A state oversight agency dismisses the newly released consultants’ findings from prospective Palace Hotel buyers that possible ground contamination warrants demolition of the downtown landmark.
An agency representative said Tuesday that the North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board would not even “open a case” based on the information provided by the Guidiville Rancheria in its attempts to secure $6.6 million in special state clean-up funds to tear down the town’s most significant historic structure to make way for a privately owned commercial development.
The consulting reports were finally made public by the Guidiville Rancheria and a local investment group after months of being kept under wraps. They were widely touted to justify claims that the Palace was in “imminent danger of collapse” and needs to be demolished so ground contamination studies can be done and the site cleaned up. No independent structural analysis has ever been produced to support the claims, which also have been made by Ukiah city officials.
Tribal representatives and the public spokesman for a group of local investment partners have been touting the findings of two newly disclosed consulting reports on the possible location of underground storage tanks and the levels of petroleum-based chemicals found at sites around the Palace property. According to the Guidiville reports, the tanks are under public sidewalks and streets adjacent to the Palace.
However, senior state engineer Heidi Bauer said Tuesday, after reviewing the Guidiville reports, the oversight agency is not altering its stance.
“I can confirm that the Geocon and Alpha reports do not change our professional opinion that any environmental work associated with (underground storage tanks) at or adjacent to the Palace Hotel will not require the demolition of the building,” said Bauer.
Guidiville representatives on Tuesday did not respond to written requests for comment on the state agency’s conclusions.
They have promoted the just-released consulting reports in a new push to get the state Department of Toxic Substance Control to award state funding under a special environmental program to assist California tribes, nonprofits, and poor municipalities in cleaning up contaminated sites and preparing them for development. Guidiville was awarded a grant this year, but after questions were raised, the state board said the amount for environmental studies is “to be determined.” According to a state spokesman, a final decision is expected in April.
In the meantime, Guidiville and a group of local investors led by downtown restaurant owner Matt Talbert are mounting a renewed public relations blitz to convince community leaders and decision-makers that their proposal to secure state financing for demolition, ground cleanup, and site preparation is still viable.
City officials this past weekend publicly justified holding off on any enforcement action of a public safety order against current owner Jitu Ishwar because they said the Palace’s proposed sale to the Guidiville group is still pending.
“Prospective buyers have a plan and are actively working through it,” said Deputy City Manager Shannon Riley in a statement issued to local news media.
Riley acknowledged that the city has yet to initiate enforcement action months after it served formal notice on Ishwar to either stabilize the Palace or submit demolition plans after the City Council declared the historic building a public hazard in danger of collapse.
A Sept. 29 city inspection by building and fire department officials led to the city’s emergency declaration, a move criticized by historic preservation advocates for lacking any structural analysis of the three-story, 50,000-square-foot brick building.
Riley, in her public statement, described city findings as “alarming” and “well-documented” evidence, referring to a series of widely publicized photographs showing the palace’s deteriorated interior. The Guidiville group seized upon the city’s declaration and has been promoting the notion to the public and the state that the Palace was in danger of collapsing and needed to be torn down at public expense so it could get on with private development.
Riley did not address the issue of the city’s “emergency,” effectively blocking a review by the state Office of Historic Preservation and sidestepping a CEQA investigation into the consequences of demolition. The Palace, dating back to the 19th century, is designated a state historical resource listed on the National Register of Historic Places.
The proposed sale between Ishwar, the Guidiville Rancheria, and an unidentified local group of investors has dragged on for months. The historic landmark endures further damage from wet winter rains while the city delays imposing fines or taking allowable criminal action to ensure public safety in the core of downtown. Ishwar has owned the building since 2019 but has done nothing to stem the historic structure’s decline.
The Guidiville group cited the city’s “emergency” action in its application for millions of dollars in state funding to tear down Ukiah’s most significant historical landmark. It contended that the Palace is in “imminent danger of collapse” and needs to be demolished before ground contamination studies can be conducted.
In her statement, Riley said a city inspection by building and fire department officials led to the disputed emergency declaration.
Riley described the team’s findings as “alarming” and “well-documented” evidence, including widely publicized photographs showing the palace’s deteriorated interior.
However, it is not the first time the city has declared the Palace a public safety hazard.
In 2011, the city made the same declaration but as in the current case, chose not to impose possible fines or take possible criminal action against then-owner Eladia Gaines of Marin County.
Despite the city’s current pronouncements about the structure’s safety, no action has been taken against Ishwar other than to serve notice and demand pedestrian safety scaffolding be erected around portions of the building facing public streets.
Preservation advocates believe the Palace, despite its current decrepit condition, can still be cleaned up, reinforced, and transformed into a boutique hotel, event center, restaurant/bar, and retail complex as originally envisioned in 2022 by Ukiah investor Minal Shankar and an architectural team from Page & Turnbull. This noted San Francisco firm has done extensive historic preservation projects statewide.
Owner Ishwar rejected a bid by Shankar to close escrow on the Palace in favor of entering into a new sales agreement with the Guidiville group, who promised to make him ‘whole’ for his 2019 investment in a building that has been in decline for 30 years or more. City officials at the time declared Ishwar had done nothing to stem the Palace’s decline under his ownership.
Tom Carter, a Northern California contractor who has done restoration projects across the region in the Bay Area, including the Tallman House and Blue Wing Saloon in neighboring Lake Count, agrees. Carter said he revisited the Palace recently and believes the structure can be recycled into productive uses despite its deteriorating condition.
“It’s not unrealistic to believe the Palace can be stabilized and transformed into a viable downtown showcase,” said Carter.
It’s a loophole to get the state to pay for the demolition, so that neither ukiah or the new buyer has to deal with it. It’s a wonderful plan, I hope it works.
I call this Somebody Else Syndrome. Owner knew of condition of property. So owner gets free demolishing then sells property for the same as purchase price? It’s actually the future owners that gets a cleared property. It’s confusing what is the end goal here. Restore or demolish? The anonymous investers revealed is a question for the media to answer. If public isn’t informed of all facts it’s hard to discuss. Public is paying by tax burdens and high cost of living. So everyone paying is actually “Somebody”
paying. But…most of California isn’t a balance bookkeeping reality based state. Systems are meant to be payed into….to take out. Magical “Somebody” pays. Guess demolishing a historic landmark isn’t contradictory to “historic landmark”. Lol.
Regardless of whether this gets funded for demolition or not; It’s 30 years and still waiting to see something productive happen to this site. I really don’t care if it is knocked down or refurbished at this point. There are several hotels/motels in Ukiah and there doesn’t seem to be a shortage of vacancies. This historical preservation is a vanity project to a handful of people who don’t actually have to pay for the costs to maintain a declining vintage building.
Wacky world of to much government regulation, loopholes and insanity.
If I understand this properly the Indians of the Guidiville Rancheria, who have long wanted a Casino, along with investor Matt Talbot and other, anonymous, individuals
have hatched a plan to use State Taxpayer funds to tear down a State Historical Landmark building and make this spot in the center of downtown Ukiah ready for them to erect whatever they may want. WOW! I do wonder who might profit from this and
what they might want to build after the taxpayers have cleared the way for them.
This plan, happily, seems to have been rejected. I hope that it stays rejected.
I would like to see the Palace restored. I think that preservation of historical buildings and landmarks is important because those things give us, as a society, a sense of our history. I think that they give us, as individuals, a sense of belonging to something enduring, something beyond and outside ourselves that we will lose if everything is modern and new.
Is making a profit a crime if someone plans to dropped millions of $$$ into this site? This building will cost a fortune to refurbish or demo and rebuild. Is Tom going to bicker over the historical value when the courthouse sits empty like the hotel has for 30 years? Keep your Boonville in Boonville.
I did not say that I am against profit. I am curious as to how and why Matt Talbot and a group of anonymous investors have teamed up with the Guidiville Rancheria Indians to attempt to use taxpayer funds to tear down the Palace and clean up the site so they can then build whatever they want. As a taxpayer I do not like secrecy and I would like to know more. Your statement “…plans to dropped millions…” does not tell us very much.
The fate of our Ukiah Courthouse is another matter. Perhaps somebody will come up with a plan to remodel or rebuild it and turn it into a Casino – that would probably turn a profit for anyone investing in the scheme.
You would like me to butt out because I am from Boonville. I would point out that we have no idea at all who you are or where you are from because you choose to remain anonymous. That is your choice, of course.
Tom, you are sensationalizing this: “WOW! I do wonder who might profit from this and
what they might want to build after the taxpayers have cleared the way for them.” Who cares? Someone is going to make money from this deal; that’s business. The public money may not get released and if it does; so what? Ukiah can get rid of this eye sore after 30 years of being a giant albatross.
As a common tax payer we have no real say over this matter because it is up to the private investors. Secrecy is a privilege to the buyer who is actually trying to do something with this site. Eventually, they will disclose their project to the public via the city council planning committee. Keep in mind this is private property and not public property.
My identity is irrelevant. Making anonymous comments on Mendo Fever is done by design. You chose to disclose your name. As I have chosen to make my name title relevant to this article.