Middletown Ohio


Find us on
 Google+ and Facebook


 

Home | Yearly News Archive | Advertisers | Blog | Contact Us
Friday, April 19, 2024
FORUM CITY SCHOOLS COMMUNITY
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - BANK ONE..TO SELL OR NOT ?
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

BANK ONE..TO SELL OR NOT ?

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  12>
Author
 Rating: Topic Rating: 1 Votes, Average 5.00  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
Vivian Moon View Drop Down
MUSA Council
MUSA Council


Joined: May 16 2008
Location: Middletown, Ohi
Status: Offline
Points: 4187
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote Vivian Moon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: BANK ONE..TO SELL OR NOT ?
    Posted: Apr 14 2014 at 6:47am

Posted: 12:00 a.m. Monday, April 14, 2014

To sell or not? That’s the question council faces

By Rick McCrabb

Staff Writer

MIDDLETOWN — 

One of the investors interested in purchasing the city-owned Bank One building downtown wants City Council to delay its decision on whether to sell the property.

In an e-mail to Mayor Lawrence Mulligan Jr. that was obtained by the Journal-News, Mike Robinette, who already owns several properties in the city, suggested council table its discussion set for Tuesday’s meeting.

At the last council meeting, members were told Toast of the Town Events LLC, offered $135,000 for the Bank One building, 2 S. Main St., and artist and owner Chris Walden planned to convert the building into an art gallery and event center. They heard a presentation from Doug Adkins, director of community revitalization, and will vote on the emergency legislation Tuesday.

Robinette has said that he was interested in buying the building, but was told by city officials that it wasn’t for sale, since it was being lease to Miami University Middletown. But when Robinette learned that Toast of the Town Events had made an offer, he made two offers: one for $185,000, and a second for $202,500, or $67,500 more than the offer the city is considering.

Adkins told council the offer was unsolicited and said it made “good sense” because it generated revenue, fit the downtown business plan and got the city out of the landlord business.

The building is valued at $137,980, according to the Butler County Auditor’s Office.

The city paid $275,000 in December 2010 to the Perry Thatcher estate for several downtown properties: CG&E Building, First National building, Masonic Temple and the Bank One building, Adkins said. He said the city received $202,000 from Higher Education Partners for the purchase of the former CG&E Building that is being used by Cincinnati State Middletown. If the Bank One building is sold, the city would make $62,000 off its investment.

City Council has donated the First National building to Cincinnati State Middletown and the Masonic Temple building to the Art Central Foundation.

In an e-mail to Robinette, Mulligan said council was interested in a selling the properties to “a broad, diverse group of investors and owners that can help move these properties forward.”

While Mulligan said there are examples where single ownership and control works well, but in the city’s case, he believed “diversification is better.”

Robinette’s investment group, Geo CRE, already owns the Goetz Tower and the Rose Furniture building.

Robinette wrote that the city should conduct a competitive process for the sale of this property. He said the Bank One property has significantly more valueable than the negotiated price of $135,000.

“We believe it is important that the city thoroughly evaluate all offers for the purchase of this property, considering their track record of success and ability to successfully complete and sustain the project,” he wrote.

 

Back to Top
VietVet View Drop Down
MUSA Council
MUSA Council
Avatar

Joined: May 15 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 7008
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote VietVet Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Apr 14 2014 at 7:44am
"TO SELL OR NOT?"

How about "TO FOLLOW THE LAW OR NOT?" How about "TO MAKE THE SALES IN A COMPETITIVE, OPEN ENVIRONMENT OR NOT?" How about "TO SELL TO THE HIGHEST BIDDER?"

WOULDN'T ANY OF THESE OPTIONS BE BETTER THAN TO CHOOSE THE BUYER BASED ON THE OLD TIME WORN THEME OF CATERING TO THE FRIENDS OF THE CITY AND CLOSING THE DOOR ON ANY OTHERS THAT ARE INTERESTED?

WHAT IS THE MATTER WITH THE PEOPLE IN THE CITY BUILDING AND BEHIND THAT COUNCIL DESK?
I'm so proud of my hometown and what it has become. Recall 'em all. Let's start over.
Back to Top
spiderjohn View Drop Down
Prominent MUSA Citizen
Prominent MUSA Citizen
Avatar

Joined: Jul 01 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 2749
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote spiderjohn Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Apr 14 2014 at 8:49am
Cool--I expect this to be pulled due to the possibility that it will not pass as an "emergency"--why should it

Getting my bid ready
Back to Top
Mike_Presta View Drop Down
MUSA Council
MUSA Council
Avatar

Joined: Apr 20 2008
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 3483
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Mike_Presta Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Apr 14 2014 at 9:56am
"because it ... fit the downtown business plan"!?!?!?

That is exactly the problem!!!

1. What the heck city government doing imposing a "business plan"???

2.  Their "business plan" is the same old risky scheme that has continuously failed for decades (using other people's money, I might add)!!!
“Mulligan said he ... doesn’t believe they necessarily make the return on investment necessary to keep funding them.” …The Middletown Journal, January 30, 2012
Back to Top
acclaro View Drop Down
Prominent MUSA Citizen
Prominent MUSA Citizen
Avatar

Joined: Jul 01 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 1878
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote acclaro Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Apr 14 2014 at 10:26am
It matters not to me, whom gets the building.

What matters is the law as written is followed, associated with an equitable and publicized bidding process.

And, the city receives the maximum amount of money from liquidation. Simple. Amazing how the city could not fund Sunset Pool, its glorious history, and usage for decades, and could care less about making an extra 75,000- 100,000, or more.

Finally;

Larry Mulligan says;

"While Mulligan said there are examples where single ownership and control works well, but in the city’s case, he believed “diversification is better.”

Wait Larry, didn't the city buy all the buildings to prevent diversification, to control who, why, and when, in order to avoid real estate speculation that was supposedly going to prevent Cincinnati State from having HEP spend more money?

Elementary contradictions ERODE any credibility by anyone at Donham and Main.

Lets walk through this again:

1.  Open bids 30-45 days.

2.  Sell to highest bidder

3. Proceed to selling airport

4. Close on building after bidding closed.

Painless.   
 

'An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last.' - Winston Churchill
Back to Top
Vivian Moon View Drop Down
MUSA Council
MUSA Council


Joined: May 16 2008
Location: Middletown, Ohi
Status: Offline
Points: 4187
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Vivian Moon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Apr 14 2014 at 10:36am

Gentlemen,
 Do you remember the Masonic Building real estate deal?
 City Hall received a bid on this property also and yet they decided to DONATE the property 
 to the Art Central knowing that this group did not have the funds available to restore the building.
 This building also had a value of more than $5,000 and yet proper procedure was not followed in this
 real estate deal either.
  

 
  
Back to Top
acclaro View Drop Down
Prominent MUSA Citizen
Prominent MUSA Citizen
Avatar

Joined: Jul 01 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 1878
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote acclaro Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Apr 14 2014 at 10:51am
Memo to MUM;

Monthly RENT, $ 5200 OVER 5 Years- $312,000.

Bid range- 135,000; 200,000.

Savings if Buy- Greater than $100,000.

So....why not bid?

Okay, get it. You lease as a favor to PT and city. 

'An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last.' - Winston Churchill
Back to Top
Vivian Moon View Drop Down
MUSA Council
MUSA Council


Joined: May 16 2008
Location: Middletown, Ohi
Status: Offline
Points: 4187
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote Vivian Moon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Apr 14 2014 at 11:03am

Acclaro
I would like to add to your above list
Because these historic buildings are in such poor condition, Mr. Mulligans main concern should be that the
investors have the knowledge and funds available to restore these buildings within a reasonable amount of
time.
Has Mr. Walden and his group proven to anyone at City Hall that they have $250,000 to $500,000 to restore this building within a reasonable amount of time?
Isn't that what a good banker would do?

Back to Top
Mike_Presta View Drop Down
MUSA Council
MUSA Council
Avatar

Joined: Apr 20 2008
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 3483
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Mike_Presta Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Apr 14 2014 at 11:12am
Originally posted by acclaro acclaro wrote:

Amazing how the city could not care less about making an extra 75,000- 100,000, or more.

Well, I don't know how much that is in pizzas (City Hall's currency of choice when trying to pass a tax increase), but it could fund a police officer or a firefighter for over a year!!!
“Mulligan said he ... doesn’t believe they necessarily make the return on investment necessary to keep funding them.” …The Middletown Journal, January 30, 2012
Back to Top
acclaro View Drop Down
Prominent MUSA Citizen
Prominent MUSA Citizen
Avatar

Joined: Jul 01 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 1878
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote acclaro Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Apr 14 2014 at 11:25am
Valid point on funding an officer or two, and cost to restore/ maintain.

Surprised HEP hasn't shown an interest non C State related, just benefit from return on low capital outlay.

Mr. Coon is impressive with the work they have done in this wheelhouse, historic.

Who is the E in Geo CRE, (Coon, Robinette, and E?)

Just curious, no significance to process.

'An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last.' - Winston Churchill
Back to Top
Mike_Presta View Drop Down
MUSA Council
MUSA Council
Avatar

Joined: Apr 20 2008
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 3483
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Mike_Presta Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Apr 14 2014 at 11:34am
Originally posted by acclaro acclaro wrote:

It matters not to me, whom gets the building.

What matters is the law as written is followed, associated with an equitable and publicized bidding process.
...
Lets walk through this again:

1.  Open bids 30-45 days.

2.  Sell to highest bidder

3. Proceed to selling airport

4. Close on building after bidding closed.

Painless.   
 

You are exactly correct, Acclaro!!!

City Hall should have no concern with whom the bidder is--only with whether or not they have submitted a legitimate bid.

Neither should City Hall have any concern with the successful bidder's "business plan".  After the sale, City Hall's only concerns should be whether or not the property is maintained in compliance with building codes and in compliance with zoning ordinances!!!

If the mayor (or any other city official) wants to get involved with "business plans", they should resign, develop all the business plan that their hearts' desire, and then raise the private venture capital necessary to implement those plans!!!
“Mulligan said he ... doesn’t believe they necessarily make the return on investment necessary to keep funding them.” …The Middletown Journal, January 30, 2012
Back to Top
Mike_Presta View Drop Down
MUSA Council
MUSA Council
Avatar

Joined: Apr 20 2008
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 3483
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Mike_Presta Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Apr 14 2014 at 11:42am
Originally posted by acclaro acclaro wrote:

Memo to MUM;

Monthly RENT, $ 5200 OVER 5 Years- $312,000.

Bid range- 135,000; 200,000.

Savings if Buy- Greater than $100,000.

So....why not bid?

Okay, get it. You lease as a favor to PT and city. 

You are correct about the favorable ROI.  I thought about submitting a bid myself, but then rejected the idea:  If MUM bails at the end of their lease, who wants to be stuck paying taxes on this white elephant???
“Mulligan said he ... doesn’t believe they necessarily make the return on investment necessary to keep funding them.” …The Middletown Journal, January 30, 2012
Back to Top
acclaro View Drop Down
Prominent MUSA Citizen
Prominent MUSA Citizen
Avatar

Joined: Jul 01 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 1878
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote acclaro Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Apr 14 2014 at 12:25pm
A subsidiary of Weit-Keiffer LLC is interested in bidding that does strategic fund raising consulting for higher learning institution, the elite privates. Non profit, no property taxes, will offer to redo the MUM contract at cost, no mark-up to MUM, for 5 year commitment.

This may be interesting to determine what the final cash $ to be.

Isn't the concept of open, public bidding, to guarantee everyone has a seat at the table?

Appears council thinks taxpayer cash is their hedge fund investment to use.

Transparency is a good thing.



'An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last.' - Winston Churchill
Back to Top
Vivian Moon View Drop Down
MUSA Council
MUSA Council


Joined: May 16 2008
Location: Middletown, Ohi
Status: Offline
Points: 4187
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Vivian Moon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Apr 14 2014 at 1:21pm

S T A F F  R E P O R T 
For Business Meeting:
April 1, 2014   

Date: March 19, 2014 
Mr. Adkins states:

Original Purchase Price by City: $275,000 for all buildings 
Plus City Hall forgave and or paid all leins and debts on these buildings
Plus City Hall gave the Senior Citizen Building to Cincinnati State, valued at about $325,000
Plus City Hall paid $3,000 for Appraisal of Senior Citizen Building plus attorney fees
Plus City Hall paid Greg Pratt $75,000 to negotiate the deal with Cincinnati State

Less Cinergy purchase by HEP: -$202,000 

Deficit: ($ 73,000) 

Purchase price to City for Bank One: $ 135,000 

SUBJECT  1  

Net to City from all purchase/sale transactions: $+62,000

The records of the DOWNTOWN FUND clearly show that City Hall has spent thousands of dollars on the maintenance of these downtown properties over the past few years…read and weep
DOWNTOWN FUND 2010
http://www.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~ohcmiddl/DowntownFund-2010.htm
DOWNTOWN FUND 2011
http://www.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~ohcmiddl/DowntownFund-2011.htm
DOWNTOWN FUND 2012 first half
http://www.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~ohcmiddl/DowntownFund-2012.htm

No matter what magic math City Hall may use the net is not $+62,000 as proven my their own records.




Back to Top
Vivian Moon View Drop Down
MUSA Council
MUSA Council


Joined: May 16 2008
Location: Middletown, Ohi
Status: Offline
Points: 4187
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Vivian Moon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Jun 03 2014 at 3:23pm
APPRAISAL OF BANK ONE BUILDING  $297,000 to $300,000 and is now listed as an income property.

Back to Top
Vivian Moon View Drop Down
MUSA Council
MUSA Council


Joined: May 16 2008
Location: Middletown, Ohi
Status: Offline
Points: 4187
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Vivian Moon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Jun 03 2014 at 3:39pm
Please notice that this appraisal was completed on May 7,2014
When was it placed on the City Web Site?
Is City Hall back to playing games with the sell of this property again?
Back to Top
swohio75 View Drop Down
MUSA Citizen
MUSA Citizen


Joined: Jun 13 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 820
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote swohio75 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Jun 04 2014 at 10:07am
I don't care what an appraisal says, a building is only worth what someone is willing to pay for it.  
Back to Top
Vivian Moon View Drop Down
MUSA Council
MUSA Council


Joined: May 16 2008
Location: Middletown, Ohi
Status: Offline
Points: 4187
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Vivian Moon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Jun 04 2014 at 12:12pm
swohio75
I don't think $135,000 will buy this building now...unless you are a friend of those at City Hall.
Back to Top
Factguy View Drop Down
MUSA Resident
MUSA Resident


Joined: Dec 07 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 217
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Factguy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Jun 04 2014 at 12:16pm
$300,000 won't buy the building, unless you have detailed plans for use that is compliance with usage defined by Marty Kohler and others associated with art, history, and dining.
Back to Top
Vivian Moon View Drop Down
MUSA Council
MUSA Council


Joined: May 16 2008
Location: Middletown, Ohi
Status: Offline
Points: 4187
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Vivian Moon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Jun 04 2014 at 12:54pm
.....and that Factguy is why THEIR DOWNTOWN will not thrive
Back to Top
spiderjohn View Drop Down
Prominent MUSA Citizen
Prominent MUSA Citizen
Avatar

Joined: Jul 01 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 2749
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote spiderjohn Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Jun 04 2014 at 1:23pm
but....everything other city property in the area has been GIVEN away, + cash for repairs and efforts to achieve govt.grants, factguy?

city was ready to sell it for $135,000 to a sketchy group with very vague plans.... adjacent corners were given away-Rose building was given away + $300,000+, and nothing seems to be going on with any of them. city actions have rendered downtown property to be valued as worthless liabilities---the old Wards building--Sonshine--Ligon's--Studio/Strand--Happy Hobby House--Midd.Journal building--Historical Society site--Sorg Opera House(Colonial Theater-duh) etc.

check out the history of city involvement over the last decade+----forgiven loans, giveaways, repeated façade grants--all with virtually no conditions or time lines and not a lot to show for them--

is admin being vindictive after being nailed trying to illegally move this property?

remember--we don't really have a new city manager yet
what is the hold-up/snafu, factguy?

why RENT to MU-M while GIVING the farm to C State?
who has done the most to improve the city and long-term commitment/service?

but
I really like the people involved with both MU-M and C St.
C St. and Beau Verre are the only success stories in the district, though per $$ invested, expensive to the local taxpayers
Back to Top
swohio75 View Drop Down
MUSA Citizen
MUSA Citizen


Joined: Jun 13 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 820
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote swohio75 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Jun 04 2014 at 1:51pm
Speaking of commercial property, I understand the old Central Ave Dillman's store is on the market with a long-term lease agreement with Dollar General for over $1.3 million.


Back to Top
over the hill View Drop Down
MUSA Citizen
MUSA Citizen
Avatar

Joined: Oct 19 2012
Location: middletown
Status: Offline
Points: 952
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote over the hill Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Jun 04 2014 at 1:57pm
Beau-Verre has had their share of "sweetheart" deals while flying under the radar. I think some in the city building are running scared because their house of cards is about to crumble. Little by little their "dirty deals" are being uncovered. I don't think we have seen the last one. IMO
Back to Top
Factguy View Drop Down
MUSA Resident
MUSA Resident


Joined: Dec 07 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 217
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Factguy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Jun 04 2014 at 2:14pm
The property tax on the old Dillman store will be very high on a commercial lease. They should have waited a year and bought the Marsh property and made it a super-store. Jay Moorman said what the terms of his deal were, 300,000, which they paid back. What's the issue? City opening time for more bidders, and also writing bid requirements for use, as it would be unfair to have staggered bids rolling in, each knowing the offer from another submitted prior. Gnau who bought the Manchester is interested in buying Bank One. That will drive up Stefano's, barbecue joint, hair stylist.        
Back to Top
Factguy View Drop Down
MUSA Resident
MUSA Resident


Joined: Dec 07 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 217
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Factguy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: Jun 04 2014 at 2:32pm
Hasten to add: MUM has said they will leave the Bank One building if the buyer for building doesn't meet the standards the city will have for building. Only reason MUM is downtown is to help city. Play by their rules, or no MUM lease dollars, and won't be able to buy buildings if over 100,000 highest bidder that is in line with city. Robinette has too many downtown, city wants it to be diverse. Mark it down. MUM lease up end of June.  
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  12>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.109 seconds.
Copyright ©2024 MiddletownUSA.com    Privacy Statement  |   Terms of Use  |   Site by Xponex Media  |   Advertising Information