Before Bob Culver's time as the County Executive, Wicomico County government rented buildings throughout the area to house the Election Board's administrative and election equipment. However, now that this building has been purchased, they will no longer be renters.
This multiple-location consolidation is a huge push by Executive Culver towards a more fiscally sound plan for the County's monetary management while providing tangible assets. If you think about the MILLIONS of dollars in rent being paid for the WCBOE's digs, which is dollars being thrown away (literally), this holds a sizable cost benefit to the County and better use of taxpayer money!
The project is slated for completion in four months and a total relocation of all facilities will be completed long before the next election cycle. This will give the staff plenty of time to get reacclimated so they can better service the area's voters!
I didn't notice any statement about the return on investment for this purchase vs. continuing to rent property.
ReplyDeleteThe ROI would be "how many years" to own the building and its costs, versus the same years continuing to rent property and those costs.
Mr. Culver probably has that information at hand. It would be great if he released that information to build even more support for the plan.
Finally someone is doing business for the frigging taxpayers! It's about TIME! Thanks, Bob!
ReplyDeleteOutstanding! I was wondering if someone was working at that government building. Nice to see someone doing their job. Saw the sign a couple of days ago but didn't know Wicomico bought it. I'm glad to hear it.
ReplyDeleteThe BOE seems more interested in how fast and loose they can spend our money. Boo on you!
ReplyDelete12:19, there's absolutely NO ROI on renting property! How can you even think that there is? If the ROI on purchasing is a dollar over 20 years it's better than zero.
ReplyDeleteSMH....
12:19 is on the right track. However, the more insightful number would be the IRR or internal rate of return.
ReplyDeleteI'm certain Wayne, Bob or the millenial up there has calculated this and can provide it to you Joe.
Thanks for your investigative approach.
Agree with 12:49 and even am SMH, too. You people are too much. Full of your quasi-think tank knowledge. Any moron with half a brain can tell you renting is throwing money away especially when no new structure has to be built to replace a rental. The building is already standing and bones are good so why are pissing over rent/own continuum? Sounds to me like some landlords getting a bit weak in the knees that they wouldn't be living off the taxpayers' dime anymore. A great place for Wicomico but not so hot for the landlord class trying to control the County and hold us all hostage financially. Get a clue, McGoo. This is a brilliant move on Culver's part! Culver/Taxpayers 1 / Landlords 0
ReplyDeleteAu contraire, grasshopper.
DeleteIn the world of finance and value, it is far from as simple as buying always trumps renting. The best path forward is an objective evaluation of the real numbers.
Good luck with your bullying.This should be the adults only blog.
1251 when you say the millennial are you referring to Weston Young?
ReplyDeleteGet some respect! You can call him Mr. Young, you imbecile.
It is entirely possible. If I was aware of his name I would have used it.
DeleteYour inference is that you are offended by the descriptive term millennial defending my approximation of age. No disrespect to Mr Young, if it is in fact him.
For you sir , I will reserve my respects. You see, I am a millennial and I don't believe imbecile is a comparably neutral descriptive term.
Now about that adult discussion of the IRR
OK let's sum it up:
ReplyDeletePurchasing a property is an investment.
Renting property is a cost.
The question is this: How long does it take for the investment to make sense versus renting the property?
Very simple question to consider when making an investment. There are plenty of businesses which prefer to rent property instead of purchasing property because they want to keep the cash on hand for conducting their business instead of tying it up in the purchase price.
It is not an automatic that purchasing property is always better than renting property. To think so is a little bit "simple minded" and the other commenters might wish to reconsider their harsh condemnation of one who is asking a business question about their local government.
Thank you
And thank you!Exactly.
DeleteFor far too long we have made decisions out of many perspectives and motivations other than a clear eyed, conflict and nepotic free perspective. When less than confident people are obliged to explain it usually goes emotional.
Thank you.
1:14 I would go further and say despite Mr Young's age - which if we are speaking of the same - his presence, so far as observed, has been a stabilizing one of reason and commitment to the Executive's team; in sharp contrast to your own emotionally charged, combative angry "style".
ReplyDelete152
ReplyDeleteI think you are saying the same thing as 132.
It is not necessarily better to buy a property in every situation. Sometimes it is better to rent a property.
For instance, if cash on hand is a problem (low income situation such as low tax base, or deteriorating tax base) it may be better to hang onto the cash. If a business or entity is flush with cash (has plenty of cash on hand) it is usually better to invest the cash in a property. But there are more variables: What are the odds of property value depreciating? This is a real concern. Are we "over paying" for the property because of temporary inflated values?
It is simple minded to believe it is ALWAYS better to purchase rather than rent.
Back in 2006 I wish I could have a do-over.
I made a purchase when the market was over-heated, i.e.. price was too high.
But I didn't realize my mistake until the crash of 2008 - 2009.
Then, I realized I should have continued to rent instead of making that purchase.
Lesson learned the hard way.
And of course there are the trade off questions vis-a-vis return on cash and more appropriately IRR on opportunity costs elsewhere in the system, cost of money, erosion of borrowing capacity, etc.
ReplyDeleteIt beyond time to start having objective, informed, quantitative discussions regarding governance.Those that fight it likely have something to hide if even the deficit in the rigors of their process.
As the county rarely lets go of any property it owns, the discussion of resale value is more or less moot. It just comes down to rental cost vs. purchase payments and cost of maintenance of owned parcel and building. If there's a savings, then we're good.
ReplyDeleteOne more thing. The County under another county executive was notoriously bad at physical maintenance of buildings that it owns. Culver is cut from a different cloth. More is getting done in that regard than has been seen in a long time.
Why not utilize an existing County owned building???? Save even more money????
ReplyDeleteYou go Bob Culver, now if the county council would just learn from you Wicomico County would be in a better financial situation. Now tell the council we want volunteer firefighters supported , stop paying the city. I've never heard of a county not supporting volunteer fire companies but they sure have it in for station 13, in today's times we need as many resources as we can get. I see fewer firefighters on the rigs now as compared to the past, so funding and supporting station 13 is a win win situation. Salisbury can't handle what they have now, no way can they even steff the equipment they have now. And they have to call in a 4 th company from the county to assist with a standard structure fire that years ago was handed by one station. So they need the help, station 13 is here close sounds dump to look a gift horse in the mouth. Put Jake Day in his place, they heed this county a lot more than we need this city.
ReplyDelete