The story on Asburypark.net is as Joe stated, because there is a 3rd appraiser provision. Luckily, it is baseball arbitration, whereby the 3rd can come in with a value that is different from either appraiser and in this case, actually has to do an appraisal. The typical case in these circumstances is that there has to be a majority opinion and in most cases, the 3rd splits the baby. My contention at the meeting, since this is my work, was that both appraisals missed the mark. The city acted surprised and appeared to geniunely want to get to the bottom of it and asked me if I could suggest possible 3rd's, act as the 3rd myself, or give general assistance. I later offered my assitance gratis but have not heard back. I won't hold my breath although I have no reason to suspect that the city reps were not being genuine. The developer on the other hand, suggests that I did not have all of the facts and that after I am given the facts, I would probably think that the city's appraisal was high. I was asked if I would look at the facts and attend the next meeting and if I changed my opinion, would I say so at the meeting. Of course I said yes since I have no agenda but to get at the truth. I am still waiting and I won;t hold my breath on this one either. A great deal of time was spent by the council trying to dispel the allegation that the price (or upfront payment) of $400,000 was dictated by that amount of shortfall in the budget or forecasting that anount when they made the budget. Sort of like the tail wagging the dog. Most were not convinced and if you thought Reagan used voodoo economics you should have been there. I don't know what the truth is myself, but the way the ordinace was written sure made it seem that way in most people's minds. Why do we need it in the first place? Well haven't you heard, AP has a rateable problem. No sh$t Sherlock, where'd you park the squad car? At the pace (or lack thereof) of development, coupled with the tax abatements (needed to give a profit to the middleman) I expect it to contiue for some time. explain to --- In AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com, "Joe Dandrea" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, 20 Dec 2004 17:33:58 -0500 > "Tyler, Mark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Your point that our Council should have seen the problem > >coming some time > > ago is a good one. Asburypark.net has posted a story > >indicating that the > > sale price may rise despite an advance payment of > >$400,000. Does anyone > > know exactly what that is about? > > > The price could RISE or it could FALL... it's all in the > ordinance whereby both parties have agreed to a third > apraiser who's decision will be final. So hopefully the > third appraiser will strike a higher price. But they might > also strike a price that's lower then $400K and then, as > it regards a tax increase, we'll be in the same boat we'd > be in if the sale didn't happen before the end of 2004. > (there is some protection here in that if the final price > is less then $400K the city won't have to shell out any > cash, but rather will have to take a hit on future revenue > from "additional rent on the pavilion properties." > Convoluted? You bet! > > ~joe
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Make a clean sweep of pop-up ads. Yahoo! Companion Toolbar. Now with Pop-Up Blocker. Get it for free! http://us.click.yahoo.com/L5YrjA/eSIIAA/yQLSAA/Y2tolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AsburyPark/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
