Georgia and Brian Think You Can’t Add and Subtract

On July 27 I sent the email attached below to Goodyear City Manager Brian Dalke.

Here is how Brian, Georgia, and the rest of the liars in Goodyear city hall have characterized their $12 million dollar purchase of a building that their own appraiser told them was only worth $8 million.  2012 July Aug Infocus0001  A two page spread in Goodyear’s taxpayer funded political magazine, Infocus as well as Georgia just gushing about it in her pathetic monthly political advertizement column.  Georgia’s calling it an “investment”.  Telling you that she is “delivering” for you. What a bunch of BS.

Does she think you can’t add and subtract?

Now they want you to believe that they are going to “save tax dollars” and “generate revenues”. More BS.  They could rent the building for $12 per sq ft through a lease extension and save themselves over the $15 to $16 plus per sq ft that they’re over-paying now. (Yeah, I know, she doesn’t write any of this, her $80,000 per year assistant does but she lets them put her photo on it).

They tell you it won’t cost you a penny, but they forget to mention the $ 4 million in cash they are spending that they don’t count as part of the expense.  Then they tell you the building is fairly valued at $12 million “due to renewed demand” for commercial property in Goodyear.  These are the same people who were giving away your tax dollars only a few months ago in order to attract new commercial businesses to the area.

Why did Goodyear even bother to hire an appraiser for $3,500 if they weren’t going to take his opinion? Don’t they think their own appraiser would take current market conditions into account?  In fact he did.  He told them that Goodyear was paying too much on their current lease for this building and he called it “bonus rent” that they were paying their landlord, the same guy who they now want to over pay to purchase the building they’re in.   Maybe Goodyear’s appraiser realized that the same building is advertized for $10 – $12 per sq ft and has been partially vacant since at least 2006.

email to Brian Dalke

From: howardsgoodyearblog
Date: Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 9:40 AM
Subject: Why is Goodyear Paying Nearly 50% More Than Their Appraiser Valued a Building For?
Cc: Jim Painter ,,,

Brian Dalke
City Manager
City of Goodyear, AZ

Dear Mr. Dalke;
As City Manager of Goodyear, Arizona, I believe you have a responsibility to speak truthfully to the citizens and taxpayers of our city. You have not done so in your most recent comments in Goodyear’s InFocus city magazine.

I take exception to several incorrect and misleading statements that have been made to the public in your most recent InFocus magazine article on GY’s improper purchase of the Venita business park where Goodyear has agreed to pay close to 50% more than Goodyear’s own appraiser told the city in writing that this property was worth.

1. You say that, “this purchase costs the City the same as our annual lease payment today”. But this is not true. When you make that claim, you only compare the cost of a $10 million bank loan to the current lease costs and you neglect to account for nearly $4 million of city cash that will be used to fund this purchase. When one takes money out of one’s savings account to pay for something, that does not mean that the money was not spent just because it was not borrowed does it?

2. The article goes further to say that the city paid well over their own appraiser’s estimate of the value of the building due to the fact that there is “limited” similar space in GY. If that is so, then why did your own appraiser’s report call Goodyear’s current lease payments to Cornwell, “bonus payments” in his report since Goodyear is paying well over the current market for such property? And even more telling, if similar space is so scarce in Goodyear, then why is it that this same building is advertized on line and elsewhere for only $10-$12 per sq ft, and they are unable to rent it even at those fire sale prices?

3. And to further refute your claim that the “numbers support” the purchase, if you were not aware of, you should have been aware of the fact that a portion of the additional overpayment of rent by Goodyear under the current lease which you use as part of the justification for your overpayment for the building is your payment of nearly $200,000 for covered parking spaces in this building’s parking lot.

4. These facts make your statement at the end of the article that, “the numbers support the purchase” and that “tax dollars (that) will be saved” patently false.

I would like you to explain to me how you can come to your erroneous conclusions and then foist them on an unknowing public while maintaining your commitment to serve the public?

I have attached links below to articles which include excerpts from your own appraiser’s report which support my position and which demonstrate the improper and what I believe may be criminal culpability that Goodyear has demonstrated through this obvious misuse of the public’s funds.

Howard Brodbeck
Concerned Goodyear Citizen
Owner howardsgoodyearblog


GY’s $200,000 Parking Spaces

Do you have a covered parking space where you work?

How about where you shop?  If you only shop in Scottsdale, well, maybe.

How about even at your home?  Do you have a garage or car port for your car or does it sit in the heat sometimes?

The city of  Goodyear, AZ pays nearly $20,000 per year for covered parking spaces at a single city building.  $20,000 per year of your tax money has been going out the window so I assume some of Goodyear’s most favored employees who work at the Venita Business Park, (the building that Goodyear wants to purchase for some reason for $4 million dollars more than their own appraiser told them it was worth) don’t have to leave their cars out in the hot sun all day and get all sweaty when they get in at the end of their busy, busy day.

I assumed that was the case, anyway until I drove over there to see the spaces for myself. Instead, I found a third or more of the spaces empty and many, many more of them with what appeared to be city of Goodyear underutilized vehicles being kept in the shade. Maybe a lot of Goodyear employees drive Goodyear vehicles to work so I guess it’s still possible these are for employees.

And in case this information is just too much to believe possible even when we’re talking about government waste, here’s Goodyear’s own appraiser’s report on Venita where I learned about this and where he states on page 149, shown below, that Goodyear rents 45 spaces at $35 per month per space for a total of nearly $20,000 per year.

Did I say $200,000 parking spaces? I presume that Goodyear has been paying for these spaces since 2006 when they signed the lease.  That means that by the time the lease is done, YOU will have forked over nearly $200,000 to either keep some favored Goodyear employees’ cars in the shade or store some underutilized Goodyear vehicles.  Not a lot of money, you say?  $200,000 would pay for 5 school teachers for a year in Goodyear’s schools, for example.

How’s that for belt tightening?

No Reply

This happened once before,
When I came to your door,
No reply-y-y-y.

Lennon, McCartney

A Four Million Dollar Question

Why would the city of Goodyear pay $12.2 million dollars or $4 million dollars MORE for a building than their own appraiser told them it was worth?

You don’t have to believe me.  Shown below and also attached is Goodyear’s own appraiser’s report, page 138, where he states exactly that. The appraiser only increases his estimate of the current value of the building from $8.2 million to $9.2 million because he says that Goodyear is paying “above market value”, “bonus rent” under the current lease agreement*. Lopez Appraisal page 138

$4 Million Dollars of YOUR Money!

Once I became aware of this issue, as a good citizen, I first went to a GY city council meeting and asked them if they knew what they were doing, and then I followed up with an email to Goodyear City Manager Brian Dalke and copied council woman Wally Campbell. I asked Dalke to explain the many inconsistencies in his analysis of why Goodyear should spend $12.2 million dollars for a new building that GY is currently leasing and which Goodyear’s own paid appraiser told Goodyear in a written report was only worth $8.2 million dollars. Dalke Email

Well guess, what?  No reply from Mr. Dalke.  Are you surprised? Instead I received an email blast general issue marketing email from someone on Mr. Dalke’s staff a few days after my inquiry. GY Marketing email.   The latest spin on this story is that now they’re no longer claiming the building, “won’t cost us any money to buy”. Now Goodyear claims that, “buying this building will save us money”.  I can’t wait until I get my next issue of InFocus magazine to see just how far from reality they’ll continue to spin this story in Georgia’s own personal taxpayer paid for political advertizement magazine.

So before Dalke, Lord and their legion of highly paid marketing staffers get to you citizens out there to convince you they are only working in your best interests, here are some actual facts about Goodyear’s recent building purchase;

  1. Goodyear had the building appraised by their paid appraiser at a cost of $3,500. Goodyear’s own appraiser told GY that the buildings were worth $8.2 million dollars.
  2. But instead of paying something close to $8.2 million dollars for the buildings like their appraiser told them they were worth, Goodyear has decided to pay the current owner and their current land lord $12.2 million dollars for it.  That is a 49% premium over what their own appraiser said it was worth!
  3. Goodyear is paying $12.2 million for a building that is currently leasing for only $10 – $12 per sq ft.  But Goodyear is paying $15 to $16 per sq ft for it under their existing lease, a lease that has only about 24 months left on it.
  4. Goodyear justified their purchase by only considering the $10 million that GY will have to borrow to purchase the building. The rest of the nearly $3 million dollars Goodyear will spend to purchase and refurbish the buildings they don’t count as “real” money because it’s cash on hand that they already have.  I know, there is no logic to that but that is what they are doing.

Is it any wonder there’s been No Reply?  Que the music….

I tried to telephone,
They said you were not home,
That’s a lie-i-i-i

* You can find the entire appraiser’s report here. Appraiser Report Article.

%d bloggers like this: