HomeMy WebLinkAboutM Halfon - Fwd_ Oswit land trustFrom:Mary Lou Halfon
To:Planning; marylou46@icloud.com
Subject:Fwd: Oswit land trust
Date:Wednesday, July 24, 2024 1:52:49 PM
NOTICE: This message originated outside of The City of Palm Springs -- DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments
unless you are sure the content is safe.
Dear planning commission,
I would like to sign onto the letter below written by Angie Knapp. She has listed all the
issues that are pertinent to the situation with the land that is now owned by Oswit and
Palm partners.
My husband and I lived in Mesquite for 24 years. For years our association paid lease
payments the the owners of the land that was Mesquite Golf Club. The lease was
created when our condos were built. Open land was required by the city at the time
because of the density of our community . There are 600 units. The lease spelled out
what the land could be used for and how the land was to be maintained. Our lease
protected us from many attempts by developers to turn the land into more
apartments. Our lease had stood up in court. Nothing can change the terms of the
lease without a majority vote of the owners. Oswit bought the land on a silent sale
and gave back part of the land to the seller. They immediately expected the
250,000.00 per year lease payments . They did not adhere to the terms of the lease
nor did they try, before or after, to negotiate a new lease. They just proceeded to do
as they intended with no regard to the owners of the 600 units that surround the land.
They attempted to attend our HOA meetings to have a voice in our association. When
that did not work Prescott bought 2 units in order to attend board meeting and
influence owners. He lives in neither unit. He is not a member of our community.
They have shown disregard to home owners, the city, and the county. They ignored
permitting rules, dumped rocks and debris in a flood plain, ignored letters from the city
as to the need for the rocks to be removed. They just do as they please.
In light of all of that and the steady deterioration of the land as well as to the loss of
value of our condo, we put our unit on the market. We saw owners, both Jane and
Mr. Prescott, and Palm partners, who was paid 3 times the market value for the land
and able to retain 10 acres, with deep pockets and major influence in the city and the
failure of the city to enforce any regulations as a battle to hard to fight. Money and
influence are hard competition and that is what we have been facing since the
purchase of the land.
We so love Palm Springs so we bought another lovely place and are very happy with
it. However, it continues to sadden me to see the land become such an eyesore.
Many others would like to move but many can not afford to do so. The land itself is a
blight on all the surrounding neighborhoods. It has become less safe from animals
and people as well. It is frustrating to see the city so powerless to enforce its own
regulations. Letter after letter were ignored by Oswit and no consequences put
forward in the letter were ever put into effect. This is a very sad situation for the
owners in Mesquite as well as other surrounding communities.
Mary Lou Halfon
former owner of unit F37 phase 5 of MCCHOA
---------- Original Message ----------
Angie Knapp
Date: 07/24/2024 1:02 PM PDT
Subject:
nning Commission at planning@palmspringsca.gov
Subject: July 24 Agenda, Oswit Land Trust
I strongly encourage the Planning Commission delay a decision on Oswit’s request
for a minor amendment to PDD 153 to convert the former Mesquite Golf Course to a
nature preserve. I suggest it is premature.
I commend Brad Prescott for his extraordinary financial contributions to area non-
profits. I also commend Oswit for its efforts and commitment to land preservation.
However, the Oswit entity is very new and has no proven experience for what it has
planned. According to Oswit’s grant application and media statements, no one does
because no one has put a nature/wildlife preserve in the middle of a decades old,
high density, urban area.
I believe with the City, surrounding neighborhoods and Oswit working together with
flexibility and open minds, obstacles can be overcome so the final outcome is win-win
for all parties concerned. I support a preserve in concept, but I believe it is premature
and have concerns for the following reasons:
1. Original Intent. Purchase Agreement was originally between two real estate
developers. Seller-Palms Partners, is a real estate developer. Buyer, a Prescott
Apartment Company, is owned by Brad Prescott, a real estate developer.
2. MOU between Prescott and Oswit has a clawback clause under Article 10.
Frustration of Purpose. Prescott can take property back. What if he does for good
reason, sells to a real estate developer and donates the money to another project like
the Plaza Theater? Golf Course Conversion Ordinance would be unenforceable by
then.
3. Golf Course was open and golfers playing it until Buyer contractually required
Seller to close the golf course just days before sale. Sale closed 2 years ago, not 3.
Most of public believes the false information that the course was closed and
abandoned long before sale and the sale rescued it.
4. When Oswit announced the acquisition, it told the public it would be Central Park
West. Much public support comes from people believing it will be a green grass park
like Demuth.
5. Contrary to what the public believes, the property was not rescued from being filled
with housing. PDD 153, Golf Course Conversion Ordinance, and Mesquite Country
Club 90 year Lease Agreement prevent.
6. Prescott and Oswit contractually agreed as condition of sale that neither would
oppose housing plans by Seller for the parcel he retained. Seller already in
discussions to put up several rental apartments.
7. Puzzled that a permit can be granted for an entire parcel when Seller retained
portion of that parcel, it has not been subdivided and Seller is applying for a housing
permit.
I respectfully disagree this is a simple Minor Landscape Modification.
1. Can a project that requires at least $7 million dollars to come to fruition realistically
be simply a minor landscape modification?
2. Can a project never implemented anywhere in the middle of a densely populated
urban area be simply be a minor landscape modification?
3. Can a project that has the potential to negatively impact the property values of
1800 nearby homes simply be a minor landscape modification?
4. Can a project that has already brought in numerous truckloads of boulder piles
filled with painted concrete debris, without a permit, that people connected to Oswit
have publicly posted are for the purpose of giving coyotes hiding places just a few
feet away from homes, simply be a minor landscape modification?
A minor modification doesn’t address life/safety issues of the plan.
1. Has an independent wildlife expert been consulted to ensure the design minimizes
potential for human-coyote interaction for the benefit of humans AND coyotes? There
are documented incidents of hungry coyotes attacking dogs near/on the City bike
path easement.
2. What is the City’s liability if a child gets attacked walking on the City bike/walking
path easement?
3. Has design been evaluated for neighborhood protections under the federal Clean
Air Act?
Humans with COPD, asthma, valley fever concerns.
4. Has City considered impact of increasing traffic through the Desert Chapel
elementary school property with the new Information Center?
Finance/Compliance Questions and Concerns:
1. The County just filed a tax lien against Oswit for the preserve parcel it subleases
from Sunshine Villas. The Dec. and May real estate taxes are also past due with
penalties accruing on all the other parcels except New Mesquite leased parcel.
2. Oswit has been delinquent with the CA Attorney General since Nov 15, 2023. It
was notified first by form postcard and reminded by letter May 2024, it is not to solicit
funds while delinquent. However, the Oswit website has remained open for donations
and Oswit has actively solicited donations in its newsletters.
3. No grant money to restore appears to be on the horizon for restoration and grant
agencies don’t generally fund operating expenses.
4. Oswit expected the MCC HOA to continue $250,000+ annual payments under the
HOAs 90 year lease related to a golf course. MCC proceeded to litigation.5. Many of
us believe the current condition of the property violates the following PS
Municipal Codes:
11.72.170 - Property Maintenance
11.72.170(a) - Economic Welfare, Residential Attractiveness, Community
Character
11.72.170(b)(5) - Irrigation systems for planted area.
11.72.170(c) - Dead, decayed trees etc. Harbor rats/vermin. Fire hazard.
11.72.170(d) - Substantial lack of maintenance...viewable from by the public
and neighboring properties.
11.72.060 - Polluted Water...Algae
8.80.120 (2)(4)(5) - Blight
Thank you for the opportunity to provide input. I appreciate the difficult position the
City staff and Planning Commission are facing. I thank all for the time and thought
they have approached the project with. This is a very unique set of circumstances.
Angie Fiechtner Knapp,
Mesquite Country Club Owner