Shout Box

Who's Online
0 registered (), 10 Guests and 3 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Page 19 of 22 < 1 2 ... 17 18 19 20 21 22 >
Topic Options
#60668 - 10/01/11 03:36 PM Re: Taxes VS preservation...have at it! [Re: Kent]
donald perry Offline
veteran

Registered: 06/27/11
Posts: 1530
Loc: New Jersey
Originally Posted By: Kent
Donald, you're pretty whacky. I'm not going to waste my time with a play by play rebuttal of your nonsense. Instead, I have a challenge for you.

In one of your many posts above you chose two political appointees, the Gardiner tax assessor, and a Gardiner Zoning Board pf Appeals member to buttress your claim that the zoning law has not reduced property values of Mohonk Preserve neighbors. Rather than use such highly biased sources, why not choose professional real estate appraisers?

Here's my challenge. I'll bet you $1,000 that the value of my land has depreciated by at least 10% as a direct consequence of the zoning law. The values with and without the zoning law will be appraised by three professionals who have no affiliation with the preserve or any landowner. It would be best to bring in people from way out of town really. The loser will have to fork over $1,000 and also pay the fees of the appraisers, which will run about $1,500 altogether. So we each would have to put $2,500 into escrow before the appraisals.

Are you willing to put your money where your mouth is or are you going to prattle on for another ten pages?

Edited to add: As you have already revealed your litigious character, you'd have to previously agree to not sue the appraisers or whoever holds the escrow funds should the appraisals not go your way.


Originally Posted By: Kent
I'll bet you $1,000 that the value of my land has depreciated by at least 10% as a direct consequence of the zoning law. The values with and without the zoning law will be appraised ...


The new zoning, the old zoning, or both? In other words if we are talking about appraisals with the old zoning and the intentions of the old zoning in place then, yes I am interested. What kind of construction did you have in mind?



Edited by donald perry (10/01/11 03:41 PM)
_________________________
The Mohonk Mountain House and the Mohonk Preserve have done a great job protecting the environment thus far, but ... it's all down hill from here http://youtu.be/9AU8fMo8v4k.

Top
#60669 - 10/01/11 03:40 PM Re: Taxes VS preservation...have at it! [Re: ianmanger]
chip Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 10/06/01
Posts: 2676
Loc: Sittin' Pretty in Fat City
As the current real estate values have declined through-out the entire U.S., it would be very difficult to prove that any local reduced value along the ridge is a result of zoning changes rather than part of more pervasive changes. Also, Gardiner real estate became quite inflated after 9/1/01 and the general histeria to move north from NY City seems to have quelled.

Top
#60671 - 10/01/11 03:55 PM Re: Taxes VS preservation...have at it! [Re: chip]
Rickster Offline
old hand

Registered: 10/16/07
Posts: 847
Loc: Orange Cty, NY
Chip has made some fine points. The three out of town appraisers would have to really do two appraisals. One reflecting the probable current value without the new zoning code, and one reflecting the current value with the new zoning code. Would this change the cost of have these three appraisers?

Top
#60673 - 10/01/11 04:03 PM Re: Taxes VS preservation...have at it! [Re: Rickster]
donald perry Offline
veteran

Registered: 06/27/11
Posts: 1530
Loc: New Jersey
"The new zoning, the old zoning, or both? In other words if we are talking about appraisals with the old zoning and the intentions of the old zoning in place then, yes I am interested. What kind of construction did you have in mind?"

Name three appraisers Kent.
_________________________
The Mohonk Mountain House and the Mohonk Preserve have done a great job protecting the environment thus far, but ... it's all down hill from here http://youtu.be/9AU8fMo8v4k.

Top
#60680 - 10/01/11 09:30 PM Re: Taxes VS preservation...have at it! [Re: yorick]
donald perry Offline
veteran

Registered: 06/27/11
Posts: 1530
Loc: New Jersey
*


Edited by donald perry (10/01/11 11:17 PM)
_________________________
The Mohonk Mountain House and the Mohonk Preserve have done a great job protecting the environment thus far, but ... it's all down hill from here http://youtu.be/9AU8fMo8v4k.

Top
#60682 - 10/01/11 10:23 PM Re: Taxes VS preservation...have at it! [Re: donald perry]
donald perry Offline
veteran

Registered: 06/27/11
Posts: 1530
Loc: New Jersey




These Little Red Hoods are $30.00 a piece. Email my with your address so I can send one to you!
_________________________
The Mohonk Mountain House and the Mohonk Preserve have done a great job protecting the environment thus far, but ... it's all down hill from here http://youtu.be/9AU8fMo8v4k.

Top
#60683 - 10/01/11 10:49 PM Re: Taxes VS preservation...have at it! [Re: chip]
tradjunkie Offline
enthusiast

Registered: 04/19/04
Posts: 365
Originally Posted By: chip
As the current real estate values have declined through-out the entire U.S., it would be very difficult to prove that any local reduced value along the ridge is a result of zoning changes rather than part of more pervasive changes. Also, Gardiner real estate became quite inflated after 9/1/01 and the general histeria to move north from NY City seems to have quelled.


Not at all, just another variable to control for, and something any appraiser ought to be able to take in stride. If non-ridge properties in the area have declined by, say 20% (just to pick a number), and ridge properties not in Gardiner have declined by 20%, and the ridge properties in Gardiner have declined by 30%, then you can do the math pretty easily.
(By the way, an initial investment of $100k would have turned into $80k off the ridge and $70k on the ridge, which is more than a 10% difference...it's an 8/7 or 7/8 difference.)

If there really is real money on this, I am glad to see that we have strong advocates on both side! This will be fun and instructive for all. I am particularly glad to see Kent wiling to invest to prove his point with some solid evidence. Data always wins me over, personally.

By the way, given that the original complaints around the closure were around the inability of ridgeowners to subdivide (staying in their existing home but selling surplus property to fund their retirement, right, Kent? 'cuz they still want to live there and have to live somewhere), I would argue that the parties involved should specify to the appraisers the value of any subdivision be explicitly calculated, since the value of the homeowners, stub property is rather moot since it was not to be sold.

Kent's original wager was 10% on the overall property value, not on the subdivided part, but I think that the allocation of value will be instructive for all parties.

Top
#60684 - 10/01/11 10:53 PM Re: Taxes VS preservation...have at it! [Re: Kent]
tradjunkie Offline
enthusiast

Registered: 04/19/04
Posts: 365
Originally Posted By: Kent
Here's my challenge. I'll bet you $1,000 that the value of my land has depreciated by at least 10% as a direct consequence of the zoning law.


Kent, I like your challenge. If this is really on and leads to a real outcome, and if you name an appropriate cause to which I can donate, I will donate a small sum within my budget (right now $20 is a stretch, but if my budget changes I will increase it) do the cause of your choice should you win. Should your wager fail, I will donate the same sum ($20, unless I increase it later) to the Mohonk Preserve or the Open Space Institute.

Top
#60685 - 10/01/11 10:54 PM Re: Taxes VS preservation...have at it! [Re: donald perry]
donald perry Offline
veteran

Registered: 06/27/11
Posts: 1530
Loc: New Jersey




These are $23.00. Send me an email and how many you want and what sizes. If you click on the shirts they enlarge so you can read it.


Edited by donald perry (10/01/11 10:55 PM)
_________________________
The Mohonk Mountain House and the Mohonk Preserve have done a great job protecting the environment thus far, but ... it's all down hill from here http://youtu.be/9AU8fMo8v4k.

Top
#60686 - 10/01/11 11:18 PM Re: Taxes VS preservation...have at it! [Re: donald perry]
donald perry Offline
veteran

Registered: 06/27/11
Posts: 1530
Loc: New Jersey
Kent wrote the following complaints about the Preserve:

Originally Posted By: Kent
1. Their willingness to use quit claim deeds and litigation to lay claim to land.

2. Their seeming propensity for mismarking property lines.

3. Their lobbying for aggressive zoning laws which take property rights away from their neighbors.

4. Their failure to pay property taxes as promised by Smiley family members at the inception of the Mohonk Trust.

5. Their lawsuit against the Town of Gardiner to avoid paying property taxes.


6. Transferring the MP campground land on RT 299 to the PIPC so the MP can circumvent the land use restrictions in the same zoning law they helped write.


We will now deal with "1. Their willingness to use quit claim deeds and litigation to lay claim to land."

In the use of quick claim deeds, we are talking about one or two cases as I understand it, both of which were some years ago. I will need more information on these properties you wish to establish as iron clad examples, but in regard to your point it is unnecessary. You cannot establish the Preserve as an Evil Empire based on isolated cases outside of present and ongoing protocol. So I am going to cross this off the list too.

However, if you want me to put it back on I will, for the sake of argument. But if you wish to argue it, I need the names and dates you want to use to get a better understanding on exactly how the quit claim deeds were used and why.

_______________________________________________________________


And as for your challenge about new Zoning vs. "old" Zoning at a 10% difference on your property, like I said before, that argument is spurious because it has to do with the consensus of the people on the ridge who do not necessarily climb and have been there for over 30 years. These are the people you will need to convince if you want to deal with the Zone. However there was a zone in place before, as well as a mind within the building department and the people concerning development on the ridge that was there all along, but not expressed succinctly in the old zone laws. We are done with Zoning, it is no longer a reasonable argument.

However, if you want to wager that your property has changed value at 10% because of zoning that's fine. But it has nothing to do with your own argument about the Preserve as the Evil Empire. And I do not how you are going to win because you will have to prove that people who care about the new zone were not the same people who put the old zone in place for the same reasons.

The very fact that you yourself have put up no trespassing signs demonstrates that you view these lands as zoned for private use set apart from people. Your intentions are to contradict yourself and an unchanged thinking, expecting us to view this as something reasonable.

I therefore conclude that Kent's arguments are spurious.
_________________________
The Mohonk Mountain House and the Mohonk Preserve have done a great job protecting the environment thus far, but ... it's all down hill from here http://youtu.be/9AU8fMo8v4k.

Top
Page 19 of 22 < 1 2 ... 17 18 19 20 21 22 >


Moderator:  webmaster 
Sponsored