In last week’s Journal of Business, the headline, front page story says, “Lender takes part of Riverstone”. This is a very big story! The theaters at Riverstone have reverted back to a Seattle-based lender, as well as the buildings on either side of the theaters…including those containing Azteca and the home decor business on one side, and the ice cream shop all the way around the corner to Starbucks on the other. All of it.
The loan balance is $14 million plus $3,600 in daily interest since Aug. 1…ouch! There will be a Trustee Sale for the properties on Dec. 20 at First American Title in CdA.
Did I miss this in the Press?
Even more pathetic is that Riverstone is still considered to be the anchor project for the education corridor which is proceeding at some pace. Adding fuel to the spendthrift fire is the pending McEuen project. It is as though they can’t wait to waste public funds and the more the merrier. As poorly as many of our urban renewal projects have gone I have to wonder why any of them get any serious business traction at all.
Comment by Wallypog — October 9, 2011 @ 10:28 am
Don’t worry, it will all pay off after we are dead and gone. Right johna?
Comment by concerned citizen — October 9, 2011 @ 10:53 am
Mary, A little off point: your lcdc poll is tongue in cheek, isn’t it?
Comment by Ancientemplar — October 10, 2011 @ 7:56 am
You are so astute, Ancient!
Comment by mary — October 10, 2011 @ 8:28 am
Remember, CC, taxes are due and payable whether a property is in foreclosure or not. So, LCDC is receiving taxes from these properties, or they will even if they are delinquent. As such, there is no risk of default on the financing for the Ed Corridor and McEuen Field projects.
Also remember that even astute developers like Marshall Chesrown have struggled in this historic economic downturn. It’s unfortunate but that’s the nature of the real estate business. Riverstone will thrive again (as we’re seeing with all of the new construction) but in the meantime the taxes still flow to LCDC.
Comment by JohnA — October 10, 2011 @ 3:35 pm
Maybe I am wrong, but my understanding is that only the building that house the theater reverted back to the lender. Doesn’t Regal Entertainment still own the Riverstone Cinemas business and the assets inside the building? If this is a franchised theater that is actually owned by the developer it would be one of only a handful that Regal has ever done.
Comment by patrickh — October 10, 2011 @ 4:29 pm
patrickh,
This excerpt from the entire article (posted in its entirety this morning) may answer your question:
Comment by Bill — October 10, 2011 @ 5:03 pm
patrickh, I did not mean to imply that the there will no longer be movies in Riverstone. My understanding is that the buildings are in default, which I’m sure creates concerns for Regal, as well as all the other business owners in those buildings.
Comment by mary — October 10, 2011 @ 5:07 pm
Again, from today’s post:
Comment by Bill — October 10, 2011 @ 5:13 pm
Riverstone originally had the potential to be a stellar example of a well master planned development. It appears to me to be little more than a bunch of buildings placed here and there with little thought given to planning or architecture. It just might be that the only awards will be from lcdc not the American Institute of Architects – a definite bonus for John Stone but not the city.
Comment by Susie Snedaker — October 10, 2011 @ 10:33 pm
Chesrown did not struggle dumping the ed corridor on the public. How much would that $10 million$ hunk of overpriced land GENUINELY appraise for today, Austin? What was is really worth when that bogus lease was struck? That entire deal stunk (bogus appraisal, and all) and the public is left holding the bag. And if they sell any of that land off to any of the LCDC ‘connecteds’ you can bet it will appraise for really low, cuz of the downturn, huh John?
Just plain slime. Pure and simple.
Comment by Wallypog — October 11, 2011 @ 3:40 am
Why is it up to US to pay for riverstone when some of us could never see it come to fruition? Because there are those that have the need to see their name on a plack no matter the cost to the little people.
So, johnA once again chiming in, endorsing and condoning corporate welfare for his wealthy developer friends. Let me tell you that your wealthy developer friend Chesrown is NOT the only one that lost something. Jeeze man, have you seen the unemployment rate? At least the mills paid a livable wage. All of the service jobs that YOU created do not. They pay an unethical $3.35 per hour plus tips. That is disgusting. Oh yeah Chesrown lost SOME properties, but he is still living in his palace in mexico avoiding the contractors that he shafted and destroyed here in Idaho. You wealthy developer friends over extend themselves and everyone BUT them pay for it.
Wallypog,
I agree. I will NOT be surprised WHEN the LCDC and or NIC sell to their specific developer friends. I guarantee it WILL be much less than the grossly outragous price that WE, the taxpayers, paid for it.
Comment by concerned citizen — October 11, 2011 @ 7:00 am
The hearing for the rezone of the NIC former mill site has been rescheduled for November. The request is for a change from C17L to C17. I wonder who will profit from this change. This is not about education; it is about commercial development.
Comment by Susie Snedaker — October 11, 2011 @ 7:28 am
Wally, how the hell is the public left holding the bag because of what’s happening at Riverstone? Unless you live in the urban renewal district and the value of your property has increased since 1997 you don’t have one nickel invested in the LCDC financings of the Ed Corridor. Nothing.
Now, if you want to talk about NIC’s role in the corridor, and their acquistion of the waterfront parcel, and I assume like the rest of us you pay taxes to NIC, that is a different issue, one that is totally unrelated to Riverstone. To mix the two issues together is wrong, pure and simple.
CC, I’ve never met Chesrown and I have no wealthy friends. Plus, here’s one last fact. I haven’t been involved with LCDC since 2000 so I have no dog in this fight. I have my opinion, like you and Wally, and I understand I am allowed to voice that opinion here without personal assault.
Comment by JohnA — October 11, 2011 @ 11:40 am
The public paid a grossly inflated price for the corridor land. The GOB’s used a single outdated appraisal from an appraiser who happens to do all of the LCDC appraisals. No private business would ever buy property that way, not ONE. John A., you could not get a home mortgage using the same procedures used to substantiate the value established for the corridor property. No bank would use an outdated appraisal for any home loan. But the citizens DID because the FIX was in. Chesrown got his earnest money salvaged and the citizens get to pay top dollar, the very top dollar, for that property.
Comment by Wallypog — October 11, 2011 @ 12:22 pm
post #5 johnA wrote “Also remember that even astute developers like Marshall Chesrown have struggled in this historic economic downturn.”
I did not personally assault you. You are the one that claims how great it is to take our hard earned tax dollars from those that USED to at least have a livable wage from the mills in this town to entice wealthy developers. All the LCDC has done is attract sub minimum wage jobs creating a bigger gap between the haves and have nots. The majority of taxpayers in this town ARE the have nots.
Comment by concerned citizen — October 11, 2011 @ 12:48 pm
CC, the majority of the taxpayers in this town are not paying for McEuen Field or anything else funded by LCDC. Only the 14-15% of the city’s taxpayers, those in the urban renewal district, pay for the LCDC-funded projects. That is the way it works.
It would appear you should be aim your arguments at NIC, and not LCDC, because if you own property anywhere in Kootenai County you pay taxes to NIC, some of which went for the mill site. Remember, too, that neither NIC or LCDC had anything to do with the loss of the mill or the jobs that went with it.
I still contend that the acquisition of that property will be hailed as the right move, one that helped to create an education corridor our children and their children can enjoy, not in twenty years or even ten years, but very soon indeed.
Comment by JohnA — October 11, 2011 @ 1:45 pm
It is also noteworthy that you do not dispute my description of the corridor business MO. That informs us all which direction your ethics compass points. So if I can rob a bank and get away with it – izzat OK/w/U? After all you have no trouble if the citizens get robbed.
Comment by Wallypog — October 11, 2011 @ 3:42 pm
I think the anger here would best be directed toward the LCDC itself and the LCDC’s oversight, which is the City Council. If you’re unhappy, then please don’t blame Mr. Austin. Instead, focus your energy on getting new people on the City Council.
And by new people, I mean people who’ve never held public office before.
Comment by Dan — October 11, 2011 @ 3:48 pm
The thing is Dan, people that hold government positions, contracts (because of their connections), and government jobs cannot even begin to understand what they have created. They just “raise the taxes” if there isn’t enough. The sad thing is, they always make it LOOK like there isn’t enough so they can ask for more. Those of us in private sector pay until the end of July just to pay taxes. Listening to the same old rhetoric is getting old. Things MUST change. And no johnA, the end does NOT justify the means.
Comment by concerned citizen — October 11, 2011 @ 5:19 pm
A half truth, at best John and you know that. Everyone else in the County pays higher taxes when the TIF increment goes to the LCDC instead of to the other taxing agencies. But then why would anyone expect anything from you except apologies for the LCDC instead of the whole truth?
Comment by justinian — October 11, 2011 @ 6:08 pm
You are not right, Justinian. Sorry, but you don’t understand local government taxation. Governments cannot raise taxes just to full some alleged void in taxes deferred to another entity. Taxes don’t go up because of urban renewal. In fact, a case can be made that they go DOWN because of urban renewal, especially for schools that pass special obligation levies like plant facilities and maintenance overrides. Stay tuned next week as I make that case in the CDA Press.
After reading my article, if you choose not to believe the truth, that’s something I can’t help you with.
Comment by JohnA — October 11, 2011 @ 7:10 pm