-
-
I listened to Turn 5 last night, what a frustrating situation. I like how Mr. Williams is playing it. He will either walk away and strip the place of all that he bought and owns, or he stays and has offered a large increase on the lease amount. The bureaucrats however want a huge increase, but if they don't accept the offer, they will end up with nothing.
Hang in there Mr. Williams. We support you and appreciate the struggle you are going through. I wish you could buy or build your own damn track, and never have to deal with that airport board and the nameless, faceless officials at the FAA.
Don't take my word for it, listen for yourself. -
Its a shame but I guarantee the FAA won't bend/give much. Its a shame but its also what is wrong about giving your all to a place that has a short term lease. Almost NEVER does the lease get better, I'm thing of showtime, guess its great now but what about when the lease ends in a few short yrs, and if PGS and Desota have to close??? Guess everyone can get the dirt tires out and go to East Bay.Comment
-
The Airport Board is just doing the job they were put in there to do, watching the taxpayers money. The taxpayers own that property and they have every right to expect the largest rent amount possible. Otherwise, you have the good citizens of Punta Gorda/Charlotte County/Florida/USA demanding to know why a race track gets to lease that property at far below it's true market value.
I hope Kevin can hang on to it. If he can't come to terms with the board, then i hope it remains a racetrack. As for taking everything he added, leases are usually pretty specific about things like that.Comment
-
watching the taxpayers money
No doubt that the board is composed of dedicated public servents carefully watching over the public funds. However, since they entered into a lease with the track, they have to meet some obligations there too. It doesn't sound like that end is going very well.Comment
-
It would be interesting to hear the boards' side of things. You're right, the lease he agreed to should spell out everything for the duration of said lease. Either he or the board didn't read it very carefully i guess. Otherwise there wouldn't be any confusion about the increase.Comment
-
i see that you just joined karnac, and have posted a remark that is so far off the mark. if you would like to discuss this with the owner he would be glad to answer any of your questions, 941-575-7223. He is always open to discuss any concerns some may have. i think that the track rent, which is the real topic here, goes to the airport not the tax payers. The tax payers will suffer if the speedway is closed, along with all the surrounding businesses that benifit from our fans, drivers, crews and staff that support them every weekend. always love when a newbee has a negative remark, makes ya wonder?Comment
-
Pretty rude there Linda. Matt has good points, and he's right.... if it's only 2-3 years into the lease at this point, then the increase shouldn't be a surprise to either side. If it's not IN the lease, they CAN'T increase it. If it IS in the lease, then there shouldn't be any surprise here.
You claim to know so much, yet you point out that "you THINK the rent is paid to the airport, not the taxpayers".
Also, right from the first post about 'saving our track', it's been pretty obvious that the property improvements needed because of drainage, are a big issue. Seems to me that neither side wants to PAY for those improvements.... that's where it gets sticky. The airport is under no obligation to improve anything that wasn't specified in the original lease. On the other hand, many leases allow for property improvements (if approved by the land owner) are allowed, at the leasee's expense, and that those improvements can't be un-done at lease termination.
If the County is the one that built a road that impedes the drainage flow, then THEY are the ones who should right the situation that their construction caused..... not the Airport Authority. Good Luck suing City Hall.Comment
-
Isn't the Airport Authority owned by the taxpayers? I have no idea about any of this but tell me. Whenever something is leased who is the winner and who is the loser 90% of the time?I can't imagine entering into a lease without knowing specifically all of the terms. With rent and accessability probably being the two most important issues. From what I hear, and I take most discussions on a racing forum with a grain of salt, it sounds like these two basic issues weren't covered very well from the start.Comment
-
I've listened to both sides and have written to the entire board just to see if I would get an answer. I'm going to call shenanigans. The Airport Authority has an agenda, business's have come and gone but the track has been a steady stream of tax revenue for the most part. I think the Airport Authority will trip over quarters to pick up dimes as is in this case. Greed and politics go hand in hand. Both are powerful and until there is transparency you are in a losing battle. Hang tough Mr. Williams.Comment
-
oh don't get me wrong, i wish Mr. Williams all the best. I believe the authority has seen the improvements made and how well the track has done and now wants a bigger piece of the pie. A loophole to be able to do this must be in the lease and its a shame Mr Williams didn't recognise it before he signed it. It may be found in the end the drainage repair will be proved to be a bargaining chip. I honestly doubt the Authority wants the track closed at least not yet? Maybe in 10yrs or so, depending on growth of the area.Originally posted by eagletai View PostComment
-
In the raising the rent on the track is not something new back when I was operation manger back before Kevin took over there was talk about it back then on the new lease for 2013. I was working with the airport back then about the increase and was trying to get one signed back then. It was a major subject back two year ago when Bobby had it. This is one of the reason things come to a stand still back then Bobby did not want to put more money in the track like Kevin says he has been on a stand still also.
I agree details like this should have been worked out way before now.
I just have one question If Kevin does not want to pay the price of the new lease and per is interview its his home track like many other there he would not like for the track to go away. Why would he not want to just sell his items to the new owner if one was to bid on the track an got it????? When I left I offered to sell my items that I had invested there to Kevin and I was told no so I just remove them. I feel Kevin should offer the same if a new ownwer were to come in.
Just my thoughts
Gary LaplantComment
-
I heard from a couple different people that Kevin was looking to leasing Desoto from john.Last edited by 77NovaRacer; 01-30-2013, 02:58 PM.Comment
-
Ok this will see how many Real Promotors are out there.This is your chance to run a race track and show us how to make it work with all of your great idea's.But remember you have to have skin in the game to make it work.
Now with everyone knowing on how to do this right put your heads together with 2 or 3 guy's and sign up for this.I know your out there so I will make a great deal with you,this could be your deal.
All you have to do to sign up is call us at 941-748-3171 the track and we will set up a meeting and talk face to face and we will fill you in on all the details, No Talking over the phone and e-mails please,lets see who can Walk the Walk and Talk the Talk, will the Real Promotor stand up.
As I have seen over the years on Karnac you all have great idea's so maybe this will help someone get their feet wet,thanks again for all of the surport over the years. John SarppraiconeComment
-
This is very simple!!!
Either get a copy of the lease through public records and READ IT! Or ask the track owner to publish the lease online.
All this bantering over something everyone is ignorant on is insipid.
Get your facts straight people.Comment
Tweet
Comment