There was just a Dedication day for St. Mary of the Lake Catholic Church on August 28th. This year is the 70th anniversary of laying the corner stone for the Church. I don’t know if Easterday Construction was involved with the construction of the Church then, but we have completed several projects there of which I’m aware.
At one point in the recent past, we removed all the pews and replaced the floors in the sanctuary. We also remodeled and updated the bathrooms in the basement just off the community room. (Have you ever been threatened by a grumpy Priest with a gun?) But the biggest remodel we did was the creation of a new entrance and Day Chapel at the front of the Sanctuary with a glass wall partition between the two.
You can read a fairly detailed description of the project here. We won and ABC Award of Excellence for this project when it was completed in 2007.
The Heritage Park Pergola Dedication was in the Culver Citizen last week. The project was built by Easterday Construction Co., Inc. in the 90’s. It was commissioned by Richard Ford. I’ve discussed it here, here and here in the past.
One of the cool things about working in construction is the ability to drive around our area and see the projects that become history over time. Great Grandpa Easterday wasn’t the best about recording the early history of Easterday Construction… He was too busy running a business! But for those of us that remember, we see reminders of our beginnings as we look around Culver and throughout our region.
The Pony Barn remains adjacent to the Easterday Construction Co., Inc. office as a reminder of when the site was the Easterday beef farm at the edge of town. (Before the high school was built, neighborhood kids would ride their bikes to the north end of Slate Street and feed treats to the Grandpa Easterday’s Hereford Cattle in the field there.) The dedication marker on the elementary school gym is a reminder of a depression era project we completed, when we had a three digit phone number and our offices were in on the top floor of the State Exchange Bank Building (Now First Farmers Bank & Trust). Those that remember that history are disappearing. Only the 3rd and 4th generations of the Easterday Construction family remain and some of them have passed on. Those of us that are left still remain proud of the mark we have left in the history of Culver and surrounding communities.
There is an old adage regarding investing that when your stocks are down, you haven’t actually lost any money until you sell the stock. Because of this, the corollary has always been, that likewise, the gain is not realized until you sell the stock. Gains and Losses “on paper” don’t really matter, until they are realized when they are converted to cash or traded for other things. President Biden and now candidate Harris, along with some members of Congress are pushing a Wealth Tax, which would tax these paper gains.
As an example, if you bought 100 shares of Apple’s stock in 2010, it was 6 dollars a share. It cost $600 to make that purchase. It is now over $200 per share so your $600 investment is worth upwards of $20,000 or a 33 times as much as when you bought it. But that gain is on paper. You’re not able to use that value to purchase anything until you sell the stock, at which time you’ll take a $5,800 capital gains haircut.
The wealth tax proposal suggests that you should pay tax on that unrealized gain now. But how will the unrealized tax be determined? Apple’s stock’s all time high was $237, but its highest day end value was $234. And on August 5th with the short crash, it was at $207. Those numbers all are within the past month. With the constant fluctuation of stock prices, will there be an arbitrary day chosen? The all time high? An average of the past year? At a minimum, this seems like a record keeping nightmare. Record keeping is already a problem with the current capital gain tax where you have to keep documentation of a stock purchase price, transaction costs, and splits along the way… sometimes over decades. This is worse with a business or property where you have to track expenditures on improvements, depreciation and other things that affect value.
Another local example is what has happened to many families around Lake Maxinkuckee. Their ancestors owned a lake cottage which was bought decades ago. The property was passed down to descendants. Not all of these descendants were wealthy, but suddenly they were wealthy on paper because of the appreciation in lake property values. They were then forced to sell property that may have been in the family for generations because they couldn’t afford the real estate taxes on the appreciated value. The wealth tax could be another hit on unrealized generational wealth like that.
In a Kiplinger.com article, John Goralka posits this concept about estate planning, “The cash people receive from you is more cash than you have.” This translates to day to day things as well. Wealthy people don’t live like Scrooge McDuck, with a vault in the back of their home where they swim in gold coins. How much money do you think Elon Musk or Jeff Bezos have that they can access immediately? More than me, I’m sure, but as a percentage of their wealth, I would guess the percentage is smaller. Wealth is generally tied up in “things” and those things are working to help you create more wealth. Some of those things employ people who provide goods and services. It’s likely that a wealth tax would require forced liquidation of those things to pay the tax. That would result in less investment in those things so that cash that should be put to work in the economy is held back in anticipation of tax liabilities.
John Goralka’s article has made me think about my own situation. I own my home and currently have no plans to sell it. That value adds to my net worth, but it’s not money I can spend. But when I die, that home will be converted to cash to distribute to heirs. A smaller version of what Elon Musk has with Tesla and Jeff Bezos has with Amazon, but the concept is the same.
In our current DEI world, it has become de rigueur to bash successful people. Hard work, saving and investing are out of fashion. Along with the wealth tax, there are discussions about taxing 401(k)s and IRAs where people have saved too much or invested successfully. Envy of wealth has replaced the aspirational goal of becoming wealthy. Most wealth is the result of some risk. Most wealth remains at risk as it remains invested. No government has been good at playing Robin Hood. We should push back on this, as a tax on those creating wealth by a government that can’t live within its means won’t end well.
The Pointe has been all over the news and social media lately due to the City of Plymouth deeming the property unsafe to occupy. This has forced the charitable community to jump to action to help the residents of the 16 units there. On top of the general low income housing shortage in Marshall County, there is the issue that this property was renting at the very low rate of $400 per month. To the best of my knowledge, this is not a subsidized housing site.
As has been described to me, the facility is a former nursing home, so the “units” are small rooms with half baths, i.e. a sink and toilet. They are set up with common (shared) men’s and women’s showers and a community kitchen. There has been some deferred maintenance that includes roof leaks leading to other damage. Pictures from the Pilot News indicate that there is some mold/mildew, but the level and danger from that would have to be professionally assessed.
The landlord is taking it on the chin for this. Again, I know none of the background, reasons for deferred maintenance, etc. But I do think the $400/month is an unworkable business model. So if all the work that is projected to be needed there is done, there’s no way it supports itself at that rental rate. Here are some numbers to start the conversation:
So lets total that up as if someone were to buy this this and puts it back the way it should. That comes to $626,000. I think this is probably a cheap number, but it’s a starting point for this discussion.
First pass: 20% down = $125,200 The remaining $580,800 financed per the above at 5% = $45,996 in loan payments, against fully rented 16 units x $400/month x 12 months = $76,800. Seems like a decent return of $30,804, but remember, right now, plunking that $626,000 into a government bond funds would pay in excess of 5%, or a yearly return of $31,300 with no risk.
But lets do a second pass the way a developer would look at this:
Now we’re at a loss of $28,706 despite some of those numbers being generously on the low side. Not including the time value of money, i.e. the $125,200 down payment would earn $6,350/yr at 5%. So looking at the first three numbers in the above list, it would take a rent increase of $173/unit to get to break even. Most banks won’t finance a break even project and most developers want to make some money and have some cushion for unforeseen things. And nowhere in there was any maintenance reserve savings for when the roof needs replaced again or whatever unforeseen problem comes up.
Granted, this is an extremely simplified analysis. It doesn’t take into account the benefits of depreciation, since those are only a benefit when there is profit. Likewise it doesn’t take into account any taxes on the theoretical income. It also doesn’t take into account any escalators for inflation. There would be a large spreadsheet that a commercial developer would run this through to make their analysis.
Minimum Rent to make this begin to work would need to be $700/month, when existing tenants say they are struggling with the current $400/month. Reality is more like $800 – $900 to get to comparable rates in Plymouth that make economic sense to cover the myriad of additional things that will come up in the renovation and the probably greater management, vacancy and bad debt costs that are likely. The significant age of the building warrants a large maintenance reserve.
But lets take a step back and do really, really rough math (because I don’t know their expenses) on existing conditions assuming with the initial investment of $126,000. Assume 20% down leaves $100,800 financed. Using the 5% interest rate number in the previous scenario, that’s $665/month = $7,980 per year.
This would give us a profit of $14,944/yr. There may be other expenses I haven’t put a number to and conversely there are those that would suggest the maintenance line items should be zeroed out, since maintenance has been less than needed. In any case, this is not a gold mine as it exists today.
This is the real life example of what I’ve said for years… I would rather have a leaky roof over my head than no roof at all. Some of these residents have been living that situation, but the City has (rightly) cited safety concerns that removed their leaky roof.
the $626,000 number is a low number for the renovation, but it’s an impossible number to duplicate that building. $626,000/9,840sf = $64/sf. New construction on a facility such as this would be in excess of $200/sf. It is also questionable that a new facility such as this would meet current zoning standards, though a variance might make it possible. Then there is the issue of where to put it. Even if built on the same site, rezoning would be required along with the variance. That would prompt the same NIMBY protests that Garden Court ran into with the two sites they considered for their project. Theoretically, Garden Court’s GC Horizons project should have been less objectionable as fully functioning apartments.
Plymouth as a community has some hard decisions to make regarding housing. Complaints are rampant about facilities like The Pointe, but solutions are few. As seen with The Pointe, just shutting down the problem facility without a viable alternative creates a different crisis. As seen with Garden Court’s GC Horizons project, those that step up with a solution are often disparaged. Mayor Listenberger is making efforts, but is getting a lot of pushback. It’s tough when there’s a cry to “Do Something!“, but it’s accompanied by a chorus of “But Not That!“… no matter what “that” is…
Some things never change… That’s just part of the cost of doing business…
Positive Collaboration
September 3, 2024
Kevin Berger
Commentary, Marshall County, MCCF, Personal, Politics
Community, housing, Volunteering
I was pleased to be one of the Marshall County Community Foundation (MCCF) board members to attend a regional meeting of MCCF with the Community Foundation of St. Joseph County (CFSJC) and the Community Foundation of Elkhart County (CFEC). The basis of this was to foster regional collaboration on a Lilly grant that would help create more housing in our respective counties. It was great to see the groups come together and work towards a common goal. MACOG was also there, having stepped up to consider offering their services towards a Land Bank or similar vehicle to help move this forward.
I have been involved with several of these types of collaborative efforts in the past. As a Culver Chamber of Commerce (CCC) board member, I helped John Thompson and Eric Freeman create the Culver Second Century Committee. The Second Century Committee used CCC support to pull various non-profits and governmental bodies together to work towards common goals. It was successful for a brief time, creating collaboration among the various entities and was responsible for the 1998 Community Charrette and the new Comprehensive Plan that was born of the Charrette.
I was a founding member of the Marshall County Economic Development Corp. (MCEDC), which brought representatives from the county and each of the municipalities together to foster a collaborative effort towards economic growth. While chairman of MCEDC, I worked with Roger Umbaugh and Kevin Overmyer to start the County Development for the Future (CDFF) meetings. The CDFF meetings were started to bring the communities of Marshall County together to discuss challenges, successes and ways they could collaborate to learn from each other and make things better. One of the successes of CDFF was the community collaboration that brought about Marshall County Crossroads and Marshall County’s successful bid for Stellar Region designation.
I always have high hopes for these collaborative efforts. They really do bring the strengths of multiple people, agencies and entities together to create something bigger than the individual parts. There does seem to be a limited life span for them though. The Second Century Committee came together and did great things by organizing the participating groups. But then as the second generation of leaders took the reigns, it devolved into an executive committee that met and did most of the tasks themselves. They no longer had meetings to involve the underlying groups so the big initiatives went away. As the members of the exec committee burned out, less got done. They attempted to evolve into a Main Street organization, but that transition was not very successful. Main Street reorganized as Develop Culver. While Develop Culver is creating some successes, it’s not with the same larger collaboration of groups that made the Second Century Committee successful.
CDFF was extremely successful. The collaboration between communities broke down the long standing basketball rivalries and had Marshall County Communities working together. Attendees applauded the successes of their sister communities and networked after the meetings on ways to replicate those successes in the other Marshall County Communities. The other communities were all-in when Culver sought Stellar Community designation and helped make it happen. Because of that, I think CDFF was largely responsible for spawning Marshall County Crossroads and the designation of Marshall County as a Stellar Region. But a transition to a new executive director of MCEDC resulted in meetings that were more about his self-promotion and less about the collaboration. CDFF helped move us into the larger region with St. Joe and Elkhart counties when Regional Cities as launched, but at the cost of lost focus on our local communities and the tending of those new relationships. The meetings have devolved further and no longer list the accomplishments and goals of the communities. While they often bring useful information to those that attend, some communities no longer send representatives and there is no longer accountability or celebration of successes.
I was only peripherally involved with Marshall County Crossroads, serving on the larger committee and a subcommittee without having any leadership role. Crossroads took the base collaboration of CDFF and injected it with new life. It was CDFF on steroids for a while! The number of people that it brought in was amazing and the work that got done by the volunteer group was phenomenal. They accomplished the base goal of obtaining Stellar Region designation for Marshall County and set a follow up goal of continuing the collaboration and moving other issues forward as well. But the huge effort required for Stellar became difficult to sustain with a volunteer group. Crossroads has tried to spawn a new and more formal group, ONE Marshall County, but funding has been difficult and communication has deteriorated. Many of the Crossroads leaders have stepped aside and the new group is struggling to sustain the enthusiasm while also fighting some local politicians that (falsely) accuse them of trying to bypass normal government procedures. This has devolved back to infighting among communities. It’s unclear whether the group will survive Wolfe’s Dilemma.
While I continue to be supportive of collaborative efforts and think it results in outsized returns on investment, I’m coming to think that maybe they could work best as task forces in lieu of standing committees or long term organizations. So much of the initial energy and work is done by the original people starting the collaboration, but that energy and focus can become lost as the initial leaders burnout and others come in who don’t understand or agree with the core mission. Maybe they should be treated like fireworks that explode in a bright frenzy that everyone is excited about, and then everyone applauds at the end and everyone leaves happy as the smoke dissipates… Trying to sustain that frenetic energy isn’t possible and lesser results are seen as disappointing.
For this reason, I’m pleased that the three community foundations seem to be coming together for a common goal, but instead of forming a new group, they’re looking to MACOG to expand their services to sustain this. Combining the excitement and energy that bringing volunteers together generates with the infrastructure of an existing organization makes sense. This could be a new model that works. Only time will tell…
0 comments