casm said:
Been a bit slow on the uptake on this, but here's my $0.02 regardless...
Run it like a business. You've got an elected board responsible to the shareholders, and shareholders with the ability to place a vote of no confidence in the board based on a two-thirds quorum. This way everyone can hold an equal stake (one share) and vote, executive power can be maintained based on the shareholders' vote, but executive power can't be abused as long as a clear majority of the shareholders disagree with the board's decisions. Not perfect and certainly up for debate, but probably usable as a framework for further consideration if we're really serious about this.
I'd like to get the specifics worked out a bit more first, but I'm definitely interested in the idea.
This is the type of thing I was thinking. You set up a land trust of some sort (not a lawyer so I have no idea of the correct jargon). Anyway, you sell shares in the investment. Something like $100 a share with a minimum initial purchase of 10 shares. Each share has voting rights, the more shares you own the more say you have in the way things are done. An elected board to runs things and 2/3 majority needed to make any changes to the rules. Each 5 years the land or lease would be appraised and the value of each share adjusted accordingly. The owner of the share would be allowed to sell one or all shares at any time for whatever price they could negotiate. Having a campground on the land would be ideal to pay for the taxes (I assume UT has property tax) and insurance. Any money left over at the end of the year would be paid out as a dividend. Likely any land purchased would likely rise in value and thus this could be a decent long term investment.
Rules would have to be drafted of course for share holder use and rights. Of course the Trust would actually own the land and the investor’s shares of the trust. I guess what I'm saying is that no one person could put a trailer on "their" part. Any liquidation of the trust would again require the 2/3 majority vote and would require sale of the land.
Hurdles to this proposal, many I'm sure. The ones I can think of are,
Tough to find 800 investors with $1000 each. I know people are saying they are in but when it comes to brass tax how much money would come in.
It's a ton of moola so there would have to be some iron clad contract writing to protect the investors and insure no corruption (800K could corrupt a lot of people).
Money would be needed right off the bat to get the ball rolling. Lawyers aren’t shy about spending other people’s money. So that money would be gone even if everything fell through. I'm thinking about 10% of the initial investment would be eaten up off the bat. Could be more, could be less.
There must be at least some revenue stream to pay taxes and insurance. Though insurance may not be the biggest hurdle seeing as the Trust would be incorporated so individual investors would not be liable for any more than their actual investment. With dividend being paid out yearly it is unlikely there would be much to sue for. Zoning could be an issue.
I think the $$ would be the biggest hurdle. Though after making the offer available to members of
first it could be open to anyone after that.
Like Xjeeper said though, there may be better property to own in Moab which would be cool. This idea would work for any property. Maybe even for something less pricey.
Should I start drawing up the prospectus?
B-loose
