In partnership with CBSSports.com
Online Now 1708
Online now 1722 Record: 10351 (3/11/2012)
The largest and most active MSU Spartans board on the web
The place to ask questions to SpartanTailgate's recruiting experts
"The Duff" is dedicated to Michigan State football recruiting discussion
"The Bres" is dedicated to Michigan State basketball recruiting discussion
This is your pulpit to preach to the masses about everything from politics to religion
The place to buy, trade or sell Michigan State tickets
For fantasy football and other fantasy sports discussion
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
Who are these 3rd party appriasers you speak of?
Your a retard.
All of these lots went through the county foreclosure auction several times, and failed to sell for the minimum bid of $500 per parcel. That seems to me to be a good way to set the price ceiling for these lots. The city is selling lots in this zone for $200 per parcel to residents. The city sent out letters to all of the residents letting them know they could buy the lots. If the city is selling lots for $200 to the residents, and Hantz is paying $300 per lot, a 50% premium, I fail to see how that is not fair market value.
As to your insinuating I think the council is corrupt and incompetent, I never said that any where in my post. In fact, I think the Detroit city council is far from corrupt and incompetent. I would not wish that job on my worst enemy. I think under the circumstances, they do an admirable job. Also, I never criticized the residents protesting it. In fact, I said that I understood why they felt the way the did, and they were entitled to that opinion.
You just threw out that this was an "insider deal". Where is your proof of that? This is what I was speaking of earlier. The opponents of this deal just throw out accusations and see what sticks.
The city has needed to shrink for quite some time. Do it already.
"People don't care how much you know until they know how much you care." - Mark Dantonio.
I want to make something clear. When I talk about the opponents of this deal, I am not speaking of the residents in this development zone. I have been out in that area on a weekly basis, speaking to the residents. I have a ton of respect for them hanging on to houses that have been passed down to them through generations. All of this with the infrastructure of their city crumbling around them, the house next to them a burned out shell that continues to stand because the city they pay taxes to can't afford to tear it down.
I guess it just bothers me when people throw out statements with no ambiguity that this is a land grab, and an inside deal. I have a heart for this city and the people that live in it, and when someone throws out unfounded accusations, it bothers me.
This post was edited by MSUBeefman 16 months ago
Despite the fact that these lots have been up for auction, the city has been refusing to sell these and many other parcels to residents interested in farming them for years. The city's justification for this refusal has been the lack of an agricultural ordinance in the city. This is apparently not an issue for Hantz Farms, indicating an insider deal. There has also been no attempt to re-zone the land, much of which is currently zoned commercial. Hantz Farms has been resistant to rezoning, which suggests an ulterior motive. Since there is nothing in the purchase agreement which legally requires Hantz to actually conduct this tree farming operation, they could simply do nothing after the sale and sit on the land like so many other speculators in Detroit.
I know a thing or two about tree farming. My grandfather owns a tree farm outside of Escanaba and I've worked on it several summers to help pay for college. I think it's a great business model that would be great for much of Detroit's vacant land. This deal just has shady written all over it.
I'll just say that unless you are privy to the ongoing negotiations, there are a lot of suppositions you can make regarding this project. Ultimately, it is obviously a project that stirs up great passion amongst people, and the only thing I know for sure is that I am fortunate to be associated with it. I'll just leave it at that.
I apologize for lumping you in with the majority of the assholes on this board who regard Detroit with a pretentious sense of contempt. I thought I had encountered you in past threads, but apparently I was mistaken.
I have been as privy to the ongoing negotiations as anyone who is not a direct employee of City Council or Hantz Farms can be. I work with several community groups who are involved and I remain skeptical as to the motives of John Hantz. Tell me this: If all John Hantz wants to do with this land is operate a tree farm, what's the fucking rush? You can't plant until the spring, so why not take the time to allow City Council to draft and pass an urban agricultural ordinance? Why not take the time to allow these parcels to be re-zoned for agricultural use? There's clearly some motivation behind the effort to push this sale through before those steps can be taken, but if Hantz is being honest, there is no logical reason to do so. Nothing being fed to the public from the Hantz camp makes any sense. John Hantz is a businessman who has built an empire of banking, real estate, and insurance companies. Do you really expect us to believe that he's going to purchase this land and plant a tree farm with no urban ag ordinance in place and therefore no guarantee he will be able to profit from it?
That's the problem I have with this whole arrangement. It reeks of deception. I'm sorry if that offends you, and I would be more than happy to discuss this further and learn more. My mind is nothing if not open, but from where I'm sitting this looks like another con.
What exactly do you think is wrong with a businessman wanting to profit from a business deal?
When He speaks I listen.
Nothing is wrong with a businessman wanting to profit from a business deal. He should be looking to profit. That's why why his actions don't make sense. He wants to buy all this land and plant a tree farm, despite the fact that under current law it is illegal to run a for-profit agricultural enterprise within city limits. And he wants to buy it all right now, before city council has even started to draft an urban agriculture ordinance which might allow him to profit from that enterprise. That doesn't strike you as odd?
Unfortunately, I can't get into the strategies of why Hantz chooses to do what, and why. That is, especially on a public forum. If you have questions as to why the proposal is as you feel "rushed through", Mike Score, the president of Hantz Farms is the one to talk to. He is more than interested in meeting with the concerned public. That's what they pay him for, to answer the tough questions.
As someone intimately involved in the process, I can only tell you this is not a land grab, and Hantz is not getting an inside deal.
As you said, residents have been interested in buying the lots next to them for years, with no interest from the city. As of a few weeks ago, now hundreds of residents got a letter sent to their door asking them if they were interested in buying some parcels. That would not have happened if Hantz had not shown interest in this land. By Hantz coming forward to buy this land, it has helped the city develop an approach to selling land.
Forgive me if I don't take you at your word. I heard Mike Score dodge those questions numerous times on the Craig Fahle Show the other day. He was talking in circles and trying to act like John Hantz is doing this as a charity out of the kindness of his own heart. Give me a break. He's a spin guy. He's paid to not answer the tough questions.
They ARE corrupt and incompetent. Defending them demonstrates your ignorance.
I read the news today, oh boy .. ..
About a lucky man who made the grade
I don't hold it against you if you don't take me at my word. You won't convince me of your viewpoint, because as I said, I know the intimate details of the proposal, and have been involved virtually from the beginning.
As far as the Craig Fahle show, I thought Mike answered the questions well. Then again, I know the meaning behind some answers the opponents of the project would deem "ambiguous". As long as the city council members understand the proposal, and have all their questions answered to their satisfaction, that is the goal.
Unfortunately, it is impossible to disprove a negative. If Hantz is allowed to buy this land, there will always be naysayers that it is a landgrab. They will just have to be proven wrong with time.
Wasn't Bing proposing to tear down blocks of vacant homes to consolidate the populated portion of the city and concentrate city services to only those areas?
This sounds like someone paying the city for the privilege to do exactly that for them, plus pay property tax, how can that be bad?
"This board would be great if it weren't for all the posters. ." -- AA Spartan 12/16/11
Yup. Hypothetically, let's say Hantz is pretty much Mr. Burns. He razes the properties, plants trees and 10 years from now he hatches his evil plan, sells the lumber and builds houses.
Is that worst case scenario any worse than just letting these lots with abondoned homes sit and decay without bringing in any tax revenue? Most of the interviews I have seen on TV with residents have been positive, with many happy that the lots would be cleaned up and maintained.
No, the worst case scenario is that Hantz never plants the trees, never razes anything, and sits on the properties indefinitely until the economy improves and he decides to do something with them. This has happened before with big land grabs in Detroit. There needs to be accountability built into the agreement, and right now there's a distinct lack of accountability.
Like I said before, I don't have a problem with the idea of Hantz running a tree farm in Detroit. I have a serious problem with how he's been conducting his business thus far, and I don't think anyone is out of line for protesting his methods. On the surface, it definitely looks sketchy.
This post was edited by fishrose 16 months ago
I heard Hantz is planning on using the property to re-establish a habitat for this nearly extinct species!
This post was edited by IB Fine 16 months ago
The deal is a development agreement, which means benchmarks are built into the agreement that Hantz must meet. Otherwise, the property can be taken back by the city. These benchmarks may include a minimum number of trees planted, a minimum of structures demolished, grass mowed on a timely basis, trash picked up, patrols for dumping, etc. That worst case scenario isn't even possible.
There is already a surplus of those varmints around here.
Fishrose, I'm guessing you work with community gardening groups in the city. Many of them sell the produce they grow, which as you mentioned above, is illegal. They have been operating farms in the city limits without an agricultural ordinance. Why is it okay for them to do so, but Hantz has to wait until the ag ordinance is passed to start his? Why not sell him the land with the benchmarks I mentioned, and then when the ordinance is passed, he can rezone the land to agricultural? In the meantime, vacant houses are demolished, trash is cleaned up, and the neighborhood is more livable.
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports