Stevens Point News

Main Menu

  • Covid 19
  • Sports
    • Sports News
    • High School Sports Scores
    • Wisconsin Rapids Rafters
  • Crime
  • Arts & Entertainment
  • Opinion
  • Obits
  • Contact
    • Subscribe
  • Classifieds
    • View Ads
    • Place Ads
  • Legal Ads
    • Our Legals
    • Statewide
  • E-Edition
    • Stevens Point City Times

logo

Stevens Point News

  • Covid 19
  • Sports
    • Sports News
    • High School Sports Scores
    • Wisconsin Rapids Rafters
  • Crime
  • Arts & Entertainment
  • Opinion
  • Obits
  • Contact
    • Subscribe
  • Classifieds
    • View Ads
    • Place Ads
  • Legal Ads
    • Our Legals
    • Statewide
  • E-Edition
    • Stevens Point City Times
Opinion
Home›Opinion›Be our guest: Land swap skepticism

Be our guest: Land swap skepticism

By jschooley
August 12, 2019
902
0
Share:
Be our guest

By Eric Olson

Stevens Point, WI

As a taxpayer in both the city and the county, I am deeply skeptical of the proposed real estate swap with Portage County. I am also concerned about the apparent lack of controls used by the city in acquiring the land in question and subsequently offering to trade it with the county.

In the past two years, the city has acquired a fairly large amount of land, including over $400,000 for a downtown site considered for a new city hall, $340,000 for land east of Parkdale Park with no specific plan, $300,000 for the Belke property downtown, $91,000 for three acres in the East Park Commerce Center, and $2.5 million for the 80 acres in the Commerce Center that was to include the O’so brewery on the southern portion. With the exception of the 80 acres in question, the finance committee reviewed the purchase agreements and descriptions for all of these acquisitions before the sale was finalized. Why was the purchase agreement for the 80 acres not brought back to the FInance Committee before being executed? Where did the purchase funds come from?

The explanation given by city staff is that the development agreement from 2012, updated in 2014, requires the city to buy land from the seller in larger parcels, and that the development agreement with O’so required the city to initiate a purchase; the two together constitute implicit approval to buy 80 acres. That may be so, but it still seems odd that the purchase was not explicitly approved by the finance committee like all the others. What if the purchase price for the 80 acres was $4 million rather than $2.5 million? Would staff have been authorized to spend that amount without council approval? Maybe $4 million sounds crazy, but that is the amount paid by Meijer for less than 30 acres just next to the land in question. That raises another question: why $2.5 million? Was that price a bargain? A ripoff? Compared to Meijer’s purchase, it seems to be a bargain. Was the seller implicity expecting something more from the city in the future by selling at this price?

My second question is also about money: the finance committee approved borrowing $1.2 million to purchase the O’so land. Where exactly did the balance of the purchase money come from? Presumably from additional borrowing for the TID. If that’s the case, how does “swapping” this land with the county aid in gaining the taxable value growth needed to pay back the TID borrowing? The county land would be off the tax roll. Also, since the Finance Committee needed to approve borrowing the $1.2 million for O’so, why didn’t they need to approve the balance of the purchase amount?

These questions raise doubts about the serpentine path that the city used to own the land being considered for the swap. To my eye, the whole swap endeavor appears rotten at the root. Add to this the departure of the two staff people most credited with this idea (the county purchasing director and the city community development director) and we are left with a cocktail-napkin-proposal that might make sense in a tavern but doesn’t pass muster when subjected to sunlight. Finally, who exactly has the authority to initiate the swapping proposal?  This horse seems to be out the barn with no one in particular holding the door handle. Is that really good practice when dealing with millions of dollars in public assets?

The Finance Committee could consider adding additional controls to the spending of public money on real estate, including a requirement that staff present an appraisal to committee before negotiating a purchase price, and limiting the purchase of real estate by city staff where explicit approval is lacking to those transactions under a reasonable amount, say $500,000. The Finance Committee may also need to develop a process or protocol for initiating land swaps of the type being debated, ideally maintaining the flexibility to envision creative solutions to wicked problems while also preventing either party to the swap from expending money on serious design studies before swap ideas are thoroughly vetted by the city.

Previous Article

Rafters win second half, head to playoffs

Next Article

Stanley Street restriping project extended

0
Shares
  • 0
  • +
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0

Related articles More from author

  • Opinion

    Editorial- Let’s Keep Libraries Around

    February 25, 2013
    By STEVENS POINT NEWS
  • FoodOpinionTop Stories

    Food Swings – Chicken Meatballs

    September 29, 2013
    By STEVENS POINT NEWS
  • Community NewsOpinion

    Cuomo’s Column: Bring Your Own Device (BYOD)

    September 29, 2013
    By STEVENS POINT NEWS
  • Opinion

    Life on the Outside: Apologizing to Stevens Point After Prison

    September 29, 2013
    By STEVENS POINT NEWS
  • Community NewsOpinion

    Life on the Outside: Setting Goals Made Life Worthwhile

    October 6, 2013
    By STEVENS POINT NEWS
  • Community NewsOpinion

    Life on the Outside: Hope Guides Me

    October 14, 2013
    By STEVENS POINT NEWS

Leave a reply Cancel reply

High School Sports

Go to High School Sports

Free SP Newsletter

  • Sports

  • Commentary

  • Nicolet National Bank Senior Spotlight: Wyatt Blaskowski, Amherst Baseball 

    By Jacob Heid
    March 27, 2023
  • Pacelli softball leans on aggressive offense, a micro perspective

    By Jacob Heid
    March 17, 2023
  • Stevens Point among 2023 U.S. Senior Open qualifying sites

    By Kris Leonhardt
    March 17, 2023
  • Nicolet National Bank Senior Spotlight: Lily Lorbiecki, Rosholt basketball 

    By Jacob Heid
    March 16, 2023
  • Second-half run propels Cardinals to regional title 

    By Jacob Heid
    March 6, 2023
  • Pat Wood

    From the publisher: Christmas and Hanukkah

    By Kris Leonhardt
    December 24, 2022
  • Ice fishing contest Reels in $1,500 for Portage County Literacy Council

    By Taylor Hale
    March 17, 2022
  • Kemmeter Column: County celebrates year after quarantine

    By Taylor Hale
    July 12, 2021
  • Isherwood Column: Great engineering projects two

    By Taylor Hale
    July 11, 2021
  • Shoes News Graphic

    Show Column: Odd Jobs

    By Taylor Hale
    July 9, 2021

About Us


The Portage County Gazette is published every Friday by Multi Media Channels. It is locally-owned, locally-operated and locally-written. Subscriptions are $64 annually, delivered via the U.S. Postal Service.


To subscribe, go www.shopmmclocal.com/product/portage-county-gazette or call 715-258-4360

  • PO Box 408, Waupaca WI 54981
  • (715) 343-8045
  • News editor: [email protected]
Copyright © 2022 Multi Media Channels LLC.
All Rights Reserved. No part of this publication or any of its contents may be reproduced, copied, modified or adapted without the prior written consent of Multi Media Channels LLC.
×