RM 02-20-76 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

4. COMMUNICATIONS (Cont'd Ms. Derbeck, South Bend Tribune Reporter, noted that the sale of land, as shown in the financial plan are unsold parcels, but as they are included, if that is speculation of land sale? Mr. Brownell advised that the sale of Block 6 is shown in the finan- cial plan; the Plaza Park land, Disposition Parcel No. 6 -2, that will be sold to the City and is 'Item 6a on today's Agenda; and we also are estimating the possibility of other land sales in Project Indiana R -66. The Chair added that under HUD regulations, our appraisals are old, and we have asked Real Estate Research Corporation of Chicago for re- appraisals, which are in process at this time, and it would be his presumption that some of these land'values will go up, but others may go down. We don't know; this is where you get the experts from the real estate field on just what land is worth. Mr. Dan Caesar, WSBT -TV reporter, asked, "In other words, you are not abandoning the Project? You will continue to go through with it and fulfill your obligation ?" The Chair replied, "AMEN! Yes." Ms. Derbeck said, then the interpretation of the word 'close -out' is to close the books, rather than closing out the Project, and Mr. Brownell advised that it might be the close - out of the books perhaps, but the financial plan goes on. Ms. Derbeck further asked if there is a close -out in August, or whenever the time would be set, how would that affect our plans to do more construc- tion of the Plaza, or does that mean we couldn't do it any more? Mr. Brownell advised the Plaza doesn't have anything to do with that; it is not part of the Federal project, other than just part of the plan. In other words, the money for the Plaza doesn't come out of Federal funds. We always do ask for HUD approval, but that it is more of a courtesy than anything. Mrs. Irene Mutzl, Fair Tax Association, asked what the lawsuits are that President Nimtz referred to previously. Mr. Brownell reported on the Columbia Warehouse lawsuits due to the fire, and that we settled one at the last meeting for $1,000; prior to that we settled one for $14,500 of our money, plus the insurance company's money that comes from the insurance company for the City. We were not insured and are not supposed to be under HUD rules. We still have cases pending against us in that regard that are not settled and have not been tried as yet. The Chair added there's another one; e.g., the question of priority of funds to pay the Barrett Law obligations- -which has the priority? When the money is in the till, does the Barrett Law obligations come first, second, or third, etc. Mr. Brownell said the title to real estate is in- volved in that. The question is, does the welfare lien, or Barrett Law lien come first? Does the tax lien or Barrett Law lien have precedence? See the confusion? It's a matter when we get into it; there is not enough money to go around to the title of all the people who have interest in the property, so that has to be settled. - 5 -