The Belle Board of Aldermen voted 3-0-1 on Oct. 19 to re-bid the MFA building demolition project with new specifications after an asbestos test is completed and returned.

The discussion occurred at the regular city meeting, during which city clerk Frankie Hicks expressed concern to aldermen that unnecessary resources were being used to attempt to demolition the old MFA building, without proper proceedings taking place first.

“We have done this time and time again, and spent money on ads and people’s times, putting stuff out for bids, not doing it correctly and having to redo it,” Hicks said.

Alderman Courtney Abel asked Hicks if the advertisement had been placed already and Hicks said yes.

“With what bid specs? Because I told you, Steve (Vogt, mayor), that I would provide the bid specs but could not do the bid specs until I had the inspection back?” Abel asked Belle Mayor Steve Vogt.

Vogt told Abel she has the inspection, which was given to her during the meeting.

“I have it now,” Abel said. “That doesn’t mean I had it when the ad was placed. I had said I would come up with bid specs for everyone to review. But then I contacted you and said ‘Steve, I believe we need an inspection, personally, because I believe the tiles in that building have asbestos.’ Not only was asbestos a concern but other chemicals and stuff that was used in the building.”

Hicks said they paid MRPC’s Chuck Cantrell to do a structural inspection, but not an asbestos inspection. It would be about $100 for an asbestos test. Public Works Director Tony Bartich said Cantrell’s letter to the city dissuaded them from having an asbestos test completed.

“He also said in the letter that he didn’t believe there is anything in there to contain asbestos, he does not believe the tile to contain asbestos,” Baretich said. “He doesn’t see a need to test it. That is what I am holding on to from the inspector because we have that assurance from him.”

Abel asked the Baretich to confirm that there is no asbestos and no chemicals.

“Well,” Hicks began, “the way he worded it, it was very short and vague.”

Alderman Jeanette Struemph said basically Cantrell said the structure is not sound.

“He didn’t see any material that he thought would be asbestos-containing, but he just did a visual inspection, not an asbestos inspection,” Abel said, addressing Vogt. “My main concern in my test message to you was asbestos.”

Vogt apologized that he “dropped the ball again.” He told the board it was up to them if they wanted to open bids with the information they had.

“I don’t believe we should open any bids,” Abel said. “I think we should put it in the newspaper again.”

Struemph asked if they would just attach the letter.

Baretich said he would be happy to put a bid sheet together and have Terris Cates from Integrity Engineering look it over.

“Then anyone who is interested in it can understand what they are bidding,” Baretich said. “But if you want a clear answer concerning the asbestos, I think you should have an asbestos test done.”

Abel agreed. Alderman Tony Geick asked for Vogt’s opinion.

“You are the one most adamant about saving the building — now is the time in open session to speak up,” Geick said. “What are your thoughts on it?”

Vogt said he has heard both ways on it.

“Nobody has stepped forward to offer to buy the building,” Vogt said.

Geick said his concern is if someone buys the building, will it take them three to five years to renovate it?

“Like that building at the end of main street here that they have been working on for five or six years now, they are still not done with it,” Geick said.

Vogt asked if Geick was talking about the book store and Geick said no, he is talking about the building across from the art gallery.

“It’s all good if someone wants to come in, fix it, and get it done,” Gieck said.

Vogt said many have come forward and expressed an interest, but no one has stepped forward with an offer.

“If a kid wanders in there and gets hurt, who is liable?” Geick asked. “Who owns it? We do.”

Vogt asked what they wanted to do, did they want to open the bids? Struemph answered.

“Here is the thing, we put out bids to have it torn down or purchased. No one put in a bid to purchase,” Struemph said. “We do have a couple of bids to tear it down. We don’t have to specify what is in there to tear the building down. They are tearing it down on their accord. On their money. If they lose money by tearing it down, that is their problem, because they bid it accordingly.”

Geick said they are paying someone to tear it down.

“One example is the foundation. Do they haul it off? Do they get somebody who wants some material to take it? How do they take it?” Vogt asked.

Struemph said the bid should have read “to be torn down.”

“I believe I said, ‘to be torn down, concrete removed. Even the old dock to be removed,’” Geick said.

Vogt said that is what they told the people who submitted bids. Geick asked if that was in writing Baretich said they didn’t have anything in writing to give the companies at that point, though they expressed an interest in specs.

“One of the questions was if we wanted grass to be put back there and dirt hauled in to fill? Or did we just want them to slope it off?” Baretich said. “Or do we work on filling in later as time goes?”

Baretich added that he did reach out to a barn reclaimer who tears down old buildings for free because everything in there has value. He said there was not enough value left in that building for him to tear it down and repurpose what is in there and come out ahead.

“What is the pleasure of the board? Do you want to open the bids or rebid it?” Vogt asked.

“I don’t think anybody can properly bid without knowing any details,” Abel said.

Geick said they can send out a bid sheet to tear it down, then call the two companies with the specs and ask them if their bids are going to be the same or if they want to change their bids.

Geick made the motion to pass the measure and Struemph seconded. Alderman Sundi Jo Graham said she would abstain.

“What, to get it cleaned up?” Gieck challenged Graham who did not respond.

Baretich asked if they wanted to have dirt hauled in and Geick said no, they could do that themselves. However, the board does want the concrete taken away, including the dock. They also want proof of bonding insurance.

“Give us some time to get through it and get it sent back out,” Baretich said. “It will be due the Friday, (Dec.4) by 4 p.m.before the Dec. (8) meeting.”

The board agreed to do the official inspection on the asbestos. Baretich said he would call the electric company to have the service box disconnected.