|
|
Post by bob on Apr 19, 2007 7:50:14 GMT -6
DPC, BB comps are there , the SD comps are there, and knowing that they can't go above BB comps, what is your $ guess that the judge or jury will come back with and why?
|
|
|
|
Post by momto4 on Apr 19, 2007 7:50:36 GMT -6
dpc - I am not going to argue the rules of eminent domain. I think they serve a purpose to get roads, schools, etc. built. Obviously, you don't like them, so we agree to disagree. Uh wrong about my feelings on eminent domain. You are missing the point. I am NOT in favor of building on land for which we don't know the price especially when an upcoming court date has been set to determine the price which is not too far off in the future. Again, you probably wouldn't do that in a personal situation since you call yourself "frugal" but yet you don't mind doing that on behalf of all of the taxpayers. There is no way a SB member can call themselves fiscally responsible but support QT. Actually, after this came up on here last night my husband and I discussed this and we think that if we knew what nearby properties had sold for that could be used as comps, we'd feel comfortable building on the land knowing that the chosen value would have to be in line with the comps. I am comfortable with the SD doing the same thing. |
|
|
|
Post by momof3 on Apr 19, 2007 7:54:54 GMT -6
Again, you probably wouldn't do that in a personal situation since you call yourself "frugal" but yet you don't mind doing that on behalf of all of the taxpayers. . I believe in mitigating risk and taking the best possible course of action. So, yes, I may do that in a personal situation based on my attorney's advice and the comps. The closest personal situation I can compare this to is taking out an adjustable rate mortgage. And yes, we did that on our first place - a 7/23 balloon. |
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Apr 19, 2007 8:00:34 GMT -6
Uh wrong about my feelings on eminent domain. You are missing the point. I am NOT in favor of building on land for which we don't know the price especially when an upcoming court date has been set to determine the price which is not too far off in the future. Again, you probably wouldn't do that in a personal situation since you call yourself "frugal" but yet you don't mind doing that on behalf of all of the taxpayers. There is no way a SB member can call themselves fiscally responsible but support QT. Actually, after this came up on here last night my husband and I discussed this and we think that if we knew what nearby properties had sold for that could be used as comps, we'd feel comfortable building on the land knowing that the chosen value would have to be in line with the comps. I am comfortable with the SD doing the same thing. Sometimes when you have most of the facts - ( i.e. the 2 major comps for similar properties in the immediate area) - one takes a risk and I disagree people don't do that in their personal lives. How many people ( I know I was one) bridge mortgages and start construction on a house before their old house is sold ? Answer - plenty. Why ? because they have the comps for the area where their old house is at - they know what the approximate price they will get for it is, as well as the average selling time and they move forward. I agree QT was not the preferred choice - but being forced into it in order to acquire the best property for the new school was the best option on the table, so I will live with it. |
|
|
|
Post by momof3 on Apr 19, 2007 8:02:50 GMT -6
Good point who. We also bought our second house without contingency before we sold our first. We were comfortable with the market situation and the comps and felt ok taking that risk.
To suggest that no one takes risks with their own money is far-fetched. We put money in the stock market. The key is mitigating risk and imo the sd has done that.
|
|
|
|
Post by sd204taxpayer on Apr 19, 2007 8:58:46 GMT -6
Uh wrong about my feelings on eminent domain. You are missing the point. I am NOT in favor of building on land for which we don't know the price especially when an upcoming court date has been set to determine the price which is not too far off in the future. Again, you probably wouldn't do that in a personal situation since you call yourself "frugal" but yet you don't mind doing that on behalf of all of the taxpayers. There is no way a SB member can call themselves fiscally responsible but support QT. Actually, after this came up on here last night my husband and I discussed this and we think that if we knew what nearby properties had sold for that could be used as comps, we'd feel comfortable building on the land knowing that the chosen value would have to be in line with the comps. I am comfortable with the SD doing the same thing. I guess my question is why are most of you so willing to trust the values reached by the school district's appraisals as opposed to the values reached by BB 's appraisals? In doing an appraisal you just don't look at the sale price as implied by a few here - you also have to look at the net usable acres of the property - something that is not reflected in a sales price unless the appraiser contacts the parties involved in the contract. Most of the time appraisers do not go to that extent - they only go to the county office and look up the sales value. |
|
|
|
Post by bob on Apr 19, 2007 9:02:34 GMT -6
Some of BB comps are commercial corner property on major intersections and some are not even in the area. I think BB used one property that is zoned HD.
The SD and BB are not appraisals but what the land sold for (comps).
|
|
|
|
Post by bob on Apr 19, 2007 9:07:21 GMT -6
What year did we file for the 25 acres? It think 03. Someone correct me if I am wrong.
|
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Apr 19, 2007 9:07:46 GMT -6
Actually, after this came up on here last night my husband and I discussed this and we think that if we knew what nearby properties had sold for that could be used as comps, we'd feel comfortable building on the land knowing that the chosen value would have to be in line with the comps. I am comfortable with the SD doing the same thing. I guess my question is why are most of you so willing to trust the values reached by the school district's appraisals as opposed to the values reached by BB 's appraisals? In doing an appraisal you just don't look at the sale price as implied by a few here - you also have to look at the net usable acres of the property - something that is not reflected in a sales price unless the appraiser contacts the parties involved in the contract. Most of the time appraisers do not go to that extent - they only go to the county office and look up the sales value. Maybe because in real estate an 'appraisal' is quite different than a 'comparable' where you actually have a sale.  |
|
|
|
Post by sd204taxpayer on Apr 19, 2007 9:09:31 GMT -6
I guess my question is why are most of you so willing to trust the values reached by the school district's appraisals as opposed to the values reached by BB 's appraisals? In doing an appraisal you just don't look at the sale price as implied by a few here - you also have to look at the net usable acres of the property - something that is not reflected in a sales price unless the appraiser contacts the parties involved in the contract. Most of the time appraisers do not go to that extent - they only go to the county office and look up the sales value. Maybe because in real estate an 'appraisal' is quite different than a 'comparable' where you actually have a sale. Comps are components of an appraisal  |
|
|
|
Post by bob on Apr 19, 2007 9:10:18 GMT -6
Maybe because in real estate an 'appraisal' is quite different than a 'comparable' where you actually have a sale. Comps are components of an appraisal Comps are sales of land and what are used in this process. |
|
|
|
Post by momof3 on Apr 19, 2007 9:12:25 GMT -6
In doing an appraisal you just don't look at the sale price as implied by a few here - you also have to look at the net usable acres of the property - something that is not reflected in a sales price unless the appraiser contacts the parties involved in the contract. are you talking about damage to the remainder? If so, yes I have taken that into account in my decision to support the sb on this one. Also, my support is based on actual sale prices, not appraisals. Also due to the fact that the bb attorneys first tactic was to get the condemnation suit dimissed because the 257/acre was not fair and reasonable (what is it called "good faith offer" or someting-?). The judge ruled for the district in that one, so that makes me think that the judge is leaning towards closer to 257 than what BB is thinking. |
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Apr 19, 2007 9:14:28 GMT -6
Maybe because in real estate an 'appraisal' is quite different than a 'comparable' where you actually have a sale. Comps are components of an appraisal not if the comp os $230K and the appraisal is $600K -- no different then if buying a home, you want a loan for a home selling for $600K because someone picked that amount and all the comps in the area are $230K -- no one will give you a mortgage because there is a disconnect.....so pay cash or throw out the 'appraisal' I can try and get an appraiser to appraise my home for 3x it's value, but no one will be able to get a loan for it. |
|
|
|
Post by sd204taxpayer on Apr 19, 2007 9:16:33 GMT -6
In doing an appraisal you just don't look at the sale price as implied by a few here - you also have to look at the net usable acres of the property - something that is not reflected in a sales price unless the appraiser contacts the parties involved in the contract. are you talking about damage to the remainder? If so, yes I have taken that into account in my decision to support the sb on this one. Also, my support is based on actual sale prices, not appraisals. Also due to the fact that the bb attorneys first tactic was to get the condemnation suit dimissed because the 257/acre was not fair and reasonable (what is it called "good faith offer" or someting-?). The judge ruled for the district in that one, so that makes me think that the judge is leaning towards closer to 257 than what BB is thinking. Nope - totally diferent issue - net usable vs damage to remainder. Net usable is the usable acreage of the property - maybe there is a gas pipe line or wetlands or something else reducing the use of the property. Damage to the remainder is when you are splitting a parcel and affecting the use of the remaining property |
|
|
|
Post by sd204taxpayer on Apr 19, 2007 9:31:30 GMT -6
I've reposted my original post to the quick take board so this thread can stay on track
|
|
