A white paper that should be erased

The latest piece of propaganda coming from the office of David Israel is the so called "White paper" about the planned building swap.
Is this for real? is someone pulling our leg? 
First of all the info published on the"white paper" is the very same info that was brought to the Delegate Assembly by Ed Grossman who was soundly scolded and called a liar by David Israel. Now he's using the information in his bid to swap these buildings.To get a true perspective on what is going on with this whole thing, keep in mind that it came about because Israel illegally added a clause to the cable contract promising to provide space to Atlantic Broadband at $1.00 a square foot. If this "swap' doesn't happen, then Israel is going to find himself in hot water.
Here are some points to consider regarding the proposals in the "white paper"

1. It's easy to see that the building and property that is occupied by CV Realty is worth a lot more than the building they want to give UCO in exchange.

2. The "white paper" says that there is no way to estimate the value of the construction shack after renovation. In effect Israel is trying to make the swap without knowing whether it's a good deal or not. How can an informed decision be made without knowing the value of both properties? There should be a professional appraisal made on both properties before any trade is considered. To be fair, we could get an appraisal on our building and WPRF could pay for an appraisal on theirs.

3. The option of putting the UCO Reporter back in the Camden pool building at a cost to residents of $95,000.00 for restoring the building and making it fit for occupancy is not acceptable.
The lease agreements giving CV Realty the building on East Drive in exchange for giving UCO the use of the Camden pool building made no provisions for UCO to assume the costs of making it fit for occupancy.

Since the Reporter is unable to occupy the Camden pool building, it makes the lease deals invalid as UCO is not getting the qui pro quo that was in the deal. Now that the Reporter is operating from the clubhouse , we are actually paying for the space as we pay WPRF fees every month for the use of the clubhouse. Ergo: we pay for the space for the Reporter while CV Realty enjoys free use of their building. It's not the deal that was struck in the original agreement. At a bare minimum there should be a reduction in the recreation fees we are paying.

4. The three options mentioned in the white paper left out one viable and attractive option: Let CV Realty renovate the wonderful construction shack and conduct their business from there. Put the UCO Reporter back into the building on East drive. Though Israel maintains the building needs to be demolished and replaced, it's not that bad. That building still has plenty of useful life left in it, and it wouldn't cost us anything.