Loading...
08-18-14 Richard Goodwin (2) Richard C. Goodwin, PhD P.O.Box 5142/385 Fairway Drive Snowmass Village,CO 81615 P:(970)923-3033;M:(970)274-8501;F:(970)923-3761 iitI1C'gOOG\ ttl'0){i)Ii_ ast t_e www.drrichardcgoodwin.com August 18, 2014 Town Council Town of Snowmass Village P.O. Box 5010 Snowmass Village, CO 81615 TOSV Council: Whether you declare this SAC application valid or not,the facts"on the ground" are clear that PUD provisions require certain performance by specific dates, which have not been met. The failure of the Related "mothership" to support their previous subsidiary"shell"that could have prevented a foreclosure is evidence of their business plan. When the going gets tough, the tough take a hike. Attached is a legal opinion that the PUD has died by lack of Council approval of the change of ownership. While there never was a bankruptcy of the previous Related"shell," Base Village owners, associates, etc. lost its assets and has no standing in the TOSV. Related of CO employees should not be managing the Base Village Homeowners Association. The Base Village HOA was abandoned in the foreclosure. The new"shelI," SAC owns the land and incomplete buildings, but has no rights under the PUD. Maybe the TOSV wants to play another"shell" game. We don't want to get burned twice. The stoppage of construction in 2008 could have been avoided if the"mothership" in New York had provided money to at least complete the two buildings and promised improvements. But, no. The new"shell" did nothing with the old obligations. Fool me once, it's your fault. Fool me twice, it's my fault. Let's not be"fools." Ve truly yours, hare C. odwi P.O.Box 5142/385 Fairway Drive Snowmass Village,CO 81615 P:(970)923-3033;M:(970)274-8501;F:(970)923-3761 www.drricha rdcgoodwin.com August 18, 2014 Town Council Town of Snowmass Village P.O. Box 5010 Snowmass Village, CO 81615 Dear Snowmass Village Town Council: Isn't it interesting that the SkiCo has decided to put its nose into the debate of Related's SAC application?As an ex-real estate developer and builder(5,000 residences and 15,000 lots) I see a "conspiracy" between Related and the SkiCo.The TOSV's tongue is hanging out for a hotel in Base Village. Why now? It's obvious that the SkiCo wants another 400 condominiums for its business there. The SkiCo bailed 6 months ago on a hotel and this talk now is to help Related.This is the same SkiCo that,just before the vote in 2004, said we are going to build Base Village to completion over and over again. That deception got my vote because the Crowns are billionaires and owned 20% of General Dynamics. They could not sell without the TOSV approval and another vote. Well,that requirement fell through the "cracks" at Town Hall. How could the Council let the SkiCo and Intrawest(whatever that partnership was)sell to a "shell" Related subsidiary without"due diligence." Look what happened. Don't tell me the foreclosure and incomplete buildings were because of the recession. Many, many financially solid companies like the Crowns'completed projects during the recession. Related New York City could have saved the project when sales fell off, but they chose to let Hypo Bank pay millions of Related's debts to clear the title. "What an ugly web we weave when we toil to deceive."Or. Richard C. Goodwin,2014 Can we trust the SkiCo?? irtx., "(tand C. Goodwi cc: Aspen Times Editor,Aspen Daily News Editor, Snowmass Sun Editor