Basically, the USCF office building in Crossville is worthless because
>the mortgage we must pay off is more than the building is worth. The
>remaining mortgage is $410,000 and the building in today's real estate
>market in an isolated out-of-the-way place with no other structures
>around it is worth only $50,000 or at the most $100,000.
>Quinn posted on the USCF Issues Forum that upon examining the mortgage
>documents, depending on what type of mortgage it is, we might be able
>just to walk away from the building and not owe anything nor be
>indebted to the mortgage provider.
Something I never understood is why, when small and mid-size cities all over the country had vacant or under-utilized commercial real estate available, we demanded a NEW building. From what I've read, the Crossville building has no architectural features unique to our requirements -- in fact, we probably have no unique architectural requirements. But we still paid an architect when stock plans might have made sense.
Buying an older but sound building somewhere in the rust belt or even snagging a long-term lease at bargain rates didn't seem to be fully explored. As I remember, the main "competition" was a huge white elephant structure, which seemed somewhat a straw horse (excuse the mixed metaphors) to me.
It was like the decision was made, and from then on, discussion was held to be invalid because it was "water under the bridge".
I hope my memory is faulty about this period in USCF planning.