Lancaster Airport owners seek buyer

[WNYresident]

The airport wanted the income approach, but from what I read--they went with the market approach because there is no income generated from the airport. That is the issue when referring to the 3 IDA's they received relative to what the criteria is anyways.

This town should be lucky that we have a reporter like Steve Watson reporting the news.

If the airport got an "income approach" why could every other business request the same?

[ichingtheory]

If the airport got an "income approach" why could every other business request the same?

Good question!!!

[Lee Chowaniec]

If the airport got an "income approach" why could every other business request the same?

If the income approach applies to businesses, why not for residents? My income is dwindling and my assesment doesn't change.

[WNYresident]

Exactly..

[gorja]

Origianlly posted by shortstuff:
The airport wanted the income approach, but from what I read--they went with the market approach because there is no income generated from the airport.

Now I'm confused. So it was not an income based assessment?

This town should be lucky that we have a reporter like Steve Watson reporting the news.

Yes, Mr Watson reports on BOTH sides of an issue. I believe Colleen Farrell from the BEe also has been bringing out both sides of issues

[shortstuff]

Now I'm confused. So it was not an income based assessment?




Yes, Mr Watson reports on BOTH sides of an issue. I believe Colleen Farrell from the BEe also has been bringing out both sides of issues

Let me see if I can answer this only based on a pragmatic approach. If the airport wanted to use the "income approach value system" which means that income determines the value, however since their business has 0 income, the value should be lower. Since the land was purchased with FAA funds at a premium, then it is worth much more than that.

This to me would be an oxy moranic approach since it would be typical of a business to generate income, in this situation the airport has not. So the question always remains a question--why then did they get 3 IDA's?

[KevinL]

Gorja...

The airport threatened to use the income based approach. The attorneys for the town and school board took the bait. If they had done their research, only approximately 30 acres would have been based on the "income approach", not the entire 141 acres. The town needs to hire knowledgeable & capable attorneys....

[WNYresident]

And if the assessment was based on income I wonder when other businesses who are doing poorly will ask for the same favor. Can't deny them. Business is business.

[gorja]

Gorja...

The airport threatened to use the income based approach. The attorneys for the town and school board took the bait. If they had done their research, only approximately 30 acres would have been based on the "income approach", not the entire 141 acres. The town needs to hire knowledgeable & capable attorneys....

Thank you. Shortie had me confused

[shortstuff]

Sorry gorja if I confused you. I came back and read it to see what you meant, and darn I confused myself....ha ha ha ha ha oh well glad KevnL gave you a different scenerio. It must be a guy thing that understands stuff like that.

[ichingtheory]

Either way, the airport has gotten away with too many tax breaks in addition to IDA breaks for too long now.

[KevinL]

Hi gorja,
Yes, the 111 acres mentioned should have been valued as vacant & marketable land not associated as airport use land. There is no proof that original "special use permit" was ever altered or changed in any way. Just because airport owners approached the FAA, and the FAA never checked "facts" before giving them them grant money, this does not hold the Town, County or State accountable. THIS IS A PRIVATE COMPANY.

[therising]

Income Approach should be used for income-producing properties i.e. apartments, retail plazas, etc.

The former assessor did a good job of trying to get owners of such properties to disclose their incomes in order to fairly valuate their properties. In theory, it's the best approach. Problem is, a lot (maybe most?) property owners don't want to disclose such things. No one is comfortable doing so. And, I don't think you can force anyone to do it.

So...it gets to the unfortunate point where an owner will only disclose if it's beneficial for him to do so (i.e. income is down.) Then, a year or two later, when income may be up, the owner is never going to voluntarily approach the town and tell them the good news.

[WNYresident]

Income Approach should be used for income-producing properties i.e. apartments, retail plazas, etc.

Why?

A strip plaza that is empty produces no income and for the most part neither does a home. Do you really want developers building strip plazas that can sit empty and generate no property/school taxes?

[gorja]

Income Approach should be used for income-producing properties i.e. apartments, retail plazas, etc.

The former assessor did a good job of trying to get owners of such properties to disclose their incomes in order to fairly valuate their properties. In theory, it's the best approach. Problem is, a lot (maybe most?) property owners don't want to disclose such things. No one is comfortable doing so. And, I don't think you can force anyone to do it.

So...it gets to the unfortunate point where an owner will only disclose if it's beneficial for him to do so (i.e. income is down.) Then, a year or two later, when income may be up, the owner is never going to voluntarily approach the town and tell them the good news.

the rising, is the income approach what is used for the patio homes under the condo law? You know where someone builds the same $300,000 ranch home with one in a subdivision with condo status and one in a subdivision without condo status, which results in the home in the condo status subdivision receiving much lower tax bills.