Local Government TV

▼

Thursday, December 05, 2013

Rumor Mill: Wolf Building Granted KOZ

At the end of a very lengthy budget hearing yesterday, Northampton County Council members began hounding executive John Stoffa to update them on the progress of the Wolf Building sale. Bob Werner, the sole Council member to vote against it, said he's been hearing and reading a number of things, and asked Stoffa if the County has agreed to accept less than developer Mark "I'm an opera singer" Mulligan had agreed to pay for the property in June. That agreement was contingent upon a KOZ classification, which basically would exempt the property and all its tenants from all but federal income taxes.

Stoffa started to answer, but then changed his mind. "I'll have a report tomorrow," he told Werner.

Although no one is willing to go on record, I've heard from several persons that there's no reason to give Mulligan any breaks at all. That's because, against all odds, state officials have designated the Wolf building as a KOZ property. I'm guessing this is what Stoffa intends to report.

If this is so, Mulligan has no basis for holding Northampton County hostage to a reduced sales price.

What this also means is that the mad rush to reduce the assessment on this property, which was being pushed by Mulligan and Easton officials, was totally unnecessary.

The Revenue Appeals Board broke the law for nothing. The members of a quasi judicial board stained their credibility and integrity by not just disregarding the law, but by permitting one person to vote by proxy in a matter in which he had heard none of the testimony.
at

8 comments:

  1. AnonymousDecember 5, 2013 at 4:42 AM

    Fair market value $4.2 mullion.
    Sold at $1.9 million.

    Also getting more and more tax breaks. We the taxpayer keep getting screwed.

    ReplyDelete
  2. AnonymousDecember 5, 2013 at 8:15 AM

    Why aren't you hammering Stoffa on this for filing the appeal late and making the exception? Stoffa is the one who is the long time friend and one time neighbor of McAteer. And Stoffa nominated him to the appeals board. Stoffa could and should call for his resignation.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Bernie O'HareDecember 5, 2013 at 9:43 AM

    The FMV is not $4.2 million. That is blatant disinformation by someone more interested on a hateful agenda.

    ReplyDelete
  4. AnonymousDecember 5, 2013 at 2:17 PM

    Currently the Fair Market Value is $4.2 million dollars/. You can polish the shit turd of a deal Stoffa gave this guy but it is still a shit turd!

    ReplyDelete
  5. Bernie O'HareDecember 5, 2013 at 4:41 PM

    No it is not. No appraisal of that property has come close. The most recent appraisal places the value at $2.5 million. You are twisting an outdated assessment figure that everyone agrees is wrong. You are doing it to mislead people.

    ReplyDelete
  6. AnonymousDecember 5, 2013 at 5:50 PM

    The current assessed value which the Fair Market Value is derived form indicates $4.2 million.

    Sorry that that offends your mancrush John Stoffa. He screwed the people with the sale. Don't blame the messenger. You can have your opinion but not the facts. I am glad John Brown will be cutting you off from your privileged status at the courthouse.

    ReplyDelete
  7. AnonymousDecember 5, 2013 at 6:08 PM

    Yeah Stoffa made sure the appeal office comes up with a number close to what he got fore it. An insider deal. Thank God the guy is one his way out the door.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Bernie O'HareDecember 5, 2013 at 9:48 PM

    It is not worth $4.2 million. That is based on a property that has not been assessed in over 20 years and is wrong. Everyone knows that, including you, but you like to spread disinformation.

    ReplyDelete

You own views are appreciated, especially if they differ from mine. But remember, commenting is a privilege, not a right. I will delete personal attacks or off-topic remarks at my discretion. Comments that play into the tribalism that has consumed this nation will be declined. So will comments alleging voter fraud unless backed up by concrete evidence. If you attack someone personally, I expect you to identify yourself. I will delete criticisms of my comment policy, vulgarities, cut-and-paste jobs from other sources and any suggestion of violence towards anyone. I will also delete sweeping generalizations about mainstream parties or ideologies, i.e. identity politics. My decisions on these matters are made on a case by case basis, and may be affected by my mood that day, my access to the blog at the time the comment was made or other information that isn’t readily apparent.