designation rescinded. At that time, for a period of 60 days, the owner and the Commission shall work together, in good faith to locate a buyer that is willing to abide by it's designation.
The YMCA provided documentation that proved all of the these steps had been taken. Chapter 28 clearly states after these steps have been taken, "the Commission shall rescind it designation of the property". The Commission voted 4 to 4. A tie results in no action taken. I commend the four commissioners that voted to rescind. As they said, they voted for the law.
I have nothing against preserving history. In the case of this property, the roof is now metal, the siding is now imitation brick, the doors and windows are not original, and the gas pumps are gone. Ironically, it would seem you would have to rebuild it to make it original. What I have a problem with is the act of trampling on the rights of the property owner, without compensation. For most people, this has no affect on their day to day lives. In the case of the YMCA, a nonprofit, supported by donations and a fee for some services, they will be required to maintain this building. Of course, they could give it away and lose the intended use of the property and the more than $150,000 of donated money.
What do you think about the commissioners' decisions?
Tell us in the comments.
HCW
4:13 pm on Friday, October 7, 2011
A petition has been signed showing over 500 Waukesha residents want the station saved. How many want another parking lot? Perhaps the community needs to be more aware how Waukesha's Heritage is endangered?
Sarah Millard
5:26 pm on Friday, October 7, 2011
HCW - thanks for your comments and questions. What do the rest of you think about this?
Duane E Paulson
6:39 pm on Friday, October 7, 2011
If over 500 Waukesha residents signed a petition AND wrote a check for $300.00 to the YMCA, I think the Y would give them the title right away. Perhaps the community needs to be more aware that somebody has to pay for things like this.
Scott L
10:38 pm on Friday, October 7, 2011
As I clearly stated at the hearing, the YMCA has never had any intent of "selling" the property. Further, with all due respect it is clear why you are an alderman and not an attorney:
When following the rules of statutory construction and applying it to the ordinance in question, it is clear that the word "shall" does not have a mandatory connotation, thereby leaving the decision of the Landmarks Commission members to exercise discretion in making their decision. To cull a single word from a single sentence of a lengthy ordinance and take a stand on such a rigid interpretation is absurd. What matters is the intent of the ordinance as a whole. What matters is the intent of the authors of the ordinance and the purpose it meant to serve.
(cont. below)
Scott L
10:39 pm on Friday, October 7, 2011
Finally, I wish to state the facts to clear some things up.
1.) An application for the landmark status of 422 East Broadway was made months before the YMCA bought the property. It just so happens that the individual in charge of submitting that information -- an individual who has since recused himself from this position because he did architectural work for the YMCA (a conflict of interest) held the application at bay and it wasn't pushed through until after he was gone.
2.) The YMCA bought the property for substantially more than what it is worth, and then raised the selling price even higher. They are asking $159,000.00 for a property that has a fair market value of less than $115,000.00, which is an amount that was just determined within the past few weeks by the city assessor. Stated simply, they made a bad investment and played a bad hand of chance. I'll be happy when all of the litigation is concluded, because obviously the courts are going to have to straighten things out.
I'm glad the YMCA, a purported non-profit "community" institution, is so adamant in demolishing a building that the majority of the community wants to maintain in "our" community. Do the paying members of the YMCA know they are doing this -- wasting time and resources on destroying the very community it vows to support and nurture?
Dave Dringenburg
10:13 am on Saturday, October 8, 2011
Alderman Paulson, while you may agree with four members of the Commission that voted to rescind, not everyone does, including me. The fact is that the Y overpaid for that piece of property and can't recoup their money through selling it. Have you seen the property? No one in their right mind would pay 159k. You criticize the other four Commissioners for not voting 'for the law' when the term 'in good faith' is open to interpretation. Attempting to sell a piece of property for nearly 50% more than the fair market value isn't something I view as 'in good faith.' Kudos to the four commissioners who could see that.
You also commented on the fact that the the YMCA is a non profit that is supported by 'donations and a fee for some services.' While they might be a non-profit, lets not make them out to be saints. They have a membership rate, like any other fitness club. $81 for a family per month, $57 for an adult per month. Acting like the Y is an organization that benefits the community such as Hope Center or Waukesha Food Pantry is disingenuous.
Finally, in the comments section, you say that 'perhaps the community needs to be more aware that somebody has to pay for things like this.' Are you suggesting that when a privately owned organization makes a poor business decision that the community needs to pick up the tab? I'd love some clarification on that comment.