Is Mar-a-Lago worth $1 billion? Trump’s winter home valuations are at the core of his fraud trial [repost because it is relevant to recent court ruling]

Associated Press ^ | October 9, 2023

[Oystir]

You have it exactly wrong. If Trump could remove restrictions he would. He routinely tries to sue the WPB Airport, which is directly West. Take-offs go directly over the property. It’s Don Quixote. Literally. The place has limits. Possibly 300 mill+. Pre-covid 100 mil.

[Rockingham]

Trump cannot get the restrictions removed, but a more politically congenial and well-connected buyer could. As my lobbyist friends explain, it is a matter of knowing who to talk to and how to talk to them.

[Degaston]

Maybe we should demand that the jackals Dems have to pay back taxes using FMV numbers?

It should be no secret that I don’t trust or like Trump & have lots of concerns about him. But what they are doing to him reeks of Banana Republic or Putin ways of doing things. It’s appalling.

[Degaston]

That would be like Mafia rule :(

[TruthAndCuriosity]

Good luck getting the restrictions removed. Did anyone actually read the ruling?

(from p. 66) Mar-a-Lago
In 1995, Donald Trump signed a “Deed of Conservation and Preservation” in which he gave up the right to use Mar-a-Lago for any purpose other than as a social club (the “1995 Deed”).

In 2002, Donald Trump granted a conservation easement to the National Trust for Historic Preservation and signed a deed in which, in addition to conveying the rights to develop or use Mar-a-Lago for any purpose other than a social club, the Deed further “limits changes to the Property including, without limitation, the division or subdivision of the Property for any purpose, including use as single family homes, the interior renovation of the mansion, which may be necessary and desirable for the sale of the property as a single family residential estate, the construction of new buildings and the obstruction of open vistas.” NYSCEF Doc. No. 1531 at 25-26 (emphasis added).

In exchange for executing the 2002 Deed, in which he gave away, in perpetuity, the right to develop or use the property as a single-family residence, Donald Trump paid significantly lower property taxes on Mar-a-Lago. PX 1730; TT 3533-3535.

[Rockingham]

Local governments have wide discretion in planning and zoning matters and, for the correct purchaser, might well be inclined to ease the restrictions on the Mar-a-Lago property. After all, suppose a purchaser suggested privately that if the restrictions were not eased, he would dramatically expand the club membership, say to embrace historically disadvantaged minorities for a nominal fee. Palm Beach's leadership would go into conniptions and more or less grant what the new owner wanted.

[TruthAndCuriosity]

I guess it depends on what “in perpetuity” means. I thought it was kind of the same as “forever.”

[Rockingham]

Funny thing is that there is also a "rule against perpetuities," a complicated inheritance from the common law that favors undiluted fee simple ownership and is the bane of law students and (sometimes) trust and property attorneys.

More to the point, local authorities and counter parties can rescind or waive or bargain away property restrictions, for good reasons and bad. Sometimes the law takes a hand, as with restrictive covenants against sale of a property to anyone who is not white. Once common, those covenants "in perpetuity" are now unenforceable as a matter of constitutional force.