GAUTIER, Mississippi -- Gordon Gollott has been involved in Gautier city government for some time -- a former councilman, then mayor, now a councilman again -- he was in office when the mall closed, when it was demolished and now when the City finally has acquired the property for $5 million.
A couple of weeks ago, I wanted to ask a simple question: Now that the City has finally gotten its hands on the property, what’s next? It was a pretty straightforward question and Gollott seemed like a great place to start.
“I know there’s always been a hope and plan to develop the property into another commercial enterprise, as well as the Town Commons project behind it, but what’s next, what can residents expect in the coming days and months?” was my lead-in question to Gollott.
He took it from there, discussing the Blackwater Development group the City has been working with, as well as plans for an outdoor amphitheater in the Town Commons area directly behind the mall property.
Then he dropped what was -- at least to me -- a bombshell: Gautier didn’t own all of the mall property. Belk owns their site. Not only that, Belk’s contract gives it the right to approve or disapprove anything built on the remainder of the former mall property.
I want to emphasize at this point I never asked Gollott about Belk, never even thought about it (although admittedly I probably should have). I guess I assumed -- like many, as it turns out -- the Belk property went with the rest.
But taking Gollott’s comments in good faith, and after speaking with local attorney Robert Wilkinson regarding the requirements to exercise eminent domain, I wrote and published the story.
The next morning, I received the following email from Josh Danos, the Gautier city attorney:
“I am the City Attorney for the City of Gautier,” Danos wrote, “and I have been asked to provide clarification on certain items included within your most recent article on the former Singing River Mall property. The City has no plans to purchase or acquire by eminent domain the real property owned by Belk. Additionally, there is currently no time line for development of the former Singing River Mall property.”
I was dumbfounded. What I was reading was entirely contradictory to everything Gollott had said the day before. No plans to acquire the Belk property? No time line to develop the property? Why buy it, then? Has the City just wasted $5 million of taxpayer money? (Yes, the money came from the legislature, rather than the City budget, but where do you think the legislature got it?)
I informed Danos no corrections would be forthcoming, since I reportedly accurately what a City official had said, but I would consider a follow-up story in the days ahead. Unsatisfied with my response, Danos went over my head to the powers that be at the newspaper’s corporate office in Birmingham, but he received a similar response.
Scrambling to overcome the possible damage the story had done, City officials took to Facebook, classifying the story as “misinformation” and repeating Danos’ claim that the City has “no intention of purchasing the Belk department store as part of the mall redevelopment project.”
In essence, they were claiming “fake news” where none existed. Beyond that, they were saying Gollott had lied. This wasn’t simply a case of “some” of what Gollott said was wrong or that he was a “little off” in his information. These were two polar opposite positions.
In the days since, I’ve made attempts to speak with multiple Gautier officials, with little success --although to be fair City Manager Paula Yancey and I have played phone tag on a few occasions. I did speak Friday with one of the “newer” City officials, but he respectfully declined to comment, saying he hadn’t been on board long enough to have been fully informed. Belk’s corporate office, as well, has failed to respond to a request for comment.
Truth be told, however, it’s relatively easy to calculate what has and is transpiring in Gautier.
If Danos is to be believed, then everything Gollott said in our interview was completely bogus -- and I’m not buying that for a minute. What possible motive would Gollott have for giving that information to the media? There’s also no chance he thought our discussion was “off the record.” He specifically asked me “Are you doing a story on this?” Yes, was the obvious answer.
On the other hand, it’s easy to see how the city attorney would be motivated: He would likely be leading any negotiations with Belk, not only for any possible acquisition of the property, but also because Belk has in its contract the right of approval for anything the City would ultimately want to do with the property.
Additionally, were the City to ever begin eminent domain proceedings, Danos would again likely be front and center.
So it’s far more likely Danos and other officials are scrambling to protect their position in their negotiations with Belk than it is Gollott was doling out completely false information.
If these officials want to cast aspersions towards one of their own, or label our story “misinformation,” so be it. But there are still questions to be answered: If the City has no intention of acquiring the Belk property, how do they intend to incorporate a decades-old building into the new development plan? If there’s no “time frame” for developing the property, why did they enter into a contact with a developer even before they had purchased the property?
No one over there may want to give me a straight answer. But the taxpayers deserve one.
Warren Kulo is a Senior Staff Writer/Columnist for The Mississippi Press/Gulflive.com.
"really" - Google News
December 04, 2021 at 04:31AM
https://ift.tt/3Er1DyE
What is really going on with Gautier and the mall property? (column) - gulflive.com
"really" - Google News
https://ift.tt/3b3YJ3H
https://ift.tt/35qAk7d
Bagikan Berita Ini
0 Response to "What is really going on with Gautier and the mall property? (column) - gulflive.com"
Post a Comment