• Scam Diego alerts

Just how much in a hurry was David Copley to unload the Union-Tribune? The close of the sale to a Delaware affiliate of Beverly Hills Platinum Equity was announced Monday. Deeds showing the transfer of five real estate parcels were recorded that day at the county Recorder’s office, and they may furnish a clue:

The 13.08 acre complex housing the newspaper’s main offices and printing plant at 350 Camino de la Reina in Mission Valley went for $35.5 million, based on full-value transfer tax records furnished this morning by the county. The parcel’s current value on county property tax rolls is $91,288,365.

Property with the address of 5258-60 Anna Avenue was sold to San Diego Union Tribune LLC, the Platinum affiliate, for $6.5 million. Tax rolls value it at $6,997,060.

Property with the address of 7701 Herschel Ave was sold for $4.75 million to another Delaware limited liability company, 7701 Herschel Ave, LLC. It’s currently listed on the tax rolls at $4.867 million.

The property is at the corner of Herschel and Kline Street in La Jolla on the opposite end of the block where the Copley Newspapers headquarters is located at Silverado and Ivanhoe.

Property at 1152 Armorlite Drive sold to Armorlite Drive LLC for $2.75 million, according to transfer tax records information by the county. Tax rolls list it at $4 million. The company shares the Platinum Equity address in Beverly Hills.

Property at 5130 Avenida Encinas in Carlsbad went for $1.7 million to San Diego Union Tribune LLC. It is currently on the rolls at $2.12 million.

Total value of the five sales is $51.2 million

  • Scam Diego alerts

Comments

Mrs_Abbott_was_right May 7, 2009 @ 3:48 p.m.

Hellcat...errr...Norman, we've missed you so - you never visit any more.

0

SurfPuppy619 May 8, 2009 @ 3:03 p.m.

Like I said, we could fix the coprorate welfare position by exempting commercial property.

As for the "established" and "connected" getting subsidized, everyone who stays put benefits from prop 13-it is not really for the connected or established-but for everyone.

0

OceanBeachBarfly May 7, 2009 @ 5:25 p.m.

C'mon Reader, where's the updates on the layoffs? You're getting scooped by everyone in town, even San Diego News Network has a list of those axed today, and SDNN's been around for about five minutes.

0

Ponzi May 7, 2009 @ 6 p.m.

I wonder if those 192 employees the UT is letting go are the first wave or many more?

How did they select the ones that are being let go (so soon)?

Any well known ones being let go?

0

SurfPuppy619 May 7, 2009 @ 6:15 p.m.

I wonder if those 192 employees the UT is letting go are the first wave or many more?

1st wave.

Mark my words.

It is going to get worse before it gets better.

0

OceanBeachBarfly May 7, 2009 @ 6:23 p.m.

For a list of those who were let go, visit San Diego CityBeat's Web site. You won't find it here.

0

Burwell May 7, 2009 @ 8:45 p.m.

Perhaps in the case of many businesses. But I would hate to see my parents property tax bill skyrocket to $6,000 a year because they would have to sell their home. Because they bought it in the 70's for $40,000 and it's worth $600,000 now. Why should they be punished?

If I purchased a $600,000 house in your parent's neighborhood I would be forced to pay $7,000 per year in property taxes. Is it fair that I should pay taxes of $7,000 per year while your parents only pay $850 per year?

0

Ponzi May 7, 2009 @ 8:59 p.m.

Sour grapes Burwell? I hope you're enjoying your studio for $1000 a month.

0

Ponzi May 7, 2009 @ 9:02 p.m.

Oh, sorry Burwell. To answer your question... "Yes" Because thats what the voters agreed to when they passed Proposition 13. It was understood exactly what was happening, it was not a trick. But I have a feeling someone with your attitude is not going to be moving into my parents $600,000 neighborhood or mine anytime soon, prop 13 or not.

0

Burwell May 8, 2009 @ 8:58 p.m.

The property taxes paid by Ponzi's parents are not enough to cover the City's cost of hauling their trash, not to mention the police and fire services they receive. Ponzi will likely inherit his parent's house upon their passing, and their low tax base as well. Ponzi will step into his parent's shoes and unjustly foist his rightful share of the tax burden on others just like the parents are doing. This is an example of freeloading in the extreme.

0

Burwell May 8, 2009 @ 11:01 p.m.

On 3/18/09 real estate expert Gary London claimed that the 13 acres comprising 350 Camino de la Reina was worth $100 million. It looks like Gary's estimate was off a little. http://www.voiceofsandiego.org/articles/2009/03/19/economics/856uniontrib031809.txt

0

SurfPuppy619 May 6, 2009 @ 5:32 p.m.

So they are going to get some property tax cuts coming their way.

0

Burwell May 6, 2009 @ 8:43 p.m.

It looks like the taxpayers received a windfall. According to the County Assessor, 350 Camino de la Reina property was carried on the tax rolls at only $2,120,058. The annual property tax bill is only $22,105 on a $35.5 million property. This example proves the argument that Proposition 13 primarily benefits large corporations.

0

Ponzi May 6, 2009 @ 8:54 p.m.

Perhaps in the case of many businesses. But I would hate to see my parents property tax bill skyrocket to $6,000 a year because they would have to sell their home. Because they bought it in the 70's for $40,000 and it's worth $600,000 now. Why should they be punished? They're on a rather fixed income and repealling Proposition 13 would be a disaster for many senior citizens.

0

HellcatCopley May 7, 2009 @ 10:45 a.m.

UT layoffs are starting NOW! Even as I write!

0

snowflakeCsun May 7, 2009 @ 11:33 a.m.

UT layoffs are starting NOW! Even as I write!

By HellcatCopley 10:45 a.m., May 7, 2009

Nice...Wonderful that someone is excited about more people that are going to be out of work and possibly in the unemployment lines, further burdening our systems.

Good to see that there aren't many short-sighted, self-centered people in this world.

0

pascal May 7, 2009 @ 12:37 p.m.

I agree with snowflakeCsun- Based on Hellcat's insensitive glee here, as well as his/her childish past photoshop postings on this blog, I think he/she needs to grow up. Not a good day at our city's newspaper or anywhere else this is going on.

0

SurfPuppy619 May 7, 2009 @ 1:32 p.m.

Based on Hellcat's insensitive glee here, as well as his/her childish past photoshop postings on this blog, I think he/she needs to grow up.

By pascal

The fact is the UT was not very well run, and they contributed greatly to their own demise by publishing a paper that was on the extreme fringes of journalism.

And the photoshops of a very right wing, out of touch editor who contributed greatly to the UT's downfall is pretty funny IMHO.

You cannot blame others for the UT shooting themselves in the foot.

0

AugmentedBallot May 8, 2009 @ 9:54 a.m.

On Prop13: There are ways to protect the elderly that don't involve massive subsidy of the established, the connected, and corporations by the rest of us. Prop13 desperately needs to be fixed.

0

sanman May 7, 2009 @ 2:10 p.m.

The word is that 150- 200 people have been laid off. There were some editorial lay-offs but there were far more in other departments this time, including advertising sales and management positions.

0

WhatGoesAround May 7, 2009 @ 2:58 p.m.

I don't think anyone is rejoicing about another 150-200 layoffs. There were many ways to sustain and grow the Union-Tribune, but the people at the top couldn't see how they were deep-sixing this paper. Or they didn't care. Take your pick.

0

SurfPuppy619 May 6, 2009 @ 8:55 p.m.

It looks like the taxpayers received a windfall. According to the County Assessor, 350 Camino de la Reina property was carried on the tax rolls at only $2,120,058. The annual property tax bill is only $22,105 on a $35.5 million property. This example proves the argument that Proposition 13 primarily benefits large corporations.

By Burwell

============================== The parcel’s current value on county property tax rolls is $91,288,365. ===========

If the parcel was valued at $91 million, how could they have only been paying $22K per year in taxes? Wouldn't the tax roll value match up to the annual tax rate? I know Prop 13 mimited the tax inxreases to 2% annually, but I thought that applied to the tax assesor value also.

BTW-I agree with you 100% on the Prop 13 argument-commercial properties should NOT be given the Prop 13 benefits.

Prop 13 was designed for homeowners, not business owners of commercial properties.

0

SurfPuppy619 May 7, 2009 @ 10:27 p.m.

Burwell makes a good, valid point, can't knock him for making it. People who have been in place, for whatever reasons, are being subsidized by those who bought at a later date.

I personally think Prop 13 was the right thing to do otherwise people would have been forced to leave their homes over taxes. That would nto have been fair either-so the better choice between these two evils would be to do what prop 13 did.

The fact of the matter is taxes were forcing people out of their homes in the 75-78. Prop 13 fixed it. It should not have applied to commercial property and that can be fixed easy enough.

So is Prop 13 fair? No. But I think it was the right compromise.

0

AugmentedBallot May 9, 2009 @ 4:39 p.m.

@SurfPuppy -- Let me explain what I mean by "established" and "connected". By 'established' I mean you've owned your present home for more than 10 years. How many folks under 40 can say that? (I'm sure the data exists, but lets agree that it's just about nobody in CA.) So property owners under 40 subsidize those over 40. I don't think there's much disputing that. There's a similar dynamic for folks who move to CA and those who have simply taken longer to earn their way up to homeownership -- for many many years they pay roughly market-rate property taxes, subsidizing those who have been established much longer.

Save for one exception, the "connected". Here I'm on less solid ground, but my understanding is that the wealthy and well-connected find loopholes to transfer property without invoking a reassessment for property tax purposes.

All of this is a lot of collateral damage for something that was supposed to be about helping the elderly stay in their homes. And I suspect the authors knew that.

0

Sign in to comment

Join our
newsletter list

Enter to win $25 at Broken Yolk Cafe

Each newsletter subscription
means another chance to win!

Close