Breaking News

Judge denies Manning new trial in 1993 slayings

Archived Story

City buys pecan factory site

Published 12:08am Friday, June 29, 2012

NATCHEZ — The Natchez Board of Aldermen voted 5-1 at a special meeting Thursday to buy the former pecan factory site for $750,000 as part of a legal settlement with one-time condo developers.

The lawsuit filed against the city by the bluff condominiums development company Worley Brown LLC was scheduled to go to trial Friday morning.

Ward 5 Alderman Mark Fortenbery voted against the motion.

City Clerk Donnie Holloway said after the meeting that the aldermen have not decided how the city will pay for the property. He said mini bonds have been discussed, but the board will take up the issue at its next meeting or call a special meeting.

Worley Brown LLC filed the suit in September 2007 to recoup losses caused, the company has said, when it was unable to develop land on the Mississippi River bluff as a condominium complex.

The pecan factory property was donated to the city by the Krouse family more than 10 years ago.

Worley Brown purchased the land from the city in May 2006 for $500,000.

The company’s lawsuit was seeking “rescission of contract and removal of cloud on title, and for compensatory damages caused by breach of contract.”

Worley Brown was owned by the late Edward A. Worley and Larry Brown Jr., son of mayor-elect Larry L. “Butch” Brown. Worley died in 2011, and Larry, who is a witness in the case, has said he relinquished his ownership in the company shortly after Worley’s death.

The company is now owned by Worley’s estate. The executor of that estate is Worley’s son Mike Worley, Larry said.

Mike Worley has been unavailable for comment.

Larry has said he has no vested interest in the outcome of the case and is simply a witness.

Mayor-elect Brown has said his only interest in the Worley Brown case was seeing it resolved before he takes office.

Worley Brown planned to develop the site into “75 luxury residential units, a clubhouse, swimming pool and other related common areas and facilities,” according to the lawsuit.

Before the sale of the land, in January 2006, the property was deemed a Mississippi landmark by the Mississippi Department of Archives and History.

Because of that designation, MDAH had to issue proper permits to allow for construction on the designated sites.

MDAH rejected the permit request to build the condos at the site in September 2007, citing concerns about the safety of building on the site. That ruling became official in October 2007 when the MDAH approved a formal resolution rejecting the permit request.

The $500,000 the city received from the sale of the land was placed in a certificate of deposit. That CD was later used to secure a loan to pay a contractor who completed overlay work on several Natchez streets.

  • Anonymous

    So now it will be a empty lot…..with a historical landmark sign on it……WTG Natchez…..pffffffffftt

  • Anonymous

    So much for any benefit from the Magnolia Bluffs casino money.

  • Anonymous

    Note to Ms. Shelton: it’s “vested” interest, not “invested,” which you’ve used at least twice.
    vested interest noun1.a special interest in an existing system, arrangement, orinstitution for particular personal reasons.2.a permanent right given to an employee under a pensionplan.3.vested interests, the persons, groups, etc., who benefitthe most from existing business or financial systems.

  • Anonymous

    Just another property owned by the city and the city can’t afford to keep it up. We’ve spent the money received from the sale, we have now paid 1 1/2 times more to get it back, we have no way to pay for it, we’re already into any funds we might have received from the new casino; WHAT IN THE HELL ARE THESE PEOPLE THINKING:?????? We can’t keep the grass we already have cut; so I guess this lot will look like it has for the last few years; OVERGROWN AND WITH NO USE. Pitiful, shameful, wasteful, and a whole lot of other adjectives. I am totally repulsed by this decision.

  • Anonymous

    If you think Brown ain’t getting any of that money then let me interest you in a little ocean front property I have just south of Tselakai Dezza, Utah. The beach just goes on and on. Brown says “I’m just a witness”, you bet he doesn’t have any interest in screwing the city out of $750,000. I made the comment several times when they bought the land that it was too close to the bluff and they wouldn’t be able to build there. Now they are saying, “We made a bad decision and we want our money back”. Good luck Natchez, boy are you going to need it.

  • Anonymous

    Maybe they need a ” Vestigative Reporter” to look into this….

  • http://www.natchezdemocrat.com khakirat

    All I have is sympathy for the poor tax whipped city folks so keep your chin up and raise H—!!!

  • Anonymous

    Butch left convention center debt from his last term, West left a vacant lot. Middleton steered the city through some very rough waters during his term and left it on the verge of some growth.  Brown will get to beat his drum as a result of that growth.  Oh well, that’s politics! 

  • Anonymous

    Ok, so the city sold it for $500,000, and it had a building on it. Then we paid to have the building removed. Now we are paying $750,000 to buy it back. Somebody is making some money, but it sure ain’t Natchez.

  • Anonymous

    This was an out of court settlement.  The City really didn’t have a choice.  The judge was going to make them pay anyway.  The law is the law.

  • Anonymous

    Pat yourself on the back Philip West for the chaos AND BIG LOSS FOR NATCHEZ…..Just to think you had the audacity to run for public office again….Makes me think of the arrogant, self appointed king you helped put in the White House.You should be publicly shamed and put on the road out of Adams county, for that matter the whole state. Go join your kings army in Washington.

  • Anonymous

    LOL !!!!!!  Sorry, but I have to laugh!!!  There is nothing else to DO but laugh!! So true!

  • Anonymous

    mojomagic- right you are!!!  Oh, if we could only follow the money….

  • Anonymous

    And yet, attaboy2, he was overwhelmingly elected.

  • Anonymous

    Yep, and in 2 years those that elected him will be wondering, WHY?? As far as I am concerned, you elected him now suffer the consequences.

  • http://www.natchezdemocrat.com khakirat

    Too much like work!!!

  • Anonymous

    Sorry belle but I didn’t like the condo plans and I’m far from a little old lady. It was unsafe to build it there. Quit blaming everything on the ladies that held Natchez together for so long, they are  no longer alive.

  • Anonymous

    Demolition and removal costs of that building would have cost more than it was worth.  The eyesore is gone, let’s at least celebrate that fact if nothing else in this situation.

  • Anonymous

    Brown’s son, Larry, was the owner.

  • Anonymous

    The city should have included a buyback provision for the original sale price. Another failure by the City Attorney. Should have gotten a lawyer out of Jackson to review the contract.

  • Anonymous

    Now we have this wonderful great piece of property overlooking the mississippi river…..Let’s do something wonderful with it.  
    What would be the best use of this land?   Botanical Gardens…park with par course….child’s state of the art playground….dog park?…We have a 
    blank canvas………come on everybody relax, smile and get to thinking….

  • Anonymous

    Perform your due diligence BEFORE you purchase a property. 

  • Anonymous

    They were so busy bringing “growth” to the town they forgot to mop and maintain the Council Chambers for four years.

  • Anonymous

    It was not unsafe.  They had volumes of geo-engineering reports that said it would be safe.  Those reports were required by MDAH but they didn’t reference them.  They referenced one man who had never been to the site and had not done any studies and probably wasn’t even an engineer who said “it probably won’t be safe.”  And MDAH took that guys word for it inspite of the evidence to the contrary.  I am not talking about the ladies that started the pilgrimage which is all fine and good.  I am talking about those who raised a conniption fit just because they could.  They fought all the way to the supreme court and lost!  The developers changed the plans for those who didn’t like it, but NO.  That wasn’t good enough. They were out for blood. And now the city has to pay for it. Period.

  • Anonymous

    Also, the Natchez Grand was built right there on the bluff too!  So, if you think the condos weren’t going to be safe, then that hotel isn’t safe either and they built it!

  • Anonymous

    If the city doesn’t have the money to buy the land, how in the world do they have the money to build your dreams?

  • Anonymous

    Yep they did, and I don’t think it is safe either. In fact I don’t think any of downtown Natchez is safe. If you think about the river washing up underneath the so-called bluff stabilization, you will understand why I say this. One day, the whole shebang is going to fall into the river. Glad I live out in the country.

  • Anonymous

    A dog park – fence it in, put up some fake hydrants and bushes, and let ‘em run. Good idea! But who is going to clean it up after the dogs, certainly not the owners because they don’t even clean up when the dogs potty in someones yard.

  • Anonymous

    Dividing that pie up,typical Natchez

  • Anonymous

    one day an earthquake will hit and your house out in the country will fall into a crack….give me a break…nobody is going to live in the fear you are trying to preach.

  • Anonymous

    ROFLMAO!!! No Fear dear, just some common sense which is sadly lacking in the world today. Yes, the New Madrid Fault line has been very active lately, or I could get wiped out by a tornado, or a hurricane, or any number of natural disasters. But, I don’t put myself and property in danger if I can possibly help it.

Editor's Picks