golf rules 2:  Do you need to have certain credentials to speak before the council ?  If you own property and pay taxes in the city of record, can I voice a concern about the way it is done or being done whenever?  Residency allows you  too make decisions and financial decisions without having to spend any money of your own, when you rent or lease real estate. 

Buying real estate with taxpayers dollars requires very deligent concern for the taxpayer, not a church wanting to get all they can by leaning on the city bank roll for assistance.  As I stated before    "BUY IT IN THE CHURCH NAME"  "SPLIT THE PROPERTY IN THE CHURCH'S NAME"  AND THEN  DO THEIR THING FROM THERE ON"          HOLD IT/DEVELOP IT/SELL IT WHATEVER

There must be something going south on this deal or it would of already been done.   Your question of premium is derived from taking option positions in stock trades and it is called a premium.  You pay this to have a position in relation to the current status of the option. So COH has extended the city this option to buy the land and expects a premium for the position.  But then again they do not own the property, they are in escrow trying to secure ownership.  Once they have ownership then they can negoiate price and terms with the city appropriately.  Final thought, I sure hope the COH and or the City procure an appraisal to justify certain actions.  As in the Peed deal,Councilman Baker walked away with all the commissions and no appraisal to backup the purchase price.     Have a nice day.

I honestly think azcarcarrier has lost a bit of credibility here, particularly in talking about the church selling property for 45 million dollars, then quite obviously trying to back-peddle by saying "I'm not sure but I think 45M means 45,000.00." Come on, any adult (or 13 year old, for that matter) knows that 45K, not 45M, is $45,000--let alone someone in the real estate business, presumably dealing with money all the time. Not that $45K was anywhere near the actual figure either..

Azcarcarrier, for someone who says he was there, listening to the whole presentation, you sure seem to be shaky on even the most basic of details.  The fact that you obviously had no clue about how much the transaction even cost the city, but were willing to present your unsubstantiated and very incorrect figure as fact in the first post here, makes me question the truth of anything else that you present as fact--or whether you even bother to attempt verifying the truth of anything that you post here. 

It's not even a 45K profit. Where did you get that figure from?

Even at $6,300 per acre, that doesn't come out to $45,000...

AZcarcarrier, whether you said 45K or 45M--which, by the way, was not stated as profit in your original post but as the actual amount the church was selling the property to the city--neither is close to the actual amount the property was sold for.

You assume that anyone who disagrees with you is a "follower" of GolfRules. This is obviously not the case when, in fact, some of us have disagreed with him on other threads (such as DesertDweller and myself), and I'd assume that others who were posting here don't know him. Again, it's just that when you clearly get facts wrong, you lose credibility.

Just like said above by cliffinAZ, I think it's rude to call people followers just because they might agree with an opinion.  That tactic is used by you because you want to shut people up.

I enjoy different opinions on this forum, but what I don't like are people who help spread rumors without verification of facts, people who lie, and people who simply don't know anything about a subject, but they post ignorant comments anyway.  I also don't like people who say they are against something, yet they are not willing to speak out publically to make a difference when they have the opportunity (such as Godsey and azcarcarrier), but they have plenty of wind to bash things/people on a website.