Tuesday, October 14, 2014

Throckmorton asks "Why did Mars Hill Tacoma and Everett wait until 2014 to thank Mars Hill Global?"

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/warrenthrockmorton/2014/10/14/why-did-mars-hill-tacoma-and-everett-wait-until-2014-to-thank-mars-hill-global/

https://marshill.com/2014/06/05/thank-you-mars-hill-global-sincerely-mars-hill-everett
Mars Hill Everett thanked Mars Hill Global on June 5, 2014.  For what?  For a home.

Throckmorton linked to a bit of coverage from July 2013, and here's the link.
http://www.theheraldbusinessjournal.com/article/20130712/SCBJ02/707129993
... The property was ultimately purchased for $1.275 million not long after Mars Hill Church purchased the 104-year-old First Congregational Church building in Tacoma for about $1.9 million. The organization is not shy about handling restorations of historic properties.

Seems to be true, but when did Mars Hill Everett get purchased?

https://www.snoco.org/proptax/(ndmj4bz14tatuwb0k4g3z445)/result.aspx
Property Account Summary
Parcel Number00439162701300Property Address2730 OAKES AVE , EVERETT, WA 98201-3628

Parties - For changes use 'Other Property Data' menu
RolePercentNameMailing Address
Taxpayer100MARS HILL CHURCH1411 NW 50TH ST, SEATTLE, WA 98107
Owner100MARS HILL CHURCH1411 NW 50TH ST, SEATTLE, WA 98107
Well ...

Property Sales (since 7/31/1999)
Transfer DateReceipt DateSales PriceExcise NumberDeed TypeGrantor (Seller)Grantee (Buyer)Other Parcels
1/30/20131/31/2013$0E021220 QCSTATE OF WASHINGTON MILITARY DEPT MARS HILL CHURCH No

Looks like it was January 30, 2013.  Why wait about a year and a half to thank Mars Hill Global publicly for real estate that was bought back in 2013? 

If there was no Mars Hill Global fund why thank it?  Or if there was one but there stopped being one why did Mars Hill Everett wait so long to issue a public thank you for a fund that either never existed to begin with or stopped existing at some indefinite time before or after the purchase? 

The gap between January 30, 2013 and June 5, 2014 seems kind of big. 

No comments: