Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old May 27th 06, 09:18 AM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess,misc.legal
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 1,558
Default Joel Channing reports on the Zoning Issue

Posted: Sat May 27, 2006 2:02 am Zoning of New HQ Bldg

I began researching the Crossville land deal at the annual meeting in
Phoenix last August. I became concerned when I read a note in the
financial report that said that, in the event of a sale of the
building, the City has the right to buy back the land for one dollar.
When I raised this as a question at one of the sessions I was assured
that it was not the case - it was an error by the accountants, and
that provision only applied if we were to try to sell the land without
building a building. Nevertheless, I insisted on being given a copy of
all the documents so I could read everything for myself. I was then
able to confirm that this was correct - once we built a building this
provision would become void. However, upon reading these documents, a
new question about the zoning occurred to me. The development in which
the building is located is zoned industrial. There is a covenant that
was obtained from the City which does allow us to build an office
building - but only for a national membership organization. For months
I insisted on, and we finally received written confirmation of this at
our last Board meeting (May). While it is true that these limitations
do not preclude our ever selling the building, in the event that we do
ever want to sell the building, I believe that, as a practical matter,
having to sell the building as an office building only for a national
membership organization severely limits the number of potential
buyers, and, alternatively, if we have to sell it to an industrial
user I don't think we'll get a satisfactory price. It would have been
much better for us if office use was permitted without the limitation.

Joel Channing
  #2   Report Post  
Old May 27th 06, 09:33 AM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess,misc.legal
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 3,026
Default Joel Channing reports on the Zoning Issue

SAM IS RIGHT AGAIN

HARRY SABINE'S VILLAINY

Rob Mitchell has verified Sam's claim about the zoning
restrictions? Is the building essentially a worthless
trap that will never appreciate meaningfully? -- Larry Parr

There is no confusion. Rob Mitchell has disputed,
not verified Sam's claim. Really, try harder next time. klg

CHANNING CONFIRMS SAM'S ORIGINAL CLAIM

Sat May 27, 2006 2:02 am Zoning of New HQ Bldg

I began researching the Crossville land deal at the annual meeting in
Phoenix last August. I became concerned when I read a note in the
financial report that said that, in the event of a sale of the
building, the City has the right to buy back the land for one dollar.
When I raised this as a question at one of the sessions I was assured
that it was not the case - it was an error by the accountants, and
that provision only applied if we were to try to sell the land without
building a building. Nevertheless, I insisted on being given a copy of
all the documents so I could read everything for myself. I was then
able to confirm that this was correct - once we built a building this
provision would become void. However, upon reading these documents, a
new question about the zoning occurred to me. The development in which
the building is located is zoned industrial. There is a covenant that
was obtained from the City which does allow us to build an office
building - but only for a national membership organization. For months
I insisted on, and we finally received written confirmation of this at
our last Board meeting (May). While it is true that these limitations
do not preclude our ever selling the building, in the event that we do
ever want to sell the building, I believe that, as a practical matter,
having to sell the building as an office building only for a national
membership organization severely limits the number of potential
buyers, and, alternatively, if we have to sell it to an industrial
user I don't think we'll get a satisfactory price. It would have been
much better for us if office use was permitted without the limitation.

Joel Channing

  #3   Report Post  
Old May 27th 06, 09:51 AM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess,misc.legal
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 781
Default Joel Channing reports on the Zoning Issue

It is incredible to me that these people actually are building a
worthless building. The USCF is forever stuck in Crossville, Tennessee.
You bitch about FIDE, but at least FIDE can move their office around.
The USCF is stuck, forwever, in Tennessee. At least I am only a few
hours south if I want to drive up and check these morons out.

Marcus Roberts

  #4   Report Post  
Old May 27th 06, 12:33 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess,misc.legal
Rob Rob is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 1,980
Default Joel Channing reports on the Zoning Issue


wrote:
SAM IS RIGHT AGAIN

HARRY SABINE'S VILLAINY

Rob Mitchell has verified Sam's claim about the zoning
restrictions? Is the building essentially a worthless
trap that will never appreciate meaningfully? -- Larry Parr

There is no confusion. Rob Mitchell has disputed,
not verified Sam's claim. Really, try harder next time. klg

CHANNING CONFIRMS SAM'S ORIGINAL CLAIM

Sat May 27, 2006 2:02 am Zoning of New HQ Bldg

I began researching the Crossville land deal at the annual meeting in
Phoenix last August. I became concerned when I read a note in the
financial report that said that, in the event of a sale of the
building, the City has the right to buy back the land for one dollar.
When I raised this as a question at one of the sessions I was assured
that it was not the case - it was an error by the accountants, and
that provision only applied if we were to try to sell the land without
building a building. Nevertheless, I insisted on being given a copy of
all the documents so I could read everything for myself. I was then
able to confirm that this was correct - once we built a building this
provision would become void. However, upon reading these documents, a
new question about the zoning occurred to me. The development in which
the building is located is zoned industrial. There is a covenant that
was obtained from the City which does allow us to build an office
building - but only for a national membership organization. For months
I insisted on, and we finally received written confirmation of this at
our last Board meeting (May). While it is true that these limitations
do not preclude our ever selling the building, in the event that we do
ever want to sell the building, I believe that, as a practical matter,
having to sell the building as an office building only for a national
membership organization severely limits the number of potential
buyers, and, alternatively, if we have to sell it to an industrial
user I don't think we'll get a satisfactory price. It would have been
much better for us if office use was permitted without the limitation.

Joel Channing


I think that while this is an interesting detail and to be fair to Mr.
Channing, Mr. Parr and Mr. Sloan, they are correct about their being a
change in zoning to permit the USCF to build there; it isn't much of a
problem. Zoning changes in Tennessee are very commonplace and
developers and realtors pretty much get whatever they want when
requested.

I think that should the USCF ever wish to divest itself of the property
it could do so without much trouble. Mr. Channing has a very good point
and if the property were in Florida where regulations are much stiffer,
I would have greater concern. I think a great deal of the distrust over
the move to Crossville arose out of the manner in which certain
individuals advanced the issue without full disclosure of all aspects
and conditions of the property. Many in the USCF felt they were being
sold a pig in a poke.

While many may disagree with the way the USCF has been governed the
reality is that it is the only game in town. We don't have the
opportunity to go anywhere else. The USCf is our only membership
organization. I think the biggest problem is the lack of competition.
If there was an alternative to the USCF we would have fewer problems.
Rob

  #5   Report Post  
Old May 27th 06, 01:56 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess,misc.legal
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 3,026
Default Joel Channing reports on the Zoning Issue

HARRY SABINE'S VILLAINY (continued)

Sam and I get it right again. In effect, the
Federation is trapped in a building that will likely
decline in price if the time ever comes to sell it.
Thems the odds.



  #6   Report Post  
Old May 27th 06, 05:54 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess,misc.legal
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 252
Default Joel Channing reports on the Zoning Issue

"...Zoning changes in Tennessee are very commonplace and
developers and realtors pretty much get whatever they want when
requested. .." (Rob Mitchell)
==================
In Tennessee how much do you have to pay under the table to get a
favorable change in zoning?

Old Haasie

  #8   Report Post  
Old May 27th 06, 08:20 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess,misc.legal
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 781
Default Joel Channing reports on the Zoning Issue

While many may disagree with the way the USCF has been governed the
reality is that it is the only game in town. We don't have the
opportunity to go anywhere else. The USCf is our only membership
organization. I think the biggest problem is the lack of competition.
If there was an alternative to the USCF we would have fewer problems.


So you agree that any wealthy US Chessplayer has a right to start a
revolution in another country to join FIDE to avoid problems with the
USCF. I have served on the Board of Delegates. I am sick of the USCF. I
can not contrubite. Therefore, I go elsewehere. Futhermore, I am
morally justified. Do you agree?

Marcus Roberts
St Kitts and Nevis
The West Indies

  #9   Report Post  
Old May 27th 06, 11:58 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,alt.chess,misc.legal
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Mar 2006
Posts: 281
Default Joel Channing reports on the Zoning Issue

It's Marinello who quickly tried to start construction so Channing
can't stop the process.

Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Joel Channing reports on the Zoning Issue Sam Sloan rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics) 9 May 27th 06 11:58 PM
Joel Channing reports on the Zoning Issue Sam Sloan rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General) 8 May 27th 06 11:58 PM
Open Message to Joel Channing irvin rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics) 72 January 23rd 06 04:30 PM
Open Message to Joel Channing irvin rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General) 0 January 17th 06 01:39 PM
Why Joel Channing can "Chill Out" by Andrew Zito the Pushed Pawn rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General) 5 October 4th 05 02:00 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:36 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2019 ChessBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Chess"

 

Copyright © 2017