BCC Upholds Planning Commissions Rejection of Ravines Land Use Study
Last night the BCC voted 5-0 to accept the Planning Commissions rejection of the Land Use Change Study on the Ravines represented by the PERSONAL ATTORNEY of the Bankruptcy Trustee for Jacksonville Golf & Learning Center, and Ravineland Inc. With that decision the attempt to entice a developer at the Jan 31st Auction to pay more then three times what that course is worth has failed. No idiot in their right minds are going to pay 5 million dollars for a course that needs at least a million dollar investment to bring it back into operation. As of todays date the attempt by the Bankruptcy Attorney to get rich off the Bankrupt Assets once belonging to Jacksonville Golf & Learning Center has dimmed considerably. Isn't this a great Country where the Laws are set up so an Attorney Appointed by the Court can basically create his own wealth while unsecured creditors are just out of luck. Isn't it grand that Clay County is going to lose probably close to 100K in upaid Taxes yet the Bankruptcy Attorney gets a nice fat commission off the top if he can sell the people of this community out to a Developer. Isn't it grand that the Law allows him to engage Personal Counsel to be the front man for the Courts Business. The BCC moved the item to second place in a two page agenda due to the sheer number of Citizens there for that specific item. This was not my first time at a BCC meeting. Previous assaults on the integrity of the subdivision had taken me there before. This was however the first time I had chosen to speak. I am not a Public Speaker. I was an aspiring vocalist as a teenager with a few awards and and the honor of having been put into our National Archives in a "Who's Who among Music Students in American High Schools" I've sang in front of a few thousand people with no problems, Public Speaking I have never done. I had no speech prepared wanting only to address areas where my fellow residents may not have had the time, or to rebutt things from the PERSONAL ATTORNEY for the Bankruptcy Trustee. Wouldn't you know in the middle of it all I would lose my train of thought. The Commissioners were all very gracious about it and I think I lost about 15 seconds trying to find myself. I won't go into everything I said, this isn't about me. I would however like to point out that I ended my comments by pointing out to the BCC that a great number of homeowners living in Deed Restricted Communities were paying attention to this issue. If they chose to let this move forward that it would take alot of those owners sitting on the fence about the Hometown Democracy Amendment off of the fence. The woman who spoke after me said it best, that it would become "The Poster Child for Hometown Democracy". The real hero of that meeting was my Husband, Fred. Since the PERSONAL ATTORNEY for the Bankruptcy Trustee was given 7 minutes to make his case the BCC allowed our side one person to have the same amount of time and the rest of us got 3 minutes. Fred was armed with a fistful of Case Law, where in Civil Courts Judges have time and time again ruled on Covenants & Restrictions. Remember when Commissioner Bradley wrote me and told me the County Attorney said they have no obligation, no standing? These Civil Cases prove otherwise. The overall and repeated verbage in these cases are that where the Covenants and Restrictions are "clear and unambigious" that they cannot be violated by anyone. Fred only got a chance to point out one of those cases before Commissioner Bradley (who was acting Chairman last night) banged the gavel for a ten minute recess to find this case and review it. Speed reading must be a requirement for a Commissioner, how else could you absorb a 47page legal case in ten minutes. Before the meeting took up again they informed Fred that they didn't need for him to say anymore. One of assistants to the County Attorney had a response that did not reveal all pertinent facts to that case, no surprise there. The fact of the matter is that there are around 8-10 cases contained inside of the two samples Fred had chosen to point out. The fact of the matter is, that although the BCC could have chosen to go the other way and forced this issue into a Civil Court Proceeding they would lose. All of you out there living is similar communities need to realize and believe this. Fortunately for the residents of the Ravines, as well as all you taxpayers the BCC chose to do the right thing. These case law precedents allow for damages and Attorneys Fees when communities are forced into Civil Court over such issues. Bottom Line, your Covenants and Restrictions under the view of the Courts are binding to all. The property is set for Auction next week, I do not believe it will sell and soon Bank of America will take possession and the next saga begins. It is supposed to be well over another year before any requests for study on Land Use Changes can be applied for. I still say if an application ever includes that Golf Course that the Planning Staff SHOULD have an obligation to reject the application itself. It is absurd that these people who are experts in their field don't do the simplest of things.........like determine if the request is legal. When Public Records and Docs are right there that say what they're asking for is illegal. I would like to acknowledge the BCC for unamiously voting to do the right thing. I would especially like to Thank George Bush for his comments recognizing the rights of the Homeowners to be able to count on what they buy into. That wasn't their criteria for accepting the decision of the PC, but I know at least one Commissioner "gets it". My next beef is that I believe the Clerk of Court or whoever is running herd on that Auction there should be a written and public disclosure that has to be signed by all applicants acknowledging the C&R's on that Golf Course, and that the PUD is built out in order to bid. Related: Marsha's blog | login or register to post comments | printer friendly version | Tags: Deed Restricted Communities | Land Use Change | ravines
Submitted by USMA72 on Wed, 01/23/2008 - 12:41pm.
Marsha- I am happy to hear that the BofCC has seen fit to do the right thing regarding the Ravines, despite all the pandering done by the attorney for the bankruptcy trustee. I hope that all of your efforts had some worthwhile impact in the decisonmaking process(your husband's citing of cases helped). I cant help but think that the underlying issue that comes into play in the Ravines issue and those yet to be heard is the growing sentiment by the people to have a say in the way this County has run roughshoud over the overall planning and growth. The HTDA is quickly becoming a dirty word in the eyes of those in power because it is coming like a freight train and it is not going to stop until people say enough is enough and take back the unregulated growth by voting in the HTDA. Having heard that HTDA mentioned in the BCC meeting might have made some of them think about how they voted. I read in the paper the recent results of a quality of life survey in the Jax area and I cant wait to see the results of the Clay County one, because I think it will show how unhappy most people are with the decisions made in the past to modify and change our Comprehensive Plan like we change channels on a TV.
Submitted by Marsha on Wed, 01/23/2008 - 1:16pm.
Thank you Finder Mike and USMA72. Lets us hope that now that the BCC is aware that although they have their "regulatory criteria" that they will do some homework on all these case law studies and see the intent of the law when pursued beyond local goverment. Let us hope that if they choose to take a side that will inevitably lead to litigation that they will do so on the side of the community it effects. I would feel alot better about tax dollars spent to defend the citizens rather then big business. Let us hope at some point there will be some protection at the lowest level to prevent such things to begin with. Doing those things would convince me that they are making a great effort to even the playing field for the average Citizen. Personally I wish there were something that could be done, some sort of timelock on built out PUDS and any applications for anything that conflict with Covenants & Restrictions who's original intent in clear and unambigious terms refused at the application stage. We should not have to fight this battle every year. I too am curious to see the results of the Quality of Life Survey for Clay County.
Submitted by OneMann on Wed, 01/23/2008 - 1:58pm.
Ain't public speaking fun, Marsha? My congratulations, too, on the performance of both you and your fellow Ravinians at last night's meeting. We all know the level of work you've invested in this issue, and I hope your success breeds confidence in others that they can tackle City Hall, or the County Administration Building in this case. I know you won't fall into a false sense of security because of last night's County Commission vote. Close your eyes long enough to rest and some lobbyist will force a bill through the Legislature requiring that all golf courses in disrepair be converted to new housing. Michael S. Mann
Submitted by Marsha on Wed, 01/23/2008 - 5:30pm.
I'm not sure fun describes it but I have to admit everyone was on their best behavior last night. All Commissioners were cordial and treated everyone with respect, they were even pleasant. I've heard reports of how hostile things have been in the past but they weren't last night. I don't understand why George Bush turned over the gavel to Rob Bradley though, is that like the School Teacher who selects you for "extra special" responsibilities? This mess isn't over, there is more to go through. Maybe I will become like Durwood Smith and show up at every meeting to tell them they need to put a timelock on built out PUDS and not accept applications for anything where they conflict with C&R's. This has been a waste of Country Resources and this is what, the 3rd, 4th time in the last three years? Submitted by joninclay on Sun, 01/27/2008 - 9:30pm.
I'm a resident of the Ravines, and I'm glad that we won this victory. I've been following the saga, thanks to Marsha's blog posts here. There are a couple of questions I have that I don't understand: 1. What do you mean by "the bankruptcy attorney gets to create his own wealth"? Do you mean the trustee or the trustee's attorney, or someone else? If the trustee or the trustee's attorney, how does he get to "create his own wealth"? 2. How does the bankruptcy attorney get a "nice fat commission off the top" if the land gets sold to a developer? Again, do you mean the trustee, the trustee's attorney, or someone else? And how does that person get a commission? Other than these questions, I'd like to think I've got a pretty good idea of everything else that has transpired. Thanks for keeping guys like me in the loop, Marsha.
Submitted by Marsha on Mon, 01/28/2008 - 8:01am.
The Trustee has represented on more then one occassion to both the Homeowners as a large group (were you not at that meeting?) and to a journalist that the more it sells for the more money he makes. The request for a land use change study was an attempt to make the property more appealing to a developer because that is where the big money is and always has been. That is why I have always questioned as to the resort supposedly not being able to turn a profit. I have always believed it's an issue of how much profit is enough. I just think it's wrong that there is this incentive for the Attorney to increase his own income while unsecured creditors just lose out. This is where what is right and what is legal seperates I suppose. It makes you wonder how many "Mom & Pop" businesses out there just lose out. He ought to get paid for his work, but a set amount either by the scope of the work or a flat fee, not a commission like you're selling a used car. It just seems like a Court Appointed US Trustee would be held to a higher standard and have a little more required then an Attorney in private practice.
Submitted by Marsha on Mon, 01/28/2008 - 9:26am.
I am glad one of the residents of the community, or anyone for that matter who feels they have benefited by what I've written in here about the Ravines. A good deal of it is only opinion and I try to always be clear on that. There are no doubt people who know far more then I do and I speak for no one but myself, it's just a current event in my life as it is for hundreds, thousands of others. Being able to write about it rather then the traditional sticking your head out the window to shout at the world "you're tired and you're not going to take it anymore" is a great thing. I really appreciate the tolerance and restraint by those out there who are tired of hearing about the Ravines. I'm trying to walk that line between free speech and not beating something to death. My email is open if you care to talk about it further. Submitted by joninclay on Mon, 01/28/2008 - 9:37am.
I had no idea that a trustee of a bankruptcy court could stand to gain personally in a bankruptcy proceeding. I can understand if his position was simply "I'm trying to get the most money for creditors who are adversely affected by this filing", but by giving him a financial incentive to do that is perverse! He should do the court's business, not HIS OWN business! That's messed up! No, I wasn't at the meeting. I'll be completely honest with you: I am, for the most part, incapable of being civil at those kinds of meetings. I feel that I would be a detriment to our community if I went, because I would likely tick someone off to the point where they would react out of spite. I'm not saying that people who DO go are all calm and stuff, but I doubt they could get really hot under the collar and bitingly sarcastic like I can. Trust me...you guys do NOT want me there! Submitted by joninclay on Mon, 01/28/2008 - 1:12pm.
Marsha, are you or Fred going to the auction on Thursday? Do you have any guesses (which I won't hold you to) as to what might happen at the auction? I saw your comment where you said you didn't think it would sell? Why not, and if not, what happens after Bank of America gets the land back?
Submitted by islander on Mon, 01/28/2008 - 7:07pm.
I am totally sympathetic with the residents of the Ravines. I almost bought a town home in the new section. I just don't think there are any winners in a situation like this. The golf course needs major overhauls, there are many courses in Clay now, and the residents don't want any more homes, so we are in a pickle. The only use for the land as it stands today (who knows about tomorrow) is a golf course. What if nobody is interested in having a course except the residents. What if BOA rejects the residents bids, hoping for a change of use and a recoup of their money? It is all up in the air. How much profit is enough? I do understand the business people wanting to make a fair return on their money. The problem is how much money will be needed to jump start the course. People will not invest a huge amount of money for a relatively small return. Maybe the housing issues we now face may make a smaller, but safer return more likely, and a buyer will emerge and rescue the course. I talked to several golfers who were members of some of the local clubs, and they all say that the clubs are having a rough go of it. There is barely enough money to operate, and no money for updates, and renovations. I don't know if this is true or not, but many people simply play the clubs when they can and pay the fees, without memberships. The final disposition of the property is yet to be determined.
Submitted by Marsha on Mon, 01/28/2008 - 11:40pm.
No, we won't be at the Auction, nor will anyone who represents us. The reason we won't be is because the total of JGLC debts far exceeds the value of the course, even in pristine condition. In order to make the course viable again you're talking at least a million dollars. The Ravines Resort and Golf Course is not worth over 4 million dollars, even in pristine condition. In order for the course to return no one in their right minds who wants to operate the Ravines Club & Lodge will pay more then 1.5 million considering the investment it will take to bring the course back to a "reasonable condition". I hear all the talk about golf courses having a rough time but you must understand, it is standard business practice to not count the "CASH" and operate "at a loss" because of taxes. You must understand that a great many businesses "operate at a loss while not reporting the cash", for tax purposes. Cash cannot be traced unless you put it in the bank. Try to book a tee time at reasonably priced local course and that will give you a realistic idea of how much they're suffering. The growth in the Middleburg/Lake Asbury area has been tremendous, the business is there, and don't forget this isn't just any course, it is the most unique course in the state, and even the southeast as a whole. The income to earn a living is there, provided you don't want to become the 21st centuries' version of "King Midas" The income is there provided your goal isn't to develop. I've said it before and I will say it again, this is about greed, pure, selfish, self serving greed with no regard for community or neighbors. I may have a "pie in the sky, looking through rose colored glasses" view of the course, but I am telling you without a doubt, it can turn a profit, and someone can make a living off of it. Again, it's an issue of how much is enough. For us, had it happened, we already have an income, all our eggs would not be in the basket and we would have had the time and the leeway to bring this course back. I am very confident BoA will be concerned only with getting their investment out and the rest will be left out in the cold. Once that happens there will be capital left for any savy business man or investment group to come in and invest the captial needed to return the course to a playable condition. There are enough golfers in the area for the course and resort to turn a profit and provide someone with a decent living. I am now excited and even optomistic about the future of the resort now, it's hit rock bottom and there is no where to go but up from where its been in a few years. Submitted by read44 on Tue, 01/29/2008 - 8:36am.
PUBLIC AUCTION RAVINES GOLF COURSE Submitted by joninclay on Tue, 01/29/2008 - 11:17am.
If I understand you correctly, Marsha, you're saying this: If anyone bids at the auction to buy the golf course and clubhouse, they will be the proud owners of not only the course and clubhouse, but all of the debt that was incurred in operating them. However, if no one bids and the property goes back to Bank of America, then all the debt on the property is also gone, and then someone can buy the property from Boa without all of the debt that was previously attached to it. Is this correct?
Submitted by Marsha on Tue, 01/29/2008 - 11:58pm.
It is my understanding that there will be a minimum or reserve bid on the resort which encompasses all the "secured" debt that I have referenced in round figures that are a compilation of what I've been told. I don't actually know what the precise amount is. I don't believe anyone will inherit any debt if bought at auction, had there been an outright sale before the Bank took it away the first time they would have but this is an auction on a bankrupt property. Having all the debt stripped away is a good thing for the community, it's gives the resort a chance with a new owner. If it doesn't sell BoA will take the property back and then all they care about is getting a non performing loan off their books. They may sell it for what they have in it and they may sell it for much less just to get rid of it. Submitted by read44 on Thu, 01/31/2008 - 1:37pm.
Man, do I wish I had seen the way this site describes the sale of the property before today. http://www.auctioncompanyofamerica.com/index.php?page=pg_brosure&br_id=220 Submitted by read44 on Thu, 01/31/2008 - 1:50pm.
Scroll down to the second story: http://news.jacksonville.com/chipshots/
Submitted by Marsha on Thu, 01/31/2008 - 1:54pm.
Busting it up and selling it piece by piece has been touted by not only the former owner but the Trustee as well. This isn't a surprise to me.
Submitted by Marsha on Thu, 01/31/2008 - 2:55pm.
There are many variables to take into account on that question and I am not an expert so I would rather not try to comment, it would be an enormously long entry to try to encompass it all. At the moment that back parcel can only be accessed through an easement that you must enter through the Ravines. It's a catch 22 type scenario. Those homes would not by legal standards be part of the community, but they would have to come through the community to get to their homes which is why I personally was against more homes to begin with having only one entrance. I've been told, and don't know if it's true or not that they would pay dues yet have no vote in the Association. If broken off and sold there will be another request for a land use/zoning change coming at some point in order to get all the value of the land out for development. The pieces will fall where they fall, and when they do we pick them up and begin again. I've had no word, but I'm not looking for the answer either on whether or not it has sold, we'll hear eventually.
Submitted by Marsha on Thu, 01/31/2008 - 5:13pm.
I spoke to one of the media people at the auction. The information I have is not first hand knowledge so believe what you will. The bid started at 6mil, went down to 2mil and then back up to 3.9mil. The minimum amount is 4.1mil. I was told that BoA Attorneys filed for some sort of extension to give them more time to work something out, whatever that may be. It was told to me that the Auctioneer commented that there was a possibility it could sell. If you look at the way the place was represented by the Auction company, and realize what the place actually looks like some people are probably suffering from visual shock. It's like expecting a buxom young stripper and finding an aging vaudville dancer instead. Maybe someone else with more information will come into the blogs. People are talking about ...Here are the recent blog postings with the most comments. |
Who's online
There are currently 5 users and 181 guests online.
Online usersRecent comments |
Oorah!!! Score one for the good guys. Please know that there many of us that applaud you and all the others involved. Thank you!
MikeH