Taxpayers deserve a greater return on State School property

To the editor,

What should be done with the State School property? That is the question. There is however a larger question. What should have been done to maintain a very valuable piece of taxpayer-owned property. All the taxpayers of this state have been asked over the years to invest dollars into buildings, land and jobs for the benefit of the taxpayers.

The state has built the assets and carry on their books $11,000,000 of assets. I don't know about you but if I buy a home for $300,000 and intend to use it until such time as I can afford to move or buy a better home, I don't think I would want to sell that property for $30,000 and then build another home. That is what the state has decided to do with the school property.

According to the latest article by Rep. Alida Millham (August 8), "Laconia has a vested interest in what the property is used for. It made sense for the city to have the first option." The city of Laconia was ready to purchase an $11,000,000 property for $2.16-million. This was not accepted by the state. Next, the state follows a statute stating is must sell the property to the county for fair market value. The county commissioners were not willing to accept a very generous offer of sale for $1.7-million because the majority of the commissioners owes their allegiance to the City of Laconia. When I asked the state for the review of this property by the legislators of this county, I was met with hostility and disrespectful remarks by the county commissioners in an article in The Laconia Daily Sun.

The majority of legislators from Belknap County were willing to review and tour the property and we came out with a different opinion than when we went in with.

This county does not have the means to offer a productive plan for the property. They would also need the approval of the state representatives to purchase the property. Given their attitude that this property should go to the City of Laconia, I doubt they would know what to do with a gift horse if it looked them in the mouth.

I have my doubts if the City of Laconia has the financial where-with-all or the tax base that the state has, to do much with the property, especially if you believe all the argument against anyone wanting to buy the property because of all the problems and contamination.

The phase one study that was done on the property has not given a definitive analysis and as yet there are ongoing studies being done to see what real problems are going to be turning up. In the meantime, about 12 of the 30 buildings that could be operational with minor repair and made operational quickly.

I believe there are many valuable uses for the space and I would think the state, in this time of economic downturn, should be looking to the future of what can be done with this property to offset the cost of new state facilities or, how can this property return some of the investment we the taxpayers have made. There definitely needs to be a greater return on investment, other than $1.7-million, for the State of New Hampshire taxpayers. I do not believe we should be accepting anything less.

Representative Robert Greemore

Meredith