I have a good friend who is a Librarian. She shared this with me. I have a sister-in-law that is a Library Director. We have done work many libraries throughout this area where the Librarian or Library Director are friends from our past work together. This is an important issue for Libraries and you should consider contacting your legislator about it.
The flier above gives information for legislators in Pulaski County. Since most of my lurkers are from Marshall County, our State Senators are:
Ryan Mishler if you’re a resident of District 9 in NE Marshall County
200 W. Washington St.
Indianapolis, IN 46204
Phone: 800-382-9467
or 317-232-9400
Email: Senator.Mishler@iga.in.gov
Mike Bohacek if you’re a resident of District 8 for the remainder of Marshall County
200 W. Washington St.
Indianapolis, IN 46204
Phone: 800-382-9467
or 317-232-9400
Email: Senator.Bohacek@iga.in.gov
And our State Representatives are:
Jack Jordan if you’re a resident of District 17, which covers the majority of Marshall Count
200 W. Washington St.
Indianapolis, IN 46204
Phone: 800-382-9841 or 317-232-9651
Email: H17@iga.in.gov
Jake Teshka if you’re a resident of District 7, which covers a small part of Marshall County west of LaPaz
200 W. Washington St.
Indianapolis, IN 46204
Phone: 800-382-9841 or 317-232-9981
Email: H7@iga.in.gov
One of yesterday’s Sunday morning talking heads referenced a Martin Lomasney quote. It was interesting enough that it prompted me to look it up. Mr. Lomasney was what would now be called a political operative in Boston around the turn of the 20th century. He apparently once told a young follower, “Don’t write when you can talk; don’t talk when you can nod your head.” Sage advice! In the age of Hillary Clinton and Elliot Spitzer, “write” could have been updated to “email” and now in the era of President Trump, maybe “write” should be updated to “Tweet”…
Quote referenced through Wikipedia and Pioneer Institute
“The Framers of the Constitution envisioned a multiplicity of interests that would argue their way to a common good. We succeed with more voices, not fewer, and we should have enough confidence in our arguments to hear out our opponents.”
Kimberly Strassel in Imprimis – April 2017, Volume 46, Number 4
Last week was a rough week. Two funerals for a parent of two different good friends. Those obligations just added to what was an already stressful week. Fortunately neither were unexpected. Both of of the passing parents were in their 90’s. It’s never good, though.
The second funeral was for a Navy veteran and he received military honors at his funeral. This isn’t the first time I’ve seen this done. Both my grandfather’s and my mother-in-law’s 3rd husband’s funerals included military honors. It is always a moving and touching display.
The respect for the Flag that the seamen displayed was particularly noteworthy considering the current controversy. I wonder how many of the football players using the National Anthem and Flag presentations as a time to protest have seen this? Would it affect their choices?
I don’t dispute that they have the right to protest. That’s one of the things our Flag represents. Veterans often would be there first to affirm that, though often with a look of despair as they also recognize the disrespect. The Flag represents so much more to so many people. To many, the Flag is sacred. Would the players have better served their cause by choosing another form of protest? it would appear so… My favorite unsourced quote about Free Speech is, “While it is true that you have the right to free speech, you do not have the right to be heard.” To the NFL’s chagrin, some fans are now former fans because of the protests. They’ve chosen not to listen. Probably not what was intended.
I wasn’t an NFL fan before the protests started, but this has brought them onto my radar… and not in a favorable light. Without commentary on their goals, I wish they would have chosen another form of protest. Another comment I heard recently resonates. “If we don’t teach our youth respect for our Country, will they feel bound to protect it if necessary?” There was a news story about a Pee-wee football team that chose to kneel during the national anthem because that’s what their “heros” are doing. We reap what we sow… and sometimes we regret it.
Image borrowed from a Daily Mail article on Beau Biden’s funeral.
Cost of doing business
August 12, 2024
Kevin Berger
Commentary, Plymouth, Politics
Affordable Housing, Community, government, housing, Multi-family, Politics, Trends, Volunteering, Workforce Housing
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…
0 comments