Panthers terminating Rock Hill project agreements

[Devil Doc]

On 6/3/2022 at 4:55 PM, Anybodyhome said:

I know business property owners in my city who have a different LLC for each property they own, thereby protecting all their other properties if one tanks.

Matter of fact I was doing some title work yesterday for a local commercial building owner who has 6 buildings downtown, and for each of them the property owner is the address LLC, for example, "123 Main St., LLC." There's no limit to the number of LLCs you can create and they're all separate entities.  

Yep, Ryan Newman owns property near me and it is listed as RKN Farms LLC, RKN Farms II LLC  and RKN Properties LLC. It is the same as Dale Jr. Owning property listed as RDEJ REVOC TR,  RDEJ Restated 2005 REVOC TR, and his sister owning the property around his ( they both use it) Dirty Mo Acres LLC, and Dirty Moe Acres LLC. I can give many examples... but you get it. This was more for the people who didn't know this information. 

 

[SizzleBuzz]

1 hour ago, CRA said:

then you answer this

Serious question.  Do you think Tepper/Panthers have any role in the bonds being issued? Where are talking in general.  Go back and time.  RH needs to issue bonds.  Do you think they need Tepper in any way for that? 

 

I don't know...

[poundaway]

1 minute ago, Mr. Scot said:

You want to take it to mean that they blame Tepper less than they do Rock Hill. That's not true.

 

This is a false statement.  I never said that.  I know you want to make it a blame competition.  You all want to make sure that Tepper gets at least some blame. 

I  was just surprised the COUNTY IS SUING THE CITY because as the county's lawsuit states:
"Ultimately, the City of Rock Hill failed to issue the required bonds, the development project collapsed"

Then the angry dude came storming in.

 

[SizzleBuzz]

2 minutes ago, poundaway said:

This is a false statement.  I never said that.  I know you want to make it a blame competition.  You all want to make sure that Tepper gets at least some blame. 

I  was just surprised the COUNTY IS SUING THE CITY because as the county's lawsuit states:
"Ultimately, the City of Rock Hill failed to issue the required bonds, the development project collapsed"

Then the angry dude came storming in.

Standard operating procedure for Carnac...

...literally fabricates statements and attributes them to others as fact .

[Anybodyhome]

12 minutes ago, Devil Doc said:

would the zoning for this building be considered Commerical? It is listed as MP-C

Master Planned Commercial (MP‐C): The purpose of the MP‐C district is to provide mixed‐use retail and office  development, with limited moderate and higher‐density residential uses integrated into the development above street levels and as separate stand‐alone uses. Rezonings to MP‐C districts must be at least 10 acres unless City  Council reduces the minimum size during the rezoning process.  

Would that not allow it just to stay where it is, and not have to be torn down? 

 

First and foremost, it is and will remain private property. Therefore, any issues the city has with respect to zoning, ordinance or nuisance violations have to be addressed with a legal notice.

At some point, the city could view this as an eyesore which is having an adverse effect upon property values (which is a fairly catch-all and generic, but often used phrase, in municipal, county and state ordinances and statutes). They can then demand the property owner take action to mitigate the violation and, if there is no compliance, the city could, theoretically, demolish the place.

Not that any of this will happen, but, by the book, that's how it works.

[Mr. Scot]

4 minutes ago, SizzleBuzz said:

Standard operating procedure for Carnac...

...literally fabricates statements and attributes them to others as fact .

And here you said you were going to ignore me.

Knew you couldn't

[poundaway]

Just now, Mr. Scot said:

And here you said you were going to ignore me.

Knew you couldn't

He probably read your post in my reply.  Its a problem with the ignore feature.

[Devil Doc]

4 minutes ago, Anybodyhome said:

First and foremost, it is and will remain private property. Therefore, any issues the city has with respect to zoning, ordinance or nuisance violations have to be addressed with a legal notice.

At some point, the city could view this as an eyesore which is having an adverse effect upon property values (which is a fairly catch-all and generic, but often used phrase, in municipal, county and state ordinances and statutes). They can then demand the property owner take action to mitigate the violation and, if there is no compliance, the city could, theoretically, demolish the place.

Not that any of this will happen, but, by the book, that's how it works.

Oh, I am not saying it wont be private property, I was just under the impression that there is not many ordinances if it is considered commercial. 

[SizzleBuzz]

1 minute ago, poundaway said:

He probably read your post in my reply.  Its a problem with the ignore feature.

Bingo .

[CRA]

38 minutes ago, SizzleBuzz said:

I don't know...

Well, if you don’t know….how do you explain being so adamant that Tepper isn’t partially to blame with RH on the bond mess?  Which you have been doing for months 

RH has made some legit accusations that need answers on the bond issue.  Tepper has chosen silence when asked on this specifics.  

so both look at fault there IMO until proven otherwise.  Yet you consistently dig in to it only being RH to blame. 

so it doesn’t square 

[poundaway]

1 minute ago, CRA said:

Well, if you don’t know….how do you explain being so adamant that Tepper isn’t partially to blame with RH on the bond mess?  Which you have been doing for months 

Fine I'll say it for you.

Tepper is to blame.

There, is it all better now?

[SizzleBuzz]

1 minute ago, CRA said:

Well, if you don’t know….how do you explain being so adamant that Tepper isn’t partially to blame with RH on the bond mess?  Which you have been doing for months 

Why would Tepper ever submarine the bond issue?

What does he stand to gain by doing so?

If you have info implicating Tepper put it out there pal...

[CRA]

21 minutes ago, SizzleBuzz said:

Why would Tepper ever submarine the bond issue?

What does he stand to gain by doing so?

If you have info implicating Tepper put it out there pal...

RH made the accusations about the bond mess and Teppers part. Tepper refused to respond to those allegations.  All that has been discussed. 

I’m saying both them likely have fault and fugged this thing up.  This was new for RH AND Tepper. 

You keep digging in to it being all and only RH,  I’m merely saying both are likely to blame for it falling apart.  And you have consistently been against THAT stance. 

[poundaway]

Just now, CRA said:

RH made the accusations about the bond mess and Teppers part. Tepper refused to respond to those allegations.  All that has been discussed. 

I’m saying both them likely have fault and fugged this thing up.  This was new for RH AND Tepper. 

You keep digging in to it being all and only RH,  I’m merely saying both are likely to blame for it falling apart.  And you have consistently been against THAT stance. 

You didn't answer his question you just kept repeating what you've said over and over.

Why would Tepper undermine RH issuing the bonds?