City loses lawsuit against Sleiman and is ordered to pay $3.7 million more for the Landing properties. If anyone is counting, it seems to me we are over $20 million for the purchase and demolition at this point.
https://www.jacksonville.com/news/20191218/judge-city-owes-sleiman-firm-37-million-for-landing-parking-area (https://www.jacksonville.com/news/20191218/judge-city-owes-sleiman-firm-37-million-for-landing-parking-area)
Over and counting. Total incompetence.
(https://i.imgur.com/V9y3EcE.gif)
By not living up to the city's responsibilities and "saving" the city from paying a few million to repair, update, and maintain the Landing, Curry has squandered close to $20 million. Good thing he's not one of those "tax and spend Democrats".
Must be a hoax and a witch-hunt
My disgust has passed the point of being registered with words. We are doomed as long as Curry is mayor. What else can he tear down and "f" up?
He could go to congress
Quote from: jcjohnpaint on December 19, 2019, 04:04:31 PM
He could go to congress
This Republican won't be voting for him.
Within a decade Sleiman will buy back The Landing property for pennies on the dollar lol
Is the Landing a prospective site for a Waffle House and a Dollar General?
Quote from: Snaketoz on December 20, 2019, 07:28:05 AM
Is the Landing a prospective site for a Waffle House and a Dollar General?
That would certainly generate traffic
Throw in a liquor store and it'll be a poor man's Vegas...
Quote from: jaxlongtimer on December 18, 2019, 11:37:45 PM
City loses lawsuit against Sleiman and is ordered to pay $3.7 million more for the Landing properties. If anyone is counting, it seems to me we are over $20 million for the purchase and demolition at this point.
https://www.jacksonville.com/news/20191218/judge-city-owes-sleiman-firm-37-million-for-landing-parking-area (https://www.jacksonville.com/news/20191218/judge-city-owes-sleiman-firm-37-million-for-landing-parking-area)
The city would be on the hook for this money regardless of the demo.
There's cause and effect with everything we do. It wouldn't have been if it would have worked with the owner and kept to the deal that had been arranged under the previous mayoral administration.
Quote from: JaGoaT on December 20, 2019, 04:06:06 AM
Within a decade Sleiman will buy back The Landing property for pennies on the dollar lol
At this point, the city should be so lucky. Though he may be soured on the whole site by now and just wants to move on.
How long ago did he buy the parking lot that the city never actually gave him control of? 10 years?
Quote from: jaxlongtimer on December 18, 2019, 11:37:45 PM
City loses lawsuit against Sleiman and is ordered to pay $3.7 million more for the Landing properties. If anyone is counting, it seems to me we are over $20 million for the purchase and demolition at this point.
https://www.jacksonville.com/news/20191218/judge-city-owes-sleiman-firm-37-million-for-landing-parking-area (https://www.jacksonville.com/news/20191218/judge-city-owes-sleiman-firm-37-million-for-landing-parking-area)
a) There was no purchase. The city owned the land. The city bought out the lease Sleiman had on the property.
b) The demolition cost is $1.25 million.
There is no reason why the city couldn't have bought Sleiman out of the lease and kept The Landing. Those costs are not one and the same.
The most important part of this is that they city has made a series a terrible decisions in regard to the Landing. The first was picking up 40% of the cost to build an indoor shopping mall downtown. Horrible decision in itself.
The other huge thing was instead of calling it a day when it didn't work, they entered into a sweetheart lease deal with Sleiman Properties, one with provisions that officials were well aware they couldn't live up to.
Sleiman came on the scene when he acquired the the buildings and lease agreement from Rouse. COJ didn't have anything to do with that part.
QuoteThere is no reason why the city couldn't have bought Sleiman out of the lease and kept The Landing. Those costs are not one and the same.
Sleiman owned the building which he bought from Rouse. He had a long term lease on the land underneath the building which also transferred from Rouse. The city couldn't have cancelled the lease without his approval and obviously he would not agree to that without being compensated for the building he was surrendering in the process.
Not sure what your point is.