Mason Square residents eager to know just when, exactly, they’re finally going to get back their neighborhood library branch should be sure to attend next Wednesday’s meeting of the City Council’s Veterans, Administration and Human Services Committee. Chairman Jimmy Ferrera has called on the city Law Department to offer an update that day on the relocation of the Urban League from the once and future library building at 765 State St., following the Council’s vote to take the building by eminent domain last summer.
In the meantime, City Solicitor Ed Pikula sent the Advocate a copy of following update to Library Director Lee Fogarty, which offers the latest on the dragged-out process by which Steve Mollica, a relocation expert working for the city, and Henry Thomas, president of the Urban League, are seeking a new home for that agency:
“Mr. Thomas, on behalf of the Urban League, is still in discussions with [Springfield Technical Community College]. The Urban League however has concerns with the space that might be available. The first space, that has the most potential is on the technology side of the campus and is not available in incremental segments (the old Springboard tech space), and may be too big for their needs.
“The second space is an historic house in need of restoration. The Urban League is evaluating and in discussion with STCC, as to whether it could use its capital endowment for the renovation and whether or not STCC would accept the renovation in lieu of rent. Further the historic site is on a more remote part of the campus and may be customer friendly to their constituents.
“Bob Greeley showed them properties at 39 and 57 Mulberry Street. The house at 39 Mulberry was small. The larger building at 57 Mulberry would require the Urban League to have tenants. Both addresses are under consideration.
“664 State Street is a viable possibility
“A meeting is being scheduled with Mass Development for possible space in the former Federal Building.
“Discussions are still under way with Frank Colaccino, of Colvest, for relocating to the building next to the Burger King, on State Street. Rent and configuration are being discussed.
“In addition, you should note that the Law Department has received a summary appraisal relative to use and occupancy ranges for 765 State Street. It will be forwarded to Attorney John Egan, Attorney for the Springfield Library Foundation, who has agreed to indemnify the City for its expenses/losses with regard to this taking/relocation and in exchange, who the City has agreed would act as trial counsel in any civil action. The purpose of the review prior to the determination of a use and occupancy charge, in consultation with the City’s relocation consultant, is to make a proposal for the payment of use and occupancy to be presented to the Urban League, to be effective June 1, 2010, in the event that they have not moved.”
Pikula also answered a number of related questions that Fogarty had submitted to the Law Department:
“1) Is the Springfield Library Foundation paying the relocation consultant hired by the city, Mr. Mollica? Is the Foundation satisfied with the pace of relocation efforts?
“Answer) The relocation contract is with the City of Springfield. The City funds the contract from a gift made by the Springfield Library Foundation Inc.
“2) How much has the relocation consultant Steve Mollica been paid to date? Does his contract specify a dollar amount for relocating the UL or is he being paid an hourly rate?
“Answer) The W.D. Schock Company has been paid, to date $7,700.07. The contract has an hourly rate, but is capped at a total of $10,000.
“How was the relocation effort described to Mr. Mollica? Was he told that freeing up 765 State was a high priority and told to expedite the process in a lawful but timely manner while also taking care not to provoke a lawsuit? Was he told to cut the UL as much slack as possible? Was he told there was no particular urgency to relocating the UL? Or was he told something else?
“Answer) W.D. Schock, Company, Inc.’s proposal and contract are to be performed, in accordance with State Statute and Regulations.
“3) Besides initiating “discussion of a use and occupancy agreement and/or use and occupancy charge” what other measures are available to the city if on June 1 the UL is still in the building ?
“Answer) Summary Process (which is heavily frowned upon in the regulations) is an option. It is the Law Department’s opinion that this option by involving the court system may significantly delay the relocation process, through the introduction of the judicial process.
“4) Mr. Pikula has alluded to the need to avoid disrupting on-going UL programs by an untimely relocation. Is the city aware of a date by which time current UL programs will have wound down and relocation would be least disruptive?
“Answer) It is the understanding of the City and our relocation consultant, that the Urban League’s programs are ongoing and that to minimize the disruption, weekend moves may be considered.
“5) The city council voted to take 765 State Street on August 24, 2009. An email from Ed Pikula says the deed was to be filed at the registry on September 23. I think that is the date on which the four month period for relocating the UL began. That brings us up to January 23, 1010. On February 3, Attorney Bob Warren told the library commission that only one meeting (on December 3) was held with the Urban League between September 23, 2009 and February 3, 2010. In fact, this appears to have been the only fact-to-face meeting between the relocation specialist Mr. Mollica and the UL.
“Answer) The relocation consultant, has been in communication with Mr. Thomas, and/or his consultant and staff at least on a weekly basis and is satisfied that the Urban League is aware of the deadline to vacate and is working to secure a suitable replacement location.
“6) Why, when, and how did the date for the UL to vacate change from May (Lee Fogarty’s date in January) to the end of May (cited in Bob Warren’s update of April 9)?
“Answer) Per a requisite regulatory notice May 8, 2010 is the Urban League’s vacate date. In view of the complexities involved in any relocation and the fact that possible replacement relocations may become available at the end of the month, it seemed logical to make the end of May the vacate date. Pursuant to the regulations a vacate notice is being prepared.”
