Corrections: Story was updated April 7, 2024, 9:44 a.m. to reflect that Ashley Smith is not a military spouse. And, updated April 8, 2024, 5:37 p.m.: to clarify that George Griggs is an Army veteran but did not serve in Vietnam.
The Hinesville City Council voted 4-1 at its April 4 meeting to approve a plan to rezone, redevelop, and annex the Georgia Homes at Live Oak Mobile Home Park, but only after adding a requirement for the property owner, Newbridge Residential Parks LLC, to meet with residents and local officials. Several residents at the meeting said they had yet to hear from the owner’s representatives about plans to close the park and relocate residents, along with 22 mobile homes they own, to another park in Walthourville.
No elected county official who currently represents the tenants was there to speak on their behalf. Liberty Consolidated Planning Commission Executive Director Jeff Ricketson said the park, which is in unincorporated Liberty County a few car lengths from the Hinesville city line, is in county commission district 3. Commissioner Connie Thrift represents District 3.
Owner’s representative absent
Some council members expressed dismay that the owners had as yet to meet with all residents. Newbridge’s representative, Maryann Rossignol, did meet briefly with several residents outside chambers during the March 21 council meeting. However, she made no promises about whether the company would pay for any moving damage that might occur to homes owned by 22 residents.
Rossignol was absent, according to District 1 Councilwoman Diana Reid, due to an eye infection. Several times throughout the meeting, Reid reiterated that she was in regular contact with Rossignol, offered the Newbridge executive’s phone number to residents who spoke against the measure, and expressed frustration that the redevelopment deal was not moving quickly enough.
If the property is annexed into the City of Hinesville 18 months from the time both parties sign the development agreement, according to Liberty Consolidated Planning Commission Executive Director Jeff Ricketson, it likely would become part of Council District 3, which is represented by Councilwoman Vicky Nelson.
City didn’t want park as is
Ricketson said that, after nearly a year of discussions, developers had the choice of either fixing up the park or redeveloping it, and that they chose the latter, after the city had “expressed some concerns about annexing an existing mobile home park without some assurances that the mobile home park would be redeveloped.”
No one rose to speak in favor of the matter. When the council asked to hear from anyone opposed, Benjamin Roque said his wife had lived there 25 years and that he had been there 15 years. “I love the place, always pay the rent on time,” he said. “And now that we’re being relocated, I would like to at least get to pick the lot that I’m being moved to.” He sighed. “If it’s possible.”
District 5 Councilman José Ortiz said he had visited Roque the day before. “He’s been there 25 years and is really, really moved in,” Ortiz said. “He’s got a single-wide trailer but it looks like a double-wide, really moved in, really big space, and that’s what his concern was. He didn’t want to be moved into a single-wide area when he’s got a lot of stuff.”
“Where he’s been all this time?” asked District 1 Councilwoman Diana Reid. “I’m saying Ms. Maryann’s been here since last September. When she met with the tenants, Mr. Benjamin, did you meet with her and express that?”
“No,” Roque said. “No, I haven’t met with nobody.”
“I don’t want to go backwards with this,” Reid said.
‘How do I go about this conversation with you all?’
Mayor Karl Riles said he thought Roque’s issue could be resolved if he spoke with Newbridge. “While this is a tenant-landlord [matter], I think that this council is on record as making sure that we make this process as convenient for both parties as possible, but it sounds to me — and you guys stop me if you don’t think so — it sounds to me like this is just a simple discussion between the new property owners and yourself. We were told that they were making that happen. And we put this agreement in place to make sure that those conversations do happen. So I’m not speaking from something that we don’t intend to see through. And we’ve put language in it, with lawyers, to make sure that happens, so I think that if you express that — I can’t speak for the owners, either — but they want to make this happen, and they want to make the transition happen, and so do we. So I think that in your conversations with them, if you relay that to them, I believe they’ll find a solution that’ll be suitable to your needs.”
Roque asked, “And how do I go about this conversation with you all?”
Reid offered him Rossignol’s contact information, adding, “I was told that they had a meeting with the tenants. So they didn’t meet with each one? They didn’t go door-to-door.”
Roque and several tenants in the audience said no one from Newbridge had contacted them directly about the forced move.
Ricketson said, “You’ll recall at the last meeting that the developer was here and she indicated to you all, I think that question came up at the last meeting, she indicated that they didn’t want to go clear out all their tenants before they knew you were going to agree to all this, because they’re in a business, and if you’re not gonna agree to all this, they need to keep their tenants, so that conversation was not going to happen until—”
“Right,” said Riles. “And I told her that I believed that the tenants did know and that they needed to start having those conversations….I don’t want to speak for everyone but I think they’re on the right path, and we have given them some pretty strict guidelines that we expect them to adhere to, so I believe if we give them a little time, I think that we’ll find them to be satisfactory.”
Resident Ashley Smith also spoke against the measure.
“Like you guys said, they haven’t spoken to us about anything,” she told the council. “It’s really hard to communicate with them because I guess they’re based out of Augusta. Whenever you call, no one really answers the line, so it’s just keeping us in the dark a little bit like. I know I talked to Nora Grimaud, she’s over the property management for us, but she tells us not to worry about anything whenever we see the zoning signs. So the last time there was a zoning sign, she told us not to worry. This time, she told us not to worry. She told me personally not to worry. So I guess it’s just a lack of communication for us to know what’s actually going on.”
Communication breakdown
District 4 Councilman Dexter Newby said he was disturbed that Newbridge had yet to meet with all residents.
“To me, that’s kind of concerning,” he said, “because you have that gentleman who’s been there for 25 years, and all of a sudden you want him to up and move, but he’s not receiving any information. And mayor and council has given the property owners guidelines, requirements that they need to complete, then where are we at with that if they’re not fulfilling the guidelines?”
Reid replied, “She [Rossignol] would have been here today, but because of the eye infection she’s not. Ma’am, this is her number. She’ll pick up.”
District 2 Councilman Jason Floyd pointed out that the city would not annex the property unless the terms of the zoning request and development agreement were fulfilled. “Everything else is just in discussion, but, you know, they have to adhere to this legal document if we sign it with them.”
Newby replied, “I understand, but the most important people that need to know don’t know. And that’s the people that’s living there.”
Floyd said that the agreement would give Newbridge 18 months “to notify those folks, to have those meetings, and, you know, agree to that relocation.”
Newby threw up his hands. “I mean, I understand it’s about business, but we’re looking at livelihood. We’re looking at people who — he has 25 years invested in this place, and all he’s asking for is, let him know something so he can pick out his new place.”
As for concerns about tenants moving out if they got wind of the deal, Newby pointed out, “If they’re here today, then evidently, they done heard something more than what they’re getting from the people they should be getting it from and their concern. … But, you know, I’m just saying I’m not really sure if things are going the way they need to go. Because the people who live in the property, who’s gonna be affected the most, does not have any information about what’s going on.”
Reid said she was surprised the tenants hadn’t heard about the move because talks had “been going on since last September.”
Nelson said that she was concerned about the company’s apparent lack of communication. “Especially since they keep saying how they’ve talked to everyone, and how they’ve done this, and how they’ve done that…. I have a real concern that the citizens that live there haven’t even had a conversation with them, or they find it too difficult to get in touch with them.”
Ricketson said, “This development agreement has very specific performance things that Newbridge has to do and there are 20-something tenants that have to be moved, and they all have to be moved according to that document or else you don’t annex. So I think it’s nailed down as much as the city attorney can nail it down.”
Riles asked for a motion.
Nelson asked that the vote be postponed until the tenants met with the owners.
Reid said, “I know the mayor instructed Miss Maryann to be sure to reach out to them, and then we suggested that our attorney put things into place. Now it’s before us and we’re going to table it again? We’re never gonna get anywhere.”
Nelson said “Well, can it be contingent upon them reaching out to the tenants?”
Howard explained, “The development agreement states that the developer relocate the tenants within that 18 months, free of costs.”
Riles again called for a motion. Nelson moved to approve Newbridge’s rezoning and annexation petition and the development agreement, then amended her motion to include special conditions that Newbridge “have the conversations, or that they include Mr. Howard and Mr. Ricketson in the conversations” with the tenants. Ortiz seconded the motion. The measure passed 4-1, with Newby voting against it.
Still waiting for answers
Outside council chambers, residents said they still had no idea what would happen.
Smith, a mother, said she rents a three-bedroom and wants to know if the mobile home she might get in the new park would be the same size. She said management has put up signs at the park, offering to sell used mobile homes to renters, and expressed concern about retaliation for having spoken out publicly.
George Griggs, a 20-year Army veteran who owns his mobile home, said he had wanted to comment during the meeting, but felt “embarrassed” because he relies on hearing aids and could not hear any of the discussion for himself. He said a friend has offered him a piece of land for less than his current lot rent. He is prepping his doublewide for the move by himself because the company has said it would only move residents to the Walthourville property it owns.
While removing the awning from his home the other day, he said, he fell off a ladder.
You must be logged in to post a comment.