Wed
Feb 16 2011
02:08 am

From Josh Flory at News-Sentinel ...

The article refers to some TIF complications with City View.

As an aside ...
That is a huge boat dock they have at City View. I am surprised they can commandeer so much of the river. What kind of laws control that sort of thing?

From the article ...

The Cityview condo project may have new owners, but the old TIF deal is causing a legal headache for the city.

Earlier this month, a pair of entities with ties to the South Waterfront project filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court against the city of Knoxville and Knoxville's Community Development Corp. The dispute centers on a complicated financing arrangement that was established to help spur the condo project, which is across Fort Loudoun Lake from Neyland Stadium, on the former Knoxville Glove Co. site.

The article

384
like
michael kaplan's picture

the old TIF deal is causing a

the old TIF deal is causing a legal headache for the city

sounds like a 'win-win' to me ..

Rachel's picture

Do you really hate

Do you really hate everything?

bizgrrl's picture

complicated financing

complicated financing arrangement

What a mess. Is there anyone living there yet? Has anyone actually bought and closed on one of these condos? You can't tell from KGIS.

Crawfish's picture

Who dropped the ball here?

Who dropped the ball here? Alvin Nance, Madeline Rogero, or Larry Martin? This is a bureaucratic nightmare. The City of Knoxville plays the fool and bankrupts the first developer and is now sued by the second developer.

Is this how you create jobs Madeline?

metulj's picture

Attention Padgett Campaign:

Attention Padgett Campaign: You do not want Mike Mitchell dust busting for you.

cafkia's picture

First of all, you are going

First of all, you are going to have to include documented evidence of participation along with the appropriate timelines as I have no knowledge whatsoever of Madeline's involvement in this project. Unless you are willing to out yourself as an intentional liar, show me some evidence. To be fair, I do not know what the specific contributions Alvin or Larry made either but obviously, only Madeline is running for Mayor and as such, a target for your clumsy attempts at political assassination.

"The sub, however, told KCDC it hadn't been paid. KCDC apparently determined it shouldn't reimburse Cityview for expenses Cityview had not paid out."

Who at KCDC made that decision?

That has to be the single dumbest question that I have ever seen asked. If one has not imbursed, once cannot possibly be "reimbursed". Are you complaining that a business was not given something for nothing? Really, seriously? That is your big bitch? The janitor could have made that decision and it would still be the correct one assuming the correctness of the italicized portion.

Rachel's picture

Is this how you create jobs

Is this how you create jobs Madeline?

Madeline had nothing to do with this TIF. Geez, at least do your homework before you attack people.

cafkia's picture

Hello, Crawfish

The TIF for City View was approved by City Council in January, 2006 and County Commission in March, 2006. The transaction was closed in September, 2006. Madeline Rogero joined the City of Knoxville in December of 2006

Gosh you are no where near as quick to apologize as you are to falsely accuse. I suppose that tells us something about you.

Barker's picture

*

Though the financing is complicated, according to Josh's report the gist of the dispute seems to be that Cityview sought reimbursement for payments to a subcontractor. The sub, however, told KCDC it hadn't been paid. KCDC apparently determined it shouldn't reimburse Cityview for expenses Cityview had not paid out. So Cityview sued to get the money.

Of course, the legal proceedings will sort out whether Cityview should have received the money, and more facts certainly will come to light. As Josh points out, the legal battle seems like it will turn on how the line of credit can and can't be used. Only then will we find out if anybody "dropped the ball."

Oh, and to answer jbr's question, TVA controls the shoreline and approves boat docks as it sees fit.

Crawfish's picture

"The sub, however, told KCDC

"The sub, however, told KCDC it hadn't been paid. KCDC apparently determined it shouldn't reimburse Cityview for expenses Cityview had not paid out."

Who at KCDC made that decision? As far as the "complicated" part. The PILOT for the News Sentinel was so "complicated" that it was unenforceable. So when the Sentinel transferred jobs to India they got to keep their sweet PILOT.

Who at the City keeps writing these "complicated" TIFs and PILOTs?

These things are supposed to spur job creation, not kill it.

Rachel's picture

These things are supposed to

These things are supposed to spur job creation, not kill it.

Well, I suppose that's a secondary purpose. The primary purpose is to put a piece of property that is basically worthless for tax purposes back on the tax rolls, while revitalizing said piece of property.

michael kaplan's picture

worthless for tax

worthless for tax purposes

That's a pretty limited - and regressive - role for city government IMO. That property - inner-city waterfront - surely has more value than that to a city. In fact, couldn't that beautiful old glove factory have been renovated and used for housing, offices, retail, etc, in the way the Cherokee Mills factory has been reused? The latter has taken its time, had ups and downs, but has finally turned the corner to success. Been there lately?

Barker's picture

*

Oh, certainly the old glove factory could have been renovated. But the owner was willing to do it, apparently because it wouldn't be worth the money. There are lots of things that could be done, but aren't financially feasible. For example, Baptist Hospital could be converted into a mixed-use, commercial, condo and apartment development. But who is willing to go to that considerable expense, especially in this real estate market?

Barker's picture

I meant to say the owner

I meant to say the owner WASN'T willing to do it. My bad.

michael kaplan's picture

well, the project began

well, the project began before "this real estate market" existed. it was only people like me who asked whether a TIF could be risky. i was assured - at the time of the previous real estate market - that a TIF was a "win-win" deal.

burntorange68goat's picture

I thought the Knoxville Glove

I thought the Knoxville Glove Factory was an ongoing concern, that at the time was convinced by the City and Dave Hill to relocate to its current Southerland Road location, so they could proceed with the South Waterfront Plan?

The Factory owner and this site, just proved to be the course of least resistance for the City to begin the project.

Barker's picture

*

I imagine the buck stops at KCDC with Alvin Nance, though it might have gone before the board of directors.

As for the KNS's PILOT, you are woefully misinformed.

Sharpe1's picture

"I imagine the buck stops at

"I imagine the buck stops at KCDC with Alvin Nance, though it might have gone before the board of directors."

This wasn't Section 8 housing. I thought Rogero managed these contracts. Either way, shouldn't you check into it?

fischbobber's picture

Boat Docks

Oh, and to answer jbr's question, TVA controls the shoreline and approves boat docks as it sees fit.

The Army Corps of Engineers used to be involved. Did someone squeeze them out of the picture?

Rachel's picture

Actually, shoreline permits

Actually, shoreline permits involve TVA, the Corps of Engineers, AND TDEC. TVA will sometimes coordinate all the permitting activity, tho.

MemphisSlim's picture

These TIFs are all engineered by the lawyers, accountants, and

financial consultants who rip and clip hefty fees from these "complex" financing arrangements but are not stakeholder's in any of the entities ongoing efforts and why the city would extend TIF financing to a speculative residential condo deal is beyond imagination. A factory, a office building, a commercial development is one thing, but a speculative residential condo deal on the wrong side of the river is bizarre.

At best it's UT housing with parents and investors soaking up the condominiums, with the bridge being built from the condos to the arena until saner minds take a look at where it should be.

Rachel's picture

the wrong side of the river

the wrong side of the river

Some of us would like for you to rephrase that.

MemphisSlim's picture

My bad, the side of the river with extremely limited vehicle

access and currently burdened with the additional traffic complications associated with the reconstruction of the Henley Street Bridge.

bizgrrl's picture

Traffic is not really a big

Traffic is not really a big deal, especially from the CityView condos. They just drive about a half mile to Gay Street bridge and cross over, bam you're in the big city (the north side).

michael kaplan's picture

once you get by the potholes

once you get by the potholes at the south end of the henley bridge. any plans to pave that intersection now so heavily used?

Somebody's picture

Wait...

So a $24.7 million investment in Henley Street Bridge to upgrade and improve access to the south side of the river is a liability. And while those improvements have that bridge out of commission, there's another bridge (also completely overhauled recently) about a 30 to 45 second drive to the east. A couple of minutes east of that, there's a highway bridge (completed just a few years ago) with limited-access highway connection directly to the interstate. This is what you call extremely limited vehicle access. Interesting.

rikki's picture

why the city would extend TIF

why the city would extend TIF financing to a speculative residential condo deal is beyond imagination

Dude, you've got a powerful enough imagination to imagine HUD requirements are the primary obstacle to financing condos. You have no trouble making shit up to suit your political ends. I find it hard to believe your imagination is as limited as you claim.

rocketsquirrel's picture

Rikki, In this particular

Rikki,

In this particular instance, no one is imagining. Ask local realtors how hard it has been to help buyers get financing on condos. After Flordia, starting in 2008, lenders had to take a harder look at owner-occupied rates, CAMs, and percentage of the building sold. The lender can write the paper, but if these terms aren't met, Fannie Mae won't buy the mortgage.

  • Fannie Mae ordinarily will not buy a condo loan from a lender if more than 15 percent of the owners in the condo development are 30 days late on monthly maintenance fees.
  • Condominium associations must set aside 10 percent of their budgets for maintenance and reserves.
  • New condo developments (like ours) are ineligible for Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac financing unless 70 percent of the units have either sold or are under contract.
  • The F.H.A. requires that at least 50 percent of a building’s units belong to owners who occupy their units, and that no more than 10 percent are owned by a single investor.

MemphisSlim's picture

Made up HUD regs on condominiums linked here

Mainstream condominium financing has been problematic since the Fall of 2009 and it's not limited to just South Knoxville developments, it affects condomiums on Gay Street, Peachtree Street in Atlanta, Sea Pines Drive on Hilton Head Island, Flyway Drive on Kiawah Island, or Collins Avenue in Miami Beach.

The pertinent restrictions are noted on pages 4 and 5 of the HUD letter.

Maybe the South Knox condo owner can guarantee the underlying mortgages for the condos sold in an effort to keep them moving, but to think that project is free and clear of a number of problematic markets concerns right now is completely laughable. These are not the type of developments the City of Knoxville should find itself in, as if the financial markets will support this type of development, they will support this type of development (which Regions did on the front end)and if the financial markets will not support the development, then by definition the City of Knoxville should not be supporting such developments.

(link...)

rikki's picture

to think that project is free

to think that project is free and clear of a number of problematic markets concerns right now is completely laughable

Nothing could be more obvious than the existence of "a number of problematic market concerns." What's laughable is pointing only to HUD as the problem. That's like saying the problem with UT athletics is that the NCAA has standards.

The financing for these condos was written up before the years of fraud and regulatory negligence brought down the real estate and credit markets. By 2006, mortgage lenders had essentially normalized fraud as a standard practice so they could feed an unregulated derivatives market that wound up consuming untold trillions. All real estate projects are floundering right now because no one is buying. That's not HUD's fault.

Pointing to the city and to HUD as the culprits here is pure political prejudice and a weak attempt to cover for the dishonest bond issuers and lenders who crippled the world economy while Republican office holders were drunk on deregulatory zeal.

metulj's picture

"Pointing to the city and to

"Pointing to the city and to HUD as the culprits here is pure political prejudice and a weak attempt to cover for the dishonest bond issuers and lenders who crippled the world economy while Republican office holders were drunk on deregulatory zeal."

Any other reading than Rikki's is delusional especially pertaining to the projects under discussion. What's problematic is that people use these nonsense objections at a local scale to mask what always comes back to personality politics.

bizgrrl's picture

Maybe the South Knox condo

Maybe the South Knox condo owner can guarantee the underlying mortgages for the condos sold in an effort to keep them moving,

Maybe? Does it help that Clayton has invested in the City View condo project and Clayton has a bank?

metulj's picture

That's a thought....

That's a thought....

michael kaplan's picture

why the city would extend TIF

why the city would extend TIF financing to a speculative residential condo deal

as i recall, it was the TIF-that-couldn't-wait - so urgent that a special redevelopment plan was prepared for the glove factory site alone.

bizgrrl's picture

a speculative residential

a speculative residential condo deal on the wrong side of the river is bizarre.

I find it bizarre that you would write such a thing. Having said that, some of us on the south side do speculate curiously about the happenings on the north side.

MemphisSlim's picture

There are river condos on both sides of the river

There is only one lawsuit pending against the City and KCDC and it does not involve condos on the "other" side of the river. The city and KCDC had nothing to do with the financing of the condos on the "other" side of the river.

Accessibility is a universal real estate concept, it is not limited to particular areas of Knoxville or Knox County, however, those residential developments which carry limited access also have additional pricing and marketing concerns and currently few, if any traditional lenders, are able to lend into the condominium environment given the HUD requirements for lending on condominiums these days.

This creates a major headache for developers looking to sell condominiums and current owners looking to sell or refinance their existing units.

Barker's picture

*

The lawsuit is Cityview at Riverwalk LLC and Focus Development Inc. v. Knoxville's Community Development Corp. and the city of Knoxville, Tenn. It was filed in U.S. District Court for East Tennessee on Feb. 1, 2011. Source: Federal courts database, known as PACER.

cafkia's picture

As an aside ... That is a

As an aside ...
That is a huge boat dock they have at City View. I am surprised they can commandeer so much of the river. What kind of laws control that sort of thing?

TVA gets final say on commercial and residential access to the river. That dock is considerable but isn't really that large. Keep in mind that this project was conceptualized when waterfront property was skyrocketing in price and popularity. This project had most of the advantages of extreme urbanity while also offering easy and unfettered access to the river. In the old economy it was a bet a lot of folks would have made. If the project had happened earlier in that economy, the docks probably would have been covered, at least in part.

If I am wrong and the economy ever does get back to what it was, that condo/dock is going to be stupidly popular and successful. But even if that doesn't happen, there is a good chance for it to be a signature component of the development of the South bank.

barker's picture

*

Just a hunch, but my guess is that them that can afford a riverfront condo with a private boat dock ain't doing so bad in this here economy.

cafkia's picture

Actually, given that sales of

Actually, given that sales of cabin cruiser style boats are down quite a bit, it would appear that those who used to be able to afford the condo with a boat dock are not necessarily the same ones who used to be able to.

Barker's picture

*

Sorry. Cafkia. I thought the rich were getting richer.

cafkia's picture

Actually, given your explicit

Actually, given your explicit verbiage, you were probably correct. However, a lot of the people who were buying those condos and boats could NOT afford them. They thought they could once they interjected time along with the assumption of the continuance of atypical growth in the economy. Of course, they were wrong. The much smaller population of people who actually could afford all of those things probably still can for the most part. Unfortunately, there are simply not enough of them to support an economy the size of one built on the purchases from tens or hundreds of times their number.

Bill Lyons's picture

Timing

I have received a few inquiries about this. The TIF for City View was approved by City Council in January, 2006 and County Commission in March, 2006. The transaction was closed in September, 2006. Madeline Rogero joined the City of Knoxville in December of 2006. Thanks.

R. Neal's picture

Thanks, Bill.

Thanks, Bill.

Rachel's picture

Padgett supporters are going

Padgett supporters are going to make everything City administration ever did "Madeline's fault" right up until 9/27.

It won't work. There are too many people who'll call them on it.

If I were Mark Padgett, I'd be running as far away from Mike Mitchell/SusieQ/slapshot/insert pseudonym of the week here as fast I possibly could.

goose Creek's picture

Urgency

"as i recall, it was the TIF-that-couldn't-wait - so urgent that a special redevelopment plan was prepared for the glove factory site alone."

Michael, that special zone has been in place since 1981 or 2. That's not what I call urgent.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.

More information about formatting options

CAPTCHA
This question is used to make sure you are a human visitor and to prevent spam submissions.
Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.

Upcoming events:

Lost Medicaid Funding

To date, the failure to expand Medicaid/TennCare has cost the State of Tennessee ? in lost federal funding.

TN Progressive

TN Politics

Local Media Blogs

Shopper Columns

Local News

News Sentinel

State News

Wire Reports

Site Statistics

Last 7 days:
  • Posts: 24
  • Comments: 293
  • Visits: 12,246
  • Pageviews: 29,360
Last 30 days:
  • Posts: 106
  • Comments: 1609
  • Visits: 48,136
  • Pageviews: 122,390

TN Progressive

Nearby:

Beyond:

At large: