Someone owes Santa Cruz County more than $5 million in back property taxes on some 2,400 unoccupied lots in Rio Rico. On Wednesday, the board of supervisors voted unanimously to pursue litigation against that entity, Vatere LLC, to collect those taxes.
|
|
No one showed up at the meeting to represent the Vatere, but two employees of Rio Rico Properties sat in the audience and their attorney addressed the supervisors.
“We have an interest in the property,” said attorney Tyler Stradling. He represented Rio Rico Properties, a subsidiary of Avatar Holdings Inc., which owns and sold most of the lots in Rio Rico. “Our concern lies in a possible attempt through litigation to remove the easements.”
The history of the so-called Vatere lots goes back almost 10 years. On Dec. 20, 1999, Rio Rico Properties sold 2,842 parcels of land for $1 per lot to Vatere LLC, according to a story published Aug. 17, 2007, in the Nogales International. Five days before the sale, Rio Rico Properties placed a Declaration of Easements, Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions on the property that required an owner to maintain the parcels as open space.
“Why did you do this 10 years ago?” asked Supervisor John Maynard.
Stradling replied that it was the “business strategy decided upon at the time.”
“Were any lots reconsidered over the years?” Maynard asked.
Vatere sold some and Avatar bought some back with that easement, said Liz Gutfahr, manager of land development services for Rio Rico Properties.
“We believe these easements are valid and we intend to take action to protect them,” Stradling told the supervisors.
Supervisor Manuel Ruiz assured Stradling that the county only wanted its back taxes. Then he asked, “Are Vatere and Rio Rico Properties partners?”
When Stradling answered ‘no,” Ruiz said, “I’m kind of confused here.”
If the county was taking action against Vatere, why did he and Rio Rico Properties staff show up at the meeting? Ruiz asked.
Vatere has different officers from her company, Gutfahr said. After the meeting, Sheila Vasquez, assistant vice president, said Vatere had its headquarters in Phoenix.
A Google search for the company listed only references in the Santa Cruz County supervisors’ minutes and the Nogales International, not an office.
Vatere LLC filed its articles of organization with the Arizona Corporation Commission on Dec. 3, 1999, said ACC spokeswoman Rebecca Wilder. As an LLC, it is not required to file an annual report.
Attorney Lee A. Storey was listed as a representative for Vatere, but had changed law offices since the filing. A call to her current law firm was not returned by press time.
“They (Rio Rico Properties) say these lots are unbuildable (too steep), but I don’t agree,” said County Treasurer Caesar Ramirez.
A few property owners bought Vatere lots adjoining their property to maintain their view and are paying their property taxes, he said. Others bought lots at the treasurer’s annual sale of properties with delinquent taxes and then foreclosed on the property.
Community Development Director Mary Dahl wrote to P.K. Fletcher, Avatar’s general counsel and vice president, about the back taxes, in June 23, 2009.
A third party expressed an interest in buying some of the lots, Dahl said. Would Avatar agree to lift the building restrictions if the buyer got his or her own water supply certificate?
Fletcher wrote back on Aug. 27 and said it would not lift the restrictions because the lots were intended to be “perpetual open space.”
“All of the Vatere lots should have been reclassified to ‘common areas’ by the county,” Fletcher said. “The reason the back taxes are so great is solely due to the county’s failure to reclassify such lots.”
Ramirez has been waiting four years to take action on the back taxes, he said.
“Our fire districts are losing out,” Ramirez said. “The school districts are losing out because they (Vatere) don’t want to pay.”






Comments
George Wilgers wrote on Oct 15, 2009 8:53 AM:
dr wrote on Oct 10, 2009 8:00 AM:
Close It wrote on Oct 9, 2009 1:28 PM:
George Wilgers wrote on Oct 9, 2009 11:09 AM:
Why did they put the restrictons on the lots? Simple, it had to do with Rio Rico's water rights. That is what Ms. Story has stated in the past.
As far as the lots being unbuldable. Poppycock, there is no such thing as an unbuildable lot. All it takes is a person willing to spend the money necessary to build on the lot. "