An investor someone who is willing to see the return a little further out in the future, not someone who expects to be paid off in 3-5 years which seems to be all the patience that most developers/profit takers seem to have anymore of course someone not willing to wait longer than 5 years may qualify as a benefactor in your mind, if that is the case we disagree on meaning of the terms. I am pretty sure that Dr. McKean had a much longer time frame on when he expected a return on JDM Place than the expectation of return on his other properties since he was willing to spend more on it in our budget meetings with him and his staff. Every time that he had budget concerns we gave him cheaper options and he turned them down every time because he didn't want to compromise on that building.

Most developers that I have worked with are profit takers and not investors, their pro forma is designed on a 3-5 return for leases and most have the desire to sell out before then so the buildings are "spec'd" for that time frame which goes against a sustainability mindset that we try to do. We always tried to use better windows,more insulation, and quality materials to make it a better building. Unless the developers were going for "green marketing" they usually chose the lowest common denominator when it came to products used because they intended to flip the building. Now I had some projects (funded by ING in the Houston area) where the financier required a better quality of product because their intention was to hold onto the property and the developer was only responsible for the construction and leasing of the project.

That said, no I don't really expect any one to commit to an $80 million renovation without an expectation of return. I expect any renovation to be piecemeal unless someone with the financial clout like a Devon decides to take on the project. I do feel that a successful mixed-use project in that building could be valued well in excess of an $80-85 million investment based on similar projects that I have seen elsewhere where the building sold after completion.

All investors require an adequate return on capital invested. You are talking about short or long term, not the fact they are investors. Long term investors understand the net present value of money and do not forego the expectation that what they lose in the short term they will make up in the long term. The also understand risk and that the higher the risk the higher the expectation of returns. That doesn't change the analysis on the FNB. It must be acquired cheaply and the building must be able to appreciate. Nobody will come in and invest $80 million and just forget about it. The real value of the building must be raised to cover their total investment, including the opportunity costs of the money. To get any commercial lending group to finance the investment means they will have to have their own evaluation. Unless a private investor puts up $80 Million of their own money, is willing to accept the risk, and has extreme patience, this will be a difficult retrofit. Not saying there isn't someone out there to do it, but I bet it requires an extremely low acquisition cost and perhaps some public assistance.

According to Steve:

"JUDGE BILL GRAVES, sources tell me, has the discretion to call an end to this chapter of the First National story on Monday and have a receiver appointed"

So assuming the magical (my dog ate it) "lost money wire" does not show up by Monday, will the judge end this farce?

Fingers crossed.

Unless a private investor puts up $80 Million of their own money, is willing to accept the risk, and has extreme patience, this will be a difficult retrofit. Not saying there isn't someone out there to do it, but I bet it requires an extremely low acquisition cost and perhaps some public assistance.
I think once it is removed from current ownership it is going to have to go for next to nothing, I don't think Milbank is going to be able to get much for it as they hope and will have to take pennies on the dollar for it. I also think that some public financing/assistance is more than likely to get the project going. I just don't want it to sit for 20 years wasting away like the Skirvin did, just seems like something should be able to be done to this building. Like I stated before, there are many examples across the country of buildings just like FNC that have been renovated into viable, profitable jewel.

Is it unreasonable to think that Devon may want to buy it for pennies on the dollar and fix it up and put the additional Houston employees in there? They certainly would have more of a long-term outlook.

I think I heard somewhere, not sure how reliable the source was, they looked at buying and renovating First National before building the current tower but decided against it because for what they were looking for they got more out of building new, probably would have had to been early in the process since it seems hard to see they could have gotten everyone in the current tower in FNC.

Obviously you are not a HVAC expert. I wonder if you even know what a chiller is. (First hint - chillers do not go in ceilings). Large commercial HVAC has been my area for over 20 years and I have done some of the largest systems in the world. So, don't try to bluff. I don't know what you think you "saw" but it could have been any number of system types. Were they central systems or not? Splits? Water or refrigerant? District? Sizes of spaces? Load requirements? Reconfigurable? Lift requirements? How was the ventillation handled to meet code - separate system or integrated? Was the same system used in the commercial spaces? Was the building occupied 24 hours? How was the humidity and changing load handled? What was the building type and orientation? Was the objective installation costs, operating costs, life costs, comfort control?

Until we know use of the project we don't really know the optimum system or what might be required. I guess we could just put new window units or mini-splits in and call it a day. I've seen that done too - in places like Jakarta and Sao Paulo. It is cheap and quick and you can do that a room at a time. But I don't think that is the standard for this type building and this location...at least I hope not.

As far as the why nots...it is easy to dream. But full feasibility analysis is pretty comprehensive. Especially if you are investing up to $80 Million. Conjecture, extrapolation and lunch time chatter doesn't cut it. If this building can be bought cheaply then developers will engage in a full feasibility study and offer alternatives. Once they know what it can be bought for they will assess how much they can spend to update and convert based on expected revenue from their use objectives. This will help determine the infrastructure retrofit options they have. Like JTF's example in Kansas City, the fact that the property was bought for $2 million allowed them to use their investment for improvements knowing they could turn around and sell the condo's for $300 a foot. If FNC can be bought cheaply and condo'd out at $300 a foot, then we will see multiple options for quality retro-ing.

Well you can tell me i'm wrong all you want. I've been there for it. I've seen it with my own eyes. You could have installed it for 50 years. But if you haven't been present for it, then i can't really speak to that. Systems are made exactlly for this purpose. As i've said, they are more expensive becase of what's involved in getting them where they need to go given the extra constraints....but they do exist. I've said all along that it won't be easy. Let's go through some of these, and remember we're starting from scratch rather than even touching the old steam based system. But here's what it was.....

Were they central systems or not? Yes, it was a large central system.
Splits? No.
Water or refrigerant? Water. The main unit had not been converted in 2000. That's when my cousing actually worked for the company...in the building...that leased space out there. So i've got first hand knowledge of the place. Being interested, i of course asked a milion questions, and saw some things most wouldn't be able to.
District? Yes it was.
Sizes of spaces? Of course that varies.
Load requirements? Varies if you're using any space as a data center, but since the floor plates in the tower section are so similar, you get a basic same load. What varies are the other portions of the district.
Reconfigurable? Not easily. It would be very difficult compared to what you see today. Remember heating includes radiators as well.
Lift requirements?
How was the ventillation handled to meet code - separate system or integrated? The guts of the thing is from the 20's. Remember code is only applied when major renovations are done. Most floors dont even have smoke detectors either. So code requirements aren't something they had to worry about in the past.
Was the same system used in the commercial spaces?
Was the building occupied 24 hours? No
How was the humidity and changing load handled? You can tell that it wasn't handled all that well. The place can become VERY humid inside in the summer and because VERY dry in the winter.
Was the objective installation costs, operating costs, life costs, comfort control? The goal when it was built, is not what the goal today would be. Individualized comfort control wasn't a question. Much like any large system, the basics of the thing was...it's on or it's off. You get AC or you get Heat. Anyone remember their old dorm days?

------

Now if you want to look at these same questions, but from the new re-hab side, you alter some things. No one would want to see window units on the thing. But what you are going to find, especially if it converts to residential, would be the comfort control ability. No one wants to live in a building with the large central contols like it has today. That question starts the whole discussion of what the new system would look like. It DRASTICALLY changes, as i'm sure you know, what you would do. Knowing that you'll have smaller units like that also means that the amount of infrastructure becomes smaller, but more frequent. Remember, you don't have a dropped ceiling to shove a blower in either...ceilings are too low. So they're going in a close like they would for a home unit. The difference, is going to be on the other end.

Whatever....

Doubling down is a dangerous thing to do. Lol.

Well you can tell me i'm wrong all you want. I've been there for it. I've seen it with my own eyes. You could have installed it for 50 years. But if you haven't been present for it, then i can't really speak to that. Systems are made exactlly for this purpose. As i've said, they are more expensive becase of what's involved in getting them where they need to go given the extra constraints....but they do exist. I've said all along that it won't be easy. Let's go through some of these, and remember we're starting from scratch rather than even touching the old steam based system. But here's what it was.....

Were they central systems or not? Yes, it was a large central system.
Splits? No.
Water or refrigerant? Water. The main unit had not been converted in 2000. That's when my cousing actually worked for the company...in the building...that leased space out there. So i've got first hand knowledge of the place. Being interested, i of course asked a milion questions, and saw some things most wouldn't be able to.
District? Yes it was.
Sizes of spaces? Of course that varies.
Load requirements? Varies if you're using any space as a data center, but since the floor plates in the tower section are so similar, you get a basic same load. What varies are the other portions of the district.
Reconfigurable? Not easily. It would be very difficult compared to what you see today. Remember heating includes radiators as well.
Lift requirements?
How was the ventillation handled to meet code - separate system or integrated? The guts of the thing is from the 20's. Remember code is only applied when major renovations are done. Most floors dont even have smoke detectors either. So code requirements aren't something they had to worry about in the past.
Was the same system used in the commercial spaces?
Was the building occupied 24 hours? No
How was the humidity and changing load handled? You can tell that it wasn't handled all that well. The place can become VERY humid inside in the summer and because VERY dry in the winter.
Was the objective installation costs, operating costs, life costs, comfort control? The goal when it was built, is not what the goal today would be. Individualized comfort control wasn't a question. Much like any large system, the basics of the thing was...it's on or it's off. You get AC or you get Heat. Anyone remember their old dorm days?

------

Now if you want to look at these same questions, but from the new re-hab side, you alter some things. No one would want to see window units on the thing. But what you are going to find, especially if it converts to residential, would be the comfort control ability. No one wants to live in a building with the large central contols like it has today. That question starts the whole discussion of what the new system would look like. It DRASTICALLY changes, as i'm sure you know, what you would do. Knowing that you'll have smaller units like that also means that the amount of infrastructure becomes smaller, but more frequent. Remember, you don't have a dropped ceiling to shove a blower in either...ceilings are too low. So they're going in a close like they would for a home unit. The difference, is going to be on the other end.

Whatever....


Bomber,

HVAC is Rovers business.................he knows this industry.

Is it unreasonable to think that Devon may want to buy it for pennies on the dollar and fix it up and put the additional Houston employees in there? They certainly would have more of a long-term outlook.

This.

According to Steve:

"JUDGE BILL GRAVES, sources tell me, has the discretion to call an end to this chapter of the First National story on Monday and have a receiver appointed"

So assuming the magical (my dog ate it) "lost money wire" does not show up by Monday, will the judge end this farce?

Fingers crossed.

Unlikely..and I'm willing to bet a lot of money (just so I can finally be wrong and see an end to this madness)

Is it unreasonable to think that Devon may want to buy it for pennies on the dollar and fix it up and put the additional Houston employees in there? They certainly would have more of a long-term outlook.

This would be a fantastic result. However, yes, I think it's unreasonable. Or at the least, unrealistic.

The situation at FNC is actually less bleak than the Skirvin, which had been completely shuttered for years.

But like the Skirvin, I think it's going to take the city getting involved with private investors for this building to ever reach it's full potential. Otherwise, it will continue to limp along, even with new ownership.

Bill Graves is a nice old guy, and I'd bet he's not going to force anything today. I don't think anyone is pushing for it to go into receivership. The current owner want more time, the lender wants to get every penny they can, so it will limp along for as long as they think they can get some extra cash. I'm sure it will go into receivership eventually, but the judge isn't going to just do it on his own.

Another Extension | OKC Central (http://blog.newsok.com/okccentral/2012/10/15/another-extension/)

Big surprise.

This is what Yashouafar does.

I have no idea why he drags these things out and holds on like grim death, but that is his pattern.

And in this instance, we have a judge and bank that are acting as enablers. NOBODY is representing the interest of the tenants, downtown or the community.



What happens if he finds some way to scrape up the money? Then what?

Not only would he not have a dime to put into the place -- remember that Devon is still paying them rent until this summer, then it's going to get really ugly -- but who on earth is going to sign a lease or even do business with this ownership group??

Maybe he's hoping he can gain control of it again so someone who wants to get it out of his hands will buy it from him, not the bank?

But even then, he has to come up with $12 million.

Who is going to pay $12 million for that complex?

If Capmark thought that was a decent possibility they would just take it back and flip it.



I really think Yashouafar is at least slightly insane.

Either that, or he just loves fighting with people in court, because that's how he spends the large majority of his time and he never comes out ahead.

John Mulaney has a joke about how Donald trump is not just a rich man, but what a hobo imagines a rich man to be. I think this is what Yashouafar is doing as well. He doesn't just want to be rich, he wants everyone to know he is rich and he wants to do all the thing he imagines rich people do, like go to court.

What's really sad is, the ugliest building in the complex is the one that makes the most money as well.

Let's throw some LED lighting up the sides, have it run, strobe the accent lighting, and we'll turn it into party central? LOL

At this point i think im just going to have to throw my hands up. If the banks don't even care, what hope do we have that anythin will ever happen?

Remember, Devon is still paying rent there so he is still getting a paycheck.
I think once that stops, he will let it go to the banks.
But until then he will fight it just to collect the built in paychecks.

The building is completely UN-marketable to lease out from a commercial real estate perspective.
Something drastic needs to be done, and I believe it will. Probably when Devon is done paying.

The problem is, nobody with an interest in historic preservation has a legal interest here. He's going to get continuance after continuance. As I said, the lender knows it's going to lose a ton of money on this, so they're trying to mitigate their losses. As long as he keeps paying something, it's worth it for them to let him drag it out. If they can get an extra million dollars every few months, hell, let him have the time. Remember their interest is to get their money.

Yashouoafa... Yashuoa... homeboy's interest is to keep the building. Why he thinks he needs to keep it is beyond me. Maybe he thinks his luck is gonna turn around. Maybe he thinks he'll make a lot of money on some other business venture that he can use to pay off FNC. Whatever the case, he wants to keep it as long as he can.

The judge has both sides asking for more time, he isn't going to press it forward on his own. There are a handful of judges in Oklahoma County who woud do that (mostly on the criminal docket), but Bill Graves isn't one of them.

The story is in front of the pay wall for today on our website:

Bank releases First National Center from mortgage, property safe from receivership

Bank releases First National Center from mortgage, property safe from recievership | The Journal Record (http://journalrecord.com/2012/10/18/bank-releases-first-national-center-from-mortgage-property-safe-from-recievership/)

Ugh.


“With their renewed ability to focus their attention on the building and its tenants, the owners and managers of this OKC landmark plan to resume renovations that had been previously started and to aggressively pursue a leasing program to increase occupancy,” Swedlow said in a statement.

First National’s owners have paid off Capmark, Swedlow said. The bank abruptly dropped its foreclosure lawsuit against the owners of the First National Center on Wednesday.

Ugh.

Damn it. This sucks.

So if I read correctly, he owns the building outright at this point?

The Journal Record's Brianna Bailey reports today that Milbank is out of foreclsure and has retained the First National Center
http://journalrecord.com/2012/10/18/bank-releases-first-national-center-from-mortgage-property-safe-from-recievership-real-estate/

So if I read correctly, he owns the building outright at this point?

Just means he paid Capmark enough money for them to release him from the mortgage they held.

Undoubtedly, he borrowed THAT money from another bank somehow.

I doubt he owns it free and clear.

Now, we are back to this:


With a deadline looming for First National Center to go into receivership, a potential sale is in the works that involves the center and east portions of the complex being converted into structured parking.

Architect Don Beck appeared before the Downtown Design Review Committee on Thursday on an unscheduled presentation and told members his unidentified client had not yet bought the properties but was looking at turning them into parking.

Read more: Mystery buyer proposes turning First National annex buildings into parking | NewsOK.com (http://newsok.com/mystery-buyer-proposes-turning-first-national-annex-buildings-into-parking/article/3701557#ixzz29glCH4ZR)


So, it's entirely possible Yashouafar is going to flip the Center and East buildings and then, what??? Renovate the tower?

Out of the frying pan and...

Aaron Yashouafar will be sentenced for embezzlement in four weeks. So instead of First National being controlled by a receiver or lender, it will be in the hands of a guy who is on his way to jail.

Have the moving trucks started lining up yet along Park & Robinson?

This is just incredible. A landmark building controlled by a felon and a judge had the ability to stop it the whole time. Maybe Yash can start more renovations that trash what's already there and really bring it down...

Don't forget there is a pending federal investigation that Yashouafar took government money for asbestos abatement then provided falsified cancelled checks from the vendors who did the work.

This is just incredible. A landmark building controlled by a felon and a judge had the ability to stop it the whole time. Maybe Yash can start more renovations that trash what's already there and really bring it down...

The judge couldn't strip Yashouafar's ownership just because he's a bad guy. The main issue before the court was non-payment to the lender, and a deal has apparently been struck.

Yashouafar wouldn't have worked this hard to keep it if he didn't have a deal in the works. Still, he's back in control, at least until he goes to prison.

No, this parking thing all came out when the architect showed up at the Downtown Design Review Committee in an attempt to gauge possible reception to the idea before they closed on the sale.

This could have completely fallen through for all we know, but nothing can happen downtown without going through the correct approval process and any such large change would be closely scrutinized. Further, I'm sure the potential owners/developers would be working with the City due to the obvious need for more parking in the CBD and also the opportunity for various grants and loans.

<honking big sigh>

<honking big sigh>

Sums it up.

Sums it up.

I was thinking something more explicit. But the sigh will do.

I really thought "we" were getting close to FNC gaining better ownership. Very disappointing development today.

I was thinking something more explicit. But the sigh will do.

Can't argue with that. I'd join in with you, not that it would change anything.

I just wonder how that attorney could say this with a straight face.


“The resolution of this matter is beneficial to all involved,” Swedlow said.

I just wonder how that attorney could say this with a straight face.

Read it more as: the resolution of this matter is beneficial to all who are paying me

Read it more as: the resolution of this matter is beneficial to all who are paying me

Actually, in the long run, I'm not sure that's true either.

Someone had posted that Judge Graves was a nice old man that wouldn't prevent the sides from working out a deal, but what was his reason(s) for letting the building stay with a criminal who is under additional federal investigation in our own city?? How this whole deal played out is just disgusting.

I have a feeling this isn't over. Whatever payments Capmark received, they'd better set that money aside because it might be getting clawed back. This is strictly my opinion based on publicly available information on Aaron Yashouafar's dealings.

I have a feeling this isn't over. Whatever payments Capmark received, they'd better set that money aside because it might be getting clawed back. This is strictly my opinion based on publicly available information on Aaron Yashouafar's dealings.

That's a good point.

The guy is getting sued and prosecuted all over the place for misappropriation of funds. There was already an outcry from the Las Vegas condo owners about him possibly shifting insurance payments for their property (again!) to feed to Capmark.

There are plenty of people wanting money from him and his various shell companies and the fact he was able to come up with somewhere around $12 million is going to draw the attention from other creditors.

[QUOTE=OKCTalker;586083]The judge couldn't strip Yashouafar's ownership just because he's a bad guy. The main issue before the court was non-payment to the lender, and a deal has apparently been struck.


Why can Judge Graves do this then?:

Oklahoma judge refuses to let men planning sex-change operations have feminine names | NewsOK.com (http://newsok.com/oklahoma-judge-refuses-to-let-men-planning-sex-change-operations-have-feminine-names/article/3710063)

[QUOTE=OKCTalker;586083]The judge couldn't strip Yashouafar's ownership just because he's a bad guy. The main issue before the court was non-payment to the lender, and a deal has apparently been struck.


Why can Judge Graves do this then?:

Oklahoma judge refuses to let men planning sex-change operations have feminine names | NewsOK.com (http://newsok.com/oklahoma-judge-refuses-to-let-men-planning-sex-change-operations-have-feminine-names/article/3710063)

Actually, Judge Graves could have granted Capmark's request for a receiver when they appeared in court last Thursday. Yashouafar had in the original deal, promised not to appeal or oppose such an action if he couldn't pay up by the original May 27 deadline. Capmark agreed each time to extend the deadline. Then, Graves refused to recognize this deadline agreement when it finally came up again last Thursday, and he gave Yashouafar another five days to get the money - which Yashouafar did. Tell me again, OKCTalker, how the judge was powerless in this situation ....

“To grant a name change in this case would be to assist that which is fraudulent,” Graves wrote. “It is notable that Genesis 1:27-28 states: ‘So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. And God blessed them, and God said unto them, be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth ...' The DNA code shows God meant for them to stay male and female.”

The judge also wrote about not wanting to be “complicit in legitimizing sex changes through changes of names.”

Wow.

[QUOTE=Bailey80;586445]

Actually, Judge Graves could have granted Capmark's request for a receiver when they appeared in court last Thursday. Yashouafar had in the original deal, promised not to appeal or oppose such an action if he couldn't pay up by the original May 27 deadline. Capmark agreed each time to extend the deadline. Then, Graves refused to recognize this deadline agreement when it finally came up again last Thursday, and he gave Yashouafar another five days to get the money - which Yashouafar did. Tell me again, OKCTalker, how the judge was powerless in this situation ....

Steve, did you have any feel for if Capmark's attorneys were happy to allow the continuances in the hopes of getting paid?

Or were they pressing Graves to put the property in the hands of the receiver on Thursday?

They were not happy on Thursday. They were eager and ready to go to a receiver.

Wow.

Wow doesn't even begin to cover this. But I suppose that's for another thread, ha. Anyway, what a disappointment that this was allowed to happen.

The judge couldn't strip Yashouafar's ownership just because he's a bad guy. The main issue before the court was non-payment to the lender, and a deal has apparently been struck.


Why can Judge Graves do this then?:

Oklahoma judge refuses to let men planning sex-change operations have feminine names | NewsOK.com (http://newsok.com/oklahoma-judge-refuses-to-let-men-planning-sex-change-operations-have-feminine-names/article/3710063)

Interesting. Not sure if I agree with a judge denying name changes to people who clearly have no fraudulent intent, but he did propose some well-stated legal and social problems that make it a complex issue.

Interesting. Not sure if I agree with a judge denying name changes to people who clearly have no fraudulent intent, but he did propose some well-stated legal and social problems that make it a complex issue.

Like citing the Bible as a reason for his decision in a formally written judicial order??? Or saying he doesn't want to 'legitimize' something that is completely legal and within the rights of any citizen??

Regardless of his personal convictions, how foolish do you have to be to actually put this in a court order?


He's not only going to be overturned on appeal he may be completely run off the bench.

Someone had posted that Judge Graves was a nice old man that wouldn't prevent the sides from working out a deal, but what was his reason(s) for letting the building stay with a criminal who is under additional federal investigation in our own city?? How this whole deal played out is just disgusting.

Should we strip all property rights from people accused of crimes? Yashouafar has pled guilty, but he has not yet been sentenced. He isn't a convicted felon yet. Now, that day may be coming very soon, or he may have a plea agreement where he avoids a felony conviction. Judge Graves does not have any duty in this situation towards the well-being of the building.


[QUOTE=Bailey80;586445]

Actually, Judge Graves could have granted Capmark's request for a receiver when they appeared in court last Thursday. Yashouafar had in the original deal, promised not to appeal or oppose such an action if he couldn't pay up by the original May 27 deadline. Capmark agreed each time to extend the deadline. Then, Graves refused to recognize this deadline agreement when it finally came up again last Thursday, and he gave Yashouafar another five days to get the money - which Yashouafar did. Tell me again, OKCTalker, how the judge was powerless in this situation ....

The attorneys are officers of the court. They have a duty to be truthful with the judge. They can't stand up and argue "the check is in the mail" (which is basically what they did here) if they know it to be false. Now I know a lot of attorneys who draw a very fine line on what they "know". But Judge Graves gave them 5 days after Capmark had two or three agreed continuances on the matter, and he managed to come up with the money during that time. So clearly the attorneys representing old boy were not being untruthful.

Judges are supposed to be impartial. They aren't supposed to be looking for an excuse to hammer someone who isn't popular.

I don't like this outcome any more than you guys do. But it is what it is. If this was a guy struggling to keep his house, and the judge granted him 5 days to come up with the money after the bank demanded final payment, and he managed to come up with it, everyone would be happy. We just don't like this guy and we want our building back.

Like citing the Bible as a reason for his decision in a formally written judicial order??? Or saying he doesn't want to 'legitimize' something that is completely legal and within the rights of any citizen??

Regardless of his personal convictions, how foolish do you have to be to actually put this in a court order?


He's not only going to be overturned on appeal he may be completely run off the bench.

Yeah that part I'm not gonna defend. Probably easier for the name change people to just go to a different judge though, rather than filing an appeal.

Someone had posted that Judge Graves was a nice old man that wouldn't prevent the sides from working out a deal, but what was his reason(s) for letting the building stay with a criminal who is under additional federal investigation in our own city?? How this whole deal played out is just disgusting.


While their property rights should not be striped away upon accusation, when there is a clear patter of operation then they should not continually get the most favorable ruling for them.

Going to a different judge does not address the issue of a judge who -- as you clearly stated above -- is sworn to be impartial and isn't even attempting to do so.

It also sharply calls into question his judgement in general. What the heck was he even thinking?

Like citing the Bible as a reason for his decision in a formally written judicial order??? Or saying he doesn't want to 'legitimize' something that is completely legal and within the rights of any citizen??

Regardless of his personal convictions, how foolish do you have to be to actually put this in a court order?

He's not only going to be overturned on appeal he may be completely run off the bench.

No, in saying "well-stated legal and social problems," I clearly wasn't referring to his use of scripture or vilifying transgender persons, thank you. Just because I don't get emotional about things easily doesn't mean I don't disagree with his decision. I'll restate my point. Judge Graves pointed out some legitimate and significant legal and social issues with people who have undergone surgery to alter their apparent and physiological gender changing their names to be more consistent with their preferred gender identity. I don't condone or condemn his ruling. His decision will likely be overturned, but it is much more difficult for a judge to be removed from office than as a result of rulings. Judges are typically removed for habitual behavioral issues, and uncommonly for unpopular rulings.

I apologize ethan if I appeared to be attacking you.

The issue is that we have a judge who is deciding important court cases of all types who is brazenly inserting his personal views and own moral judgments AND doesn't seem to even comprehend this is not appropriate.


Anyway, let's get back to discussing FNC. Sorry for my role in hijacking.

I apologize ethan if I appeared to be attacking you.

The issue is that we have a judge who is deciding important court cases of all types who is brazenly inserting his personal views and own moral judgments AND doesn't seem to even comprehend this is not appropriate.

Anyway, let's get back to discussing FNC. Sorry for my role in hijacking.

I didn't take it personally. :) I know things like that can be hot-button topics. I am pretty disappointed that Yashouafar will keep FNC. Good for him for coming up with the money, but I would rather the building go to someone who would give it the care it deserves.

No, and that isn't what I said either. Yashouafar wasn't merely accused of crimes, he's plead guilty and is awaiting sentencing. In this case, yes, he should be stripped of his property rights. And the judge does have a duty to not leave this building in the hands of a guilty embezzler that is under more investigation by federal authorities.

[QUOTE=hoyasooner;586486]Should we strip all property rights from people accused of crimes? Yashouafar has pled guilty, but he has not yet been sentenced. He isn't a convicted felon yet. Now, that day may be coming very soon, or he may have a plea agreement where he avoids a felony conviction. Judge Graves does not have any duty in this situation towards the well-being of the building.[QUOTE]