Farm Island

[BroadHopper]

Originally Posted by Garcia

I would love to see all future development stopped, a limit on the size, speed, sound, and number of boats, free parking and access for island property owners, lower property taxes, and more, but that's not going to happen, nor should it.

And yet there are people that think it can still happen! Greed is our worst enemy!

These folks should move to Squam Lake, instead of rattling our cage!

[DEJ]

My opinion has changed. Looks like camp Belknap had a few opportunities to purchase this property and for several reasons could not at the time pull the trigger. According to the article it appears the Winchesters tried to sell to the camp but it did not work out. The NIMBY crowd has no standing here, I wish the new owners well.

[FlyingScot]

Good article in LDS. If the buyers are sincere that they do not wish to develop the island beyond one simple home and only need a security blanket of sorts, then the solution is pretty obvious--in a 3-way deal, Camp Belknap could buy the development rights to the island from the current buyers for $500K to $1MM (I leave the exact number to the principals). The current buyers could pocket a big slug of cash today, dramatically reducing their risk; and Belknap could insure its tranquility for a lower price than would otherwise be possible.

https://www.laconiadailysun.com/news...6e83059d7.html

[chasedawg]

Originally Posted by FlyingScot

Good article in LDS. If the buyers are sincere that they do not wish to develop the island beyond one simple home and only need a security blanket of sorts, then the solution is pretty obvious--in a 3-way deal, Camp Belknap could buy the development rights to the island from the current buyers for $500K to $1MM (I leave the exact number to the principals). The current buyers could pocket a big slug of cash today, dramatically reducing their risk; and Belknap could insure its tranquility for a lower price than would otherwise be possible.

https://www.laconiadailysun.com/news...6e83059d7.html

Flying Scout ding ding ding...you hit the target...but in reality it won't work. The developer has said flat out I will not sell any part of the island to the camp. They have said "I don't want any part of the camp functions and activities near my development". Yet Camp Belknap owes 1/3 of the island and the boundary lines between the homestead home to be restored and camp owned property is only 25' feet away. So go figure!!

[ursa minor]

I’ve heard that the property may be in “current use” tax status. From my understanding that would mean either the seller or the potential buyer would need to come up with the difference between the reduced current use tax rate and the residential rate from the time the current use variance was granted. Depending on how long the island has been in “current use” that could be a tidy sum.

[chasedawg]

Originally Posted by ursa minor

I’ve heard that the property may be in “current use” tax status. From my understanding that would mean either the seller or the potential buyer would need to come up with the difference between the reduced current use tax rate and the residential rate from the time the current use variance was granted. Depending on how long the island has been in “current use” that could be a tidy sum.

Good thought....The potential buyer is going to continue with the "current use" status. From what I understand it will be a tree farm to gain "current use" status. Many trees will be removed especially the umbrella trees that have been there for 90 years.

[SAB1]

Lot of rumors out there. Who knows if half are true but I have heard there are tax issues ie. back taxes owed. I’m sure the town wants it developed for the tax revenue. Don’t believe the camp pays taxes.

[Wifi-1]

According to my sources, there is no back taxes owed on the land, and hasn't been.

[SAB1]

Originally Posted by Wifi-1

According to my sources, there is no back taxes owed on the land, and hasn't been.

Good. I found it hard to believe since it wasn’t long ago the camp bought part of the island.

[hemlock]

Originally Posted by chasedawg

Good thought....The potential buyer is going to continue with the "current use" status. From what I understand it will be a tree farm to gain "current use" status. Many trees will be removed especially the umbrella trees that have been there for 90 years.

The way current use works is that the owner gets a reduced tax rate for keeping the property in its current use as farmland ,woodland, unproductive land etc. Once the property is developed it is considered a change in use and a tax penalty is applied in the amount of 10 percent of the ad valorem value of the land. So 12 house lots at 300k each equals a penalty paid to Tuftonboro of 360000. Current use is only applicable if the property is at least 10 acres in size. Subdivision below that size triggers the penalty.

The only way to avoid the penalty is to not develop the property

[Outdoorsman]

Originally Posted by FlyingScot

Good article in LDS. If the buyers are sincere that they do not wish to develop the island beyond one simple home and only need a security blanket of sorts, then the solution is pretty obvious--in a 3-way deal, Camp Belknap could buy the development rights to the island from the current buyers for $500K to $1MM (I leave the exact number to the principals). The current buyers could pocket a big slug of cash today, dramatically reducing their risk; and Belknap could insure its tranquility for a lower price than would otherwise be possible.

https://www.laconiadailysun.com/news...6e83059d7.html

These "feel good" propositions always make me laugh.

How about letting the OWNER decide? or...... BUY IT and divide it your way and make that "3way" deal!

[FlyingScot]

Originally Posted by Outdoorsman

These "feel good" propositions always make me laugh.

How about letting the OWNER decide? or...... BUY IT and divide it your way and make that "3way" deal!

You have confused a proposition that will make people feel good with a "feel good proposition". It is NOT a feel good proposition, it's a business deal. Obviously, all 3 parties would have to agree it was in their best interest. These types of transactions happen regularly. Here's a recent example of a current owner getting cold hard cash to forego development, it's an especially apt one because the developer had no emotions or town pressure

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/22/n...ir-rights.html

[tis]

I hate to see Farm Island developed too but I keep wondering why didn't Camp Belknap didn't buy the whole thing, or why somebody else didn't buy it to save it if they want it saved. It has been for sale for quite a while.

[SAB1]

At the time they purchased the one third they didn’t have the money I believe. Lot changes going on there in past couple years to make needed improvements.

[fatlazyless]

Originally Posted by FlyingScot

Good article in LDS.

https://www.laconiadailysun.com/news...6e83059d7.html

Just tuning in to this thread? Here's a little background music with a July 26 replay from the LaDaSun; 'Island plan leads to unhappy campers in Tuftonboro' .... a Lake Winnipesaukee summer camp, island melody with two color photographs showing 20-acre Farm Island plus a photo with campers in three sailboats.

[Randy Owen]

I appreciate all the input. The news is not anything but the facts. For the record I have had no problem with the camp in prior years. I held a contract with Gene Clark and Gene did everything he promised and the transaction was flawless. Currently management there is acting like they are above the law. Zoning is zoning. Shoreline protection laws are what New Hampshire requires.

Protecting the loons is important. When a person points to me for my custodial efforts for the protection of the environment and then builds an extremely busy boat landing right on top of one of the lakes best potential loon nesting areas I must speak out. This is a fraction of the broken laws. In turn I ask what are
we teaching our children? I felt a duty to inform

Sorry for any collateral frustration.

[DEJ]

Originally Posted by Randy Owen

I appreciate all the input. The news is not anything but the facts. For the record I have had no problem with the camp in prior years. I held a contract with Gene Clark and Gene did everything he promised and the transaction was flawless. Currently management there is acting like they are above the law. Zoning is zoning. Shoreline protection laws are what New Hampshire requires.

Protecting the loons is important. When a person points to me for my custodial efforts for the protection of the environment and then builds an extremely busy boat landing right on top of one of the lakes best potential loon nesting areas I must speak out. This is a fraction of the broken laws. In turn I ask what are
we teaching our children? I felt a duty to inform

Sorry for any collateral frustration.

To the Winchesters, is this how you want the legacy of the island to be remembered that has been in your family for decades?

[Randy Owen]

The Camp has done very many evasive things already directly to the Winchester family members. I am certain the lack of care the camp has demonstrated with Loons and the law only accelerates the ill feelings.
Thank you for your input.

[SAB1]

Sorry randy but I’ve lived right there since 2002. The only loon nesting area that has occurred on the island since then is off the two black pins on northwest side of the island, more precisely the northernmost pin of the two which just so happens to be the land up for sale. I have no beef in this at all but the tact you displayed in your post is anything but professional and honestly with that type of attitude you displayed in your post I certainly wouldn’t want to be in a real estate transaction your involved in

[Descant]

Randy Owen:
There are a lot more Camp Belknap alumni/supporters out there than you can imagine, plus the conservationists. Every time you post here, you lose ground. At the very least you should hire a PR firm to be your spokesman. At the best, you should just leave. It is obvious that maintaining or improving Lake Winnipesaukee is at the bottom of your to do list, if on the list at all.

[Sue Doe-Nym]

I continue to be amazed at the lack of civil discourse whenever a contentious topic rears its head. Even a thin dime has two sides. In the case of Farm Island, can’t there be a civilized debate without the rancor?

[ursa minor]

Originally Posted by Sue Doe-Nym

I continue to be amazed at the lack of civil discourse whenever a contentious topic rears its head. Even a thin dime has two sides. In the case of Farm Island, can’t there be a civilized debate without the rancor?

You’re aware that Randy Owen is in negotiations to purchase Farm Island from its long time owners correct? And that the YMCA camp already owns a portion of the island?

[Randy Owen]

the comments have not fallen on deaf ears. there remains a belief that wonderful things have come from this camp. at a time i engaged with gene clark with the most wonderful rewarding experience. but no one and no entity can act beyond the law. i offered full transparency to current director of the camp. to that end see what has come of it.

[chasedawg]

Originally Posted by ursa minor

You’re aware that Randy Owen is in negotiations to purchase Farm Island from its long time owners correct? And that the YMCA camp already owns a portion of the island?

It should be also known that Camp Belknap has made an offer to purchase many months ago as well. It appears that the potential buyer RO is panicking and trying to grasp at any thing he can think of to create confusion. From what I Understand the Tuftonboro Planning Board is doing their due diligence to make sure they hear everyone's concerns about this project and get the facts from organizations that specialize in specifics like water quality, boat and land traffic conjestion etc. etc. The P&S was signed about a year ago. The Winchester family could have had their money many months ago without having to deal with Planning Board hearings. As it is there has been extension after extension and that continues. The Planning Board is doing their job. And the Planning Board could go on with their job of helping other Tuftonboro citizens with projects that do not impact the lake and surrounding areas like this subdivision that 90% of the locals object too.

[Sue Doe-Nym]

Originally Posted by ursa minor

You’re aware that Randy Owen is in negotiations to purchase Farm Island from its long time owners correct? And that the YMCA camp already owns a portion of the island?

YES. If you read my post you will see that it is about civility.

[ursa minor]

Originally Posted by Sue Doe-Nym

YES. If you read my post you will see that it is about civility.

Thanks. From my perspective, I’ve seen mostly thoughtful discussion from a number of forum members that live in the area of Farm Island. Again, in my opinion, it’s Mr. Owen that just dumped a can of gas over the campfire here.

I do agree that there has been a shift on here in the past few years but in the case of this this thread Mr Owen owns any escalation. It should be interesting to see what the planning board has to say.

[FlyingScot]

Originally Posted by Sue Doe-Nym

I continue to be amazed at the lack of civil discourse whenever a contentious topic rears its head. Even a thin dime has two sides. In the case of Farm Island, can’t there be a civilized debate without the rancor?

Sue, I agree in general. But Mr Owen has smeared a beloved institution that appears to be a great citizen, and he has done so with virtually no substitution at a time he is in a land dispute with that institution where he appears to be the less community-minded party. So I think those of us who have jumped on him have been relatively fair

On the plus side, he seems to have united the rest of the group

[Sue Doe-Nym]

Understood. I will try to MMOB. Hopefully, this will all be resolved amicably, ��
but that might be a stretch. Many of the wonderful camps have disappeared over the years, which is very sad.

[Mr. V]

Assuming that RO is the buyer who has a binding purchase and sale agreement, the Winchesters do not have the legal right to back out, without being in breach of contract.

Given the flavor of his comments I suspect RO is attempting to sway public opinion to his side viz. the pending hearings.

Hello, backfire.

[Descant]

I would expect the Owen P & S to be contingent on subdivision approval, so, "partially binding?" If there were no contingencies, the closing would have occurred ages back. The planning board cannot deny based on public sentiment. They just confirm that all the laws and ordinances are met. If they deny whimsically based on public sentiment, they will likely lose an appeal.