City Council to vote on release of nonpublic minutes for fire station land buy

THE DEED IS DONE: When negotiations stall, the owner sends off an email to Rochester Assistant Fire Chief Tim Wilder lamenting the fact. He also says he'd be happy to donate $10G to the department. About a month later the sale reflects said donation.

ROCHESTER - Rochester taxpayers on Tuesday may find out who was in charge of negotiations to buy a $300,000 parcel of land in East Rochester for a third fire station and why the purchase and sale agreement was signed without a cash deposit from the city as is typical in such transactions.
The process surrounding the sale has been steeped in controversy ever since the City Council voted to reject the sale during a regular meeting on July 5, only to have the decision reversed 45 minutes later following a secret meeting held in a back room at City Hall.
The initial vote taken at the 53-minute mark of the meeting failed to get the two-thirds vote needed as funding was from supplemental appropriation from the unassigned fund balance and not in the budget.
Voting against it were councilors Jim Gray, Amy Malone, Skip Gilman, Steven Beaudoin, and Mayor Paul Callaghan.
Abstaining on the vote was John Larochelle, who said he was a friend of the owner, Arthur Taylor Jr., of San Jose, Calif.
As the meeting was about to end, however, City Attorney Terence O'Rourke called for a so-called "nonmeeting," which is occasionally called by the city attorney on legal oversight issues.
The so-called nonmeeting, which is not recorded and requires no note-taker, lasted about eight minutes after which a motion to reconsider was made. Moments later Malone and Callaghan had changed their minds and the vote was 10-3 to buy the land. This time Larochelle did not abstain and also voted for the purchase.
The purchase and sale agreement obtained by The Rochester Voice shows that the document was dated June 13 and required that conveyance be made no later than July 6, just one day after the City Council vote.
Interestingly, the purchase and sale agreement from the city included no deposit, which led one longtime real estate agent to speculate a lawsuit from the owner was inevitable if the city tried to back out.
"I'm pretty sure they were told the city would be faced with a lawsuit if they didn't go through with the sale," said Doug Lachance, a former mayor, city councilor and longtime real estate agent with Hourihane, Cormier & Associates of Rochester.
The stealth meeting that led to the reversal has irked many residents and at least once councilor who has publicly condemned the tactic.
In an email provided in a Right to Know request disclosure obtained by The Voice shows City Councilor Steven Beaudoin expresses frustration with the use of the secret meeting to a fellow Rochester resident.
"Being new to restrictions on public disclosure of 'non meeting' discussions, I'm reluctant to elaborate on what exactly the legal oversight (from O'Rourke) was," Beaudoin wrote. "Suffice it to say, it was, in my opinion, inexcusable. Personally, I can think of no good reason that this was not discussed publicly."
Beaudoin has also voiced his frustration directly to The Voice.
One government insider who did not want his name used for fear of retaliation told The Voice the nonmeeting could have been called since an open meeting might have embarrassed or tarnished the professional reputation of a city employee, which, itself, could draw a lawsuit.
Also gleaned from the Right to Know disclosure was the public's growing suspicion that this deal was of the back-room variety, a view shared by a former city councilor.
"Without seeing the dated purchase and sale agreement I am guessing that the public vote was for show, and that a non-public "vote" authorized the (city) Manager to sign the agreement and he did so," former councilor Ray Varney wrote the mayor. "That non-public vote should only authorize City staff to negotiate and bring to the CC (city council) for final approval. The CC owes the public an explanation. We shouldn't need a RTK request to get answers. The CC can not vote in non-public."