jj
I have to give it to him though, he sat quietly through a lot of abuse,. Yes, the 3rd appraisal is binding. If it comes in higher (I wouldn;t hold my breath again, but hey, surprise me) the developer can contest it. What happens in an arbitration is that the parties (usually the one who likes it) asks the court to affirm it. The court has limited power in overturning an arbitration decision unless there were certain deficiencies. Also, it depends on whether the federal or state laws prevail, and typically, the former only applied when inter-state issues are involved. However, in NY we have recently had a number of decisions which are confounding people which laws apply. For the record, I have been involved in a few arbitrations in which affirmation of the awards were still held up in the courts for a year or two or more. If the city were really serious, both parties should take back their appraisals and we start from scratch both on the same premise and done correctly. I suspect much of the problem stems from the written agreement of how the appraisal process is to be done and on what basis. I am led to believe from the developer's side that it is supposed to assume the zoning prior to the redevelopment plan and consider the other costs the developer is to expend in the area. AGain, I don;t know what is the truth here, but remember, this entire agreement was characterized as being "developer driven." To be honest, however, we may be stuck with the written agreement no matter how lousy it is unless malfeasance or incompetence can be proven. I still think they are missing the big picture with regard to the inherent value of the waterfront land, no matter how dismal things looked in 2001 or 2002. --- In AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com, "jerseyjohn99" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Here's a thought: what if the third appraisal comes in high, let's > say $2.5 mm. From what I've heard, the 3rd appraisal's decision is > FINAL. Is Asbury Partners REQUIRED to pay it, or can they back out? > If required to pay, they could then threaten bankruptcy, hold up the > entire redevelopment & try to negotiate down. If they are not > required, can the city sell that parcel to a subdeveloper directly, > and not have to pay a markup to the middleman, Asbury Partners? > > I wish I had a camera on Wed to take a picture of the grimace on > Larry F's face when Dan was throwing out numbers. It looks like he's > not very good at poker & I think the residents have called his hand. > > --- In AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com, "Joe Dandrea" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Mon, 20 Dec 2004 17:33:58 -050 > > > > > > 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 --------------------~--> $4.98 domain names from Yahoo!. Register anything. http://us.click.yahoo.com/Q7_YsB/neXJAA/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/
