EDITOR: Insanity is often said to be doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. Perhaps the new faces in the El Dorado County government office need to familiarize themselves with the 2000-2001 Grand Jury report regarding the County of El Dorado’s former ill-conceived acquisition and desperate disposition of the Logan Building in light of the County’s current desire to potentially lease and occupy space there again.
Some highlights of the Grand Jury’s 2000-2001 findings regarding the Logan Building in Diamond Springs are:
The county previously lost somewhere between $800,000 and $1 million on this property through its poor acquisition and subsequent disposition along with six-figures of wasted county personnel time.
That the interior of the building was not configured in a manner that would accommodate the county’s needs, without the existence of substantial wasted space.
The Logan Building had been built to serve a single-purpose facility. It was constructed as a special-use building and not for the purpose of being sold, subdivided, leased or otherwise marketed to others.
The county ignored the major American with Disabilities Act impacts of the building’s design, as the building lacks an elevator and parking.
The building was to be occupied by Tim Logan Construction Co. solely, with stairways as the only access to the upper floor.
The floor-tile covering most of the middle floor of the building, while obviously luxurious and expensive, is unsuited to traffic by the public. Tile floors constitute a potentially dangerous condition as to which the county will be exposed to dangerous slip-and-fall litigation.
The Logan Building is located in a remote area of Diamond Springs which is already subject to significant traffic congestion, and the adaptation of the building to county uses will exacerbate that problem. Current traffic models show a Level “F” service in the area.
The Grand Jury found that the county would probably spend substantially over another $1 million to reconfigure and remodel the building to suit the county’s needs back in the year 2000.
Is the county looking to make the same mistake twice?