Now that Wayside Christian Mission, or rather, Tim Moseley, has taken title of the Hotel Louisville property on Broadway, it is paying thousands of dollars in interest on the $10 million it bid at the May 26 auction, according to WHAS-TV’s Chase Cain.
His report says Wayside hasn’t yet paid for its purchase, and until it does, the interest meter is ticking. The rate is 12 percent, and the amount is $3,200 daily. The homeless organization has already racked up more than $50K in interest in the two weeks since its purchase, according to the county commissioner’s office.
Tim and Nina Moseley didn’t answer Cain’s calls for comment.
There could be a simple explanation for why Wayside doesn’t go ahead and pay up and avoid the interest charges. It doesn’t have the money. But the Mission showed an $11.8 million balance on its Form 990 in 2006, and has since sold its properties on Market Street for $5 million.
It may be continuing to try to sell the property to Jefferson Community and Technical College, which has its main campus across the street, and make a profit. Reps of JCTC met recently with Wayside officials. The school wants to put a parking garage on the property. Plus, Metro Government officials have said they’re not sure it’s legal to operate a homeless shelter at the location.
Either way, the Wayside organization needs some advice on handling media, because it’s getting more difficult for the general public to be sympathetic to the plight of the non-profit.
17 responses so far ↓
1 David Harpe // Jun 12, 2009 at 11:27 am
The only reason you don’t worry about the interest is if you know for a fact you’re not going to be the one paying it.
As the report points out, putting it in Rev. Tim’s name instead of Wayside’s is a red flag. How can he transfer $10M from Wayside to himself to pay this thing off without huge tax issues?
2 Mark H // Jun 12, 2009 at 1:05 pm
I really hope this goes well, but normally these flips happen the same day. I really hope the Rev. understands the risk of compounding interest on a $10M note.
No bank is going to give them a loan in that amount on that property in that condition. Every day that passes, the risk increases because there is blood in the water.
I just hope we aren’t going to be faced with a plea for a fundraiser to “save the shelter” in our near future.
3 Carter Burger // Jun 12, 2009 at 1:21 pm
I still think JCTC should let the Moseley’s tread water a little longer. Wayside jacked up the price on the property thinking they could make a quick buck off of it. I’m sure that $11 mill from three years ago is long gone.
4 AB // Jun 12, 2009 at 2:02 pm
It’s a shame how the Mosley’s are handling this deal. I don’t think anyone doubts the good Wayside does, but entering into a deal that smells so rotten and then being far less than forthcoming when questioned will almost certainly lead to the loss of support from many people – myself included.
5 Steve Coomes // Jun 12, 2009 at 2:54 pm
The whole thing stinks, doesn’t it. Not going to be good in the end for anyone.
6 Ed Springston // Jun 12, 2009 at 3:43 pm
Time to start reviewingthe bank accounts and see if Wayside even has any money available. Also time to start an investigation into the long standing rumors of Tim Mosely’s gambling problem perhaps?
With this continuing rumor, and the involvement of Gus Goldsmith, looking deeper would be a serious plus at this point.
This whole thing smells funny.
7 Mark H // Jun 12, 2009 at 4:08 pm
I really hope Tim and Nina didn’t buy one of those Real Estate System infomercial scam courses and think there are going to make a huge profit on a distressed property.
I can’t emphasize it any greater that real estate speculation is not for the amateur. I would rank it up there in risk with trading commodities on the Chicago Mercantile Exchange. Some of those guys wear diapers because if they leave the floor long enough to urinate, they may lose their rear ends.
8 Carter Burger // Jun 13, 2009 at 9:38 am
Hey Mark, if they did get one of those courses, they must have read it backwards. You don’t buy high and sell low like they are doing!
9 Ed Springston // Jun 13, 2009 at 9:58 am
You do if you “owe.” Especially if it isn’t your money ;-)
10 Steve Magruder (I, not D or R) // Jun 13, 2009 at 10:33 am
Again, I think this is a matter between Wayside and its donors, not a general public issue. The idea that the public should be interested in what decisions an organization internally makes seems foreign to me. Doesn’t seem like the America I have known.
Whether Wayside is flipping or not, that’s their business. Do we question any other organization’s internal financial decisions in public (outside of companies seeking government bailouts)?
As long as everything is legal, I think we should just let the players in this situation work it out amongst themselves. It’s just business.
11 Mark H // Jun 13, 2009 at 1:17 pm
I have to completely disagree with you Steve. It is everyone’s interest, including mine for the following reasons:
1) They are a non-taxed charitable orgainization. Every other reale estate investment company has to pay huge taxes, so why sho they be exempt. How much tax revenue is not going to be collected because they purchased the property instead of a private investor?
2) If the adjoining college has to pay more for the property because Wayside and Gus brokered a side deal to run up the price, once again the tax payer gets the short stick again.
3) If it’s “just business” as you say, then they should be taxed like one.
12 Ed Springston // Jun 13, 2009 at 6:08 pm
I agree Mark. One other interesting sidepoint to consider as well. What has been reported is that Tim Mosely is the one the property is actually sold to NOT Wayside. Would this be of concern to anyone else?
13 Mark H // Jun 13, 2009 at 8:55 pm
I will wait to see what facts come out, but the inherent conflicts and lack of transparency sure as heck make me wonder if Wayside is a straw buyer in this deal.
The true test of legitimacy will come with a mortgage lender stepping up to fund the deal. I don’t know a lender who would finance a 1963 antiquated hotel riddled with asbestos and a shot HVAC system for $10M in this market. Maybe in 2006-2007 when they would sell the loan off to the Capital Markets, but not today.
The system is obviously being gained, the only question is who is going benefit and who is going to get shafted. The attempt appears to be for Gus, Wayside, and Mosely to benefit, and the taxpayers to get shafted. As a taxpayer, part of me hopes the deal blows up in their faces, but unfortunately then, the homeless are going to get shafted.
14 Jim // Jun 14, 2009 at 1:20 pm
Seems to me that we would have much less of a homeless problem if our government encouraged living wage jobs in the city of Louisville instead of getting part time box flipping jobs at UPS and every other low wage, low mentality sweatshop.
15 Steve Magruder (I, not D or R) // Jun 15, 2009 at 10:39 am
Last time I checked, non-profit organizations can conduct all the “business” they want to conduct. It’s a free country, I thought.
And the “what if” about JCTC is just that, a potential scenario.
And oh yeah, let’s start taxing all non-profit organizations that “conduct business”. Again, this isn’t the America I know.
16 Mark H // Jun 15, 2009 at 11:33 am
It’s not a free country. I’ll send you my company’s tax statement to prove it. Real estate speculation is not their “business.”
I guess you would be fine with them starting up the Wayside Hedge Fund or becoming direct home lender as long as it made money for the cause? This is a dangerous precedent if this goes unmonitored.
17 Scott G // Jun 23, 2009 at 7:23 am
“Never do business with a religious son-of-a-bitch. His word ain’t worth a shit — not with the Good Lord telling him how to f**k you on the deal.”
— William S. Burroughs
Leave a Comment