University might back off buying Joe's, lawyer says
Posted June 22nd, 2008 by mrasor
Football
If Akron loses its appeal of the $3.1 million verdict to Joe Nemer, it might back off purchasing the land, according to Nemer's attorney Warner Mendenhall.
Probate court judge Bill Spicer will rule on UA's motion to set aside the verdict early this week. Mendenhall said the university's attorney told him it would not be interested in buying the land through eminent domain at that cost.
Would the university really set aside a huge plan for a residence hall over a measley million bucks? Probably not. It looks like posturing, because Nemer obviously can't get $3.1 million for his land on the market. Even if the university is serious, it might not be able to back out.
June 22nd, 2008 at 10:55 pm
What would the Nemer's do if the University decided not to pay the 3.1 million that the jury set as the value of their property. The county then reappraised the value of their property to reflect this value, and the Nemer's would see a very different tax bill than the one they currently pay. Common sense says that the University would save millions, the Nemer's would then have a huge tax bill, and they would probably fall all over themselves in running back to the University to accept their original offer.
June 22nd, 2008 at 11:41 pm
This might be even better than going through eminent domain. Just sit back, watch them pay property taxes based on the new values established in court (property taxes on a non-revenue parking lot valued at $ 1 million must to be absurd), and wait until they can't afford to stay in business. Then swoop in and buy the property at its actual value.
Fence off the area from campus property for safety reasons (people getting shot outside the bar, bums, druggies, ect.). Get some real college bars to come to the area, using the lure of te stadium, to provide competition andrunning their business becomes unfeasible.
June 23rd, 2008 at 7:21 am
I don't see UofA backing off even if they lose the appeal and IMO, this is posturing by Nemer's Attorneys. I do hope however Judge Spicer set asides this outlandish verdict by jury.
June 23rd, 2008 at 8:09 am
If the U backs off, I smell an inverse condemnation suit.
June 23rd, 2008 at 10:16 am
Just wondering: How exactly do kids afford to attend UA these days, with the constant building, acquisitions, expansion? Do you realize I could've completed a 4-year college education at UA on what it costs for a single semester now? Is this progress? Has anyone looked at the economy lately and thought about how kids emerge from UA with $50,000 in loans are going to repay them?
All of this property being snatched up, including The Sun, etc., is being passed along to the students in cost. Will it ever stop? And if so, will there still be anyone able to afford to attend? These are realistic questions, don't ya think?
June 23rd, 2008 at 10:51 am
Common Sense-
Any type of building projects (ie. the Student Union, rec Center, Stadium, etc.) are not paid from student tuition. Plain and simple. Student Tuition covers operating expenses, which have all gone UP with the cost of gas, food, etc. Every single school has a capital improvement budget which is not part of the university fund- some of it is paid by grants, donations, development agreements, etc.
What students need to do is actually have a PLAN on how to pay for college before attending. Some students have that, but many don't.
June 23rd, 2008 at 11:01 am
There's cap on tuition across the board for all state schools. UofA student fees are in line with other state schools. UofA has been in massive building program and has been for years. All schools have capital budgets and you borrow monies as well as get money form the state. UofA debt load has prettu rating long and short term as they managed their debt load pretty well.
June 23rd, 2008 at 12:51 pm
Wouldn't it be an interesting story in the Beacon to read about the University's financial responsibilities so that we can educate ignorant people in Akron who think like "Common Sense"?
June 23rd, 2008 at 1:26 pm
Yes I agree, and maybe somebody can explain how the board only allocated $5M of the donations towards purchasing land, and then accidentally spent it all before purchasing 2 of the largest parcels. Oh and made sure to give Jack Morrison Jr. 40% more than what the fair market value was…. but apparently Jack Morrison Sr. had NO CLUE what his son did with the thousands of dollars he lent his son… and the appraiser was more than qualified for that
June 23rd, 2008 at 2:11 pm
I guess you've never heard of cost overruns? The original 5 mil was set aside for purchasing and demo of the properties. They had to remove lead and asbsetos which is very, very costly from many of the properties to date. They underesitmated the cost of removing Nash St and rerouting some of the utilities in the area. This is nothing as this type of thing happens all time in project of this size. They run over budget down here on both of UGA recent expanisons and GA Tech expansion as well. UofA is not hurting for monies and more then likely the only reason it has been mentioned, is posturing in the eminent domain cases. The Morrison house still stands and is still tied up over legal issues. Nobody has anything on that as Judge Spicer is picking it apart. Methinks Jack Morrison Jr is not going to get what UofA first offered.
June 23rd, 2008 at 3:47 pm
Funny how some people complain about how much over supposed FMV Morrison got and then cheer for how much the Nemers got.
June 23rd, 2008 at 4:22 pm
You're absolutely right, funny how its not "fair" at all (no need to abbreviate fair market value), but instead it's all politics. The Nemers who have maintained their properties for over 20 years don't get the same treatment as the Morrisons who owned their property for 1 year. But God works in mysterious ways, so maybe this will teach the Morrisons and the U of A committee to be a little more ethical when they conduct business transactions, so that the property owners get the "fair" share that they deserve.
June 24th, 2008 at 8:49 am
Wow, some UA "insiders" got a little testy there when the school's out-of-control spending is mentioned. Fact remains, a semester of college should not increase 800% over a 25-year period!! Did anyone's salary keep pace with that? Are starting jobs (if you can even FIND one) lavishing enormous salaries on kids? Anyone who thinks the kids aren't shouldering the load for UA's expansion is full of crap. If not, please justify the 800% tuition increase.
Remember when Akron used to be the safe and affordable choice for local families who couldn't afford to send kids away, due to room-and-board & tuition costs? Boy, those days are history. No wonder the dumb get dumber; only the rich can afford an education.
June 24th, 2008 at 9:26 am
Tuition costs and room and board have skyrocketed everywhere and not just at UofA and not just because of the recent construction. When I graduated HS gas cost less then 75 cents a gallon. That's just slightly under 600% in the past 30 years with gas going for 4.07 nationwide. Many things have gone 600 to 800 percent over the years. UofA recent building boom has come in the last several years and tuition has not risen becasue of it. The capital improvement budget does not come from the University fund and you talk about raising tuition all you like. You can't show any data that says capital improvement dollars are the cuase of it.
June 24th, 2008 at 12:50 pm
Explain to me how Ohio State generates the revenue that it does, and tuition there costs as much, if not more, than UA?
I agree that tuition should not skyrocket as it has, but I don't think it's all tied to building/improvements.
June 24th, 2008 at 3:02 pm
Thanks Fred for helping to point out how common sense is making no sense. Notre Dame gets close to billions in endowments from their deep pocketed Alums. Regis alone give the school a 100 million dollars. But, guess what? ND tuition has gone up way over 800% in the past 25 to 30 years. The cost for running colleges has grown and it's not because of capital improvements or buying rundown properties which monies don't come out of the university fund anyway. But, most posters rather make outlandish comments that capital improvements are driving tuition costs and that is not factual.
June 24th, 2008 at 3:25 pm
Big Guy in GA (aka Luis Proenza): Are you on UA's payroll, or what?? A declining city & state–for decades, not just recently–and an exodus of jobs…and you're really making a case for Akron U, of all schools, to jack up their costs over 800%? Did your salary go from $20,000 to $160,000 over that span? I wager more people filed for bankruptcy that had increases like that. You are very out of touch with the common man, financially-speaking, and are a big reason why this country is in a slide it will never recover from. Un-freakin-believable.
June 24th, 2008 at 4:47 pm
I'm on nobody payroll and you need to apply some common sense to what you're posting. College tuitions have gone up across the board. UofA is nowhere near as bad as some schools. UofA current costs wouldn't pay for 1 quarter for many schools across the country. It cost upwards of 30,000 plus dollars a year to go to places like Notre Dame and Northwestern. These places have seen their tuitions go up 800% in the past 25 to 30 years. There Public schools in Ohio that cost more then UofA and have gone up as well in the past 25 to 30 years. Why do you only have you undies in tight over UofA? I agree its crime what a college education goes for nowadays. But, UofA is being unfairly singled out by you when they're hardly alone in rising costs.
June 24th, 2008 at 4:49 pm
Hello… if we're all talking about the same thing, I'm 99.9999% sure the monies the U of A is using to improve the campus is from donations, mainly from Infocision and Summa.
Bottom line, U of A has the money, isn't hurting, and they need to work on generating local business and keeping their graduates in the area… unlike what became of The All Knowing Big Shot (who doesn't live in Akron).
June 24th, 2008 at 5:54 pm
I never said UofA didn't have the monies. UofA has many deep pocketed alums giving back to the school, That's why they're in the midst 500 million campus improvement over the past few years. Yes, I left the area because of job offers only a fool would turned down. Had I gotten similar job offers in Ohio 25 years ago. I'd still be there. But, unlike many who post here. I'm postive about Akron future and I support UofA and APS and will continue to do so.
June 24th, 2008 at 7:44 pm
Looks like that .00001% came back to bite you in the ass Akronite. A majority of the money used for capital improvements comes from the State (and it's not the University's job to generate local business).
June 24th, 2008 at 8:01 pm
First, UA receives "some" donations, but I can tell you first-hand, it sure isn't covering these $-half-billion expansions (for fewer students, I might point out). Summa? Yeah, ever heard of overpriced health care? We're ALL paying for the stadium/field. The "State" funds you speak of? Yeah, we're ALL paying for this crap. Heard of insane taxes, lately?
Bottom line, UA is building a storybook kingdom that no one but the rich will reasonably be able to afford. The school and state have effectively delegated Ohio teens to other options. And we wonder why there's a "brain drain" and young people fleeing Ohio after HS? If I'm not mistaken, California residents attend UCLA free of charge. But hey, it's fine and dandy to charge Ohio kids $80,000+ for a degree, right?
At least we'll have a pretty place to play football, and a rundown Sun Bar to visit afterwards, since the one time UA decides to get frugal, it's when they're taking a person's livlihood.
June 24th, 2008 at 8:33 pm
Like I said no common sense
http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/Fees/undergradgradfees08-09.pdf
UCLA
6,262 Resident
6,849 Non Resident
California has the Nation's highest COLA and property taxes out there far, far higher then Ohio on houses that cost far, far more then Ohio (try a mid range of 100 k's higher)
That's your trade off to save about 1800 a year.
You're making no sense again
June 24th, 2008 at 9:04 pm
You must be out of touch Common Sense. I've been checking college tuition and UofA is bargin compared to many schools around the country. I lived in Illinois for number of years before I moved south. Illinois State which isn't near the size of UofA is 10,000 per year less student fees and that's if you're State resident. It's 18,000 per year for non-residents. The list is long of State schools that cost more then 10,000 plus a year and don't even me started on private schools. Northwestern is 30,000 per year. It's costly to run a college and you need to check around see what everyone else is paying before you keep picking on UofA. While their price is not cheap. It's is more of bargin then many, many colleges these days.
June 25th, 2008 at 7:12 am
Big Guy in GA is exactly correct. UofA is a fantistic school on many levels and is an excellent value now and will be in the future because of the improvements.
The cost of tuition is little compared to the future earnings a person can get from a college degree. Student loans are at such a low interest rate that taking one out is almost like getting a cash loan. There are many scholarships and grants UofA offers to those who can not afford to pay out of their pocked immediately.
June 25th, 2008 at 7:34 am
So you guys are arguing that it's fine and dandy for Action U's tuition to skyrocket tenfold just because everyone else is doing it? Whatever happened to controlling costs and making education attainable for everyone? Pity. I suppose I'll be attacked now, like CS, but I certainly see his points and wonder why we've tolerated such nonsense from our state institutions.
Governors and Presidents run on platforms of being "pro-education," but are blowing smoke because of the economic realities so many Ohioans face. It's like Congress being "appalled" at gas rates or cereal prices, but then doing zilch to correct the problem. "Drill in Alaska?! Are you MAD?" "Compell colleges to get their spending under control?! Blasphemy!!"
June 25th, 2008 at 8:06 am
Zipmeister: No, I was right — The money that is being used for the stadium was donated by the sponsors. So lets make it that I am 100% certain.
June 25th, 2008 at 11:45 am
I've never said it was okay for any school to skyrocket their tuition. I'm tired of UofA being signaled out here and other ABJ forums when ALL schools have skyrocketed their tuitions over the past 39 years. UofA is not even the most expensive State school in Ohio. But. you guys make it sound like they are and they're not. I'm feel sorry for this generation and the costs they have to pay to get a college education. But, slamming UofA for their current tuition while acting like others highs cost don't exists among the 1000's of college across this country and Ohio is just wrong.
June 25th, 2008 at 1:35 pm
OK, I'll say it. The cost of tuition at schools has gone up for many reasons. I really don't know how much building costs account for that, but I'm sure it adds to it. The University must upgrade at some point and now they are doing it. If you want a first class institution, UofA is one, then you need a first class environment.
Further, I think if an institution improves its educational programs then it deserves to have a tuition cost equal to the value the institution brings to the student. UofA is a much better school today than it was 20 years ago when I started and it was pretty good then. They deserve the price increase because they added value. I can't speak to other state schools as I never attended one, but for the price even today, UofA is a great value. As far as I'm concerned, they probably don't charge enough for what they offer.
June 25th, 2008 at 2:03 pm
Anyone think that 'Common Sense' is just a Kent fan pulling everyone's chain? Nobody is really that dim. She is just a good BS'er. I'm pretty sure she can turn around and argue the other side also.
June 25th, 2008 at 7:21 pm
Akronite, you didn't restrict your comment to the stadium (which will be funded by millions of state dollars. you said…
"I’m 99.9999% sure the monies the U of A is using to improve the campus is from donations, mainly from Infocision and Summa."
Which makes your statement 100% wrong.
June 26th, 2008 at 8:34 am
Zipmeister: This article is about the STADIUM, which was exactly what I was referring to.
June 26th, 2008 at 8:47 am
Wrong again! The article to which these comments refer is about a lawsuit for land to be used as a residence hall.
June 26th, 2008 at 3:43 pm
Oh really! Well then clearly this article shouldn't be posted under the Sports or Football categories if it has nothing to do with the stadium… oops!
June 30th, 2008 at 4:41 pm
http://www.ohio.com/news/break_news/22733084.html
Since very few people like to think the construction of new dorms falls under the football category, heres an educated update for your ignorant comments.
Apparently Judge Spicer believes and agrees with entire jury, against the U of A, that the Nemers should get a more fair compensation for their properties.