Woodbury’s Possible Fire Hall Move Put On Backburner

Comment   Email   Print
Related Articles

The Woodbury Fire Department won't be moving anywhere, at least until 2012, as the Aldermen of Woodbury voted Tuesday night during their monthly meeting to delay any action until the town of Woodbury sees if they can get a grant to help fund the project. 

Woodbury Mayor Harold Patrick informed the Aldermen that he had received three bids
on buildings that could be used or land that could be purchased to place a town fire hall on.

The old Jennnings Motors building owners turned in a bid of $250,000.00. Their last tax appraisal came in at $211,000.00. Michael and Lana Jones gave a bid of $285,000 for their building in the industrial park across from Crane Interiors. Their last tax appraisal amounted to $175,200.00. The Joe Duggin bid was the highest at $425,000 for the Woodbury Auto Express building on Hwy. 53. His last tax appraisal was $221,500.

The roof on the old Jennings Motors building would possibly need to be replaced. It was suggested that in about two to three years if the roof was sealed it would give a continuing lifespan of 7-10 years on the roof.

There is a possible grant that would give the Town a 70/30 match. It is an ARC Grant and the
application process must be submitted by October 1st. The process of the grant being awarded is 90 days. Mayor Patrick would know one way or another in January if the town was awarded the grant. Mayor Patrick pointed out that there was no mandate set that the fire hall had to move.

Aldermen Dottie Duggin made a motion to delay action until the town of Woodbury can see whether or not they can get a grant to fund the project. Aldermen Shade Cason seconded the motion and it passed.

The Board Of Aldermen also approved the request of Charles Steelman, of the Cannon County Football Boosters. Mr. Steelman and the Boosters are planning a fundraising roadblock Saturday September 10th.

Alan Paschal, City Works Director, reported that there have been several complaints about all of the holes around the downtown area. The work is scheduled to be finished by the end of next week. The traffic light on College Street should be fixed by the state relatively soon as the plan is to mill all the way to Chilangos.

Woodbury Police Chief Tony Burnett gave an update of the status of the buildings around the square that were in various violations of city ordinances. Terry Haynes Plumbing has agreed to put curtains up around his storefront to block all of the materials being stored in the space from public view. The bank in charge of the old video store on the square has ordered windows to replace the boards currently up in the storefront of their space.

Brent Rowland, building/property maintenance inspector for Woodbury, wrote a letter to Chief Burnett in regards to the Old City Hall Building. Chief Burnett will be following up on the letter in the upcoming weeks.

The next meeting of the Mayor of Woodbury and Board Of Aldermen will be Tuesday September 4th at City Hall in Woodbury at 7:00 p.m.

Read more from:
Comment   Email   Print
Members Opinions:
August 03, 2011 at 5:58pm
Are Joe Duggin and Dottie Duggin related? If they are, would it be considered nepotism for her to even consider voting for a bid by a relative which also seems to be the highest of all three. Should she recuse herself from the discussion if they are related?
August 04, 2011 at 3:54pm
blooeyes, nepotism is primarily considered when someone in power (like an elected official) hires or promotes a family member over other people.

I believe a better question would be is it ethical for Ms. Duggin to vote on a bid submitted by a relative? Nepotism does not apply in this case.

From what I read above she didn't vote and there won't be a vote. It was actually tabled due to her motion.

Not only that, with Joe having the highest bid, he wouldn't be considered anyway so why even ask the question?
August 04, 2011 at 9:22pm
corey, you just never know with this bunch! the lowest bid is not always the one they vote to go with.
August 04, 2011 at 11:26pm
Just to clear it up, the dictionary defines the term as follows:

— noun: favouritism shown to relatives or close friends by those with power or influence.

from Italian nepotismo, from nepote nephew , from the former papal practice of granting special favours to nephews or other relatives]
August 05, 2011 at 6:45am
OK blooeyes if you want to believe it to be nepotism instead of an ethical question then by all means keep on believing it.

This meeting was as transparent as glass. No one tried to hide anything or vote on anything that was inappropriate in any way.

There were no secret meetings or secret bids. No one attempted to allow a relative to get anything that someone else didn't get. And the three bids the city received were opened at a public meeting.

The person you are questioning actually voted to table the motion until further information could be obtained. So again, I ask why even bother to ask your original question?

This is just another attempt by you to stir the pot and complain about something that is pointless and has no merit at all.
Powered by Bondware
News Publishing Software

The browser you are using is outdated!

You may not be getting all you can out of your browsing experience
and may be open to security risks!

Consider upgrading to the latest version of your browser or choose on below: