On November 14, 2005 Robert Southerland came before the Henderson City Council in an open meeting and offered to purchase the Southerland Mill property for $35,000.
We did not vote to sell the property, and I remember saying in the open meeting that I would buy it at that low price.
The council later researched having this property turned into a park for recreation and water sports such as canoeing and kayaking. Nature conservancy groups were contacted, and preserving the natural resource was high on the council’s agenda. Selling the property was not the goal or any future vision of the council. Preserving a historic natural resource was the goal.
Then the New Direction took over, and the goals of the council changed. It was startling to read that the Council voted to sell the property to Robert Southerland for $43,000, and that they had reduced the price to that figure to compensate for having to pay for a survey. The city not only was going to lose a great natural resource, but it was going to receive less than what the city had paid for the property 50 years before. In addition, the city had an appraisal that stated the property was valued at over $175,000 in 1996. The city also had another more recent appraisal.
I was astounded that that appraisal showed the value to be worth far, far less than I thought — around $55,000. I researched to see when the council had authorized this appraisal, and I could not find any vote asking for a new appraisal. In studying the two appraisals, I could not rationalize the great discrepancy in value. Both maps and a very accurate survey filed in the courthouse presented no clues.
Who was the city looking after? Were they looking after the assets of the taxpayers, or were they looking after a former city council person? One sitting council member stated publicly that she wanted Mr. Southerland to have the property. Fortunately for the poor unconnected citizens, and to safeguard the public interest, the sale had to go to bid.
Bids have to be made in cash or certified check, and the city is required to deposit all funds within one business day. I have attended auctions all of my adult life, and knowing the rules helps. So, when I took my deposit to raise the bid, I asked to see the receipt that showed Mr. Southerland’s bid deposit. This is a routine check made by careful bidders who do not want to raise the bid on themselves by raising their offering amount against a bid that was not properly received.
Low and behold, a receipt for Mr. Southerland’s bid could not be produced. Calls were made and inquiries went out while I waited. Soon a check was produced that had been dated months before, but never deposited. Remember the legal requirements were cash or cashier’s check.
I was told by Assistant City Manager Frank Frazier over the speaker phone in the city clerk’s office that the check was being held and Mr. Southerland would make it good at closing. It seemed to me that they were sure he was going to get the property. That was not the legal process. I was not going to bid until I knew the legal bidding had been opened. I agreed that depositing the check would be proof to me that a legal bid had been made, but there was a problem and I was asked to return later in the day. I did go back to city hall later, and they showed me a receipt for a bid, so I raised the price. I want to be clear that it was not the finance officer or the city clerk who had possession of the original check. I also want to be clear that the city council had been told that an official bid had been made when they voted to sell the property to Mr. Southerland.
Professional people all over town have asked me why I bid on this property. Let me assure you that I was not playing a game as asserted by some council members. I did not bid out of revenge against Robert Southerland for his part in the New Direction as some have assumed. This property is a great investment. It was a wonderful opportunity to own some beautiful land. It was a superbly unbelievable buy at $100,000 and a very good deal at $200,000. The tract is comprised of 80 acres of land with 10 acres of pristine water. There are beautiful mature timber canopies covering the water. There is a historic dam with hand-cut stone. There is 1,000 feet of access on a paved state road that is very close to Highway 401. There are perk sites. There is beauty and tranquility. The area is protected with ETJ zoning. It is waterfront property.
The property has been associated with a number of “red herrings”: that there was PCB on the property, the dam was going to break, and it was a sewage dump and mosquito wasteland. None of that was truthful. Every time someone asked me why I made the bid, I would ask them had they seen the land. Invariably the answer was “NO.” I could only assume that others did not value natural resources as much as those bidding, and maybe they did not remember that God was not making any more land. As a property, I felt it was far more desirable than South Lake Lodge property that was developed, but that was just my opinion.
I shared all the information I could with others who expressed an interest in bidding. I was more forthright than the city because some of the maps the city gave to potential bidders showed a region marked off as not part of the property, when in fact it was part of the property. Many people, and I do mean many, called and wanted to join with me in an LLC to purchase the land. I was pleased when others joined the bidding, because that way the city would get a fairer price. I left a deposit with the city for a long time until the bidding passed my threshold for purchasing. I was serious about purchasing the land, but the high bidder wins.
I am very pleased that the city is getting a fairer market value for this property. I am pleased that the new owner will be a responsible land-owner and prompt tax payer. I am pleased that another member of the State Assembly is a land owner in Vance County. I am pleased that everyone was ultimately given a fair chance to purchase this beautiful land.
What I am not pleased with is the way the city went about deciding to sell this property. With the correct marketing, who knows what this land could have brought? The timber alone will be a good return on the money. One of my cousins who owns property near Southerland Mill Pond called me and asked if I could do for his property what I did for that swampland, he would give me a big commission. I told him if he had 80 acres of waterfront property, I could help him out.
So now the questions are answered. My motives are revealed, and there are no hidden agendas.
The bidding process says the closing will be held 20 days from the final closing bid, but the city council has the authority to accept or reject any bid. Let’s hope they don’t play that card, and that we can soon join in congratulating Rep. Bill Faison and welcome him to land ownership in Vance County.