Lakeport Landing business

[jrc]

Why waste time with bashing FLL, he can't help himself. Thanksgiving is coming, we all have that special relative.

Back to the topic. In my opinion, assuming the city does not need the lot for city purposes, it should sell or lease to the highest bidder. Anything else would smell of corruption.

[TiltonBB]

Laconia Daily Sun

http://www.laconiadailysun.com/index...keport-landing

[LIforrelaxin]

So lets think about this some. What has Lakeport Landing gotten out of this deal....

1. Free use of public property
2. extra room to help them run their business.

What has the City of Laconia gotten from this:

1. A successful business with in the Town.

What would seem reasonable at this point?

1. For Lakeport Landing be given the chance to buy the lot at market value
2. For Lakeport Landing to get the first right of refusal
3. For Lakeport Landing to create a new lease for the land with the Town, that incorporates a market value rent for the Town.

At the end of the day the Town will do what it wants.....I suggest that those of you that Live in Laconia, and have an opinion on this to get involved and give your opinion to the City Council....

I also think that Ms. Blizzard needs to be careful and more truthful about what she says. Loosing the use of the property will have a negative effect on the business, however I don't believe it will be detrimental to the business. I do believe it will have an effect on the operating costs of the business but certainly nothing that will impair the ability of the business to be profitable.

Why should Lakeport Landing get a concession like the use of the land for free? For the first 30 years the rent was the cost of putting up a building, and developing it, while cultivating their business... I am actually ok with that. Now the building is up, the land developed to their needs..... So now it is time to pay the piper and buy the land from the Town.

As Irwin would undoubtedly want to buy the lot, the Town seems to be doing what the should be doing and acting in their own best interest. I am sure Lakeport Landing, is acting in their best interest as well....Unfortunately it has to play out in a way that will make everyone comfortable... Because the town can't simply put a new lease into place or directly sell the lot to Lakeport.... There is red tape involved.....

My Hope is the following:

The town puts the lot and building up for Sale, with Lakeport Landing having the first right of refusal. Why you may ask, because it allows their to be no argument between the two parties on the value of the land. Then as the sale price also includes the building, Lakeport should get credit towards the purchase price for sum of money they invested into the building that they previously put up.

Unfortunately I don't live or own property in Laconia, so I have no ability to influence the outcome of this issue. But As I stated earlier those of you that are residents should speak to the Town council, and help influence the outcome.

[Lakeboater]

Originally Posted by LIforrelaxin

So lets think about this some. What has Lakeport Landing gotten out of this deal....

1. Free use of public property
2. extra room to help them run their business.

What has the City of Laconia gotten from this:

1. A successful business with in the Town.

What would seem reasonable at this point?

1. For Lakeport Landing be given the chance to buy the lot at market value
2. For Lakeport Landing to get the first right of refusal
3. For Lakeport Landing to create a new lease for the land with the Town, that incorporates a market value rent for the Town.

At the end of the day the Town will do what it wants.....I suggest that those of you that Live in Laconia, and have an opinion on this to get involved and give your opinion to the City Council....

I also think that Ms. Blizzard needs to be careful and more truthful about what she says. Loosing the use of the property will have a negative effect on the business, however I don't believe it will be detrimental to the business. I do believe it will have an effect on the operating costs of the business but certainly nothing that will impair the ability of the business to be profitable.

Why should Lakeport Landing get a concession like the use of the land for free? For the first 30 years the rent was the cost of putting up a building, and developing it, while cultivating their business... I am actually ok with that. Now the building is up, the land developed to their needs..... So now it is time to pay the piper and buy the land from the Town.

As Irwin would undoubtedly want to buy the lot, the Town seems to be doing what the should be doing and acting in their own best interest. I am sure Lakeport Landing, is acting in their best interest as well....Unfortunately it has to play out in a way that will make everyone comfortable... Because the town can't simply put a new lease into place or directly sell the lot to Lakeport.... There is red tape involved.....

My Hope is the following:

The town puts the lot and building up for Sale, with Lakeport Landing having the first right of refusal. Why you may ask, because it allows their to be no argument between the two parties on the value of the land. Then as the sale price also includes the building, Lakeport should get credit towards the purchase price for sum of money they invested into the building that they previously put up.

Unfortunately I don't live or own property in Laconia, so I have no ability to influence the outcome of this issue. But As I stated earlier those of you that are residents should speak to the Town council, and help influence the outcome.

I don't really follow the part about LL getting a credit for the building.
From the Laconia Sun: The lease expires on November 1, 2015 and the tenant has no right to extend it further. At the termination of the lease all buildings and improvements on the lot become the property of the city.
To me that would seem that the improvements made (the building) were instead of rent and should belong to the city or the city should gain from the improvements. I wouldn't think that LL would get a credit if they or anyone else buys it.

[VitaBene]

Originally Posted by Lakeboater

I don't really follow the part about LL getting a credit for the building.
From the Laconia Sun: The lease expires on November 1, 2015 and the tenant has no right to extend it further. At the termination of the lease all buildings and improvements on the lot become the property of the city.
To me that would seem that the improvements made (the building) were instead of rent and should belong to the city or the city should gain from the improvements. I wouldn't think that LL would get a credit if they or anyone else buys it.

They built no mansion over there. 29 years later, any storage building turned showroom/ office has had a good life!

[sum-r breeze]

Lakeport Landing has had a rough go of it over the last few years. They lost their Formula franchise and now they might lose their high visibility show room too. Those are a couple of tough hurdles to over come.

The Breeze
Wave 'cuz i'll be wavin' back

[LIforrelaxin]

Originally Posted by sum-r breeze

Lakeport Landing has had a rough go of it over the last few years. They lost their Formula franchise and now they might lose their high visibility show room too. Those are a couple of tough hurdles to over come.

The Breeze
Wave 'cuz i'll be wavin' back

While I don't disagree that these hurdles are tough on a business, I think that they put themselves in this position.....Certainly Erica's high profile legal troubles didn't help either... Why a successful Marina was aligned only with one boat MFG, is mind boggling... They should have had a better portfolio of products... but that was their choice.... The chose to build upon land they didn't own, and which had a lease with a definite end point, and conditions. Once again the marina entered into this by choice...Therefore they caused this situation...

Now that isn't to say that I think the city should simply screw the company... I think they need to understand what is allowable within the laws that govern the town and try to come to a mutually beneficial solution, that would help LL keep using the land, and building....

Time will tell...

[Happy Gourmand]

Does anybody know how much they paid to Laconia to lease this land? Some posts make it sound like they used the property for 30 years for nothing. This whole situation is not a "first". I'd be surprised if there are not procedures in place to deal with this situation that is fair to all parties.

[sum-r breeze]

Originally Posted by LIforrelaxin

While I don't disagree that these hurdles are tough on a business, I think that they put themselves in this position.....Certainly Erica's high profile legal troubles didn't help either... Why a successful Marina was aligned only with one boat MFG, is mind boggling... They should have had a better portfolio of products... but that was their choice.... The chose to build upon land they didn't own, and which had a lease with a definite end point, and conditions. Once again the marina entered into this by choice...Therefore they caused this situation...

Now that isn't to say that I think the city should simply screw the company... I think they need to understand what is allowable within the laws that govern the town and try to come to a mutually beneficial solution, that would help LL keep using the land, and building....

Time will tell...

I agree.....actions have consequences. I wonder if Irwin's has been approached by the city of Laconia? They being the closest abutter.

The Breeze
wave 'cuz I'll be wavin' back

[fatlazyless]

It could be that the City of Laconia is seeing a big big purchase price if they sell off the very hi-visibility Lakeport Landing marina home building to the next door neighbor, Irwin Marine, plus to sub-divide the one acre lot and keep one half-acre for the city for either a small park, or a parking lot, or for the Lakeport fire station, or some city use. U-know......split the property in half......keep half the land for the city....and sell the marina building on a half-acre for some big big bucks to Irwin. After thirty years, that chain link fence topped with three lines of barbed wire, that seperates Irwins and Lakeport will be a-coming down?

With three locations; in Hudson, Alton, and Laconia, and being New England's one and only five-star Sea Ray dealer..... Irwin ... www.irwinmarine.com ...definately has the big money to pay the big-bucks, and seems like an automatic, made-to-order BUYER ....with no broker needed!

As for creating more local Laconia jobs with the addition of the Lakeport Landing property over to Irwin Marine......it ain't necessarily so. About two or three months ago, an article in the LaDaSun mentioned that Irwin's had cut their number of employees from about 78 down to 49 ......something to do with having fewer than 50 employees.....and health insurance.....and the Affordable Health Care Act of 2010....and...oh well.....November 1, 2015 is about 49-weeks from now.....which is when this 30-year lease agreement expires.....so who knows what will happen?......maybe Carnac the Magnificent could foresee how this scenario will unwind? ......yes, I see a lot of money.....mucho mucho mucho mega green-stuff.....some very big money for the city here?

Irwin's could be using the Lakeport Landing building for selling and servicing jetskis and snowmobiles; items that have been sold from Alton but not from Laconia, and finance the building purchase with a low-interest, 30-year loan, or something? That seems like a good, strong Irwin use for that huge two-story marina designed, service building with its huge visibility from Union Ave; jetskis and snowmobiles; sales and service ..... certainly MUCHO more major MOJO for their retail biz than kayaks, and Sunfish sailboats!

The City has the land and building assessed for something like $375,000, so if Irwin pays double that at $750,000 for half the land, a one-half acre, and the very nice marina service building; over a 30-year loan, that works out to $750,000 divided by 30 years = $25,000/year plus the interest. Now, is it worth $25,000/year+interest to Irwin to have ownership of the hi-visibility two-story marina building for selling and servicing jetskis and snowmobiles which are two items not currently sold from Irwin's-Laconia? Only Irwin's know's what Irwin's wants to do ..... but it seems like a good business move to me for them to purchase the building.... IF they can beat out Lakeport Landing's price offer....

If Carnac the Magnificent was still on tv ... he'd be riding a new snowmobile... that he bought at Irwin's on Union Ave .... come the winter of 2016!!! ..... go....Carnac.....go.....definately magnificent!

.....say-hey....how's about the City using that new money to build on city land somewhere a $750,000, Laconia community tennis center with six courts inside an inflatable structure ... www.arizonstructures.com ; all air-conditioned and heated.....that's what Laconia really wants ..... plus maybe the City could name it the Stephanie Beaudoin memorial tennis courts as a way to remember her! Unlike football, basketball, and baseball; tennis is a sport that one can play till you are 99!

[john60ri]

Surprised at the criticism of FLL. I've always found him very entertaining. Hang in there, pal!

[fatlazyless]

"Alternative for Lakeport Landing? City Council defers decision"

Today's November 27 Laconia Daily Sun has a nuts and bolts report on the latest "what's happening" at Lakeport Landing. Some interesting stuff!

The Laconia City Council voted unanimously to wait at least 90-days before making any decisions on how to proceed with the Lakeport Landing property.

[mcdude]

Laconia Daily Sun

City manager to negotiate sale of city lot

• Published Date Wednesday, 27 May 2015 01:38

LACONIA — The City Council last night rejected two offers — one from Lakeport Landing and the other from Irwin Marine – for the property on Union Avenue leased for the past 30 years to Landing Landing, both of which fell shy of the appraised value of $480,000.
The property, a 0.81 acre strip between the roadway and railway was leased to Lakeport Landing in 1985 for 10 years with two 10-year renewal periods. The lease will expire on November 1, 2015 and cannot be renewed again. In 1987 Lakeport Landing constructed a 9,840-square-foot building on the lot. Under the terms of the lease, ownership of the building would revert to the city at the expiration date.
Erica Blizzard, who owns and operates Lakeport Landing, offered to purchase the property for $331,400 and subsequently Irwin Marine, which operates on the abutting lot, submitted an offer of $335,000.
Councilor Brenda Baer (Ward 4) proposed negotiating a sale of the property to Lakeport Landing at its appraised value. She was joined only by Councilor Arman Bolduc (Ward 6). With Councilors Henery Lipman (Ward 3), David Bownes (Ward 2) and Ava Doyle (Ward 1) in the majority, Baer's motion failed by a vote of three-to-two.
Lipman proposed authorizing the City Manager Scott Myers to negotiate with both Lakeport Landing and Irwin Marine, with respect to the appraised value as well as other conditions for the sale of the property. The city will require easements to maintain the retaining wall along Union Avenue. The owner of the property would be expected to maintain its taxable value for a specified period of time. Should Lakeport Landing fail to acquire the property, the transaction would be subject to a transition period of up to two years to enable the firm to make alternative arrangements for its operations. Finally, prospective buyers would asked to consider subdividing the property and transfer approximately a third of the lot to the city for a parking lot.
Lipman said he anticipated these discussion would begin soon with an eye to structuring a sale of the property in July.

[AC2717]

Originally Posted by mcdude

Laconia Daily Sun

its only worth what people are willing to pay for it
$480k is a ridiculous amount for that strip of property especially the amount of work anyone other than Lakeport or Irwin would have to do with it

I cant believe I am asking (cause I Know the answer) what is wrong with these people

[BroadHopper]

The city appraised value of 480K is for the land and building. After the sale, the buyer is to relinquish a third of the lot to the city. The city did not specify that piece if the property. Also the buyer would need to provide an easement to the city regarding the retaining wall along Union Ave. Having all that, the 330 and some change is a fair value for the property.

Obviously to Brenda Baer, its all about the revenue. She doesn't care about the what will become of the future. I hope to God someone replace that woman. During her tenure she has done more harm than good in the city.

[Rich]

Erica Blizzard, who owns and operates Lakeport Landing

Is this the person that had an 'event' that eventually led to the creating of a speed limit on the lake? Or am I mistaken? I'm not a local.

[Phantom]

Originally Posted by Rich

Is this the person that had an 'event' that eventually led to the creating of a speed limit on the lake? Or am I mistaken? I'm not a local.

Don't know that it "Led to the Speed Limit" being placed into affect ..... but yes, she had a horrific boating accident

.

[Smokienorm]

Originally Posted by Rich

Is this the person that had an 'event' that eventually led to the creating of a speed limit on the lake? Or am I mistaken? I'm not a local.

A "horrific accident" is an understatement. One person was killed and another severely injured in the incident- the press reported that the driver was DWI and got off very lightly in the criminal justice system. But that's a story for another day.

[Misha888]

sell it to The State of NH. The state pays top dollar for real estate. But, that's another thread.

Originally Posted by BroadHopper

The city appraised value of 480K is for the land and building. After the sale, the buyer is to relinquish a third of the lot to the city. The city did not specify that piece if the property. Also the buyer would need to provide an easement to the city regarding the retaining wall along Union Ave. Having all that, the 330 and some change is a fair value for the property.

Obviously to Brenda Baer, its all about the revenue. She doesn't care about the what will become of the future. I hope to God someone replace that woman. During her tenure she has done more harm than good in the city.

[secondcurve]

Originally Posted by AC2717

its only worth what people are willing to pay for it
$480k is a ridiculous amount for that strip of property especially the amount of work anyone other than Lakeport or Irwin would have to do with it

I cant believe I am asking (cause I Know the answer) what is wrong with these people

There are two interested buyers who opened the bidding at $331,400 and $335,000. Based upon this and the fact that the seller is a city (read stupid government entity and God knows Laconia has proven this time and time again) I'm fairly certain that the fair value of the property is closer to the appraised value. Obviously, the bidders started the process low hoping to attain the property at a discount. The city should move to install a parking lot and I'm sure the offers will substantially increase.

[AC2717]

Originally Posted by secondcurve

There are two interested buyers who opened the bidding at $331,400 and $335,000. Based upon this and the fact that the seller is a city (read stupid government entity and God knows Laconia has proven this time and time again) I'm fairly certain that the fair value of the property is closer to the appraised value. Obviously, the bidders started the process low hoping to attain the property at a discount. The city should move to install a parking lot and I'm sure the offers will substantially increase.

don't disagree here, but in the end it comes down to what someone is willing to pay

[brk-lnt]

Originally Posted by AC2717

don't disagree here, but in the end it comes down to what someone is willing to pay

Agreed with that.

This is also, IMO, a very interesting case. The property has a relatively high prospective value to Lakeport Landing and Irwin's. However, given the fact that it's pretty much boxed in, it would be a poor location for many other businesses. It has no direct water access, so it's diminished value for any other kind of boat brokerage. Parking would appear to be a significant issue if it were to become independently owned.

This appears to be another in a long chain of poor decisions from the Laconia city planners.

[mcdude]

Laconia Daily Sun

Published Date Thursday, 28 May 2015 12:37

LACONIA — City officials yesterday clarified the decision the City Council took when it met this week with respect to selling the property on Union Avenue, which has been leased to Lakeport Landing, Inc. for the past 30 years. The city manager has been asked to hold "informal conversations" with the two companies that have expressed interest in buying it in order to answer questions about the city's detailed position and gauge the level of remaining interest.
The property, a 0.81 acre strip between the roadway and railway was leased to Lakeport Landing in 1985 for 10 years with two 10-year renewal periods. The lease will expire on October 31, 2015 and the tenant has no renewal rights. In 1987 Lakeport Landing constructed a 9,840-square-foot building on the lot. Under the terms of the lease, ownership of the land and building would revert to the city at the expiration date.
In January, Erica Blizzard, who owns and operates Lakeport Landing, offered to purchase the property for $331.400 and subsequently Irwin Marine, which operates on the abutting lot, submitted a more recent offer of $335,000. Meanwhile, earlier this month Capital Appraisal Associates, Inc. of Concord pegged the market value of the land and building at $480,000.
With Councilor Bob Hamel (Ward 5) absent, five of the six councilors discussed the issue in a non-public session prior to their regularly scheduled meeting, but remained divided. Reading from a prepared statement in open session, Councilor Brenda Baer (Ward 4) offered a motion to negotiate the sale of the property solely with Blizzard. "First do no harm," she began. "We are dealing with people. We are dealing with our neighbors." She recalled that the council agreed to sell the former police station on Church Street to Binnie Media for $1 in an effort to revitalize downtown and said that selling to Blizzard would "build confidence with the business community." Baer urged her colleagues to "do the fair thing, the right thing." Only Councilor Armand Boluc (Ward 6), whose ward includes the property, joined with Baer and her motion failed by a vote of three-to-two.
Councilor Henry Lipman (Ward 3) then moved to reject both offers, which fell short of the appraised value of the property, and to authorize City Manager Scott Myers to conduct "informal conversations" with representatives of Lakeport Landing and Irwin Marine to inform them of terms and conditions of a sale of importance to the city.
Mayor Ed Engler said on Wednesday that the city manager was not directed to negotiate a sale of the property, but only to sound the two parties on reactions to four specific issues and report to the council when it meets on Monday, June 8.
First, he said that the city expected the sale price to match or exceed the appraised value of the property.
The city will also require an assurance that the owner of the property will not alter or demolish the existing building unless the change sustains or increases the existing taxable value of the property.
If the current tenant is displaced by the sale, the mayor said that the city will require the date of possession by the new owner be deferred for up to two years from the date of the closing to provide time for Lakeport Landing to secure new quarters. Should this provision be invoked, he explained that beginning when the lease expires on November 1, 2015, Lakeport Landing would pay a monthly rent consistent with the appraised value of the property.
Finally, Engler said that the property must be conveyed with easements enabling the city to maintain water and sewer lines as well as the retaining wall paralleling Union Avenue.

[TiltonBB]

Originally Posted by AC2717

its only worth what people are willing to pay for it
$480k is a ridiculous amount for that strip of property especially the amount of work anyone other than Lakeport or Irwin would have to do with it

I cant believe I am asking (cause I Know the answer) what is wrong with these people

It is all about the exposure for sales but it comes with the benefit of additional space to operate your business. It just has to make financial sense.

The building and land are situated so that everyone that drives by sees their boats on display. I always look in when I go by to see the boats that are there. That is "free" advertising for them.

Since the markup on boats from wholesale to retail is about 30% the sale of one $300,000 boat, even at a negotiated price, will generate $50,000 to $90,000 for the seller. That income will more than offset the purchase price.

Now if that lot and the exposure helps to initiate the sale of 2 or 3 or more boats per year even a purchase price of $1,000,000 could make financial sense to the buyer.

[LIforrelaxin]

Originally Posted by Lakeboater

I don't really follow the part about LL getting a credit for the building.
From the Laconia Sun: The lease expires on November 1, 2015 and the tenant has no right to extend it further. At the termination of the lease all buildings and improvements on the lot become the property of the city.
To me that would seem that the improvements made (the building) were instead of rent and should belong to the city or the city should gain from the improvements. I wouldn't think that LL would get a credit if they or anyone else buys it.

I don't disagree... My reasoning is the following LL could have made no improvements to the land, and just used it as a storage yard.... Why make them pay for the building twice, that is all....LL new what they where doing and involved in... so they caused this situation all on their own.... from that regard I have now sympathy for them.... I expect the city to be fair, but do what is best for them city, and allowable in the confines of the laws that govern them..

[dave603]

Don't really see a problem here. Lakeport "leased" the property for the last 30 years at $0 dollars.
So what if they did do improvements to the area.
The City charter, according to this last article, demands the city to put it out for bid to ALL interested parties.
Sounds more to me like someone got a sweetheart deal 30 years ago.
Wish I could get that kind of lease to run my business. I could use 30 years of making a profit with no lease.

[Woodsy]

I didn't see where Lakeport Landing leased the property for $0... but who cares if they did? I doubt there $0 dollar lease only because it would smack of the very favoritism that Irwin Marine sued the city over when the city originally sold the contested property to Lakeport Landing. I think a $0 lease would have been cause for another lawsuit. Though back then I suppose anything was possible.

Anyway, Lakeport Landing has 30 years of paying the taxes on the property, 30 years of maintaining and improving the property and they have 30 years of being a good business in the city. They employ a lot of people and this will negatively affect them one way or another.

As a Laconia resident I would like to see what is best for the City, and Lakeport Landing within the constraints of the law... I do not need to see my tax dollars being spent defending a silly lawsuit brought by Irwin Marine or Lakeport Landing.

That being said, I think the only real course of action is to declare the property surplus, then sell the property.. Unfortunately for Lakeport, I don't think there is an easy way out other than buying the property. I don't think the City can legally give Lakeport the first right of refusal. But if they can, they should. If not, then let the bidding process begin and be open and transparent.

Woodsy

[BroadHopper]

Originally Posted by Woodsy

As a Laconia resident I would like to see what is best for the City, and Lakeport Landing within the constraints of the law... I do not need to see my tax dollars being spent defending a silly lawsuit brought by Irwin Marine or Lakeport Landing.

That is exactly what the city did with the D. Gammon case. Dave contested the $538 that was owed to him in challenging a case the city lost. Instead the city balked and the city lost again spending 10 times that in Superior Court. This is one of many. When it comes to the Lakeport Landing case, well history will repeats itself. No wonder the lawyers in town are living well. And on our dime!

[BroadHopper]

I did have serious contention during the SL debate. But it is to the proponent advantage when he was making accusations that was false.

I do admire his wits and every forum has a 'character'. Normally I ignore his remarks and others can either take it at face value or do your homework and the truth will speak.

[LIforrelaxin]

Originally Posted by Woodsy

I don't think the City can legally give Lakeport the first right of refusal. But if they can, they should. If not, then let the bidding process begin and be open and transparent.

Woodsy

Well Woodsy, the good news is we agree....

The question is can they legally give first right of refusal.... I don't know why they couldn't, but I also don't know if the could.

The other possibility is that it be Auction off to have the same effect... Once again if it is allowable within the governing laws....

And that is what this is really about, what legally can be done...... I am sure the Town could release the land to Lakeport as well... But what does that do... it just puts the same situation in play again sometime in the future.

[Happy Gourmand]

Aren't many of the buildings at the Weirs and some other locations on leased land? What happens when those leases expire?

[BroadHopper]

I believe the land between the railroad track and the lake are considered leased land. Gov Hassan, in order to raise revenue, passed a law back in 2007 that anyone using that land must pay lease to the state. Not sure if it is really happening, but I do know they are looking into a development of land between the lake and track off Paugus Bay. The state is determining whether the developer/association must pay a lease fee.

Can you imagine what would become of LB/SD, Channel and Thurston Marine? How about Irwin Gardens? Hassan open Pandora's box!

[Rusty]

Originally Posted by BroadHopper

I believe the land between the railroad track and the lake are considered leased land. Gov Hassan, in order to raise revenue, passed a law back in 2007 that anyone using that land must pay lease to the state. Not sure if it is really happening, but I do know they are looking into a development of land between the lake and track off Paugus Bay. The state is determining whether the developer/association must pay a lease fee.

Can you imagine what would become of LB/SD, Channel and Thurston Marine? How about Irwin Gardens? Hassan open Pandora's box!

Hassan wasn't Governor in 2007.

[Woodsy]

Happy...

The State of NH has been leasing the waterfront (mostly on property that the railroad originally owned) to property owners for decades... It used to be be for pretty short $$. During the last building boom, developers were taking advantage. As a result, the State looked at getting more $$$ for those leases.

For example... Southdown is a property with LOTS of leased waterfront. They could be very negatively affected if the State decided not to renew their lease.


Woodsy

[BroadHopper]

http://laconiadailysun.com/index.php...orefront-lease

After reading this article, the state was leasing the land, however the state is reviewing all properties as there are those who have not been paying a lease. As the last paragraph states, its all about revenue.

[gwhite13]

Is anyone sure taxes were paid by LL. If I lease property from someone, they generally are responsible for taxes. Since a municipal entity does not incur taxes, moot dollars abound.

[brk-lnt]

Originally Posted by gwhite13

Is anyone sure taxes were paid by LL. If I lease property from someone, they generally are responsible for taxes. Since a municipal entity does not incur taxes, moot dollars abound.

No idea, but it wouldn't be at all surprising if they didn't pay *property* taxes. They would have likely paid other taxes to the city though.

[Resident 2B]

Originally Posted by brk-lnt

No idea, but it wouldn't be at all surprising if they didn't pay *property* taxes. They would have likely paid other taxes to the city though.

What other taxes are there? No sales or income taxes in NH.

R2B

[brk-lnt]

Originally Posted by Resident 2B

What other taxes are there? No sales or income taxes in NH.

R2B

You're right, I was thinking of the state taxes that businesses pay. Not sure what other taxes, if any, would have gone to the city of Laconia.

[tis]

State business profits and enterprise taxes. But those are not Laconia taxes of course.

[VitaBene]

"The way most laws governing the disposal of public property are written, I think the city has a fiduciary and legal duty to the citizens of Laconia to sell the property for fair market value."


Woodsy, I can't say it better than that

[Woodsy]

The way most laws governing the disposal of public property are written, I think the city has a fiduciary and legal duty to the citizens of Laconia to sell the property for fair market value.

I don't think the public property disposal laws allow for the City to be able to legally "gift" the property to a "For Profit" business.

The City can show any favoritism towards Lakeport Landing, and I think the right of first refusal might be considered favoritism by Irwin Marine and result in another lawsuit. But I have not seen the lease agreement either.

How the City goes about the sale of the property will mostly be semantics. In the end a sale will occur, and the property will belong to someone other than the City of Laconia. I personally would like to see Lakeport Landing retain the property. IMHO I think it would be extremely detrimental to their business to lose that location.

Woodsy

Woodsy

[playinghooky]

The sale of Lakeport Landing to Irwin is unfair, reconsider it
Jun 11, 2015

In 1978, my family purchased Lakeport Landing Marina. They sold everything they had including a vehicle just for the down payment. My father came from less than nothing, but what he lacked in education and money, he made up for with hard work and determination. My parents struggled for years working every day to turn a boat yard, which looked more like a junk yard, into a marina. My father had a vision.

His vision was hindered in 1983 after he rightfully purchased the property located at 21 Elm St. from the City of Laconia for $25,000. An error was made by the city and Irwin Marine sued to block the sale. The mistake resulted in the city having to undo the transaction and return the money to my father.

We ended up with a 30-year lease instead which at the time was our only option. My father always believed that there was an understanding with the city that he had the first right to purchase the property at the end of the lease.

My father passed away on April 10, 2013. For most of my life, I have known how important obtaining this property was to him. I saw how disappointed he was at the end when he realized that his time was running out and this part of his vision from way back in 1978 had not been achieved.

Over the years, we invested over $500,000 in the property in the form of improvements, taxes and lease payments. Last fall we offered to purchase the property for $331,400, which is the assessed value. By this offer, we were essentially purchasing the showroom twice. We had made the lease payments for the last 30 years and also paid to build the building, which in 1983 was in excess of $200,000. It was the deal my father had to take 30 years ago and 30 years later, this is what the city of Laconia felt the property was worth.

I became aware that Irwin Marine also still wanted the property and intended to move aggressively to do whatever it took to obtain it. They are already the largest marina in the state of New Hampshire, so obtaining this property, which is a long, narrow strip of land less than one acre, was not going to give them any more exposure and very little additional space. I couldn’t help but think that it must be some sort of power play when their representatives bluntly told me that they would acquire the property and have much deeper pockets than Lakeport Landing to do so. They informed me that it “wasn’t personal, it was business.” After 37 years of being their neighbor it was both personal and business, bad business.

I was shocked when the City Council unexpectedly made their decision during a time where I felt we were still in the negotiation process. I believe there was a “rush to judgement” and lack of consideration when the final decision was made roughly 30 minutes after looking at the two offers.

Sure, the Irwin Marine offer was in excess of any reasonable value for the property, but I question whether the City Council really had time to consider the fairness of the two offers. Without committing to a final price, my offer included an agreement to keep a taxable building of the existing size on the property for a period of 50 years.

I also agreed to substantially increase the size of another building on Park Street, which would have added to the city’s tax roll. In the long run, the city would be making much more money with Lakeport Landing’s commitment to expand, than Irwin Marine’s one time overpayment.

The City Council took something special away from me to give to Irwin Marine, because they felt this was in the best interest of the city. Who is the city? Am I not part of the city? Is my family’s taxpaying dollars since 1978 not part of the city? Are my employees who live here not part of the city? Was it fair to view both parties as identical even though Lakeport Landing has invested hundreds of thousands into the property and Irwin Marine has invested nothing?

The City Council still has the opportunity to “get it right,” if any one of the four councilors (Bownes, Doyle, Hamel or Lipman) would move to reconsider Monday’s vote to sell the property to Irwin Marine and acknowledge that the process of our negotiations may not have been properly followed.

Erica Blizzard

Laconia

[secondcurve]

Originally Posted by playinghooky

The sale of Lakeport Landing to Irwin is unfair, reconsider it
Jun 11, 2015

In 1978, my family purchased Lakeport Landing Marina. They sold everything they had including a vehicle just for the down payment. My father came from less than nothing, but what he lacked in education and money, he made up for with hard work and determination. My parents struggled for years working every day to turn a boat yard, which looked more like a junk yard, into a marina. My father had a vision.

His vision was hindered in 1983 after he rightfully purchased the property located at 21 Elm St. from the City of Laconia for $25,000. An error was made by the city and Irwin Marine sued to block the sale. The mistake resulted in the city having to undo the transaction and return the money to my father.

We ended up with a 30-year lease instead which at the time was our only option. My father always believed that there was an understanding with the city that he had the first right to purchase the property at the end of the lease.

My father passed away on April 10, 2013. For most of my life, I have known how important obtaining this property was to him. I saw how disappointed he was at the end when he realized that his time was running out and this part of his vision from way back in 1978 had not been achieved.

Over the years, we invested over $500,000 in the property in the form of improvements, taxes and lease payments. Last fall we offered to purchase the property for $331,400, which is the assessed value. By this offer, we were essentially purchasing the showroom twice. We had made the lease payments for the last 30 years and also paid to build the building, which in 1983 was in excess of $200,000. It was the deal my father had to take 30 years ago and 30 years later, this is what the city of Laconia felt the property was worth.

I became aware that Irwin Marine also still wanted the property and intended to move aggressively to do whatever it took to obtain it. They are already the largest marina in the state of New Hampshire, so obtaining this property, which is a long, narrow strip of land less than one acre, was not going to give them any more exposure and very little additional space. I couldn’t help but think that it must be some sort of power play when their representatives bluntly told me that they would acquire the property and have much deeper pockets than Lakeport Landing to do so. They informed me that it “wasn’t personal, it was business.” After 37 years of being their neighbor it was both personal and business, bad business.

I was shocked when the City Council unexpectedly made their decision during a time where I felt we were still in the negotiation process. I believe there was a “rush to judgement” and lack of consideration when the final decision was made roughly 30 minutes after looking at the two offers.

Sure, the Irwin Marine offer was in excess of any reasonable value for the property, but I question whether the City Council really had time to consider the fairness of the two offers. Without committing to a final price, my offer included an agreement to keep a taxable building of the existing size on the property for a period of 50 years.

I also agreed to substantially increase the size of another building on Park Street, which would have added to the city’s tax roll. In the long run, the city would be making much more money with Lakeport Landing’s commitment to expand, than Irwin Marine’s one time overpayment.

The City Council took something special away from me to give to Irwin Marine, because they felt this was in the best interest of the city. Who is the city? Am I not part of the city? Is my family’s taxpaying dollars since 1978 not part of the city? Are my employees who live here not part of the city? Was it fair to view both parties as identical even though Lakeport Landing has invested hundreds of thousands into the property and Irwin Marine has invested nothing?

The City Council still has the opportunity to “get it right,” if any one of the four councilors (Bownes, Doyle, Hamel or Lipman) would move to reconsider Monday’s vote to sell the property to Irwin Marine and acknowledge that the process of our negotiations may not have been properly followed.

Erica Blizzard

Laconia

Is it just me or is this lady highly offensive? "An error was made" which allowed the sale to be blocked? I wonder what the lease payments were for all these years? Probably a pittance? She should have bid above the appraisal price ($480,000) if she wanted the property. Her sense of entitlement is obnoxious.

[Sunbeam lodge]

Originally Posted by secondcurve

Is it just me or is this lady highly offensive? "An error was made" which allowed the sale to be blocked? I wonder what the lease payments were for all these years? Probably a pittance? She should have bid above the appraisal price ($480,000) if she wanted the property. Her sense of entitlement is obnoxious.

From a financial viewpoint LL said they have spent $500k in improvements over the 30 years . $200 k for a building the rest was for taxes, lease payments. First the 200 k in building was an asset that is fully recovered through depreciation and a reduction in Fed taxes. The other $300k over 30 years amounts to $10k a year for taxes and lease payments. Can anyone sell millions of dollars of boats on that property and only pay $800 for taxes and lease payments. In addition those are normal cost of doing business and in their tax bracket the net cost after taxes would only be half that amount. They should have made a creditable bid as they have had a great deal over the years and they could then depreciate the cost of the new building over its useful life.