In last week’s issue, residents voiced concerns over Evansville Brownfields Corp. and an auction held by the Vanderburgh County Commissioners. This week, concerns were heard after some of those who purchased property at the auction were told by Evansville Code Enforcement Officers that the property they purchased was on the list to be razed.
The Vanderburgh County Commissioners initialed the proposal on February 2, 2010. The absolute auction took place on June 8, 2010.
Properties in the auction were sold via “Absolute Auction” at Sohn & Associates. Local auctioneers explained that an absolute auction means that something is sold as is and that all liens against the property had been dropped.
According to the contract between the Vanderburgh County Commissioners and Sohn & Associates, the maximum commission and expense for the Vanderburgh County Commissioners was $19,000. Advertising was factored into the expenses. While they noted that marketing was a key component of their sales efforts, they also state that direct mail is important, “Direct mail flyers will be produced in full-color and mailed to targeted audiences including, developers, investors, brokers, neighbors and end users. An electronic version of the flyer would also be sent to our proprietary list.”
In speaking with some neighbors of properties on the list, they said they did not receive any notice of the sale in the mail. This was the first concern voiced just after the auction was held.
A phone call to the county commissioners office requesting a copy of the properties that were on the list because of Code Enforcement violations was fulfilled. The list states which properties since 2000 that had been cited for violations. Some were pending; some were active; and some were closed. The list did not state which properties were set to demolished.
The second item is a bit more concerning. Residents and property investors are looking at where to go next with the properties they bought at the auction. Typically, when a property is sold, particularly a residential property, a “Sales Disclosure” is required. However, Karen Woolston, with Sohn & Associates, said that no sales disclosure forms were sent to Sohn from the county, but that they did have a book people could look through to see why the properties were in the sale. She also said that properties sold at tax sale, court ordered sale or government auctions are not required to have sales disclosures.
In searching the Indiana Code to find the state ruling on such matters, Woolston was correct. According to IC 32-21-5-1, which discusses “Residential Real Estate Sales Disclosure,” the chapter does not apply to “transfers to or from any government entity;” or “transfers made because of the record owner’s failure to pay any federal, state or local taxes.”
The question then went was then raised about how the state law interacts with the federal Fair Housing Laws. According to local realtors, the information about the status of the properties, and if they were to be razed should have been noted prior to the sell.
The third item of concern was that a number of properties were removed from the auction. Originally, there were approximately 280 parcels of real estate set for the June 8, 2010, absolute auction. Residents were concerned as to why some 30 properties had been removed from the list.
People have started to question the city’s growing involvement in local real estate speculation. They are finding it harder to buy properties adjacent to them or investment properties because of the increase in government involvement.
They are asking questions like: “Why is the city buying properties? Where is the money coming from to buy all these properties? How can local people buy properties if they are competing against the city?”
A call to the Vanderburgh County Commissioner’s Office revealed that several parcels had been wanted by the city via the Department of Metropolitan Development. Kristen Comer, administrative assistant to the commissioners, emailed a list of properties that was transferred to DMD along with Resolution CO.R-04-10-003 (Resolution Regarding Transfer or Exchange of Property With Governmental Entity), which was dated April 20, 2010, and approved by all three commissioners.
According to the resolution, “the County shall, contingent upon the adoption of the resolution by the Cty to accept the delivery of a Quitclaim Deed to the Real Estate, execute and deliver a Quitclaim Deed to the Real Estate to the City for and in consideration of Twenty Three Thousand Seven Hundred Forty Four Dollars and Thirty One Cents ($223,744.31) and other good valuable consideration.”
On May 10, 2010, Evansville City Council members Wendy Bredhold and Connie Robinson sponsored Resolution C-2010-8 that went before the board. The resolution titled “A Resolution of the City Council of Evansville, Indiana Regarding Transfer of Exchange of Property with Vanderburgh County,” cited Indiana Code 36-1-11-8 in order to purchase the properties by and through the Dept. of Metropolitan Development. The City Council approved the resolution on that date, and Mayor Jonathan Weinzapfel signed the resolution on May 12, 2010.
A list of the properties shows that many of them are located either in the Front Door Pride area, in the proposed new TIF District, or in the Haynie’s Corner area. The city paid either $465 or $1,249.77 for the properties, as stated in city and county documents.
Earlier this week, questions were sent to the Dept. of Metropolitan Development. Here are the questions and the city’s responses:
1. Why did DMD select these particular properties that were set to be auctioned by the county? (I know some are in the Front Door Pride Area; some are near the Haynie’s corner area; and some are in the proposed TIF district.)
DMD reviewed all of the properties available in the County’s “no sales” list.
DMD identified those which were within the Industrial Park (6 parcels) and Focus Area (31 parcels). The other 9 parcels were judged first on whether they were NSP eligible, which means that they are in HUD eligible census tracts. In addition, they were evaluated according to the City’s NSP plan and established area of greatest need. The parcels were then reviewed to see if they were of the size to be a buildable lot and if they had appropriate zoning for residential development.
2. How was the purchase price for each property arrived at? (It is somewhat peculiar that almost all of them are worth the same price of $465.)
The County Commissioners established the asking price based on their expenses to gain title. A few were priced by the County at more than $465 but that was because court costs were involved.
3. What does DMD plan to do with these properties?
Some will have new homes constructed on them and some will be land banked.
The staff of the Independence Times will update readers as more information is made available.



