Just a quick update here relative to our finances. February is our major Board meeting of the year and before that our Finance Committee meets.  We have pretty much concluded there would never likely be an opportunity to have a meeting of the minds with your dad on acquiring your 10 acres and that we should take the $700k or so we have re-accumulated above the Board's liquid reserve requirement and invest it long term.

 

Back when we spoke years ago about the price I was feeling threatened by development. But I've come to realize that control of our 9 acres is pretty good protection.  While I totally understand an owner posturing to argue for value, when you dad talks about buyers other than Chris Daye being interested, with the access issues, I don't see how anyone but Chris could buy it.

 

Fortunately for you, Chris is unique in the industry in terms of his integrity and I expect at some point you will manage to make a deal with him. Timing just may depend on whether what is already one of the longest expansions in history continues for enough years.

 

Chris purchasing the property does not threaten us like the residential plans of a home builder I was not sure I could trust.  He knows what concerns we have about the kind of development that we feel would not be threatening and I think he has respect for what our opposition to a development means.  It is also unlikely he would have a project that required only your ten acres. Most likely he would also need our 9 acres.  So I feel pretty well protected against a residential development that I view as potentially causing us a problem.

 

Your dad is absolutely entitled to have his view of the value and I don't want to risk a repeat of the strained incident where he seemed insulted at any different suggestion of value.  As you know, a developer values property based on what he can build profitably. We are not a developer, so for us, additional property is a buffer.  So absent the fear I had a few years ago that drove my thought to use the $1mm over reserves we had at that time, there just is not a reason to stretch.

 

How much of the property is usable upland is relevant to a developer, but not really to me when looking at buffer.  Again, I understand your dad being an experienced negotiator arguing for 8 upland acres.  Technically he may be right.  But years ago I talked with an environmental engineer who worked for developers. A chunk of the upland is in a 100 foot wide strip south of the wetland that is too narrow build anything on. So I'm not sure a developer is going to buy the idea that there are 8 acres of upland.  But, 6 acres may be all Chris needs to assign a value you can agree on.

 

The other factor that makes me think we could never buy it is that your dad, or perhaps the other owners he represents, never seemed to place any value on the idea of a cash deal.  He or they wanted us to pay cash at the same price as a developer putting up a small deposit contingent on rezoning, etc. and, implicitly, on the economy since a downturn tends to put a stop to many projects.

 

As I have mentioned to you, after our meeting where we could not agree, we used our funds to buy properties along North Meadowview to house interns and staff and rent out. By paying cash we typically paid 70-80% of market because of the value of the cash deal.  But again, it is totally up to a seller whether a cash deal like that has value. It does to my Board - that is what they expect me to present.  Since the cash deal we could have done does not apparently have value to your dad or the other owners, it is hard to think we could ever buy the property.

 

I don't mean to go on, and none of it may be meaningful because you might well have already concluded that the ultimate sale will have to be with Chris. I just wanted to give enough explanation so no one was offended if you ever had in mind to renew our talks and I had to decline for lack of funds.  Once we put the funds in long term instru