National Eviction Moratorium Extended Through June

April 1, 2021
By: Dwayne Page

The Biden administration has announced a three-month extension to a national eviction moratorium, a move designed to help millions of tenants who have fallen behind on their rent even as courts have disagreed on whether the relief is legal.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention extended the eviction moratorium through June 30. It had been set to expire Wednesday, March 31

The moratorium, which originated from an executive order signed by then-President Donald Trump in September, protects tenants who have missed monthly rent payments from being thrown out of their homes if they declare financial hardship.

“The Covid-19 pandemic has presented a historic threat to the nation’s public health,” the White House said in a press release Monday. “Keeping people in their homes and out of crowded or congregate settings—like homeless shelters—by preventing evictions is a key step in helping to stop the spread of Covid-19.”

A series of conflicting court rulings have called into question the legality of the moratorium. At least three federal judges—in Tennessee, Ohio and Texas—have ruled the moratorium is unlawful. The Justice Department is appealing those cases.

This ruling will continue to affect landlords and tenants in DeKalb County.

“The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) last year put down a nationwide moratorium on detainer actions along with the Supreme Court. The thinking was that this was no time to put somebody out on the sidewalk (eviction) because of the financial strain COVID has been on so many people although I understand it is also a financial strain on landlords because many of them owe on their rental property and the banks are looking for payment every month and if the renters are not paying its putting a real burden on them,” said General Sessions and Juvenile Court Judge Bratten Cook, II in a previous statement in January.

“For those landlords who have rental property that consists of single family homes or residential property, there can be no detainer actions heard at all until at least July 1. Tenants are still obligated under the Supreme Court order to continue paying rent but there currently can’t be any detainer action and consequently no writs of possession where the sheriff comes out and actually moves someone out. That only applies to rental property that is used for residential purposes. That does not apply to business rental property,” Judge Cook said.

March 31, 2021
By: Dwayne Page

No deal!

The county commission met in special session Tuesday evening for the purpose of leasing the old Cherry Hill Community Center to Jason Carver, the owner of JBeez Watercraft near Silver Point on Highway 56 who wants to possibly open up a restaurant there. But after several motions and amendments, the commission could not muster the seven votes needed to grant the lease.

Carver wants a five year lease with three more renewable five year options up to 20 years. The rent for the first five years would be $500 per month and increase by $100 per month in the subsequent five year intervals ($600 per month in years 6-10, $700 per month in years 11-15, and $800 per month in years 16-20). Under terms of the lease, Carver would be responsible for maintaining the HVAC, roof and septic system and all general upkeep of the building and grounds including walls, floors, ceilings, parking areas, driveways, sidewalk, landscaping, etc. Both the county and Carver would carry liability insurance on the property.

Only nine of the thirteen members of the county commission were present for the special meeting including Julie Young, Sabrina Farler, Myron Rhody, Anita Puckett, Jerry Adcock, Dr Scott Little, Jeff Barnes, Beth Pafford and Bruce Malone. Commissioner Malone left soon after the meeting was opened stating he would not participate in an illegal session. Malone complained that County Mayor Tim Stribling had not given a prior five day advertised notice of the meeting as Malone said was required by state law. County Attorney/ Parliamentarian Hilton Conger said Stribling complied with the county commission’s policies and procedures by posting notice last Thursday on the county’s website and sent notices to members of the commission and local media. Conger went on to say that if commissioners felt adequate notice was not provided they could suspend the rules for this meeting. That was not done. Malone said the county’s rules can’t be in conflict with state law.

Stribling said Malone suggested to him last Tuesday that a special meeting could be called for the following Tuesday (March 30) when he (Malone) knew that the notice could not have been published in the weekly newspaper in time. Now, Stribling said Malone wants to complain about adequate notice.

Like Malone Commissioner Jerry Adcock expressed concerns saying he didn’t get his notice of the meeting until Friday. At one point Adcock started to leave the meeting room but then returned to his seat.

As for the Cherry Hill Community Center issue some commissioners thought the county was acting too quickly and should take more time to consider terms of the lease. Others thought a potential 20 year lease was too long.

Commissioner Jerry Adcock said a lease for that long could tie the county’s hands later if someone stepped up to buy the property. But Commissioner Dr. Scott Little argued that lease extensions were proper since the tenant would be renovating and maintaining county property at his own expense.

“This gentleman is leasing the property and paying for the renovation. I understand his need for an option to continue if he wants to. Its not fair for us to let this man pay for all these renovations to our property and then possibly take it back from him in five years,” said Commissioner Little.

The issue may be brought back up at the next regular meeting in April.

March 31, 2021
By: Dwayne Page

A temporary restraining order will remain in place for at least a while longer to keep the City of Smithville from intervening in the operation of the Animal Shelter which is under the control of the DeKalb Coalition for Humane Treatment of Animals, INC.

Chancellor Ronald Thurman made the ruling during a hearing in DeKalb County Chancery Court Tuesday morning. The proceeding went longer than expected and had to be cut short before all the proof was presented in order that Chancellor Thurman could make it to a noon court session in another county.

Chancellor Thurman kept the temporary restraining order against the city intact until another hearing, possibly within a few days, in which both sides will get to finish making their case. Chancellor Thurman also wants the County to join in the hearing because it has a stake in the case.

The Coalition, represented by attorney Sarah Cripps, is seeking to make the temporary restraining order against the city permanent and for the Chancellor to construe and interpret provisions of both the Coalition’s lease and contract with the City as well as the Coalition’s memorandum of understanding with the County.

City attorney Vester Parsley is asking that the temporary restraining order against the city be dismissed.

Both the city and the coalition claim they are in charge of operating the animal shelter and that the two full time employees work for them.

Cripps was granted the temporary injunction, later amended to a temporary restraining order, after the Smithville Aldermen voted unanimously on March 1 to terminate the city’s 99 year lease with the Coalition and for the city to assume total control of the animal shelter. The mayor and aldermen claim that the Coalition, which since 2017 has contracted with the city to manage and oversee the facility, had breached its agreement. City officials contend that the city’s own employees who work there are actually managing the day to day operation of the shelter and not the Coalition itself as specified in the contract. In a separate move, the aldermen voted 4 to 1 to again allow the shelter to accept animals from outside the city but within the county. Something the Coalition had been fighting for since the aldermen issued the ban during a special meeting on October 29.

Parsley said Tuesday in court that the city was well within its right to void the lease with the coalition.

“There is a provision in the lease that allows the city or the coalition, without notice, to declare this contract void. The city council at their March 1 meeting by a unanimous vote declared that the coalition was in breach,” said Parsley.

Under the restraining order the city may not prevent the Coalition from resuming its regular business duties at the shelter which includes the day-to-day management, oversight, and operation, and the staff and volunteers working at the shelter will be under the control of the Coalition according to what Cripps views as terms of the Coalition’s lease and contract with the City of Smithville dated December 30, 2015 and the Coalition’s memorandum of understanding with the County dated November 5, 2015. The City must also continue funding the positions of the two shelter employees to work exclusively at the animal shelter as the city has done since March, 2018 and to allow the shelter staff to continue using the animal transport vehicle to pick up animals outside the Smithville city limits but within the borders of DeKalb County. The coalition funds a part time position at the shelter.

The Coalition’s memorandum of understanding with the county states that the Coalition is to pick up animals for the county when a request is made from the county mayor’s office or the sheriff’s department at a fee of $110. Parsley said the City of Smithville is not a party to that agreement and receives no funding from it.

“The memorandum doesn’t say that the city agrees to pick up any animals in the county nor does it say in the city lease agreement with the coalition that we (city) agree to pickup any animals outside the city limits of Smithville,” said Parsley.

Chancellor Thurman said while the city has the right to void the contract it cannot unilaterally declare a breach by the coalition without a ruling from the court.

“After re-reading these contracts and agreements I think the city has the right to declare a breach but a determination of a breach is not the city’s alone. It would be up to a court of law as to whether it was breached or not. By the city’s actions that puts the plaintiff (coalition) in violation potentially of their agreement with the county,” he said.

Although the county is not a party to this case, Chancellor Thurman said it needs to be because the final outcome could affect the county.

“We have another party (county) impacted that is not before the court and there are other agreements (one between the city and coalition and another between the county and the coalition) which say you will do animal control in the county. These agreements were not artfully done. They should have been done together as a joint document (between the three parties). The county may be a necessary party to this because what this court does as it relates to the city may violate or void their (county) contract. One impacts the other. My plan is to keep the restraining order in effect until the county can be brought in here. If I don’t keep the restraining order in effect it could cause the coalition to be in violation of the agreement with the county who is not a party here. I think they (county) need to be before the court. Let’s set another date. The city has the right to get out of this (lease) if there is a breach. There may be a breach but I’m going to have to hear some proof on that to determine it. Based on the agreements I have before me there could be immediate and irreparable harm but that burden of proof is on them (coalition),” said Chancellor Thurman.

« First ‹ Previous 1 1034 1124 1132 1133 11341135 1136 1144 1234 2459 Next › Last »