Red Carpet Inn owner responds to city’s allegations ahead of court hearing

As the owner of Red Carpet Inn and Fanta Suites prepares to have his day in court, he is contesting Greenwood officials’ claims about the hotel.

Greenwood city officials are suing the owners of the troubled hotel, 1117 E. Main St., in civil court in order to force compliance with previous orders to vacate and repair the property. A preliminary injunction was filed on Nov. 4, and a hearing on the matter is scheduled for Tuesday.

Tony Paganelli, an attorney representing the hotel, made a motion to vacate the preliminary injunction hearing and/or have a continuance on Thursday. The city and Paganelli made a joint motion on Friday afternoon requesting a continuance of around two weeks.

Johnson County Superior Court 4 Judge Marla Clark had not issued a decision on either motion by Friday afternoon.

Paganelli said Friday the lawsuit is still in its early stages, and there’s “a lot” of information still to be discovered before anyone reaches any conclusions about the merits of the case.

City’s legal complaint

In the initial court filing on Nov. 4, the city’s attorney William Barrett detailed the events leading up to the injunction request.

In June 2021, the hotel was inspected by the Johnson County Health Department and the Greenwood Fire Department for potential health and fire safety violations. At the time of the inspection, the hotel was cited for 188 violations, leading building commissioner Kenneth Seal to issue a notice of abatement, according to court filings.

After the notice was issued, the city and the hotel agreed to “certain repairs and rehabilitative steps” and the hotel’s owners were issued a building permit for the repairs. However, in a September 2022 inspection, officials determined that “minimal, if any” progress had been made. Thereafter they issued a notice of non-compliance/order to vacate the property, according to court filings.

During an Oct. 24 plan commission hearing, city officials announced an agreement between the hotel and the city in exchange for a continuance until Nov. 14. The hotel was supposed to be vacated within 48 hours by all occupants, and only contractors and employees would be allowed to access the property between 8 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. on weekdays. The city also retained the right to seek an injunction to enforce the no occupancy requirement, filings show.

However, the hotel remained occupied, leading to the civil complaint being filed on Nov. 4. The plan commission on Nov. 14 affirmed the order to vacate and gave the hotel an additional 10 days to make more repairs.

A follow-up inspection on Nov. 28 showed conditions continued to be troubling despite some work being done by hotel staff, officials said.

Hotel disputes city’s allegations

In a 52-page response with exhibits filed personally on Nov. 18 by Ahmad Mubarak, the hotel’s owner, he disputed several key sections of the city’s civil complaint.

One of the events contested by the hotel’s owner is the June 24, 2021 inspection. Mubarak argues that instead of following an industry norm of having 1-to-3 inspectors, nearly 25 people, including law enforcement, took part in the surprise inspection, according to the filing.

In regard to the 188 violations found in 2021, Mubarak claims that the findings were duplicated. He also disputed the city’s claim that the hotel had made minimal progress on the violations. The hotel has done a lot of work toward correcting things such as replacing broken windows and fans, he wrote in the filing.

Mubarak said the city’s decision to seek the notice of noncompliance and order to vacate came as a surprise, and that hotel staff were told to correct the violations to avoid further actions, the filing says.

In an Oct. 3 letter to Johnson County Health Department Director Betsy Swearingen, hotel staff said they felt the number of complaints about the facility came from fired employees and guests who damaged or stole from the hotel.

In an Oct. 22 email titled “Progress Update,” Mubarak told city and health department officials the hotel had stopped taking cash to maintain the integrity of the facility. It was designed to screen clientele and prevent theft by employees, the filing says.

Mubarak also claims that he didn’t agree to the continuance arrangement between Barrett and Mubarak’s then-attorney Jeffrey Jinks at the October plan commission meeting. While he appeared via Zoom, Mubarak was allegedly told by Jinks’ office to not speak and that the agreement to vacate had been reached, according to the filing.

“I hadn’t, and couldn’t have agreed to that arrangement, because of the foreseeable problems and stress it would generate, and so discontinued his service,” Mubarak wrote.

The filings also addressed why people have continued to live at the hotel despite the vacation order: they have nowhere else to go.

An Oct. 3 statement signed by eight current employees of the hotel says all delinquent activity and illegal drug use at the hotel has been terminated. Four hotel guests also signed letters on Oct. 3 stating the hotel is their home and they would be homeless if it was forced to close, according to filings.

‘Whole life’ invested in hotel

In an interview with the Daily Journal on Friday, Mubarak said that situation showed that “someone” was interested in bankrupting the hotel. His hotel has lost revenue over the last two months because he was unable to have guests.

“We put our whole life into this investment. … I don’t know for what good reason they (are) doing this,” Mubarak said.

Mubarak, who says he is a certified inspector, has criticized the inspection process. He hired an outside inspector to inspect the building, and had previously asked if they could do the follow-up inspection. However, city officials have said the city is responsible for the inspection, not outside parties.

The outside inspector determined the building was structurally sound, according to filings. However, the inspection was limited and included the condition of the visible exterior foundations and visible roofing areas only.

Mubarak said he believes city officials are working toward a specific agenda to condemn the hotel and demolish it. He acknowledges that the hotel is in rough shape, but that’s because it’s 50 years old. They are working to repair it and make it cleaner, he said.

“Things change with time, you know, wear-and-tear, but we’ve been trying to keep it inhabitable, keep it attractive, keep it decent for our guests,” Mubarak said.

Hotel employees have been discouraged by the situation, Mubarak said. At least six employees live at the hotel.

“The last time they were here, they were crying because they’re doing their best, but that does not fit into the agenda I guess that somebody is having,” he said.

The guests should be the ultimate judge of any business, and that’s what Mubarak worries about at the end of the day.

“Whether this business goes away, this business stays, this business goes, and what have you, the customer is the ultimate judge of any business,” he said.