7/14/1992 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

jkj property. In looking at that, he came up with a number of lots that possibly could be sold off and it seemed like a significant potential there since it is oceanfront property. His feeling was that he didn't want to see an unfair trade for the County. Commissioner Scurlock felt that a limited, passive recreational area there is well suited and compatible to the existing residential. That is where he was coming from at that meeting in terms of not wanting that property to be sold since we are taking what he feels is a parcel of lesser value. That was his thought process. Chairman Eggert asked if Commissioner Scurlock supported an "and" or an "or" first refusal, but Commissioner Scurlock stated that he didn't understand the "and" or "or" in a sense. To him. when you say that it is restricted to public use, then the only people they possibly could sell to would be another public entity, and he didn't have a problem with that. Chairman Eggert understood then that Commissioner Scurlock had intended "and the right of first refusal". Town Manager Joe Dorsky advised that all the Town is concerned about is that they get equal value. He noted that both pieces of property were appraised by the same appraiser and that at least at this point we have to feel that he did an equally credible job on both pieces. However, if the piece that the County now owns is going to be perpetually restricted for public use, then it is not worth what the appraiser appraised it at because he appraised it for private use. Commissioner Scurlock pointed out that the County has a 12 - year lease on the Gifford Park, which has a value to it also. Attorney Collins pointed out that if we had to come back in 12 years and purchase a park or trade a park, he would suspect that the beach front park property would have appreciated significantly more than the Gifford Park site. 68