COMMISSIONERS WANT TO GIVE TAXPAYERS A $150,000,000+ BATH.

Well, we’re really not sure of the total loss to taxpayers because our sources have heard several different figures. Below is one taxpayer advocate’s response to this epic financial disaster.

I am totally befuddled with your comment in the article entitled “Murdock Village Plan Begins To Take Shape”, which stated “A more immediate benefit to the county is that, once the land is transferred to private ownership, it will go on the tax rolls, producing at least $15 million in annual property taxes right away, said Lucienne Pears, county economic development director.”

Given the land is being purchased for $11.6 million and given the county’s property tax millage is 6.3, please have Ms. Pears tell you (and county taxpayers) what magical tricks she is using to calculate annual property tax collections having an amount on the 452 acres being purchased greater than the acreage’s purchase price.

I have been using the figure of $140M as the county taxpayers’ MV investment. In the past two MV articles in the Sun, it has been stated the county has spent to date $128M on MV plus it owes $42.5M to the bank, which loan accrues interest. Therefore, it is safe to say the county taxpayers will probably end up investing (ha, ha) “outside of the PEG, LLC transaction” a total amount nearing $175M for MV, which calculates to about $204,000 per developmental acre. Then according to your article, the taxpayers will have to reimburse PEG for “the roadway cost” on the 75 acres identified in Phase 1, whatever that amount will total. And then the latter taxpayer funding covers only 16.6% of the acreage being bought. What lies in store for more taxpayer investment on the other 83.4% of the acreage PEG bought, if developed plus the balance of the developmental acreage not being sold to PEG, which total numbers about 404 acres?

The potential taxpayer investment numbers are ridiculous by all logical standards to the point where the taxpayers, whose tax money was invested by past commissioners without their consent in this fiasco, should have the power to vote in a referendum whether of not they want any more of their hard earned money invested (wasted) in developing this acreage where the per acre development cost is among the highest in the whole country —-urban, suburban, farmland.

At this juncture, a majority of 3 commissioners on the BOCC should not have the power to mandate, without consent, more taxpayer money be invested in this mess!

And again, I reiterate that any projections for the “future” submitted by any developer to justify any real estate development investment cannot be accurately compiled/believed by the reader given the existence of very turbulent national and global economic and financial environments. So if the commissioners decide to commit further taxpayer money into MV based on long or intermediate term financial projections provided by a developer, then that political decision would be based on nothing but “hope” and, therefore, such additional investment would be irresponsible and would totally violate the commissioners’ fiduciary responsibility to the taxpayers of this county.

Additionally, if the PEG deal closes and the county receives over $11M at closing, 100% of the money received should be committed (in writing by the BOCC) to help fund the county’s critical infrastructure replacement requirements (tens of millions of which currently have no credible funding sources), and not for any other purpose, including more growing of the size of county government.

Please advise me whether you misunderstood what Ms. Pears told you on her property tax comment or whether she actually made that statement verbatim.