Village begins to handle Bennett complex issues in court

MILLBROOK — The former Bennett College continues to deteriorate and the village of Millbrook is pursuing legal action to control the situation. On Sunday, June 12, a large dormer collapsed at the Bennett complex site, causing the building to qualify as an unsafe building in the village’s code book. The village has decided to take action in protecting the Bennett complex since the property owner’s actions have been insufficient and to stop trespassers from entering the site. Tuesday, July 12, Millbrook Mayor Laura Hurley and Village Attorney Rebecca Valk went to court against Bennett Acquisitions, LLC, regarding the Bennett site. Hurley and Valk told the village trustees what happened in court at the Village Board meeting the evening of July 12.“We filed a summons of complaint motion for a permanent injunction to get going with the demolition,” said Valk. “On top of that we filed for a motion for a preliminary injunction, which would require more immediate action, such as putting up the fence and making all the necessary applications for the demolition.”Valk said that part of that motion included a temporary restraining order. The injunction requires Bennett Acquisitions to construct a fence of no less than 6 feet in height. That is believed to be sufficient to create a perimeter around Halcyon Hall and to prevent trespassers. Bennett Acquisitions is required to complete applications and application fees for all permits necessary to undertake the demolition of Halcyon Hall meanwhile, and is required to prepare an operational plan for demolition.“What we can expect is that Bennett Acquisitions is the property owner of record and will be required through the court to construct the temporary safety fencing,” said Hurley. “To that end we have been working and gathering bids for the fencing that will be charged back to the property owner.”Trustee Joseph Spagnola met with three different companies at the Bennett site. The first bid was for $35,000; the other two bids were much lower, coming to $15,000 and $11,000 for the fence. Spagnola said that the reason the other two bids are lower is because there may be some discrepancies involved. Spagnola said that he told the fence companies the village wanted a big fence to prevent trespassers, but that it also wanted the fence far enough from the property that it could be used as a demolition fence.“So if indeed the property owner chooses to ignore the court’s order to have the fence constructed,” said Hurley, “we will be ready.”Hurley said that it was brought up in court by the opposing attorney that the village does have the authority under its code to undertake the cost of the fence.“I expressed to the judge that why should the village be expected to undertake this cost?” said Valk. “They may not recoup [the cost] for up to three years depending on when it could be foreclosed upon, when it’s the property owner, who obviously has a responsibility to maintain a property. I assured the judge that the village is more concerned about the safety than the money issues, but it’s really more equitable to have the property owner pay it now.”Valk said it should take a couple of weeks for the property owners to take action and if they refuse to follow the court order a $250 fine will be imposed. However, Bennett Acquisitions, LCC is a limited liability corporation, which limits the liability of the individuals who participate in the corporation. If the property owners continue to ignore court orders the corporation is fined instead of the individuals, which could potentially force the corporation into bankruptcy, explained Valk. Hurley and Valk asked the Village Board to support them in contacting the county to find out what the procedure is if the situation moves towards bankruptcy or if the village needs to recover demolition charges.