Quote:
Originally Posted by justjim
It is not unheard for a seller to put into a contract what the property can or can't be used for in the future. There are many examples. A church building is sold and the owners don't want it to be turned into a nightclub. The owner builds another new restaurant nearby and doesn't want the building to be competition, etc. etc.
As to "why" in this case, it would only be speculation.
I don't believe that Ms. Tutt would knowingly give a false statement for the Developer or anybody.
|
Only Janet Tutt knows why she told the AAC board and the spectator there were no restrictions on the facility being used for a restaurant. I will say this, she and the Board's attorney should have known what was in the sales agreement, especially when thet are in a advisory role. Someone did not do the job they are being paid to do, simple as that. And for it to take seven months for the Board to be informed of the restriction is not good. In addressing the comment of another OP. It is not unusual when a business is sold, to place restrictions on the new owner not using the previous name and also at times the former owner may be restricted to ever opening another business within X miles.