The Education Corridor Appraisal is in!
As Mary Souza guessed, it’s close to $14,000,000. I figured it would be exactly $10,000,000. I may still win the bet, though: My guess is that the remediation costs for the site will factor out to $3,250,000, which would put the true value of the property at — guess what? — $10,000,000. No need to get a math degree for that one.
It’s true that the person who did the appraisal, Ed Morse, is a partner with Steve Meyer (and Charlie Nipp of LCDC fame). Steve Meyer is Judy Meyer’s significant other. Judy Meyer is a Trustee at NIC. She is a big supporter of the Education Corridor. She is up for re-election. No obvious connections there.
There are many things of concern, questions that need to be answered:
First, why was the property grabbed at, desperately and without public input, by NIC before it was appraised? The public must always question government that acts too quickly. I can cite Iraq and the Patriot Act as two recent, egregious examples.
Second, why is the public being shut out of the process? The simple answer is that the leadership behind the Education Corridor is too lazy to effectively sell this thing to the public. If that’s not true, then it boils down to alternatives that would imply ulterior motives. Heaven forbid!
Third, did the appraisal take into consideration the impact of the wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) on the land’s value? I know the county appraised the property at $2,500,000 when the mill was there, and the land was zoned industrial. (The most valuable parcel is the river frontage, just south of the WWTP.)
Fourth, where are impact studies for infrastructure? Last night at 5:00 PM, I spent 20 minutes on Northwest Blvd. getting from downtown to Ramsey. That’s only going to get worse with more traffic signals and a higher volume of cars.
Fifth, where are the classrooms? The corridor is not about “a scone and a latté” type of commercial development. The brochure from MIG details condos and lotsa retail space. It’s a commercial development. I would like to see classrooms and education facilities. But I don’t. That makes me, once again, question this entire fiasco. A North Idaho student does not attend school to be a downtown Coeur d’Alene consumer.
Sixth, why are Kootenai County residents paying for land for 4-year institutions when those schools are always funded by the State in Idaho?
The environmental clean-up is a key issue here. I still don’t see anything about keeping the contamination out of the river. Remember: environmental cleanup works different when private parties (e.g., Stimson and Chesrown) pruchase property than when the government purchase property. We may see a repeat of the disaster that’s happened in Los Angeles. A very scary, and likely possibility.
Meyer-Morse Ironwood Partners
Comment by Bill — August 28, 2008 @ 7:11 pm
Bill, you are knowledgeable about appraisal fraud and who to get involved. Do your thing.
Comment by Wallypog — August 29, 2008 @ 8:44 am
It’s noteworthy that the Coeur d’Alene Association of REALTORS(R) website appraisers list has about 70 appraisers.
I wonder who ordered and paid for the appraisal(s) and how many appraisals there were?
I recall that for one of my transfers from DC to Los Angeles, my employer contracted with a relocation service. I could list and sell my residence on my own, or I could use the relocation service. If I was unable to sell my residence and chose to use the relo service, the service would buy the residence from me for a fair price. The way the relo service determined its offer was to contract with three approved appraisers (I chose them from an approved list) for separate appraisals. The three appraisals were compared, some math was done, and the relo company made a very fair offer. I could have hired my own appraiser to make an independent appraisal to check if I’d had any concerns. It seemed to me that using three appraisers dramatically reduced the odds of collusion.
Comment by Bill — August 29, 2008 @ 9:06 am
Bill,
Will there be a need for future expansion of the WWTP with all of the building that is going on in this area? If so, in your guestamation, how much of the land will have to be used for this purpose?
Comment by concerned citizen — August 29, 2008 @ 10:41 am
CC, the WWTP expansion area was delineated some time ago and, I believe, appears on the city’s harbor center map and the lcdc map.
I want to know when this appraisal may be viewed by the public.
Comment by Susie Snedaker — August 29, 2008 @ 2:03 pm
The appraisal violates the American Society of Appraisers code of ethics under section 7.3 entitled “Disinterested Parties”. Having a stakeholder appraise the property in question requires at least a disclosure of the fact. Even under those circumstances the appraisal is suspect.
If there is no concern about the properties value why not employ an appraiser who would provide an unbiased and unquestioned study? Either they were worried that an objective appraisal would not deliver the value or good buddy Ed Morse needed the work. Regardless a party that will likely gain from the project has conducted the appraisal which is now being cited as genuine and accurate. There is not one single mortgage underwriter who would not immediately throw this appraisal into the trash and terminate any dealings with the parties involved.
Comment by Wallypog — August 29, 2008 @ 2:43 pm
Susie,
Why would anyone in their right mind delineated room for expansion when the surrounding area is growing in leaps and bounds? What Is the city going to do with all of the extra waste that will be generated with all of this building that is going on along with the building that is projected for that very area?
Do they really think noone is going to poop in that area? Or, when the time comes, are the citizens of CDA going to be the ones that will be asked to pick up the tab to move the WWTP because there will be no room for expansion thus giving maximum profit for the developers involved and the citizens will get screwed AGAIN?
The people that are in favor of this are completely out of thier flippin’ minds!
Comment by concerned citizen — August 29, 2008 @ 3:07 pm
CC,
I don’t know. I am not an environmental engineer with a specialty in wastewater treatment programs. But both the University of Idaho and Washington State University have programs that the City could certainly have used to answer your very relevant question. WSU and the UofI work cooperatively in their education and research programs in this area.
Comment by Bill — August 29, 2008 @ 4:31 pm
I note with interest that a whistle blower on corruption in local government, has been selected by Sen. McCain to be Vice President. Imagine the possibilities for folks like us.
Comment by Gary Ingram — August 29, 2008 @ 8:25 pm
Gary,
You make a very good point and may be the deciding factor in the way some vote.
Comment by concerned citizen — August 30, 2008 @ 5:22 am
local government, state government and national government. the barracuda hates corruption. local was cleaning up as mayor, state was cleaning up as an ethics commissioner and governor. now she moves on to kick the corrupt out of the gop in dc. happy days.
Comment by TheWiz — August 30, 2008 @ 6:01 am
CC, Sid Frederickson has stated in the past that the WWTP facilities will have the capacity to serve 100,000 residents. The city adamantly refused to consider adding piping on the remodel of Northwest Blvd. to move grey water to irrigate city owned properties. I believe this was shortsighted. Mayor Bloem has mentioned moving the WWTP facility on several occasions.
Comment by Susie Snedaker — August 30, 2008 @ 9:47 am
Susie, 100,000 residents yes but does that include all of the commercial, retail AND students along with the residents?
Comment by concerned citizen — August 30, 2008 @ 9:53 pm
CC, This was prior to the push for the so called education corridor so I assume that excluded the proposed development. He is now considering or planning to add piping for grey water (effluent) under the railroad right of way (bike/walking trail.) I did note a $200,000 expense for effluent reuse pilot project in the 2008-2009 preliminary budget plan. Also included is $150,000 for a rate study. No doubt the city will choose to penalize the residents and reward the developers of large projects in rate adjustmennts as they did with the water rates.
Comment by Susie Snedaker — August 31, 2008 @ 10:42 am