Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
PP-CUP-EA-CZ 16-280 - Correspondence - PDCC
C1T r CLERK/ SED F'A N DESEP °FC f 2018 MAR 14 PH I: 57 Date: March 14, 2018 To: City of Palm Desert Mayor: Sabby Jonathan City of Palm Desert City Council: Susan Marie Webber, Jan Harnik, Kathleen Kelly, Gina Nestande City of Palm Community Development Department: From: Jack and Marilyn Forney Subject: PD Golf Operations, LLC plans To construct 69 Condominiums on 30 acres of the Palm Desert Country Club (PDCC) Executive Course, requiring associated infrastructure construction in the same development and zone change request. We are writing to register the strongest possible objection to the proposed development plans of PD Golf Operations LLC . Opening Statement: The Palm Desert Country Club and family style atmosphere should prevail for one important reason; Located as it is in a first rate residential district that can serve as an inducement to home owning thereabouts because of the existing open space. The heart of our community would be torn out, by the proposed development resulting in environmental degradation, intensifying segregation, the expansion of community without concern for its consequences and undermining the vitality of our existing PDCC Community. LIST OF CONSTRUCTION OBJECTIONS AND IMPORTANT CONCERNS We recognize that every business is entitled to be successful, and it is the business owner's responsibility for success not surrounding property owners. In lieu of total closure, total blight, Toss of adjacent property values and development there are other viable solutions such as neighborhood parks, preserve open space to provide an important community resource for social and recreational activities, etc. The PDCC proposed development is a planned development without regard to it's surrounding area. In practice, zoning is used to prevent new development from interfering with existing uses and/or to preserve the "character of a community". Most importantly, zoning gives the community some control over its land uses, appearance, and quality of life in the future. The city's primary concern should be with protecting the interests of the existing residents who are directly impacted. In any case fairness is of prime importance, these facts are significant enough by themselves for the city to deny PDCC ownership a zone change and development on the Executive Course. We were told by one City Official that the 188 affected residents needed to learn to accept change and the possible rehabilitation of the former Executive Course, well that is nice in theory, but what if it were you and your home were forced to live next to a blight condition , your property was devalued because of the blight, the elimination ofa golf course you paid a premium price to live next to and being pressured into accepting a proposed development you know is not right ,wouldn't the meaning of a just society depend, then, on the PD City Council acting on your behalf. The proposed development is located in a predominantly residential area where occupiers could expect a level of amenity concurrent with the property. The use of the property that has the design of a beat -up old train car that has been converted into a modern sorts of a Condominium site introduces a diverse element that by reasons of the use is likely to result in noise, disturbance, nuisance and vehicular emission pollution to the detriment of neighbor's residential amenity, health and well-being. The internal circulation is isolated, with only one entrance, or otherwise connected with the rest of the community in few ways resulting in the site not meshing well with the greater community causing Residential Segregation. The site access proposals are not in accordance with acceptable standards and would lead to potential safety hazards. The proposals for internal circulation within the site are unacceptable and will create conflicts between pedestrians, cyclists, disabled people, adjacent properties and vehicular movements thereby creating a safety hazard. The proposed circulation is within 13-16 ft. of adjacent property lines. Our homes(Lusk Development ) were built with the back yards in the front and the front yards in the back, reason being that we purchased a home abutting a golf course and to have the golf course view and mountain views. The proposed development's internal access is one way and is crammed up against one side of the development within 13-16 ft of our rear property lines. Our bedrooms, living rooms and dining rooms are on this side and night and day will be exposed to sounds of traffic and pollution. The proposed 2 retaining walls asummed to protect adjacent properties from off the road vehicular traffic, in itself says the internal flow is of the development is DANGEROUS. Repeated requests to move the road access at least 30ft away from existing property lines has fallen on deaf ears. Use original proposed Internal Circulation!!! See Attachment One point which is controversial is the relevance in planning terms of the loss of a view. It is often said that "there is no right to a view". While that maybe correct in strictly legal terms, it does not mean that the loss of a view is necessarily irrelevant to planning. This proposed development's obstruction of our scenic views would be like the selling of an upstairs and moving into the basement, living in a perpetual blind shadow. The enjoyment of a view is an important part of the residential amenity to a neighboring property, and its loss will therefore have an adverse impact on the residential amenity of that property. Loss of a view from a public standpoint will also have a wider financial impact on a neighborhood, and such matters should to be taken into account where they are raised. The City of Palm Desert's Precise Plan Application States, "Site planning shall occur in a manner that minimizes (smallest degree) obstruction of scenic views from adjacent properties". This development does not meet the minimize definition. Walls and Fencing: Many adjacent properties have permanent fencing on their property lines. Proposed Chain Link Fence/Block Wall Perimeter Wall, 2 Retaining Walls will create a 4 wall situation in Section B of the proposed development. Additionally there are Headlight Walls, Screening Walls.Why would a development need to be enclosed by so many different sections of walls? Architectural Error? Example: Section B of the proposed development: 1. Permanent block wall on adjacent properties. 2. Proposed perimeter wall. 3. First retaining wall below proposed perimeter wall 4 feet plus high 660 ft long running from lot 203-191.4. Second retaining wall adjacent to first retaining wall 630 feet long running from lot 203-191 (See Attachment). We are asking for relief from any perimeter wall or retaining walls on section B of the proposed development. See Attachment. The proposed Retention basins pose risks of safety, and welfare. There is no proposed fencing around the Retention Basins. Failure to address the safety risks caused by these basins could and, more than likely will lead to more water -related child personal injuries or death. The public is effectively invited to spend time near basin facilities because they are located in parks, along bike trails, walking paths, next to playgrounds, etc., yet the applicant fails to recognize that frequent use will occur, and public safety has clearly not been a specific design objective. Do Retention Basins affect the value of your home and the ability to sell your home? First question would be to ask why are they there in the first place? Why Grading is a Concern: The Precise Plan Application states "Site planning shall be compatible with existing terrain" This development does not meet the site planning standard. The Executive Course is characterized by gentle mounds , slopes, dips and bunkers which will be destroyed by the grading for the proposed development Newly exposed soil can erode easily, If soil placed under a building is not dense enough or if the density varies too much, the building may settle and suffer damage. Excessive grading causes loss of natural vegetation and damages other natural resources for years to come. Even minor grading can change the way water drains across ones property, which can cause erosion problems for adjacent property owners. PDCC Executive Course has already suffered extensive grading by past ownership's. Previous ownership's whose grading of the Executive Course created a ground disturbance which initiated the disturbance of Fire Ants to surface. It has taken almost 10 years to get the disturbance of Fire Ants under control. Unlike other insects that sting only once, one fire ant can sting multiple times, which makes this pest particularly dangerous to small children and pets. Termites have become a prominent issue with past grading. With the current design concept, of a 24 wide access roadway, roundabout, 6ft perimeter walls, chain link fence , retaining walls, retention basins filled with decomposed granite, 8ft. wide cart path, 4ft. walking path, driveways, parking spaces, commercial stepping stones/pavers, structures of lath and plaster, screening walls, headlight walls, patios, swimming pools, pickle ball court and etc. this project has become a design of unbreathable type concrete products crammed into a cluster design in area to small for it s design as well as any substance that people introduce into the atmosphere that has a damaging effects on living things and the environment is considered air pollution...The Precise Plan Application states, "Site planning shall occur in a manner in which asphalt or concrete is minimized",this proposed development does not meet the standard. Where is the 49% open space999 9 The proposed development does not meet the City of Palm Desert General Plan under Allowed Land Use, Section 3.20 which states " Neighborhood preservation. Preserve and enhance the character of existing residential neighborhoods". Multi family unites are allowed on a limited basis, primarily along corridors. The proposed development is crammed between two single family residential streets. The rezoning of open space is anathema to us. To rehabilitate 30 acres of the PDCC Executive Course to a Development of 69 condos will erase the past of the PDCC Community and without the past there is no future. Open Space is a precious commodity, once it is built on it is gone forever. Palm Desert County Club ownership has set us on a path towards less less open space and more sprawl." Jack and Marilyn Forney 76831 Kentucky Ave. Palm Desert, California Section B Lot 199 cc: Eric Ceja Principal Planner Attachment: Section B Lot 199 PROPOSED PERIMETER WALL & RETAINING WALLS. ORIGINAL PROPOSED INTERNAL CIRCULAT1ION I r 1 •• • • • i.y Mil r.�r r~nQo- '1 1 rr 11-En. TRIM' C; V; :4 VI cCi)a� r { 0 0 C 0 (T021,69 •LI X3 (o/.• 169 ..141 'Xa) YC W M 2 x - 0 1. • .17 1 ■ sf Oro 1 "1r 8. i.i — RECEIVED CIYCOFFICE PAIN DESERT CA 1019 MAR 14 pH 1:57 RESUBMITTED TO CITY OF PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MARCH 22, 2018 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COM1VHSSION MEETING MARCH 14, 2017 FROM MARILYN FORNEY 76831 KENTUCKY AVE. PALM DESERT, CA. TOPIC PDCC PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT "SCENIC VIEW" "STRUCTURE OBSTRUCTIONS" 1 GOOD AFTERNOON, MY NAME IS MARILYN FORNEY, MY ADDRESS 76831 KENTUCKY AVE, PALM DESERT. MY HOME ABUTTS THE CLOSED EXECUTIVE COURSE , MY HOME ADJOINS SECTION B OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT. MY NEIGHBOR GERRY SCHLITZ AT 76845 KENTUCKY AVE., WILL BE HELPING ME. I PRESENTED A COPY OF MY PRESENTATION TO THE RECORDING SECRETARY FOR THE COMISSION PANEL AND STAFF MEMBERS. I WILL BE BE SPEAKING WITH REGARD TO THE PROPOSED STRUCTURES OBSTRUCTING OUR SECENIC VIEWS OF THE SANTA ROSA MOUTAINS TO THE SOUTH OF OUR HOMES , THEY ARE THE MOST PROMINENT AND WILL BE THE MOST VISUALLY IMPACTED BY THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT. OUR SCENIC VIEWS ARE JUST AS BEAUTIFUL AND COMPELLING AS THE MOUNTAIN RANGE IN THE MURAL ON THE WALL BEHIND YOU. THESE MOUNTAINS ARE 3.4 MILES FROM OUR HOMES AND THE BASE OF THE MOUNTAINS CAN BE REACHED IN 7 MINUTES, SO THEY ARE IN CLOSE PROXIMITY. WE CONTACTED THE PALM DESERT PLANNING DEPT. AND ASKED FOR THE DISTANCE FROM OUR REAR PROPERTY LINE TO THE CLOSEST STRUCTURE TO BE BUILT AND WERE TOLD 60 FEET. I CONSTRUCTED A POLE 18 FEET 4 INCHES HIGH, MAXIMUM HEIGHT FOR THE PROPOSED UNITS AND ATTACHED MARKERS AT THE 18 FEET 4 INCH, 15 FEET 6 INCH AND 12 FOOT LEVELS WHICH ARE PROPOSED HEIGHT LEVELS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT STRUCTURES. WE PLACED THE POLE 60 FEET FROM OUR REAR PROPERTY LINES TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSED GRADING AND RECORDED THE OBSTRUCTION OF OUR VIEWS WITH PICTURES DISPLAYED HERE. A GRAPHIC EXAMPLE CAN BE DISPLAYED BY PLACING THIS RENDERING OF A COMPLETED UNIT AT THE VARIOUS LEVELS ON THE PHOTOS UNDER OBSTRUCTED VIEWS AND THE RESULTS REFLECT A VIVID OBSTRUCTION OF OUR SCENIC VIEWS. OUR VIEW AT THE 12 FOOT LEVEL WAS OBSTRUCTED 65.2 %, AT THE 15 FOOT 6 INCH LEVEL OUR VIEW WAS OBSTRUCTED 84.4% AND AT THE 18 FOOT 4 INCH LEVEL OUR VIEW WAS OBSTRUCTED 100%. THE GRAPHIC CAN BE PLACED ON ANY ONE OF OBSTRUTED PHOTOS AND THE OUTCOME WOULD BE THE SAME. THIS SAME SCENARIO COULD BE APPLICABLE TO SECTIONS A AND C OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT. GENERALLY HOMEOWNERS DO NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO A VIEW UNLESS IT HAS BEEN GRANTED IN WRITING BY A LOCAL ORDINANCE, DEED RESTRICTION OR SUBDIVISION RULE. UNFORTUNATELY WE DO NOT HAVE ANY OF THESE. WHAT WE DO HAVE IS A PROTECTION OF OUR SCENIC VIEW UNDER THE PRECISE APPLICATION PLAN WHICH EACH NEW PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT MUST COMPLETE, SUBMIT TO THE CITY AND IS REVIEWED BY THIS COMMISSION FOR IT'S CONFORMANCE TO THE ADOPTED DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT. PRECISE APPLICATION PLAN ARTICLE 5 THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS: SECTION B: SITE PLANNING STANDARDS NUMBER ONE STATES: SITE PLANNING SHALL OCCUR IN A MANNER THAT MINIMIZES OBSTRUCTION OF SCENIC VIEWS FROM ADJACENT PROPERTIES. DEFINITION OF MINIMIZE IS TO REDUCE TO THE SMALLEST AMOUNT OR DEGREE. THIS PROPOSED PROJECT MAXIMIZES OBSTRUCTION OF OUR SCENIC VIEWS AS REFLECTED IN THE PHOTOS PRESENTED HERE. ADDITIONALLY, THERE IS NO VISUAL OBSTRUCTION BY LOCAL RESIDENTAL DEVELOPMENT AS REFLECTED IN THE PHOTOS PRESENTED HERE. I AM ASKING THIS COMMISSION TO RETURN THE PRECISE APPLICATION PLAN BACK TO THE APPLICANT MARKED "UNACCEPTALBE" BECAUSE IT DOES NOT CONFORM TO THE ADOPTED DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS OF THE CITY ❑F PALM DESERT. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME! Marilyn Forney If pools can be lowered 30 in. so can pad elevations. EXISTING VIEWS lir4-•• k % ' v. '4 g 1 1 -A •• ••• 1`. •4. . •• • ( • ' n' Alir ri,r. •40/1,1.4,0 • 'L t • • , . • 1!''10 111 ir • trt ; • $ ' I • • • ' , •%'• • • rye • f 7 A • row • 1. f '',11114 , / ••44, • • 11411.4 6 • AN, % A • • .,„ 4 )114*.4 4. •t• - 4 f V. 14 r • • 1. • t• • t 4 11 . t r 41.e. „ • •I • • a e • 4 rf`•„ t .• c a • 14 i 1 v o it. • • 4. A, . A. f • • • ••• OBSTRUCTED VIEWS I CONSTRUCTED A POLE 18 FEET 4 INCHES HIGH, MAXIMUM HEIGHT FOR THE PROPOSED UNITS AND ATTACHED MARKERS AT THE 18 FEET 4 INCH, 15 FEET 6 INCH AND 12 FOOT LEVELS. WE PLACED THE POLE 60 FEET FROM OUR REAR PROPERTY LINES TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSED GRADING AND RECORDED THE OBSTRUCTION OF OUR VIEWS WITH PICTURES DISPLAYED HERE. OUR VIEW AT THE 12 FOOT LEVEL WAS OBSTRUCTED 65.2 %, AT THE 15 FOOT 6 INCH LEVEL OUR VIEW WAS OBSTRUCTED 84.4% AND AT THE 18 FOOT 4 INCH LEVEL OUR VIEW WAS OBSTRUCTED 100%. a- s REC CITY CLERK SeOFFICE M DESERT', CA 2018 APR 72 AM 9: 49 3-31-2018 TO: CITY OF PALM DESERT, CITY COUNCIL MAYOR SABBY JONATHAN MAYOR PRE TEM, SUSAN MARIE WEBBER JAN HARNIK, COUNCIL MEMBER GINA NASTENDE, COUNCIL MEMBER KATHLEEN KELLY, COUNCIL MEMBER FROM: BARBARA POWERS , 76918 KENTUCKY AVE , PALM DESERT, CA 92211 760- 777-0065 I would like to discuss the results of the City Council Meeting 3-22-2018. After the Developers and Moe Sihota spoke, no one in the audience was allowed to refute statements .made if you had previously spoken. I find it is always a good idea to find the Truth In people's statements that go on record. There were several people that spoke and read letters that were put in the record. I wish to address those statements. 1. A gentleman by the name of Mark Catroppa addressed you as living at 77440 New Mexico. Mark Catroppa is Vice President of Monark Group, Surrey ,British Columbia. It appears he 10 About I Monapk Group x C 0 O Secure https:llwww.monark.comlabout/ - Home - Riverside As, ri Property Tax Portal > ID Property lnformatior Hi gpps Q MSN.tom - Hotmail, � outiook.com 9 ourr �' HOME ABOUT WHAT WE DO DIVISIONS GROUP SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT Mr. Catroppa is the Senior Vice President of Monark Group, obtaining his degree in Financial Management, as well as several years of management experience with various Federal Government regulatory bodies. Mr. Catroppa has provided strategic marketing initiatives and business development to several successful start-up companies in the technology sector and property development. His diverse portfolio of real estate developments has focused primarily on residential and commercial projects in British Columbia. Is part of this development. You may go to Monark Group Surrey, B.C. and you will find the Web page where he is listed as VICE PRESIDENT ( It is listed under ABOUT). If you go to Real Estate on Their web site and scroll down, you will find one of their, projects as PALM DESERT COUNTRY CLUB, and a picture of the club house. This has been in effect since they purchased the Property. The information about the web site was given to the city at the time of the first meeting with the community AS WELL AS THE CHART THAT SAID FOLLOW THE MONEY. Mark went on to say people were intimated to come to the meeting to read their Letters for the project. HE READ THE FOLLOWING LETTERS: A. He stated Mr. Robinson lived at 43155 Tennessee and was for the project. If you drive by this address you will see that it is near the 18 holes, however his home does not back up to the Executive Course or the 18 holes course. He is not part of our 188 homes. B. Mark read a letter from Heather Clark (77470 New Mexico) stating she was for the project. She was originally on their committee that was forming an opinion on the project. After the March 22 meeting, she was contacted in Canada and stated that she was not even aware that he was reading her letter as it was written several years ago. She is not intimidated. C. Mark read a letter in favor of the project from Debbie and Roger Bhatti. They said they lived near the old 8th hole on the Executive Course. We were unable to find anyone that was an owner by either name. However we did find a Roger Bhatti listed in the Canada lawyerlist_com, Located at 203-8556 120 st. , British Columbia. This name was listed an attorney in B.C. Mark read two letters where people were visiting Ruth. and Harry Prince and a Phil Gooch. He stated they were for the project. We could not find any ownership with in the 188 homes. He commented on the Princes .We did find a "PRINCE TRUST" listed on Kansas, not sure if it is the same person as he was referring to but Kansas is neither on the executive course nor part of the 188 home owners. 2. Statements made by Moe Sihota: The 218 Lighting proposal was not forwarded to the City because the people did not want it. Mr. Sihota failed to post his financials, web site and other items he promised. The people were unable to vote on this item. Mr. Sihota failed to bring this proposal back to the city in October that year. It is so noted on city records. The OPEN SPACE ACTION COMMITTEE WAS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS ITEM FAILING. 3. Moe Sihota stated that people on the executive course have come to change their minds about the project because the council chambers are not filled is complete non -sense. The problem: It was Easter Vacation for a lot of people and also that people read the agenda and thought this project item was going to be heard after 6:30 p.m. The Council started hearing the project a little after 5pm. People that came at 4 pm left, and were intending to come back to 6 :30 p.m. Quite a few homeowners were stranded on the coast due to the rain storm and did not want to attempt the drive. 4. Moe Sihota was discussing his committee that originally formed this project. The following were the members of his committee.. Members: Jack Forney , (WHO IS AGAINST THIS PROJECT) Kay Adamson( JOINED OPEN SPACE ACTION COMMITTEE) AGAINST THE PROJECT. Larry Guardanapo (`Lived at 43080 Illinois, not on the Executive Course,but he sold his home and moved away. Laurie Pike 77305 Minnesota Not on the Executive Course. She moved to the high desert. Shirley Hotwagner 77075 New York , Not on Executive course Heather Clark Lives on New Mexico when not in Canada. She owns on the parcel that can not be built on. There is a recorded deed restriction with the apartment owners on California. City of Palm Desert has a copy. Bella DeCou Lives on Oklahoma. She was for the project , many letters in staff report but all the same letter. So as you can see there was only one person for this project that lived on the Executive Course for this project. 5. TRAFFIC REPORT. We have continually asked for a new traffic report.. Email sent to Ryan Stendell the day they left the measuring equipment up for 1 day in 2016. Recently I sent a complaint about the traffic trying to get out of PDCC between 8 and 9 am in the morning. No response. It was sent to Ryan Stendell. Sometimes you have to sit through 2 lights because there are so many cars trying to turn left or right. Since there are over 100 STR's in PDCC, the tennis tournament, Coachella, and Stage Coach you would think it would be prudent for a new Traffic Study. 6. A PERSONAL CONCERN. The Tract Map for parcel A Lot 180 shows a 6 foot fence at my property line with a walking path, then another fence. After that there is a retaining wall and then another fence. Ron Moreno, the head engineer for the City of Palm Desert came out to my property and verified these facts. He said the final fence was to keep cars from coming on to our patio from the curve of road. HELLO, DOES ANY ONE REMEMBER THE HOUSE AT KANSAS AND HOVLEY WHERE 4 DIFFERENT TIMES A CAR WENT THROUGH A 6 FOOT FENCE AND THE CITY BOUGHT THE PROPERTY AND PUT IN A WATER RETENSION AREA. That means I have a road closer to my home than the 40' feet set back as listed in the plans. Because the previous Developer was allowed by the City to add 4 feet of dirt behind my house I will have no view. I am looking forward to some of the Council visiting our property. 7. ONE MORE ITEM: Phyllis Harkins stated she was for this project. She has no skin in the game as she lives on Missouri, not on the executive course. She has not been the Director with HOA for almost two years. I hope some of these concerns will be addressed. I have always cared about our whole community since f moved here. 1. I was a volunteer with Palm Desert Police for almost 12 years as the PAL SECRETARY, (when Pat S. retired). PAL and PALM DESERT CC MEMBERS raised money every year for families that were in dire need at Christmas time. 2. I helped form our Neighborhood Watch for Kentucky, Oklahoma, and Tennessee. It is still active. 3. Until last year 1 put together the CRIME REPORT for the HOA that is posted in their office once a month. 4. I volunteered at the Living Oesert for several years. 5. For 12 years I was a volunteer for PAWS AND HEARTS. 6. Volunteer for Desert Jr. Golf 1984-1996. I have always been interested in the City of Palm Desert and residents welfare. I have attended Area 4 meetings, Architectural Committees, Planning Meetings and Council Meetings. Code knows me well as 1 often call regarding Community problems. I am the recording secretary for OPENSPACE ACTION COMMITTEE. Lastly, I now volunteer for EISENHOWER MEMORY CARE CENTER. We were paying members of the PDCC from 1992 until 2010 when my husband was diagnosed with Dementia. If our neighbors are in trouble you can bet that they will be helped by a neighbor. We are a very caring bunch out here. Please do not divide us. Please deny this zone change. This project is absurd. Sincerely, Barbara Po�ers March 26.2018 City of Palm Desert City Council Sabby Jonathan, Mayor Susan Marie Weber, Mayor Pro-Tem Jan Harnik, Council Member Kathleen Kelly, Council Member Gina Nestande, Council Member RECEIVED CITY CLERK'S OFFICE PALM DESERT. c A 2618 PPP . 2 AM 9: 50 Subject: Palm Desert Country Owner's (Moe Sihota) Failure To Comply Mr. Sihota has taken the opportunity at the P17 Planning Commission Public Hearing, December 19, 2017 and the PD City Council Public Hearing, March 22, 2018 to publicly infer that the Open Space Action Committee is responsible for the failure of his proposed Landscape and Lighting District. Outlined in the Staff Report presented to the PD City Council on October 10, 2013, I' lr.Sihota and the owners of PDCC are salty- responsible for the failure of their own proposal. Senior Management Analyst Ryan Stendell recalled for the Council this item was heard at the April 11, 2013, meeting and was ultimately continued to the October meeting to allow the Owners of Palm Desert County Club (PDCC) to do outreach. Ile said the Applicant offered to create a website and meet with neighbors, and the direction from Council was clear in that it wanted a high level of community support before venturing down the path of forming a landscape and lighting district. As noted in the staff report, there were five bullet points crucial to the proposals by the Applicant, yet none of the promises made at the April meeting have occurred at this point. He said staff continues to receive phone calls and emails from residents asking when those promises will be met, yet it's the burden belongs to the PDCC ownership. Staff will continue to support the assessment idea if and when there is a high level of community support. After the staff report was drafted, an email from the Applicant was received outlining reasons why they haven't complied with the promised items of the April meeting and asking for additional time to comply; the email was distributed to the Couna. Councilman Spiegel asked if the Applicant was aware of staff's recommendation and should this item be continued. Mr.Stendell replied the Applicant was made aware of staff's recommendation of denial, and continuing to a date uncertain would achieve the same thing. Councilman Spiegel moved to, Minute Motion, deify the request to begin the process of forming a Landscape and Lighting District (LLD) for homes located on the fairways of Palm Desert Country Club (PDCC). Mayor Harnik stated Mr. Sihota said he was going to put up a website and he didn't, but he could have at least posted the dates the financials and course redesigns would be available. She said there have been no communication, and the people out there probably feel insecure about the whole matter because it affects their home. She said it was not okay to leave people hanging, yet we all knew something had to be done, but it didn't appear it was moving in that direction. Mayor Harnik called for the vote and the motion carried by a 5-0 vote." Mr. Sihota and the PDCC Owners denied the PDCC property owners their right to vote on the their proposal. Respectively Submitted, Open Space Action Committee Barbara Powers, Serena Ilik, Sue Adamson, Cindy Stevenson Attachments: April 11, 2013 City Council Minutes October 10, 2013 City Council Minutes Moe Sihota's Letter MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 11, 2013 For Adoption: 1. ORDINANCE NO. 1256 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING CHAPTERS 5.87, 5.90, 25.04, 25.10, AND 25.38 OF THE PALM DESERT MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING MASSAGE ESTABLISHMENTS AND MASSAGE PRACTITIONERS. Councilman Spiegel recused himself from this item and left the Council Chamber. Councilman Tanner moved to waive further reading and adopt Ordinance No. 1256. Motion was seconded by Benson and carried by a 4-0 vote, with Spiegel ABSENT. XIV. NEW BUSINESS A. CONSIDERATION OF THE APPROVAL OF BEGINNING THE PROCESS OF FORMING A LANDSCAPE AND LIGHTING DISTRICT FOR HOMES LOCATED ON THE FAIRWAYS OF PALM DESERT COUNTRY CLUB (PD Golf Operations, LLC, d.b.a. Palm Desert Country Club, Applicant). Senior Management Analyst Ryan Stendell noted the staff report, supporting documentation, and correspondence from community members in the Council's packet. Some important key points were that tonight was not a vote to form a Landscape and Lighting District (LLD), but to consider whether to allow the process of formation to occur, which hinges on a vote of the community before the City Council could accept such an assessment district. Major questions by community members hinged upon community support and timing of the ballot. Staff recommended a 55% threshold for approval, because staff felt that a large amount of community support should be there before taking on this process_ Secondly, the timing of the ballots is a concern. Even though the assessed formation requires ballots to be mailed to mailing addresses wherever the permanent tax address would be, staff heard complaints that a summer time vote wasn't ideal. The staff report provided a time line with ballots going out in late May and the voting period going through the middle of July. However, the process can be postponed with the vote taking place in the next fall/winter when everyone was in town. Staff believes these are the two key issues with how to structure the matter if the Council wished to go through with the formation process and allow a vote to go out. He's had about 50 to 75 various contacts from community members in the last several weeks with the largest portion by phone calls, second by emails, and thirdly by letters; copies of emails and letters were provided in Council's agenda packet. The majority of emails and letters were negative with the two most common themes being that they liked what PDCC had done by getting the place opened, and the maintenance looked good, but they didn't feel taxation was the right way to go about it. The second theme 8 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 11, 2013 was that it wasn't right in any shape or form to subsidize a private business In conclusion, he noted the lengthy memo from Wildan Financial Services. He said staff believed the assessment district as proposed by Wildan could fit within the confines of the boundaries of the 1972 Act AD and Proposition 218. He said Wildan's report went into details on how that could happen, and a representative was in attendance to answer any questions. Additionally, owner representation for PDCC, LLC was in attendance and wished to make a statement. Mayor Pro Tem Benson said it would be helpful if staff explained the City's position, because what she has read in the newspaper was not true_ She said it would be wise for the community to know the City was not promoting this matter. Mr. Stendell stated the previous owner of the golf course went out of business, and the golf course was not maijsltained for quite some time. Prior to purchasing the property, the current owners approached the various departments of the City doing their due diligence and going through the normal process, and they had inquired about a potential assessment district. Staff from various departments indicated to the current owners that no purchase should be considered based on an assessment district, because no guarantees could be given. The approach of the current owners at that point was to establish a track record with the community, demonstrate their long-term commitment, maintain the facility, and potentially later talk about the formation of an assessment district. He said a bit of time has passed and the ownership has approached the City again inquiring about staff's position for formation of a Landscape and Lighting District (LLD). He said first and foremost staff wants to see significant community support, but if the City didn't have to be involved with this, it would surely be the best solution. However, based on community input, telephone calls, and his communication with the owners, staff has learned the HOA is fractured, it does not include the entire golf course; therefore, that option is out. Staff looked at a Community Facility District (CFD), which could work, but it wouldn't fit as well as a Landscape and Lighting District. It turns out that if there is community support for an assessment of some kind, a Landscape and Lighting District involving the City would be the only way to achieve it. Therefore, staff is here today asking whether or not the City should participate in that process. Councilman Tanner stated the Landscape and Lighting District requires an approval of 51%, but staff was proposing 55% of the ballots cast, and the Community Facility District (CFD) requires a 2/3 vote of the total. Mr. Stendeli agreed, stating the two major differences between the CFD and LLD, is the simple majority versus 2/3 on the voting requirements. With the LLD, the ballots go to the registered property owner, where as with the CFD 9 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 11, 2013 the ballot went to the tenant. Further responding, he clarified that the votes are based on ballots received in both districts. MR. MOE SIHOTA, Palm Desert Country Club Managing Director, stated he would respond to matters that have been raised, but first noted that if there was a vehicle apart from involving the City, they would have preferred that as well. In fact, they would have preferred going through the HOA, but as staff indicated, the HOA didn't represent the entirety of the homes in the area; therefore, by law, the only other option was to approach the City to administer the vote. He said they were not asking the City to take a position one way or the other, but simply asking for a vote to be held so that the community can express their opinion. The issue today, based on the staff report, is whether the Council should put the assessment question to a vote, which they think it should. They are fully aware of the strong opinions on both sides with to an 010.0�J�1I ICA (L. Some people feel very strongly in the community that there shouldn't be any„,,,,); etc,, provided to a business who purchases an asset on their own volition, and there are others in the community who say PDCC has done a good job and is worthy of support from the homeowners. Be that as it may, the community needs to hear those arguments and evaluate the information to make a decision. As a Course owner, they need to plan for future golfing seasons with or without an assessment. However, he read the staff report, and he has a number of concerns and suggestions to offer, most of which relate to the question of timing. His first concern is that there is now new information, as contained in the Wildan report, that Game out on Monday, which was the first time he saw it. He was sure many hadn't had the opportunity to study or inquire about it, and there will be staff reports and engineering reports to come. Therefore, a lot of fresh information needs to be shared and made accessible and circulated within the time frame noted in the staff report. He said PDCC recently had an Open House, and community members made requests for information about their revenue and expenses. Therefore, PDCC is creating a single web page that will consolidates all the information so that people can make an educated and informed decision. The web page will contain their financial information, because they think it's fair that it is disclosed. The web page will be easily accessed through a link to the existing golf course website. He said community members also asked for their corporate and ownership structure, maintenance, electricity, and water costs, therefore, that information will also be posted. He also received inquires as to how the assessment numbers were arrived at, how one can prevent the assessment from getting bigger over time, and how the assessment will work. Therefore, he will post Wildan's report, City staff reports, and other technical information that exist and is to come. Other questions included where PDCC would be putting new waste bunkers, desert landscaping, and impact to their views. Again, all this information will be included in the web page so that people can see the impact it will have on their own individual neighborhoods. Additionally, there will be a Q&A page that deals with questions like, "Why 10 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 11, 2013 can't you just increase revenue?" or "How has the course helped increase property values?" He said PDCC recently sent out a written notice to property owners providing them with a PDCC email address so that community members can propose any question, and he will personally call them back. To date, given the emails received, they have been able to respond within two days. He said, hopefully through that process, they can deal with the issues of information to ensure it is properly and fully shared. However, his concern remains that the engineering report will not be completed until May 9, and he didn't know if it will have errors/omissions and/or raise unforeseen issues. He said it would be unwise to set the date for a vote today and have the ballots go out on May 27th when the report itself won't be ready until May 9. He said prudence and caution indicates all reports and information should be in hand before setting a date. Although he preferred an early vote, he understood a delay to November could happen, but emphasized the information needs to be final and accurate before proceeding in July rather than in November. He is also concerned about the 55% threshold for a vote. Needless to say, if 46% were in favor of an assessment, PDCC wouldn't have thought to approach the City to have that opinion prevail. Yet on the other side of the coin, if 36% voted against, the way the recommendation is structured, that opinion would prevail. He said they preferred, in fairness, to follow the simple majority of 50% plus one, but they understood the decision rested on the City Council, and in spite of their comments on the staff report, they understood the.reasoning behind staffs recommendation. He said PDCC will live with whatever determination is made in that regard. Lastly, they used the County Assessor information to mail information to property owners, and about 2% of community members indicated they never received anything from PDCC. He hoped there was some mechanism where they can ensure all property owners are contacted and receive their ballots, and hoped City Staff can assist with this issue. Therefore, today from PDCC perspective, it was asking the Council to approve staffs recommendation to hold the vote, reflects and await on the engineer's report before finalizing the date, and reflect on whether the appropriate threshold is 50% or 55%. In the end, the central issue for PDDC is relatively straightforward. The Course was built in the 1960's when land was plentiful and water was cheap. The Course is 170 acres and PDCC maintains it all, and they do it with pride. He noted that most courses in the area average 110 acres. The revenue from the Course is sufficient to maintain 110 acres and provide a reasonable return on investment, and they can maintain 110 acres in a way that preserves the aesthetics for the golfers and provides a great golfing experience. In fact, they were just nominated as one of the best public courses in the Coachella Valley, and they intend to keep it that way, but the remaining 60 acres are maintained to preserve the aesthetic for homeowners and not the golfer. Therefore, by way of survey, they have gone to the homeowners and asked if they liked the way the golf course was maintained today, and 90% of the people who responded said yes. They asked then if they would be agreeable to covering some of the 11 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 11, 2013 maintenance cost, and 70% said yes. They also asked how much they were willing to pay, and 62% responded between $20 and $25; he noted Wildan's report was just outside of that range. He said the survey disclosed that most indicated an assessment would help protect property values and avoid the problems of the past, and PDCC would like confirmation of that by way of vote. If the vote passes, they will maintain the lands for the benefit of both the homeowner and the golfer. If the vote fails, they will maintain it for the benefit of the golfer, and PDCC would just like to know one way or the other so it can plan accordingly. He reiterated PDCC would like to proceed with a vote and get direction from the community one way or the other. Councilman Spiegel asked if PDCC planned to only maintain 110 acres if the vote failed. MR. SIHOTA answered yes, but he wasn't going to be that precise. He said the way the golfing industry is structured here in the Valley, most courses are 110 acres and they do reasonably well, and he knew they could do the same. He said the Club went out of the way this year to demonstrate to the community what can be done, and for the community to decide whether or not they want to go to that extra level. if they do, it will be by way of an assessment. He said they are proud of what they have been able to accomplish. In fact, just yesterday, people stopped and thanked them for what has been accomplished, because they know. what the course looked like before and what it is now. Councilman Spiegel asked if it was feasible to take the additional acreage and make it drought tolerant if the vote failed. MR. SIHOTA explained no matter what the vote is, there will have to be a level of desert landscaping and waste bunkers, and those plans will be shared on the website. He said they will also have to deal with the difficult question of the Executive Golf Course that takes up a lot of land and time, which the City asked that it be maintained. Therefore, there will be challenges to face if the vote doesn't go through, but the community likes the way the Course is, and he hopes to get their consent to maintain it with their participation. if it happens, great, but if it didn't, they will have to live with it. Mayor Harnik inquired about the monthly assessment amount. MR. SIHOTA responded the report from Wildan quotes $26.15 of which 10% of that, $2.62, would be Administrative cost of having the City involved. In response to the question as to why the City was involved, he said it was PDCC suggestion to involve the City, because it would be wrong if the money went directly to PDCC to be applied in whatever fashion it wanted, and by having the City receive the funds, it would ensure the assessment went for 12 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 11, 2013 the maintenance, which would be to PDCC benefit in any event. He said it would be better than simply turning cash over to PDCC. Mayor Harnik asked if there was any type of escalator. MR. SIHOTA answered yes, stating it was at the rate of inflation. However, he wasn't persuaded that over a measure of time that would be required. Going back to Councilman Spiegel's question, he said one could argue that if they did a higher level of desert scape and waste bunkering, the actual assessment could drop, but it will depend on what will be put into those areas, which is clearly an exercise that PDCC still had to go through with the community. He said by disclosing their plans at the front end on their web page, they should be able to protect against any increases in the assessment. Mayor Harnik said she was aware of how wide and expansive those greens were and asked if the plan was to bring in the amount of grass and put zero soaping on the sides or just maintain it with sod_ MR. SIHOTA explained the whole Course couldn't be maintained with that much sod, stating that even if one did, given what's happening with water and electricity rates, it was inevitable one wouldn't be able to maintain it tomorrow. To be frank, they knew going into this, they would either have to shrink the course by putting in a lot of waste bunkers and desert scape, shrink the -land base further, or go through an assessment where the costs are shared. Therefore, if the assessment were to pass, he envisioned a level of desert scape, waste bunkers, and some green space, stating it was in evitable they would have to go with that design. Councilman Tanner said people in the audience had written letters with concern over having an assessment placed on their real estate tax and questioned whether that was the only way to effectively make this work. MR. SIHOTA replied community would be assessed twice a year when their property taxes are paid, which was his understanding, He went on to say that one of the reasons they decided to disclose their financial information, is that people need to understand the assessment didn't represent a windfall for PDCC. He said the assessment represented a level of thought on PDCC to try to arrive at a reasonable number that recognized the need on the part of the public to try to maintain some semblance of aesthetics around their homes, as well as recognizing the challenges faced as an operator. He said they felt bad that this had resulted in a level of acrimony in the community, and they will do their best to reduce that temperature by sharing the information that has been requested. He said PDCC will be attentive to what people have to say and look at the results. 13 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 11, 2013 Mayor Harnik rioted there were quite a few speaker cards on this matter and asked that comments be limited to three minutes, stating that if a comment/point was already made, it didn't need to be repeated so as to provide everyone an opportunity to speak. She noted she had read all the emails and letters submitted, understanding this was an emotionally charged issue. Therefore, she asked that everyone show courtesy to the speakers and allow them to voice their comments. MS. BARBARA POWERS, Kentucky Avenue, Palm Desert, stated she wants everyone to read the staff report, because the Applicant did a great job with the golf course, but she was concerned about the 15-feet easement that PDCC would like to take. She shared she did neighborhood watch for most of the area, especially the area that's not in the association, and in the past, they have dealt with all kinds of trouble with kids partying, and if the easement becomes public use, homeowners will have to deal with kids, bicycle riders, and dog walkers. She said it was a great neighborhood watch that focused on the front of the house, but if they had to watch the back area, who was going to enforce it, because the wonderful police department helped to get rid of those problems. Therefore, she didn't know how owning 15-feet on both sides of every fairway was going to help. She said the blue area outlined in the map that was included with the staff report represented the 15- feet easement she was talking about, which is to be filled with either desert landscape or grass. Additionally, there are entryways onto the golf course without going through gates, which is where all the kids come through, and once they find out the area is public again, there will be problems. She said at one time there were as many as 200 kids running through her yard, but not since Mr. Sihota has been in charge. MR. BILL COTE, Florida Avenue, Palm Desert, stated that at the last meeting the Applicants held at the Country Club, those in attendance were told that if the assessment wasn't approved, property values would be negatively affected because of the ups and downs in the golf course, which sounded to him like a threat. He said to force the community to do something with a threat was extortion, and he didn't like the City even considering a LLD and putting it to a vote, which was basically rewarding a crime, stating the owners shouldn't be rewarded but arrested. He indicated on the speaker card that his position on this issue was neutral, but that's because he wants to ensure there are limits on the assessment if the vote goes through. He said if the Course becomes so profitable that the community's help is no longer needed, there should be a limit. He said the Applicants are begging the community for money, which was almost like public housing where if the person starts making too much, they are kicked out and no longer provided subsidy. He said it was the same here with PDCC wanting subsidies from the public, so there needs to be a limit on the assessment. 14 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 11, 2013 MR. DAVID GALIE, Texas Avenue, Palm Desert, stated he lives and owns his home of three years and is familiar with the history of Palm Desert Country Club. He questioned if the 55% approval vote meant 840 households or 55% of the number who vote. In other words, if 400 people out of 800 vote, 220 votes would carry the day. Councilman Tanner answered yes, stating that was the way it was explained to him. MR. GALIE said that didn't sound very favorable to his fellow neighbors who probably wouldn't go along with that process, and it was not a representation of democracy. He said the owner promised all these wonderful things, but he hasn't received a response to his written letter. In fact, he hadn't heard about this 15-feet easement until this morning, and he tries to stay involved. He said the idea that 40%, 70%, or 80% of the people voted in favor by some survey offered by the PDCC management is not a valid number and cannot be accepted. He said the Council will find that opposition is far greater, and the community will hold the City responsible if it persisted with a vote. He said people will assume the Council did it for a reason for going against community wishes, and when ballot time comes, they will vote accordingly. Additionally, the website that this owner is offering is too little too late. He believes the community should have their own meetings, then the community can return to the Council with their decision on whether to double their payments by implementing a self-imposed tax from $25 to $50 per month, or not, but it should be the community communicating with the City and not the owners of the golf course who have their own agenda. MR. RICHARD DODSON, Illinois Avenue, Palm Desert, stated he enjoys a 60-foot frontage along the fairway of the 17th hole. He attended the evening meeting held at PDCC Clubhouse on March 24. At that meeting, they were informed the golf course was 170 acres, and when compared to the other golf courses averaging 110 acres in area, it was at a competitive disadvantage in terms of the required green space maintenance. At that time, he understood the problem involved the additional maintenance of discreet pockets of green space, which were out of play, and as the presenter said, "never saw a ball." He said it would have been helpful if the presenter had provided a planned graphic indicating exactly the areas considered out of play and unnecessary use to the golf course. Had they done so, rather than waving their arms and speaking in generalities, it would have been clear that sandwiched in between the 18 links of the main golf course was a second nine -hole executive golf course, which should have been subtracted from the 170 acres. He found it hard to believe the presenters didn't consider that option and probably ruled it out, preferring to work with the 170 acre number rather than a lesser number. He left that meeting with the impression that it was more smoke and mirrors than one of clarity. Yesterday, he read a neighbor's copy of the City's staff report and 15 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 11, 2013 learned for the first time that a 15-foot easement running along both sides of the fairways was being considered for the basis of the LLD taxation of 180 homeowners fronting the golf course. He questioned how this matter went from street pockets of unnecessary green space to the proposed creation of this taxation easement for partial green space maintenance, and why and how did they arrive at 15 feet. The report also suggests that homeowners paying for the partial grounds maintenance would be able to make use of the easement, but it was not specific as to what that use would be. For example, would the 850 paying homeowners allowed to walk their dogs on the grounds they are maintaining in this easement, which is an activity currently not allowed on the private property of the golf course. He understood the golf course owners were pushing for a vote in May, at a time when many homeowners are out of town, but glad to hear they agree with his view to postpone the vote to November. He said if the vote was proposed now, community members would not have sufficient information or clarity to vote wisely. MR. LOUIS GRINBAUM, Illinois, Palm Desert, pointed out that even though these are golf course homes being discussed, many residents are low-income and on limited funds and cannot afford an extra $25 a month to help out a private business. He came across one lady who couldn't afford air conditioning, and everyone knew how vital that is in the desert; she had to have public subsidy assistance. Therefore, when considering this issue, don't just think about the snow birds who can afford $25 to $30 a month, but those whom this fee will make a big impact. He made the comment that he would be happy to take an extra 15 feet of property and willing to pay property tax on it as well, stating a lot of people would enjoy the same opportunity, which was another option to consider. He said the HOA monitored the golf course, and if it's not up to standards, homeowners do get written up. MR. BRENDAN GORDON, Minnesota Avenue, stated he has lived at his residence since 1977, and he and his neighbor did not receive a survey. He's concerned that the information given out is not including some. Additionally, he is Canadian, and he usually is home by now, but he stayed an extra week to attend this meeting. He said it took two weeks for mail from Palm Desertto arrive in Canada, and another two weeks to return, therefore, he urged the Council to allow for at least six weeks of time to submit a vote. In doing a quick calculation of the assessment at $26.15 per house multiplied by 12 months, it amounts to $265,000 a year of additional revenue to the owners, which raises the value of the golf course up between $3 and $4 million. He asked if there was a way of stopping the taxation if the golf course was sold, because if he personally owned a golf course that could make $3 or $4 million tomorrow, he would sell it. As far as he understood it, there was no way of stopping this taxation. 16 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 11, 2013 MR. CHARLIE ASH, New York Avenue, Palm Desert, stated he was concerned with some of the factors on this matter. He said the easement was a new development to him as he just learned about it yesterday. He posed a question to the City Attorney as to how that would affect the green belt that was established at PDCC over the years, stating that in this last election, property was approved and sold to housing, setting it aside in perpetuity as a green belt. He wondered if this easement affected the green belt or not. He was also concerned this issue was on a fast track, which can cause things to happen or not happen that should. He suggested taking our time in doing this right. Additionally, he pointed out that all of the houses in that area are 6,000 square feet with the exception of the new 1995 homes, which are 5,100 square feet. He said if an assessment is considered, everyone should have the same assessment, because if it's based on the frontage, he had 30 feet, and it would be unfair to someone else that didn't have the same amount of property. He said the survey by PDCC concerned him as well, because many didn't get it. He keeps hearing these percentages based on the survey that indicated 75% voted a certain way, yet who verified its accuracy. He said the City is taking action based on these percentages and wondered if City staff checked them for accuracy. Otherwise, anyone can come to the City with their own survey and the City is willing to believe it. He said more homework was needed before ending this issue, and he agreed that there are a lot of people who can't afford that additional payment. MR. FREDERIK LEEGER, Texas Avenue, stated he was a permanent resident for more than 25 years at Palm Desert Country Club, and he's seen the ups and downs of the golf course. He came to this open forum to express his strong opposition to this taxation, because he and his neighbors are living on parcels adjacent to the golf course, His backyard has a view of the 8th hole, which is nice and green like many other golf courses in the Coachella Valley, making the comment that it was a reality show of golf and money. He said PD Golf Operations, LLC, is a Canadian outfit that is self-serving and a moneymaking operation with a staff of lobbyist and financial advisors that are promoting a scheme of assessment to pay for operating expenses. He said it was all about money, and with all due respect, he had a lot of Canadian friends and people that enjoyed that. Indirectly, they get support from the HOA, because there are a few people that like to play golf and they like to play it on the cheap. He said feedback from a phoney survey claimed there was great support for an assessment in the majority of Local golfers. Who else, but the golfers that voted in this phoney survey, and he was one of the exceptions to oppose it, but many of his neighbors never opened their mail. He said many of the homeowners are residents and non golfers. He questioned, who did PDCC, LLC, think they were, because there are plenty of golf courses in the Coachella Valley. Thanks to plenty of water and sunshine there is plenty of play as long as you pay the price. The business community in the Valley welcomes the snow birds from all over the Country, 17 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 11, 2013 and it supports local economy. As a non -golfer, he will not pay any assessment or tax to support the money hungry management company out of Canada. MS. CONNIE SWANSON, Florida, Palm Desert, thanked the City Council for having this meeting. She expressed concern about a special district for landscape and lighting, stating that if this was allowed for a private golf course, even a private owner for a public golf course, what is to keep the City from another district like a shopping mall that needs painting and landscaping, will the homeowners be assessed again. She couldn't see how citizens could be assessed for a private corporation, stating it was a conundrum. She said if the golf club can no longer maintain the 60 acres, she suggested the club give those acres to the City as the residents are already taxpayers paying higher fees because they live on the golf course. She said if the City owned the property, it will have an interest in this public course and to clean is parks and recreation facilities. The City will then have a right to assess. She said if the golf club didn't want to deed the 60 acres to the City, they might consider deeding it to the property owners. However, deeding it to property owners could be a myth with all the assessments and bickering. She said the acres belonged to the City, and the Council as elected officials are trusted by the community, and they had the power and capability to solve this problem. MR. JIM LAWSER, New York Avenue, Palm Desert, provided a photograph of the area behind his fence, the grass that is nonexistent, demonstrating what a poor job they've done of maintaining eight feet of dead grass. Additionally, when the grass is mowed, it throws dead head sticker onto his yard. Therefore, since they did a bad job of maintaining the area thus far, it would do no good to have PDCC take it over and be reimbursed for it, stating the City would get more complaints than its worth. He also disagreed with Mr. Sihota's assessment of the survey that most people are in favor of an assessment, because he had a copy of it and most who were in the majority was conditional, but the conditions are not mentioned so he didn't think it was valid. There were suggestions like free golf to be included in the package, and Mr. Sihota didn't include it in the assessment. Therefore, the survey included a lot of people that are not actually for it. He said the City shouldn't be involved in something this controversial. MS. TERESA LAWSER, New York Avenue, Palm Desert, thanked the Council, City Attorney, City Manager, and especially Ryan Stendell who has been amazingly professional in this process. She understood everyone had very hard jobs as she and her husband worked for state government in Colorado for nearly 30 years. She has crossed out a lot of items off her list, stating there was a better understanding on the time line with the concern over a vote in the summer. The LLD was touched upon by Mr. Stendell on whether Proposition 218 was the right vehicle, but it was something that will 18 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 11, 2013 be figured out. She was not in favor of the assessment, but read a LLD is established for offsetting cost to beautify neighborhoods, and could also be expanded and allowed for a broader assessment if there was a broader benefit found. in other words, at a minimum, all the houses in Palm Desert County Club should be assessed and not just the ones bordering the golf course, because the house across the street will have the value of their home go up. She said there is a broader community benefit, therefore, the wealth or the debt should be shared. She pointed out that an annual $300 assessment would pay for two months of her husband's Parkinson's medicine, stating that was a lot of money for her household. She said if there was a ballot sent out, it ought to be by the City for accountability. She said she's filed open record requests with Mr. Stendell, and he was great in responding. However, if the ballot is mailed out by the Country Club, it would need to be mailed certified registered mail. MR. JIM REITHOPPER, Illinois Avenue, Palm Desert, stated this golf course has been in existence for more than 50 years, and while it's been up and down, it's all been caused by the overwhelming financial burden against the property, particularly the prior owners with the multimillion dollar renovation. He said the current owners were lucky enough to purchase this prime Coachella Valley golf course for $1,140,000, and unlike most of his neighbors, County records show they have no mortgage with the exception of a recently filed mechanic lean for $44,000 for work in repairing the state-of-the-art watering system. He didn't know how this investment company could buy for 6 % cents on the dollar, hold the property mortgage free, and not make a huge profit, And to try to get an assessment to offset their cost of water, for the most part, from poor, working class, and fixed -income seniors living in their 50-year-old, 1100 square -foot, and $150,000 homes, was unconscionable, He asked that this whole procedure be slowed down, stating it was going at a heliacal pace that it was head - turning. He never received any survey and he has talked to others who didn't receive it as well. Therefore, whatever information the Council was given to lead it to believe there was some consensus is totally bogus. Additionally, this special assessment issue should not go on the ballot. He said PDCC promised a social membership, which should be in writing if community members end up being stuck with an assessment. 1VIS. DANIELLE WRIGHT, Florida Avenue, Palm Desert, stated she purchased her home last summer, and prior to purchasing it, she investigated what her property taxes and homeowners association fees would be, and what her expenses would run for electricity, etc., doing her due diligence to make sure she could cover the costs. She said this company had to know what their operating expenses were going to be with regard to water for their maintenance, electricity, and all the things that are incurred in operating a business. If they could not foresee operating under standard golf course fees, then they shouldn't have invested in that property, and shouldn't have 19 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 11, 2013 planned to operate the business banking on putting forward an assessment on surrounding citizens to support their business. It isn't right, and she didn't think the assessment should go through or even go to a vote, because it's not the community members' problem. MR. TERRY ARCHER, Michigan Drive, Palm Desert, stated he purchased his home in 1990. Since then, he's watched the condition of this golf course go up and down like a yo-yo, and he's never seen the golf course in better condition. He didn't like the idea of an assessment, but he didn't want to see a vacant and dead golf course, with foreclosed homes, increased crime rate, and reduced property values by 60 to 70 percent, He'd much preferred an assessment to those types of conditions experienced three years ago. It's obvious, by the comments made, the information needs to be better presented to the members of the community for accuracy and to give everyone an equal opportunity to assess and make a choice. He didn't know if the voting percentage was based on an Ordinance, but to increase it from the normal rules of 50% plus one, to this 55% was unfair to the golf course. He believed the set percentage was a standard rule and regulation, and it's unfair to change it. He was in favor of the assessment, but an extended amount of time was in order to get better information out to the community and for the City's involvement. What he didn't want to see, which is happening now to Palm Springs Country Club and soon Santa Rosa, is that condominiums are going in, and he didn't want houses or condominiums in his back yard, he wants a golf course. MR. BOB LUDWIG, Indiana Avenue, Palm Desert, stated he's lived in his home since 1961. He has several issues with this matter, stating that in the golf course glory days, it used to hold the Bob Hope Classic, now known as Humana, He agreed water was more expensive, but it was great water in 1961; water now has a lot of minerals. The Club is now asking for $26+, and when he first heard about this, it was $23. He said the amount has already gone up 10% and the community hasn't even voted. He suggested turning the golf course into a desert. At the open house they were told that if the golf course was 90 to 110 acres, the owners wouldn't even be talking to the community and there would be no discussion of an assessment. He believed the owner is a business man out to make money; however, many like him are on a fixed income. He pointed out the Club is making a quarter of a million dollars for the 50 or 60 acres. He reiterated this was not drinkable water; its potable water. He agrees the golf course was green, but at what cost. His property is on Indiana Avenue, and his fence is 80 to 100 feet and it borders the golf course. In the early days, the people that ran the property would use spreaders around everyone's property, so that the seed didn't fall onto one's property. He has stone around his property, and it's difficult to move 300 square feet of stone to pull the weeds, stating he should bill the club owners for his cost of round up and his time to keep his yard looking the way the HOA wants it. He is concerned that a private business who has only been 20 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 11, 2013 operating for a year is now begging for money, and it almost sounded like the owners were already in bed with the City, however, he hadn't heard what the Council had to say. He questioned how a private corporation can come in after one year's time and want to assess the community for water and electricity. He commented the company wants to double his assessment by offering a social membership of 10%. However, $3,000 had to be spent to get that 10% to equal the assessment, which would give them an additional $2,700, which didn't make sense. MR. DAVE MOURHESS, Colorado Street, Palm Desert, stated he and his wife Karen live in the PDCC community. He developed the top ten reasons to reject the LLD for the community, which include: property owners have not been invited to be investors; public funds to subsidize operations of a private enterprise is unwarranted; assessments would create an ideological divide about the practice of subsidizing for a profit entity; the LLC hopefully conducted sufficient due diligence prior to the acquisition of the golf course, and the Pro Forma of financial forecast to project revenue and expenses for near and long-term horizons should have been analyzed; if LLC requires a capital infusion to fund their operation, they should consider equity/debt financing like every other business; currently PDCC residents pay an annual assessment, with many of them paying an additional monthly assessment to the Esperanza HOA; a business back stop program working with local lenders would be more acceptable to fund the LLC requirement for ongoing operational commitments; an assessment lasts forever. He strongly urged the Council to reject the golf courses request to establish a LLD. MS. REGINA GONZALES, Indiana Avenue, Palm Desert, thanked the Council for the opportunity to speak, stating her comments would be brief, because many items have already been discussed, She pointed out that Palm Desert Country Club was not a gated community, it is not a private entity, and community members are not paying for security there. However, residents do pay property taxes, and the bill indicates what it covers, which is to take care of the area. Therefore, she did not see why an additional assessment was needed for a private company. She said it was a public golf course run by a private company, and she didn't know how that worked and would like someone to explain that aspect. She said this was a private company that came and made the community better, but the community should not have to pay into the company to make it nice, because it was a benefit that came with it. As previously mentioned by others, if the company needs additional income, being a private company, they should consider getting stockholders, but not ask the community to contribute. She said many are living on a day to day basis and don't have the money to be paying extra expenses. 21 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 11, 2013 MR. CHARLES HANNA, Warner Trail, Palm Desert, brought a flyer that indicated the golf course was for sale, which was displayed for the audience. He said if that was the case, what would the long-term deal be with this tax bill. One of his concerns was the cost per square footage, and if it would be based on the frontage of the house or the golf course proportion, because each place is different regarding how many feet the frontage is to the golf course. He said if the assessment was $26 for 40 feet, and he has 60 or 80 feet, then he would be paying $50 or $60 a month. The other issue is that if the golf course is sold, who will be responsible for keeping up the golf course, and would there still be a tax bill that residents couldn't get rid of. However, if the community pays the assessment, he would like for the course to remain nice, but if not kept up and it went back to the way it was two years ago, can they remove the assessment or was it indefinitely. Additionally, if the golf course is sold, will the new owners have to accept what the City has established with the assessment, or can they suggest something else again. Mayor Hamik inquired about the date of the flyer, and a member of the audience clarified it was the original bank sale ad. MS. KATHRYN CULVER, Oregon Circle, Palm Desert, stated other speakers already covered PDCC was a private entity for profit. She asked for the website address that Mr. Sihota said was available for information, which he wouldn't answer about at the open house. MR. SIHOTA responded the web page hasn't been created, but there will be a link through the main website, which is palmdesertgolf.com. MS. CULVER pointed out there was a mailing list floating around. She inquired about the staff report that many referenced with the information about the easement, and a community member offered to give her a copy. She noted there was a letter sent out by Palm Desert Country Club on April 2, and in the last paragraph of the first page, it states, "People have asked that if the assessment isn't approved, it would mean some lands adjacent to homeowner properties would not be maintained. " She was confident the City of Palm Desert would not allow that to happen, questioning the Council if it will make sure PDCC maintains the property, although, at this point, they have already admitted that regardless of whether the assessment went through or not, they will change a lot of the property to desert landscape. Councilman Spiegel responded Palm Desert County Club could do that. MS. CULVER agreed, but PDCC made a threat to say, or offered not to do what was said in the letter if they got the assessment. Councilman Spiegel stated the City's Code Compliance Department enforced the last owner to keep the course up, which was very difficult and 22 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 11, 2013 it cost the City a lot of money. However, he did keep it up and he finally sold the course. He said the City will make sure the course remains up, but it will cost the City a lot of money. Mayor Harnik stated the Council had to look at the whole picture, and as closely as the Council worked with Code Compliance, everyone needed to think about the state of that golf course not too long ago. MS. CULVER said she understood, because she's lived at PDCC since 1973, and she has seen the ups and downs. She asked how much will it cost the City to send out the ballots for a vote, and is the City prepared to follow through that process. Councilman Spiegel said the City was not at that point yet. MS. CULVER asked what was the Council then deciding. Mayor Harnik encouraged Mr. Culver to read the staff report, which will be very helpful for her. MS. MARY BAGHBODORJAN, Louisiana Street, Palm Desert, stated it concerned her that the City had been working on the matter for a while, noting a financial consultant was hired to come up with a report, yet no one contacted the homeowners who will be affected by this. Therefore, the City had already spent money to help the other party. She said they had to dig through information and asked Mr. Stendell to have PDCC to announce the meeting. She said if it wasn't for the homeowners association sending a fetter to inform the homeowners, the residents wouldn't have known. Therefore, she felt the City wasn't doing anything to protect the homeowners, and they are the voters, which the Council had to remember. Mayor Harnik agreed, stating that is why there is a meeting, and the Council wants to hear from everybody. She explained that if the City didn't gather some amount of information, there would be nothing to talk about, which is why everyone here will provide even more information. MS. BAGHBODORJAN said she understood, but the information obtained regarding the homeowners is from the other party who has a vested interest to give the Council any information it wants to hear. She said the surveys didn't have names or addresses, so anyone from PDCC could have filled out as many surveys and come up with any number. She said the City should have had a lot more responsibility when it came to the survey, and the homeowners want more consideration from the City. She said if a company has paid cents on a dollar to obtain the property, they are not financially vested. The community would like to see them more vested financially, before they ask residents to pay. She said the previous owners made $7 or 23 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 11, 2013 $8 billion selling land, and now homeowners are to subsidize the current ones; she wonders what will be next. She said the City should stay out of this matter, because business is supposed to take care of itself. MS. MARILYN MORENO, California Drive, Palm Desert, explained that when she bought her home 25 years ago, she had a beautiful view of the 17th fairway, then the course was sold and then owners put in a beautiful lake. She and her husband were jumping up and down with joy with the thought of having a lakefront property. A previous speaker said, "share the wealth," well, she would have loved to share the wealth, but unfortunately, she has the pump house in her back yard and no view. She couldn't sell her house even if she wanted to, because someone can go down three houses and get a house with a view of the lake. Her concern about the assessment is that she will be assessed the same as everyone else, when her property is in the 60% of what is referred to as "seldom comes into play." She said her property has a pump house and it seldom comes into play. She asked what will happen if the owners don't want to maintain a property that seldom comes into play. Additionally, the HOA sends her letters to clean up her property, which she does, but will she have the same recourse to ensure that her property, which seldom comes into play, is maintained. She asked the Council to take that into consideration and possibly consider a waiver for people with the same problem. MR. FRANK TAYLOR, stated that most of his comments have already been answered, but wished to emphasize the need to build trust and a partnership with the community as a whole, which hadn't been done at this point. He said there has only been one community meeting accomplished. Also, as a resident of PDCC for 28 years and living on the fairway, he didn't get the survey until he spoke to Mr. Sihota at the City's study session. He spoke with Mr Sihota about fixing that aspect and, as of two days ago, it still hadn't been fixed, because he didn't receive the latest letter where the owners made the comment that properties wouldn't be maintained if the homeowner didn't pay. From working with the Council and serving as their Assistant Chief of Police before retiring, he knew the City had been at the forefront in ensuring the PDCC property was kept up to Code, even through the foreclosure process, and thanked Council and staff for that support. He asked that the vote be delayed until November, stating more time was needed for conducting community meetings and sharing of information, including the web page, instead of rushing this through. He was up for discussions regarding any type of assessment, because he wants to do what's best for the community. He recalled going through many meetings when discussing undergrounding electricity in the area, which was a lengthy process with many community meetings. He believed the same process needed to be followed here to avoid any unknowns and having hundreds of people at Council meetings being upset. He said everyone should be able to 24 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 11, 2013 come to a meeting in partnership and trusting each other, with eventually following through on what the community wants. MR. JOHN STANFORD, Louisiana Street, stated a lot of negatives have been said, which he felt were appropriate, stating the presentation offered was poorly organized and presented. The one issue he felt has been glossed over is the idea of a LLD, which is interesting, hut the Club is about 20 years behind the times. The owners have irrigated the course like never before, stating there is grass in his area wall to wall. Everyone agrees the course looks great, but water is an issue in the desert. In the last 10 or 15 years, the emphasis by the cities and the water district has been to limit the water and limit the amount of turf being irrigated. He heard the comment that the plan is to get this capital and shift over to desert landscaping so what was the point. He said this was a business deal and businesses need to adjust to the realities, stating most don't have the option of having a governmental entity raise fund to do things for its business. Itseemed to him the business was asking for the money, and the flip side is that the company will do what it should have done initially. MS. DIANA IPPOLITO, California Drive, Palm Desert, stated she owns two home on California Drive and has lived there since 1996. When she purchased her, homes, she knew it was a mix bag considering the ups and downs of the economy, which is the same with the golf course. She believed the current owners bought the golf course without doing their homework and are now having buyers' remorse. Therefore, based on what she has seen in the survey and all, the owners underestimated the homeowners, and what they are capable of and not; she believed the company is looking to the community to solve their problem. Additionally, the property next door to her home has had many violations, and the City and HOA has been out there. It turns out the property is owned by the owners of the golf course, and they also purchased quite a few homes there. Therefore, if the City is building trust, she is looking at flipped up shingles on the roof of the house next to hers, and a yard that has weeds knee high. She reiterated the people that own that home are the owners of the golf course. Responding to question from the audience, Mayor Harnik said any property owner, based on the staff report, would be a voter. Councilman Spiegel stated the City has been through this before and it appeared it was going through it again. He said the City loves Palm Desert Country Club and loved it when it annexed it, which was a few years ago. He noted the City has done a lot of good there, and Terry Archer and Charlie Ash could vouch as they served on the Project Area 4 Committee. When the City had Redevelopment funds coming in, Project Area 4 Committee would decide how the money would be spent in that area, and it worked out pretty well. Unfortunately, there have been ownerships that have gone up and 25 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 11, 2013 down. He agreed it was too soon to do anything this evening, which is why he will propose continuing this item until at least September and decide whether or not to send out a vote. In the meantime, he suggested that Mr. Sihota follow through with his suggestions for informing the community on what is going on and why he needs the money. The City wants the golf course to be maintained, because it's in Palm Desert, and is considered just like any other golf course in a gated community. He didn't believe it would be appropriate to bring anything to a vote at this time, and a continuation of the item would give the owners a chance to spend more time with the people who live there and share their information. Councilman Tanner concurred with Councilman Spiegel's comments. He encouraged Mr. Sihota to be very transparent, stating he came before the City Council and people who have purchased their homes, some who have lived there since 1973. He encouraged him to show his financials and ask/answer their questions. He certainiy„agreed this issue needed to go back to the residents of Palm Desert Country Club to make a decision on whether or not they wished to go through with an assessment. However, today was not the time, and it will happen when everyone is back in town for all their questions to be answered. Councilmember Weber agreed with Councilman Spiegel that this item should be delayed, because it concerned her thatmany indicated they didn't receive a notice or mailing, even after advising Mr. Sihota about it. However, she also heard Mr. Sihota say he was going to check on the property ownership tax rolls to make sure addresses are correct. She was baffled that those who have lived in these properties for a long time didn't receive notification. Therefore, she was in favor of continuing this item. Mayor Pro Tem Benson stated more time was needed to get the web page up, primarily for the financials, as she and Councilman Spiegel have been through this so many times, that it felt like they owned a golf course. She believed in more transparency on why the assessment was needed, and there is probably good reason for it, but the people need to know the facts if they are assessed, and if it's the right amount. She was in favor of putting this off until at least the beginning of November or September so that the vote can be during that season. Mayor Harnik thanked everyone for their patience, because she understood this was frustrating and difficult. She said great questions, great points, and valid concerns were made. One thing heard loud and clear was that better communication was needed, as it had fallen short. However, this wasn't the first time homeowners have said they didn't get what they believed was sent out according to property tax rolls, and it won't be the last, but she agreed better communication was needed. She heard a couple of times that PDCC was a public golf course, but it's not, the course is privately owned. She is 26 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING OCTOBER 10, 2013 XV. CONTINUED BUSINESS A. CONSIDERATION OF THE APPROVAL OF BEGINNING THE PROCESS OF FORMING A LANDSCAPE AND LIGHTING DISTRICT FOR HOMES LOCATED ON THE FAIRWAYS OF PALM DESERT COUNTRY CLUB (P❑ Golf Operations, LLC, d.b.a. Palm Desert Country Club, Applicant) (Continued from the meeting of April 11, 2013). Senior Management Analyst Ryan Stendell recalled for the Council this item was heard at the April 11, 2013, meeting and was ultimately continued to the October meeting to allow the owners of Palm Desert County Club (PDCC) to do outreach. He said the Applicant offered to create a website and meet with neighbors, and the direction from Council was clear in that it wanted a high level of community support before venting down the path of forming a landscape and lighting district. As noted in the staff report, there were five bullet points crucial to the proposals by the Applicant, yet none of the promises made at the April meeting have occurred at this point. He said staff continues to receive phone calls and emails from residents asking when those promises will be met, yet it's the burden belongs to the PDCC ownership. Staff will continue to support the assessment idea if and when there is a high level of community support: After the staff report was drafted, an email from the Applicant was received outlining reasons why they haven't complied with the promised items of the April meeting and asking for additional time to comply; the email was distributed to the Council. Councilman Spiegel asked if the Applicant was aware of staffs recommendation and should this item be continued. Mr. Stendell replied the Applicant was made aware of staffs recommendation of denial, and continuing to a date uncertain would achieve the same thing. Councilman Spiegel moved to, Minute Motion, deny the request to begin the process of forming a Landscape and Lighting District (LLD) for homes located on the fairways of Palm Desert Country Club (PDCC) Mayor Harnik asked if the request is denied, how long before the Applicant can come back to the City. Mr. Erwin replied there was no limit. Mr. Wohlmuth noted the only limit was that assessment districts had to go on the tax role, and they are only available once a year. 14 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING OCTOBER 10, 2013 Mr. Stendell added late July or early August is the deadline to get the assessment on the tax roles, but at this point, he didn't believe the deadline would be met. Councilman Tanner said many of the residents have shown concern on the maintenance building, and he had an opportunity to speak with Managing Director Moe Sihota this week. On concern Mr. Sihota shared was the delay in getting the permits to actually do anything with it, not that it was an excuse, but he was wondering if there was anything the City could do, for the residents sake, with regard to the maintenance shed. Mr. Stendell noted a lot of these issues get lumped into one big pot of issues, but he knew the Planning Department was actively working on it. Ms. Aylaian added staff has been working with PDCC and encouraging them to get all the submittals needed in order jo move forward. She said there was a public hearing this summer regarding their proposal to locate the maintenance yard in a different location than was previously approved. At that meeting, PDCC withdrew their request, stating they will change course and do -something different_ Therefore, staff is working with them in obtaining all the information in order to process it. She understood residents are tired of looking at this shed, and staff agreed this has been dragged out for a long time, which is why staff has encouraged PDCC to move forward with all due haste. Mayor Harnik stated Mr. Sihota said he was going to put up a website and he didn't, but he could have at feast posted the dates the financials and course redesigns would be available. She said there have been no communication, and the people out there probably feel insecure about the whole matter because it affects their home. She said it was not okay to leave people hanging, yet we all knew something had to be done, but it didn't appear it was moving in that direction. Mayor Harnik called for the vote and the motion carried by a 5-0 vote. XVI. OLD BUSINESS None XVII. PUBLIC HEARINGS None 15 Klassen, Rachelle Subject: FW: October City Council Meeting From: Stendell, Ryan Sent: Monday, October 07, 2013 8:07 AM To: Klassen, Rachele Subject: FW: October City Council Meeting From: Moe S [maitto:moesCabtelu .net] Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2013 10:53 AM To: Stendell, Ryan Subject: RE: October City Council Meeting Hi Ryan — apologies for the delay in replying but we've been giving this matter a fair bit of consideration. We've taken into account some of the comments that were made at the last Council Meeting. We've also conducted a complete review (again) of all aspects of our operations. As you may be aware, this June, we submitted plans to the City to redesign and desertscape portions of the course with a view to reducing water and maintenance costs and improving the appearance of the course. We are still awaiting final City/CWD approval of these plans. We understand that those approvals should be in place. shortly. We have also concluded an agreement with the City with regards to relocation of the Maintenance Building. As much as these plans respond to public concerns, we are still awaiting issuance of the final City Building Permits. We think it is important that the City issue final approvafso that residents are confident that we are fulfilling our commitments. Our fiscal year end is August 31. We thoughtthat it would be wrong to post Financial Statements that did not provide a complete picture of a full year of operations. Nor did we think it correct to develop a website without finalized course re -design plans (which we expect to be approved shortly). A comprehensive web page can be created thereafter. We have commenced re -seeding of the course and soon residents will be able to visualize the unmaintained corridors adjacent to their homes. We think that this will assist the discussion with regards to a potential assessment. We are also well aware (as are you) that residents prefer these matters to be dealt with in the winter rather than the summer, when there are fewer people in the Valley. Therefore, it makes sense to defer -any discussion at an October Council Meeting. I would suggest that we allow for our re -seeding and some of our course re -design work to proceed. In the interim, we will engage in community input efforts and advise you as to a more appropriate time to consider an Assessment District. Feel free to call or email me at anytime. Moe i 1 Z EIV L-130 Mt t�D'1.b3S3CNlVd 3313.4tI3A1333M A i10 From: Lisa Theodoratus <lisatheocrosn.com> Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2018 12:46 PM To: Iaylaian Jcityofpalmdesert.org Subject: PDCC - request for information - O&M agreement Hi Lauri On behalf of myself and the homeowners of Palm Desert Country Club l am requesting all information related to the legal determination and/or negotiations of the Operation and Maintenance Agreement (document #2005-0780948) past, current, and future by the City of Palm Desert, McFadden Architects and/or golf course owners and all of their agents, and Palm Desert Country Club HOA. It is the expectation of the affected homeowners of PDCC that the City of Palm Desert will help us find a solution that will keep the open space zoning of the 9 hole course intact while finding a use that will uphold the maintenance standards of the above referenced document. Kind Regards, Lisa Theodoratus Owner of 77040 Utah Circle Palm Desert 415 720-5043 Klassen, Rachelle From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Attachments: Hi Rachelle, kEVIN fAHEY <faheykevin@comcast.net> Wednesday, May 02, 2018 8:56 AM Klassen, Rachelle Aylaian, Lauri; Hermann, David RE: PDCC former Executive Golf Course Zoning change Request 1 View of large area behind 4th green.JPG; 2 HOA erected hedge to protect members from area behind 4th green.JPG; 3 Non landscaped area between 4th & 5th fairways.JPG; 4 Walled area around pump station.JPG Please include this email with web link and the photo attachments in the agenda packet for the upcoming meeting on May 10th In my last email I indicated that the PDCC ownership decision not to utilize 9 holes of the collective Golf Course as defined in Recital A of the maintenance agreement did not absolve the owners from adhering to the city's landscaping guidelines as set forth in the agreement, or the city's responsibility to enforce them. If you have not already viewed the video footage from the recent KMIR.COM news report, here is the link: http://km ir.cam/2018/04/26/nalm-desert-executive-golf-co u rse-residents-fu rious-over-condo-plans/ No reasonable person could state after seeing this footage that the owners have been in compliance. This is not the only course landscape area that fails to meet the standards. On the 4th hole of the collective Golf Course, the area behind the 4th green has also been abandoned. Our small Garden Apartments HOA of 24 units spent $2500 on a hedge to block this view for our members (see photos 1&2) In 2015 the owners finally built a permanent maintenance facility on the original agreed upon site. They had gone well past, by several years, the 9 month permit for the temporary maintenance facility tent they constructed between the 4th and 5th fairways. l met with the city's principal planner on the project, Tony Baguto, regarding what plans there were for landscaping the former temporary site and the remaining wailed in pump station. He informed me that the site was to be desert landscaped and while the pump station had to remain for operation, he showed me in the plan drawings where he had insisted on adding additional trees and plantings to help hide the wall. See attached recent photos to see what this area looks like three years later. (see photos 3&4 This track record establishes several things: 1 The PDCC owners have consistently struggled to meet City requirements and resident concerns so not any of their proposed plans can be relied upon. Reality has fallen far short of their commitments. 2 The City has struggled to enforce permits and maintenance agreements, leaving residents feeling unprotected and having to fight their own battles. What is the purpose of zoning, maintenance agreements and landscaping guidelines if the attitude is land owners should be allowed to do what they want with their property no matter how it impacts surrounding residents 3 PDCC residents have struggled to accept today's reality that in order to keep their landscaped golf course views they need to make a financial contribution and help ease some of the burden on course ownership Compromise Solution: 1. The city does not approve the zoning change and instead establishes a landscape district for the former executive course tract along with specific other areas adjacent to the course (ex: behind fourth green) The city would do the analysis, establish the required resident contribution and use approved city vendors to do the actual work (not relying on PDCC maintenance) 1 2 Let the owners focus on maintaining and operating the golf course. Rather than pay fines, let the owners make a contribution to the landscape district 3. Residents participate by contributing dollars to fund the landscape district and continuing to support the golf club All parties would need to step up compromise and do the right thing. Respectfully submitted for the public record, Kevin Fahey From: rklassen@cityofpalmdesert.org [mailto:rklassen@cityofpalmdesert.org] Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2018 1:32 PM To: faheykevin@comcast.net Cc: laylaian@cityofpalmdesert.org; dhermann@cityofpalmdesert.org Subject: RE: PDCC former Executive Golf Course Zoning change Dear Mr. Fahey: Thank you for your e-mail and attachments. They have been printed and will be included in the agenda packet for the April 26, 2018, regular Palm Desert City Council Meeting, to which the Palm Desert Country Club case was continued. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. Rochelle Klassen City Clerk Ph: 760.346.0611 Direct: 760.776.6304 rkiassen@cityofpalmdesert.org From: kEVIN fAHEY [mailto:fahevkevin@comcast.netj Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2018 10:15 AM To: Information Mail <infoPcitvofr almdesert.org> Cc: Aylaian, Lauri<lavlaianPcitvofoalmdesert.org> Subject: PDCC former Executive Golf Course Zoning change Rachelle, My name is Kevin Fahey and l reside at 77625 Michigan Drive Unit 4 here in Palm Desert which is on the 18 hole course of the Palm Desert Country Club. My neighbors and I have a vested interest in hoe the City decides the zoning request change requested by the current club owners an the open space area of the former executive course. Unfortunately we will not be able to attend the meeting this Thursdays but Lauri informed me that if I sent my with my comments and questions to you that you would pass them along to the city council members so they would become part of the record. Attached are documents presented at the last meeting which indicate the maintenance orders and covenants for the executive went back in force after the bankruptcy filing was dismissed. If this is correct, the current owners were not meeting the requirements and they were not being enforced. This in turn led to a false choice for the impacted residents to either support the zoning change and condo development project or live with a non -maintained and deteriorating landscape views which did not enhance the market value of their property. If memory serves another club owner in 2 Palm Desert recently had attempted to let the golf course go in order to gain concessions from residents and the city stepped up and enforced the maintenance requirements. We also heard directly from the PDCC HOA President that club ownership came to the HOA board with a proposal that if the board did not fight the zoning change the club owners would agree to keep operating the 18 hole golf course for as long as they owned the course. The HOA board agreed to this without bringing it to the resident HOA members. We don't believe the city should be rewarding these behaviors and approach by club ownership and granting them their zoning change. We are also not in agreement with a policy that indicates decisions on golf course conversions and open space can be decided on a case by case basis. There needs to be a planned process that gives a greater voice to residents on how any golf course converted land will be used as Palm Springs has just done. htt ps://dese rt. s n/2G Qs1lw it is clear that these issues will continue to come forward given the trends the golf industry is facing. We also know once a precedent is set, determining future zoning change requests cannot be viewed in a vacuum. We respect the right of the club ownership to make a business decision not to operate the executive course if they feel it does not work for them financially. We want them to be successful but also expect them to live up to the maintenance requirements. In the last meeting a City Council member referenced the Landscape & Lighting District application that club ownership pulled back because of resident opposition. The opposition was primarily due to it be poorly communicated and therefore not understood by residents. It is also came on the heels of a badly handled maintenance facility project so trust between the residents and club ownership was at a very low point. A fair outcome would have the club owner's maintain the former executive course open space in accordance with the city requirements for the period of time equal to the time they have failed to do so. During this period the owners could reapply for a LLD limited to the area of the executive course. This area is far less the original application which included the 18 hole course and should be a more economical assessment for resident. This approach would also give the city the time to develop a broader policy for handing golf course conversions and to do the cost/benefit assessment for the LLD. We look forward to the City Council's determination. Kevin 3 ( 1 Klassen, Rachelle From: Tom Walton <twalton@me.com> Sent: Monday, April 30, 2018 10:03 AM To: Klassen, Rachelle Subject: How can you vote to disenfranchise 187 Palm Desert residents who purchased golf course home on PDCC? To Rachelle Klassen, As I won't be able to attend the May loth meeting, would you please see that council members get my input. Thank you, Tom Walton 72720 Yucca Ct. Palm Desert, CA 92260 The original developer, built the PDCC courses so he could charge more money for the lots and houses he built facing both the nine hole executive course and the 18-hole championship course. Because the memberships were non-proprietary, the developer kept control and had total ownership of these courses. After he benefitted from these higher real estate prices, he then sold the courses, pocketing that money. New golf proprietors bought these courses over time until the last owner, who was not a golf course proprietor, but a developer from Canada. And, he bought these courses for a song, less than $2M. His intentions were quickly realized when he turned off the water on the 9-hole course and refused to market this executive course. They even refused to lease this 9-hole course at another proprietor's request. Instead this company chose to disenfranchised 187 Palm Desert owners who's properties back up to the 9-hole course, in order to line their pockets at these resident's expense. Now, this company wants the City to support a zoning change so they can put in a high density condominium project. The question is, how can we stand by and allow our residents to be so grossly disenfranchised while an outside developer profits? What is the purpose of zoning? Does the City have any responsibility to protect these 187 resident home values by not allowing obtrusive zoning changes that will clearly devalue these homes? The primary purpose of zoning is to segregate uses that are thought to be incompatible. In practice, zoning also is used to prevent new development from interfering with existing uses and/or to preserve the "character" of a community. Did this developer have other choices? Of course he did. He could have found other properly zoned land in Palm Desert to build his condo project somewhere else. To help sell such a project, they could have offered special membership programs at PDCC to the buyers of those properties. This would have been a responsible win, win strategy. If a developer was concerned about this community, do you believe they would have chosen the path they did and then ask Palm Desert council members to bail them out at the demise of another 187 residents? if vou bail them out on the 9-hole course. how lona before they will ask vou to re -zone the 18-hole championship course thus negatively effecting the value of many more Palm Desert residents. PDCC isn't the first and won't be the last to ask the City to bail them out at the demise of residents. 1 Other clubs have addressed this very issue and found solutions. Don't let smart developers use our council for their profit. The City needs to come up with a logical and fair process for helping resolve the current PDCC issue and other clubs with housing developments surrounding their golf courses. The formula that smart developers win and 187 Palm Desert residents lose is not the answer. This City needs to get ahead of the curve and stop reacting behind the curve. We're asking the council not to approve this zoning request and harm 187 residents. 2 Klassen, Rachelle From: Hermann, David Sent: Monday, April 30, 2018 8:07 AM To: Ceja, Eric Cc: Stendell, Ryan; Klassen, Rachelle; Stanley, Jane Subject: FW: City of Palm Desert: Website Contact Us Form Submission Good morning Eric, We received the message below over the weekend from a Palm Desert Country Club resident. Because it is addressed to the City Council, I have copied Jane and Rachelle on this as well. Thanks very much for any information that Planning can provide to Mr. Simmons and please let me know if I can be of any help. David David Hermann Public Information Officer Ph: 760.776.6411 Direct: 760.776.6380 dhermann@cityofpalmdesert.org From: webmaster@cityofpalmdesert.org [mailto:webmaster@cityofpalmdesert.org] Sent: Saturday, April 28, 2018 4:38 PM To: Information Mail <info@cityofpalmdesert.org> Subject: City of Palm Desert: Website Contact Us Form Submission A new entry to a form/survey has been submitted. Form Name: Contact Us Date & Time: 04/28/2018 4:38 PM Response #: 995 Submitter ID: 11570 IP address: 67.49.90.208 Time to complete: 23 min. , 6 sec. Survey Details Page 1 Your Contact Information First Name Fredric H Last Name Simmons Email Address FredpdkidsPamail.com Phone Number 760-772-1850 Address 76862 Kentucky Avenue Address 2 Not answered 1 City Palm Desert ZIP Code 92211 I am a: (o) Palm Desert Resident Comments or Concerns: Attention: City of Palm Desert Council Members Re: Palm Desert Country Club Re -Zoning Proposal State California My wife Cheri and I have owned our home since February 1997. At the time we were still working full time jobs in the Los Angeles area. I myself was in involved in the Space Station Program which forced me to work long hours. When I purchased our home, the goal was to eventually retire and move full time to our desert home. Every weekend while working we escaped to our quiet oasis located on Kentucky Street, in the Palm Desert Country Club. It was so relaxing to have a beautiful view of the Executive Course. Watered green grass, trimmed trees with fun people watching as the golfers played the course. I will not go into detail about the changes I have observed over these past years as you are fully aware of the ownership changes, defaults that resulted in Bankruptcy etc. The purpose of this letter is to plead a continuance and further discussion of the re -zoning until the Fall. Preferably the month of Oct or thereabouts. The reason I ask this is because there are a number of us homeowners that will not be able to attend the May 10th Meeting. My wife and I will not be in town May 10th. We have been faithfully attending the meetings at the city from Planning & Zoning to where this project has been put before you now. This decision is going to impact our lives greatly! The proposed road is in our backyard. Our Master bedroom faces the road and the proposed "guest parking" lot! Please please delay any decisions on this project until the Fall. Thank you, City of Palm Desert This is an automated message generated by the Vision Content Management SystemTM. Please do not reply directly to this email. 2 Apr.25.2018 09:28 AM Dennis/Michele Davison 760 775 0664 PAGE. 1/ 1 r AprII 20, 2016 Palm Desert Country Club 77200 California Drive Palm trawl. CA 92211 Dear Mr. Weinkauf, After reviewing the proposed project and evaluating property values of the existing homes surrounding It, I believe current homeowners would °aperient° en Increase In the vogue of their homes. There ere several factors that brought -Me to thie conclusion. The proposed density on the Executive Course Condo project Is extremely low. Current toning allows for a much higher density than Is being proposed. building rows of low -budget , angle family homes with no amenities could potentially have a negetive Impact en the property value of existing homes, However, this low•density project with landscaped areas, walking paths, picket parks and other amenities wet Increase values. Once built, there is no possibility of a higher density project being proposed in the future. forodosures also couse decline In property values as i am sera homeowners saw In 2009.2011 when the golf Course was closed. The Executive Course Is In a similar state today and while homes on the Championship Course nave seen an increase In values, homes on the Executive Course continue to stay level or In some cases, have decreased In value, Currently the Executive Course Is maintained only at a level as required by city ordinances and is not attractive or Inviting. The project Includes desert landscaping to be maintained by en HOA, guaranteeing a beautifully area adjacent to existing houses, I think the proposed project is a great alternative to the current state. With more golf courses dosing than opening each year, more homeowners will be faced with alternative use of empty lend. This In -fill protect Is a greet solution given the attractive design, proposed amenities and low density. As we know, the Real Estate wicket is driven by supply end demand and location, location, location. This is a great location. I have been In the Real Estate business for 29 years. I have worked In both new as well as residential resales. I have also worked in escrow marketing and as a Mortgage lean Officer, 1 am currently en Independent Broker here In the valley, Regards, Michele Davison Independent Real Estate broker CaigRE00584234 To: City of Palm Desert City Council Sabby Jonathan, Mayor Susan Marie Weber, Mayor Pro Tem Kathleen Kelly, Council Member Jan Harnik, Council Member Gina Nestande, Council Member RECEIVED CIF' LM DESER OFCI"CE April 20, 2018 2018 APR 24 AM 10: 56 Re: Zoning Change PDCC Several weeks ago my wife and I attended A City Planning Commission meeting wherein a 5 to 1 vote to approve the plan... ended the session. Speaker after speaker had voiced serious objections to the rezoning of the executive golf course for 69 condominium units. I have spent a good part of my professional life attending such meetings all across the U.S. and understood this commission was only passing on the plans and not the use. But some residents misunderstood. A loud commotion ensued as the meeting broke ... a much distraught man was led sobbing and crying from the hall. The emotion a resident places after a twenty or thirty-year investment in home is understandable. A resident's reading of the Operation and Maintenance documents between City and Developer/Owners of the PDCC would find the City had clearly restricted the possible further development of the Property. The language states that the covenants which shall run with the land, shall bind owners successor's and assign's and shall remain in effect for so long as the property is used as a golf course facility... "that it shall bind Owners and Owners successors and assign's, and shall remain in effect for so long as the Property is used as a Golf Course facility." (Property is defined to include the 9 hole executive course.) If said language was subsequently altered or given away for whatever reason, it is only reasonable some explanation would have been provided residents... somewhere. Whatever has transpired over the ensuing years is unclear. Granting the zoning change requested today could pose a liability. This decision is clearly the Counsel's call, but I would suggest a possible alternative solution that could provide a win -win for all. (There are further complications regarding the HOA's past maneuvers that could allow ^-' TO city CcEf21� 4--io13 members to raise legal claims. I will not attempt to understand or clarify that.) If the City seeks to avoid legal complications and deny the applicant the zoning change, it may be possible a compromise could be reached wherein the City loan the PDCC nominal funds to restore the executive course to a playable condition contingent on the developer pursuing, along with the City, the Tiger Wood's Design Group to redesign the 9- hole property as a signature Tiger Wood's Short Course. The applicant may not be pleased with again operating an executive course, however their prospects for success are enhanced having the first Tiger Wood's Signature Short Course for the Coachella Valley and thereby enhance the whole equation adding substantially to the appeal of the 27 hole repositioned Palm Desert Country Club. Submitted respectfully, Ned and Rosemarie Wilmot 43631 Tennessee Avenue Palm Desert, CA 92211 nedwilmot@dc.rr.com Klassen, Rachelle Subject: FW: PDCC former Executive Golf Course Zoning change Attachments: PDCC Bandruptcy gov.uscourts.cacb.1102156.95.0.pdf; Operation and Maintenance Agreement - DOC _2005-0780948.pdf From: kEVIN fAHEY Emailto:fahevkevin@comcast.netj Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2018 10:15 AM To: Information Mail <info@citvofpalmdesert.org> Cc: Aylaian, Lauri <lavlaian@citvofpalmdesert.org> Subject: PDCC former Executive Golf Course Zoning change Rachelle, My name is Kevin Fahey and I reside at 77625 Michigan Drive Unit 4 here in Palm Desert which is on the 18 hole course of the Palm Desert Country Club. My neighbors and I have a vested interest in hoe the City decides the zoning request change requested by the current club owners on the open space area of the former executive course. Unfortunately we will not be able to attend the meeting this Thursdays but Lauri informed me that if I sent my with my comments and questions to you that you would pass them along to the city council members so they would become part of the record. Attached are documents presented at the last meeting which indicate the maintenance orders and covenants for the executive went back in force after the bankruptcy filing was dismissed. If this is correct, the current owners were not meeting the requirements and they were not being enforced. This in turn led to a false choice for the impacted residents to either support the zoning change and condo development project or live with a non -maintained and deteriorating landscape views which did not enhance the market value of their property. If memory serves another club owner in Palm Desert recently had attempted to let the golf course go in order to gain concessions from residents and the city stepped up and enforced the maintenance requirements. We also heard directly from the PDCC HOA President that club ownership came to the HOA board with a proposal that if the board did not fight the zoning change the club owners would agree to keep operating the 18 hole golf course for as long as they owned the course. The HOA board agreed to this without bringing it to the resident HOA members. We don't believe the city should be rewarding these behaviors and approach by club ownership and granting them their zoning change. We are also not in agreement with a policy that indicates decisions on golf course conversions and open space can be decided on a case by case basis. There needs to be a planned process that gives a greater voice to residents on how any golf course converted land will be used as Palm Springs has just done. httos://desert.sn/2GQsllw it is clear that these issues will continue to come forward given the trends the golf industry is facing. We also know once a precedent is set, determining future zoning change requests cannot be viewed in a vacuum. We respect the right of the club ownership to make a business decision not to operate the executive course if they feel it does not work for them financially. We want them to be successful but also expect them to live up to the maintenance requirements. In the last meeting a City Council member referenced the Landscape & Lighting District application that club ownership pulled back because of resident opposition. The opposition was primarily due to it be poorly communicated and therefore not understood by residents. It is also came on the heels of a badly handled maintenance facility project so trust between the residents and club ownership was at a very low point. 1 A fair outcome would have the club owner's maintain the former executive course open space in accordance with the city requirements for the period of time equal to the time they have failed to do so. During this period the owners could reapply for a LLD limited to the area of the executive course. This area is far Tess the original application which included the 18 hole course and should be a more economical assessment for resident. This approach would also give the city the time to develop a broader policy for handing golf course conversions and to do the cost/benefit assessment for the LLD. We look forward to the City Council's determination. Kevin 2 PlainSite Legal Document California Central Bankruptcy Court Case No. 6:09-bk-23674 PDCC Development LLC Document 95 View Document View Docket A joint project of Think Computer Corporation and Think Computer Foundation, Cover art © 2015 Think Computer Corporation, All rights reserved. Learn more at http//wwwplainsrte org Case 6:09-bk-23674-CB Doc 95 Filed 03/05/10 Entered 03/05/10 14:42:25 Desc Main Document Page 1 of 3 1 FILED & ENTERED 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 MAR 05 2010 CLERK U.S. BANKRUPTCY COURT Central District of California BY milano DEPUTY CLERK UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 11 In re: 12 PDCC Development LLC, 13 14 15 16 17 Debtor(s). Case No: 6:09-bk-23674-BB Chapter: 11 ORDER DISMISSING CHAPTER 11 CASE Date: March 3, 2010 Time: 2:00 PM Location: Courtroom 303 The Court conducted a Scheduling and Case Management Conference in the above chapter 11 18 case at 2:00 p.m. on March 3, 2010 in Courtroom 303 of the above -entitled Court. Elizabeth Lossing 19 20 appeared on behalf of the Office of the United States Trustee. No one appeared on behalf of the debtor 21 and debtor in possession. 22 The Court having advised parties in interest that it reserved the right to dismiss a case at a case 23 management conference in its original June 22, 2009 "Order Setting Scheduling and Case Management 24 Conference"; and the Court having found at the March 3, 2010 status conference that: (1) the debtor in 25 26 possession had failed to file an updated status report in connection with the March 3 status conference, 27 as ordered by the Court at the December 30, 2009 status conference; (2) the debtor in possession is 28 delinquent in the payment of its quarterly fees to the Office of the United States Trustee; (3) the debtor Case 6:09-bk-23674-CB Doc 95 Filed 03/05/10 Entered 03/05/10 14:42:25 Desc Main Document Page 2 of 3 in possession has not been filing its monthly operating reports with the Office of the United States Trustee in a timely manner or at all; and (4) the only evidence of insurance that the debtor in possession has provided the United States Trustee reflects that the debtor in possession's insurance coverage has lapsed, and other good cause appearing therefor, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows: 1. The above chapter 11 case is dismissed. 2. Judgment is hereby entered in favor of the United States Trustee and against debtor and debtor in possession PDCC Development LLC in the amount of $650, representing the quarterly fees due for the fourth quarter of 2009 and the first quarter of 2010. PDCC Development LLC shall pay these amounts not later than 30 days after entry of this order. DATED: March 5, 2010 ### United States Bankruptcy Judge -2 Case 6:09-bk-23674-CB Doc 95 Filed 03/05/10 Entered 03/05/10 14:42:25 Desc Main Document Page 3 of 3 NOTE TO USERS OF THIS FORM: 1) Attach this form to the last page of a proposed Order or Judgment. Do not file as a separate document. 2) The title of the judgment or order and all service information must be filled in by the party lodging the order. 3) Category I. below: The United States trustee and case trustee (if any) will always be in this category. 4) Category II. below: List ONLY addresses for debtor (and attorney), movant (or attorney) and person/entity (or attorney) who filed an opposition to the requested relief. DO NOT list an address if person/entity is listed in category I. NOTICE OF ENTERED ORDER AND SERVICE LIST Notice is given by the court that a judgment or order entitled (specify) ORDER DISMISSING CHAPTER 11 CASE was entered on the date indicated as "Entered" on the first page of this judgment or order and will be served in the manner indicated below: I. SERVED BY THE COURT VIA NOTICE OF ELECTRONIC FILING ("NEF" R - Pursuant to controlling General Order(s) and Local Bankruptcy Rule(s), the foregoing document was served on the following person(s) by the court via NEF and hyperlink to the judgment or order. As of March 5, 2010, the following person(s) are currently on the Electronic Mail Notice List for this bankruptcy case or adversary proceeding to receive NEF transmission at the email address(es) indicated below. * Melody G Anderson manderson@hemar.com * Marc Andrews sandra.g.mcmasters@wellsfargo.com * Craig C Chiang cchiang@buchalter.com * Everett L Green everett.l.green@usdoj.gov * Whitney G Mcdonald wmcdonald@rwglaw.com * Richard A Shaffer rick@raslaw.com * United States Trustee (RS) ustpregion16.rs.ecf@usdoj.gov * Robert M Yaspan ryaspan@yaspanlaw.com, tmenachian@yaspanlaw.com II. SERVED BY THE COURT VIA U.S. MAIL: A copy of this notice and a true copy of this judgment or order was sent by U.S. Mail to the following person(s) and/or entity(ies) at the address(es) indicated below: Robert T Anderson 1950 Market St Riverside, CA 92501-1720 ❑ Service information continued on attached page III. TO BE SERVED BY THE LODGING PARTY: Within 72 hours after receipt of a copy of this judgment or order which bears an "Entered" stamp, the party lodging the judgment or order will serve a complete copy bearing an "Entered" stamp by U.S. Mail, overnight mail, facsimile transmission or email and file a proof of service of the entered order on the following person(s) and/or entity(ies) at the address(es), facsimile transmission number(s) and/or email address(es) indicated below: ❑ Service information continued on attached page -3 RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO: City of Palm Desert 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, California 92260 Attention: Carlos L. Ortega Tele: (760)346-0611 Fax: (760) 340-0574 EXEMPT FROM RECORDING FEE PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 27383 DOG p 2005-0780948 09/21/2005 08:00A Fee:NC Page 1 of 24 Recorded in Official Records County of Riverside Larry W. Ward Assessor County Clerk 8 Recorder 1111111111111111 1111111 111111111 IIIIIII III IIII 1II1111 1 U I PAGE I SIZE If OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT by and between CITY OF PALM DESERT a California municipal corporation and DAHOON INVESTMENT COMPANY, INC. a California corporation OS :C Hd 9- . ; 7. i to I 1�1 COPY I LONG PCOR NOCOR SMF MISC 1, {I 11 REFUND I NCNG I EXAM J RECEIVED OCT — 6 2005 L CITY OF PALM DESERT CITY MANAGER THIS OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT ("Agreement") is dated as of August 31, 2005, by and between the City of Palm Desert, a California municipal corporation ("City") and Dahoon Investment Company, Inc., a California corporation ("Owner"). The City and Owner are sometimes referred to in this Agreement, each individually, as a "Party," or collectively, as the "Parties." The City and Owner enter into this Agreement with reference to the following recited facts (each a "Recital"): RECITALS A. Owner owns certain real property located at 77-200 California Road, in the City of Palm Desert and commonly known as "Palm Desert Golf Course" ("Property"). The Property is legally described in Exhibit "A-1" and depicted in Exhibit "A-2" attached to this Agreement and incorporated into this Agreement by reference. The Property is improved with certain improvements, including, but not limited to, an eighteen (18) hole golf course and a nine (9) hole executive course (collectively "Golf Course"), an approximately ten thousand (10,000) square foot clubhouse ("Clubhouse"), a storage area and maintenance yard ("Maintenance Yard") and Parking Lot ("Parking Lot"). The Golf Course, Clubhouse, Maintenance Yard and Parking Lot are all depicted in Exhibit "A-2" attached to this Agreement and incorporated into this Agreement by reference. B. Owner and PDCC Development LLC, a California limited liability company, have entered into a Development Agreement with the City for the purpose of making certain improvements to the Golf Course and Clubhouse and to develop parcels that were formerly part of the Golf Course and other parcels surrounding the Property as 98 single family residences (collectively "Project"). C. For so long as Owner operates a golf course on the Property, Owner agrees to operate and maintain the Property according to the standards set forth in this Agreement, as required under the Development Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration and the mutual promises and covenants of the Parties set forth in this Agreement the Owner and the City agree as follows: ARTICLE 1 EFFECTIVE DATE 1.1 Effective Date of Agreement. This Agreement is dated as of August 31, 2005 for reference purposes only. This Agreement shall take effect on the date of the last of the following to occur: (1) this Agreement is approved and executed by the authorized representatives of Owner and delivered to City; and; (2) following delivery of this Agreement by Owner, this Agreement is approved and executed by the City and delivered to Owner. Owner and City acknowledge that Owner is improving the Clubhouse, the Golf Course, the Parking Lot and the Maintenance Facility pursuant to the phased redevelopment/renovation plan set forth in the Development Agreement ("collectively the "Property Improvements"). Accordingly, Owner and City agree that the operative provisions regarding the maintenance of the Property shall become effective only after Owner's completion of the Property Improvements. ARTICLE 2 OPERATION AND USE OF PROPERTY -2- 2.1 Operation and Use of Property By Owner. Owner intends to operate, or cause to be operated, upon the Property, a semi -private golf course facility in accordance with this Agreement in a prudent business manner consistent with the operations of an average semi -private golf course facility allowing use by both members of the public and private members, in the Palm Desert area, and consistent and in compliance with all applicable provisions of federal, state and local laws and regulations. 2.2 Capital Reserves. Owner agrees that Owner shall maintain or caused to be maintained the Capital Reserves of the Property as follows: 2.2.1 Owner shall insure that one (1) percent of the annual gross revenue will be paid into a capital reserve account for the first two years with an increase to one point five (1.5) percent in years three and four and an increase to two point five (2.5) percent in year five and annually thereafter. 2.2.2 Owner shall insure that expenditures from the capital reserve account shall be for equipment or systems that have a minimum of seven years useful life or for major retrofit of greens, tees, bunkers, fairways, cart paths, water features, etc. 2.3 Budaets and Expenditures. 2.3.1 On or before the completion of the Property Improvements, Owner shall submit its first operating budget to the City Manager. The City's review of Owner's budget pursuant to this Paragraph shall be for the sole purpose of determining that a sufficient amount of funds are being expended for the operation of the Property in accordance with the Maintenance Standards, (as that term is defined below), such that it meets the golf course facility standard set for the in Paragraph 2.1. In the event the City disputes an amount budgeted in Owner's budget, such dispute shall be resolved in accordance with the Paragraph in this Agreement entitled Conflicts/Disputes. City acknowledges that its review of the budget and the annual expenditures for the Property shall be conducted in a commercially reasonable manner at no cost to Owner. Owner shall budget and expend in the first year of operations, and increase annually thereafter, if necessary subject to the budget review process, a minimum of (i) one million one hundred thousand dollars ($1,100,000) for maintenance of the Golf Course and its facilities and (ii) $275,000 for the purpose of general and administrative which will include clubhouse maintenance. After the review of Owner's initial budget for its first year of operation pursuant to this Paragraph, the City shall have the option of reviewing the budget every year thereafter during the term of this Agreement pursuant to the terms of this Paragraph. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this Paragraph, Owner and City shall meet and discuss in detail the then existing budget every three years commencing with the third anniversary date of this Agreement and continuing every third year thereafter. Any information supplied to City by Owner pursuant to this Paragraph shall be considered strictly confidential and used solely for the purpose of evaluating Owners' performance of its obligations pursuant to this Agreement. City shall maintain the confidentiality of such information to the extent permitted by law. City shall duplicate the information only as needed for review and return all originals and duplicates to Owner, including without limitation originals and duplicates which may be in electronic form. City shall not release the information provided by Owner pursuant to this Paragraph to any third party without written notice to Owner seven (7) days prior to release of any such information to a third party. 2.3.2 On or before the City's annual inspection of the Property pursuant to this Agreement, Owner shall submit to the City Manager a report detailing the monies spent on maintenance of the Golf Course and Golf Course facilities. The City's review of Owner's -3- expense information pursuant to this Paragraph shall be for the sole purpose of determining that a sufficient amount of funds were expended for the operation of the Property in accordance with the Maintenance Standards, (as that term is defined below), such that it meets the golf course facility standard set for the in Paragraph 2.1. In the event the City disputes an amount expended by Owner, such dispute shall be resolved in accordance with the Paragraph in this Agreement entitled Conflicts/Disputes. City acknowledges that its review of Owner's annual expenditures for the Property shall be conducted in a commercially reasonable manner at no cost to Owner. After the review of Owner's initial expenditures for its first year of operation pursuant to this Paragraph, the City shall have the option of reviewing the expenditures every year thereafter during the term of this Agreement pursuant to the terms of this Paragraph at the same time it reviews Owner's budget pursuant to Paragraph 2.3.1 of this Agreement. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this Paragraph, Owner and City shall meet and discuss in detail the then existing expenditures every three years commencing with the third anniversary date of this Agreement and continuing every third year thereafter. Any information supplied to City by Owner pursuant to this Paragraph shall be considered strictly confidential and used solely for the purpose of evaluating Owners' performance of its obligations pursuant to this Agreement. City shall maintain the confidentiality of such information to the extent permitted by law. City shall duplicate the information only as needed for review and return all originals and duplicates to Owner, including without limitation originals and duplicates which may be in electronic form. City shall not release the information provided by Owner pursuant to this Paragraph to any third party without written notice to Owner seven (7) days prior to release of any such information to a third party. 2.3.3 Owner shall maintain all maintenance records for a minimum of three years and make such records available to the City for review and/or audit during reasonable business hours with five business days prior written notice, no more often than twice a year. 2.3.4 Owner shall insure that Property and Golf Course Facility maintenance costs do not include salaries of employees not performing direct maintenance functions. 2.3.5 Whenever Owner is required to provide information pursuant to this Agreement to the City for the City's review and approval, the City shall respond within thirty (30) days of the date Owner provides such information to City, and failure to respond within such thirty (30) days period shall be deemed approval. ARTICLE 3 MAINTENANCE OF THE PROPERTY 3.1 Maintenance of the Property by Owner. Upon Owner's completion of the Property Improvements, Owner shall maintain the Property and related improvements, including without limitation the Clubhouse, the Parking Lot, the Maintenance Facility and associated landscaping in accordance with this Agreement, including without limitation the Maintenance Standards for the Palm Desert Country Club attached to this Agreement as Exhibit B incorporated by this reference (the "Maintenance Standards"). 3.2 Maintenance Proaram/Maintenance Deficiency Procedure. Owner shall establish and conduct an ongoing maintenance program, in accordance with the Maintenance Standards. If at any time there is an occurrence where, in the commercially reasonable opinion -4- of the City, a material adverse condition on any area of the Property exists in contravention of the Management Plan and/or this Agreement, (a "Maintenance Deficiency") the City shall notify Owner in writing of such Maintenance Deficiency. Within ten (10) days of Owner's receipt of the Deficiency Notice, Owner shall in writing either (i) commit to remedy the Maintenance Deficiency in a commercially reasonable time and manner, or (ii) state that it disputes the City's Deficiency Notice. If the parties are unable to agree to the timing and/or the manner of cure, then the parties shall resolve the Maintenance Deficiency issue in accordance with the Paragraph in this Agreement entitled Conflicts and Disputes. 3.2.1 If Owner fails to remedy the Maintenance Deficiency either (a) within the time period previously agreed in writing by the parties or (b) by the date required in a written arbitration or judicial decision stating that a disputed Maintenance Deficiency must be cured, the City shall have the right, but not the obligation, to perform the necessary maintenance to cure the Maintenance Deficiency. If the City elects to cure such Maintenance Deficiency, the City shall give written notice to the Owner, setting forth with particularity the Maintenance Deficiency work to be done and the estimated cost of curing such Maintenance Deficiency. The City shall be entitled to reimbursement with respect thereto from the Owner as provided in this Paragraph. In the event the City has performed the work necessary to cure a Maintenance Deficiency, the City shall submit a written invoice to the Owner for all costs incurred by the City to perform such work, together with a statement that if the Owner fails to pay such invoice in full within the time specified, the City will pursue collection against the Owner pursuant to the provisions of this Paragraph. The City shall only be entitled to reimbursement for those costs reasonably incurred in performing the necessary maintenance to cure such Maintenance Deficiency. Such invoice shall be due and payable within thirty (30) days of receipt by the Owner. If Owner fails to pay such invoice in full within the period specified, payment shall be deemed delinquent and shall be subject to a one time late charge in an amount equal to six percent (6%) of the amount of the invoice. Thereafter the City may pursue collection by means of any remedies available at law or in equity. Without limiting the foregoing, in addition to all other rights and remedies available to the City, the City may levy an assessment against the Owner for the invoice costs incurred by the City to perform the cure of the Maintenance Deficiency, plus the late charge. Such assessment shall constitute a charge on the land and shall be a continuing lien upon the Property, which lien shall be treated as a construction lien pursuant to California law subject to foreclosure and priority as set forth in the Construction Lien Statutes. Owner hereby vests the City with the right and power to levy such assessment, to impose a lien upon the Property and to bring all legal actions and/or to pursue lien foreclosure procedures against Owner for purposes of collecting such assessment in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement. 3.3 City Right to Enter and Inspect Condition of Property. The City, its employees, and agents shall have the right to enter the Property and all portions of the Property in order to inspect and examine the Property and all fixtures and equipment located thereon for the purposes of effectuating the terms and conditions of this Agreement . Such right of entry and inspection may be exercised during normal weekday business hours, upon forty— eight (48) hours prior notice to Owner. 3.4 Owner and City Annual Site Inspections. On an annual basis, commencing on the first anniversary of execution of this Agreement, Owner, arbitrator and representative of the City shall jointly inspect the premises including the golf course, clubhouse facilities, maintenance yard, parking lot, and incidental amenities. The purpose of the inspection shall be to verify the Owner's compliance with the requirements of this Agreement. Any defects noted shall be documented by the City within ten business days of the inspection as a -5- Maintenance Deficiency and shall be addressed by the Owner as called for in Paragraph 3.2 of this Agreement. 3.5 Owner and HOA Bi-Annual Meetinas: Forum For Complaints. Owner shall meet on a bi-annual basis with any homeowner's association of the Project ("HOA") to discuss the condition of the Property. This meeting can be part of a regularly scheduled HOA meeting. Any concerns regarding the Owner's maintenance of the Property shall be heard at such meetings. Owner shall respond to concerns relating to Owner's maintenance of the Property within fifteen (15) business days of the date the concern was presented at the meeting. 3.6 Insurance. Within ten (10) calendar days after the Effective Date, Owner shall furnish or cause to be furnished to City a certificate of insurance evidencing insurance for the Property and its operations in commercially reasonable amounts. 3.7 Mortaaaee Protection. A breach of any of the terms, covenants or conditions of this Agreement shall not defeat or impair the lien of any mortgage or deed of trust made in good faith and for value, but such terms, covenants and conditions shall be binding upon any party who is entitled to any of the Property, or any portion thereof or interest therein, acquired by foreclosure, trustee's sale, deed in lieu of foreclosure or otherwise and those claiming under any such party. 3.8 Covenant Running With the Land. Owner's covenants to maintain the Golf Course Property in accordance with this Agreement are covenants which shall run with the land, shall bind Owner's successor's and assign's and shall remain in effect for so long as the Property is used as a Golf Course facility. Owner shall ensure that any borrowing obtained by Owner in the acquisition of the Property, or any other interest granted by Buyer to any third party in the Property prior to the recordation of this Agreement, shall be subordinate and junior to this Agreement. ARTICLE 4 CONFLICTS AND DISPUTE RESOLUTION 4.1 Conflicts/Disputes. In the event there is a dispute in connection with the interpretation of or performance under this Agreement, including without limitation a dispute regarding a Maintenance Deficiency, and the complaining party has provided written notice to the non -complaining party detailing with particularity the claimed dispute (the "Dispute Notice"), then the City and Owner will promptly endeavor in good faith to resolve such dispute. If no resolution can be reached within fifteen (15) days of the parties endeavoring in good faith to resolve such dispute, then, the dispute shall be resolved exclusively as provided in this Paragraph 4.2 in the County of Riverside. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this Article 4 and/or this Agreement, if a dispute between the City and Owner has an amount in controversy in excess of $50,000, (which amount may include without limitation, any or all of the following: costs of repairs, cost of maintenance, and/or capital expenditures) then either party may litigate such dispute in a court of competent jurisdiction by providing written notice to the other party within the fifteen (15) day good faith negotiation period referenced in this Paragraph. 4.2 Arbitration. After complying with the provisions of Paragraph 4.1 regarding attempting to resolve the dispute in good faith, in the event the dispute has not been resolved by the parties, and provided that neither Owner or City has elected to refer the matter to litigation under the terms set forth in Paragraph 4.1 of this Agreement, such dispute shall be -6- submitted to, and conclusively determined by binding arbitration conducted by an arbitrator who shall be an arbitrator selected by the parties within five (5) days of the expiration of the good faith negotiation period referenced in Paragraph 4.1, or in the event the parties are unable to agree on an arbitrator, then the arbitrator shall be selected in accordance with the Commercial Rules of the American Arbitration Association. Owner shall supply copies of current and two previous years' annual financial statements, including balance sheet and P/L statement in any arbitration or court proceeding in which the commercial reasonableness of any budgeted or expended item for maintenance results in a Maintenance Deficiency which Maintenance Deficiency is the subject of the arbitration or court proceeding. Any copies of Owner's Financial Documents provided pursuant to this Paragraph shall be subject to a protective order. The arbitrator shall award costs and attorney fees to the prevailing party. The provisions of this Paragraph 4.2 shall not preclude any party from seeking injunctive or other provisional or equitable relief to preserve the status quo pending the parties' resolution of their dispute, and the filing of an action seeking injunctive or other provisional relief shall not be construed as a waiver of that party's arbitration rights. The arbitrator(s) shall not have the power to modify any of the provisions of this Agreement. The arbitrator(s)' decision shall be final and binding upon the parties and judgment upon the award rendered by the arbitrator(s) may be entered in any court having jurisdiction. NOTICE: BY INITIALING IN THE SPACE BELOW, YOU ARE AGREEING TO HAVE ANY DISPUTE WHICH ARISES UNDER THIS AGREEMENT DECIDED BY NEUTRAL ARBITRATION AS PROVIDED BY CALIFORNIA LAW AND YOU ARE GIVING UP ANY RIGHTS YOU MIGHT POSSESS TO HAVE THE DISPUTE LITIGATED IN A COURT OR JURY TRIAL. BY INITIALING IN THE SPACE BELOW, YOU ARE GIVING UP YOUR JUDICIAL RIGHTS TO DISCOVERY AND APPEAL, UNLESS SUCH RIGHTS ARE SPECIFICALLY INCLUDED IN THE DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROVISION. IF YOU REFUSE TO SUBMIT TO ARBITRATION AFTER AGREEING TO THIS PROVISION, YOU MAY BE COMPELLED TO ARBITRATE UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF THE CALIFORNIA CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE. YOUR AGREEMENT TO THIS ARBITRATION PROVISION IS VOLUNTARY. WE HAVE READ AND UNDERSTAND THE FOREGOING AND AGREE TO SUBMIT DISPUTES ARISING OUT OF THE MATTERS INCLUDED IN THE "ARBITRATION" PROVISION TO NEUTRAL ARBITRATION. Initials: 4.3 Relief to Preclude Immediate Significant Deterioration of the Golf Course. If the City identifies a Maintenance Deficiency which the City believes in its commercially reasonable opinion will result in immediate significant deterioration of the Golf Course if not cured within a commercially reasonable time ("Urgent Maintenance Deficiency"), the City shall provide immediate written notice to Owner. If within two business days of Owner's receipt of City's written notice of the Urgent Maintenance Deficiency, Owner fails to commit to cure the Urgent Maintenance Deficiency or disputes the existence of the Urgent Maintenance Deficiency, then the City may seek injunctive relief upon proper statutory notice to Owner in addition to instituting any arbitration to resolve the dispute pursuant to the Paragraph 4.2 of this Agreement. Any judgment or award issued as a result of the injunctive relief sought by the City pursuant to this Paragraph shall contain a specific provision for the recovery of actual attorneys' and expert witness fees and costs, -7- ARTICLE 5 GENERAL PROVISIONS 5.1 Notice to the Parties. For the purpose of this Agreement, communications and notices among the Parties shall be in writing and shall be deemed to have been given when actually delivered, if given by hand delivery or transmitted by overnight courier service, or if mailed, when deposited in the United States Mail, First Class, postage prepaid, return receipt requested and delivered to or addressed as follows: To the City: City of Palm Desert 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, California 92260 Attention: City Manager Telephone: (760) 346-0611 Facsimile: (760) 340-0574 with a copy to: Best Best & Krieger 74760 Highway 111, Suite 200 Indian Wells, California 92210 Attention: David Erwin, Esq. Telephone: (760) 586-2611 Facsimile: (760) 340-6698 To the Owner: Dahoon Investment Company, Inc. 77-200 California Drive Palm Desert, California 92211 Attention: Sung Sang Cho Telephone: 626.643.7516 with a copy to: Sullivan, Hill Lewin Rez &Engel 550 West C Street, Suite 1500 San Diego, CA 92101 Attention: Madeline Clark Cahill, Esq. Telephone: (619) 233-4100 Facsimile: (619) 231-4372 5.2 Indemnity of the City by Owner 5.2.1 Owner shall fully indemnify, protect, hold harmless, and defend (with counsel reasonably selected and approved by the City, which approval shall not be unreasonably conditioned, withheld or delayed) the City and its elected or appointed officials, officers, agents, attorneys, consultants and employees and each of them (each individually, an "Entity" and collectively, the "Entities"), from and against all "Indemnified Liabilities" (as defined in subparagraph 5.2.2); provided however such indemnity shall not apply to a particular Entity to the extent that such Indemnified Liabilities are caused by the active negligence or willful misconduct of the City. The City shall immediately notify the Owner, in writing, of any claim for which the City seeks indemnification (an "Indemnification Claim") 5.2.2 For the purposes of this Paragraph 5.2.2 the term " Indemnified Liabilities" means and refers to any and all claims demands, damages, losses, liabilities, obligations, penalties, fines, actions, causes of action, judgments, suits, proceedings, costs, disbursements and expenses, including, without limitation, fees, disbursements and fees and costs of attorneys, consultants and experts, and all damages of any kind or of any nature whatsoever that may, at any time, be imposed upon, incurred or suffered by, or asserted or -8- awarded against an indemnified party, directly or indirectly relating to or arising from this Agreement. 5.3 Controlling Regulations/Governing Law. If a conflict arises between applicable governmental regulations relating to the operation and maintenance of the Property, the most stringent regulatory requirement shall control. The Parties hereto acknowledge that this Agreement has been negotiated and entered into in California. The Parties hereto expressly agree that this Agreement shall be governed by, interpreted under, and construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of California and if controlling, by the laws of the United States. Further, the Parties to this Agreement hereby agree that any legal actions arising from this Agreement shall be filed in California Superior Court, in the Court of Riverside, Central District or the appropriate federal court in such district. 5.4 Partial Invalidity. If any term or provision or portion of this Agreement or the application thereof to any person or circumstance shall, to any extent, be invalid or unenforceable, the remainder of this Agreement, or the application of such term or provision or portion thereof to persons or circumstances other than those as to which it is held invalid or unenforceable, shall not be affected thereby, and each such term and provision of this Agreement shall be valid and enforced to the fullest extent permitted by law. 5.5 No Intent to Create Third Party Beneficiaries. The Parties intend that the rights and obligations under this Agreement shall benefit and burden only the Parties hereto, and do not intend to create any rights in, or right of action to or for the use or benefit of any third Party, who is not one of the Parties to this Agreement. 5.6 Waivers. No waiver of any breach of any covenant or provision herein contained shall be deemed a waiver of any preceding or succeeding breach thereof, or of any other covenant or provision herein contained. No extension of the time for performance of any obligation or act to be performed herein shall be deemed to be an extension of the time for performance of any other obligation or act to be performed under this Agreement. 5.7 Professional Fees. In the event any litigation, arbitration, mediation or other proceeding ("Proceeding") is initiated by any party against the other party to enforce, interpret or otherwise obtain judicial or quasi-judicial relief in connection with this Agreement, the prevailing party in such Proceeding shall be entitled to recover from the unsuccessful party all costs, expenses, actual attorneys' and expert witness fees relating to or arising out of such Proceeding (whether or not such Proceeding proceeds to judgment) and any post -judgment or post -award proceeding including without limitation one to enforce any judgment or award resulting from any such Proceeding. Any such judgment or award shall contain a specific provision for the recovery of all such subsequently incurred costs, expenses, actual attorneys' and expert witness fees. The arbitrator(s) or court shall determine who is the prevailing party, whether or not the dispute or controversy proceeds to final judgment. City and Owner expressly acknowledge that this Paragraph is not intended to in any way alter the parties' agreement regarding dispute resolution pursuant to Article 4.2 of this Agreement. City and Owner agree that the reference to litigation in this Paragraph is included so that the prevailing party can recover their attorneys' fees and costs if (a) either party files a lawsuit in violation of Paragraph 4.1 (e.g., fees and costs incurred obtaining a court order compelling mediation/arbitration); or (b) a court rules that the arbitration provision in Paragraph 4.1 is unenforceable for any reason. 5.8 Entire Agreement. This Agreement (including all Exhibits attached hereto) is the final expression of, and contains the entire agreement between, the Parties with respect to the subject matter hereof and supersedes all prior understandings with respect thereto. This Agreement may not be modified, changed, supplemented or terminated, nor may -9- any obligations hereunder be waived, except by written instrument signed by the Party to be charged or by its agent duly authorized in writing. The Parties do not intend to confer any benefit hereunder on any person, firm or corporation other than the Parties hereto. 5.9 Construction. Headings at the beginning of each paragraph and subparagraph are solely for the convenience of the Parties and are not a part of this Agreement. Whenever required by the context of this Agreement, the singular shall include the plural and the masculine shall include the feminine and vice versa. This Agreement shall not be construed as if it had been prepared by one of the Parties, but rather as if all Parties had prepared the same. Unless otherwise indicated, all references to Paragraphs are to this Agreement. All exhibits referred to in this Agreement are attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. If the date on which any action is required to be performed under the terms of this Agreement is not a business day, the action shall be taken on the next succeeding business day. 5.10 Time is of the Essence. Time and strict punctual performance is of the essence of this Agreement and each of its provisions in which a time for performance is specified. 5.11 Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in two (2) or more counterparts, each of which shall be an original, and all of which together shall constitute a single instrument. This Agreement may be executed by facsimile signatures, and each facsimile counterpart, when taken together, shall be deemed an original. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Owner and the City hereby execute this Agreement by the signatures of their authorized representatives, as follow: Date:a? OWNER: Dahoon Investment Company, Inc. a California corporation By: Its: By: Its: [Remaining Signatures on Following Page] -10- -11- IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII eviddnce td be the perso acknowledged to me t capacit s�f, and that by upon • .If of which the perso W my hand and off; /- Signature of Notary Public STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ) 7—, 2005, before me, the undersigned notary public, personally appeared , personally known to me OR proved to me on the basis of satisfactory ose na re subscribed to the . 'thin instrument and e/they executed the same in 4. - r/their authorized eir signatur#) on the instrument the perso p(s or the entity ) acted, executed the instrument. al. 1 1 ANNE E. DAVIS Commission # 1423752 Notary Public - California Riverside County My Comm. Expkes Jun 12, 2007i SIGNATURE PAGE TO OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT (Palm Desert Golf Club) CITY: City of Palm Desert a California municipal corporation Date: e 3/ • OS By: • ATTEST:- •--• ••�!'g „ APPROVgb' AS' tO LEGAL FORM: BEST BEST & KRIE ER LLP By: City ttorney Bufor EXHIBIT A-1 TO OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PALM DESERT GOLF COURSE EXHIBIT A-1 PARCEL 1: LOT A OF TRACT 3860 AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN BOOK 60, PAGES 55 THROUGH 57 INCLUSIVE OF MAPS, RIVERSIDE COUNTY RECORDS. PARCEL 2: LOTS A AND B OF TRACT 4079 AS SHOWN BY MP.P ON FILE IN BOOK 66, PAGES 67 THROUGH 69 INCLUSIVE OF MAPS, RIVERSIDE COUNTY RECORDS. PARCEL 3: LOTS 72, 73, 261 AND 405 OF TRACT 2137, AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN BOOK 41, PAGES 29 THROUGH 36 INCLUSIVE OF MAPS, RIVERSIDE COUNTY RECORDS. PARCEL 4: LOT 199 OF TRACT 2137, AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN BOOK 41, PAGES 29 THROUGH 36 INCLUSIVE OF MAPS, RIVERSIDE COUNTY RECORDS. EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 262 OF SAID TRACT 2137; THENCE NORTH 0° 8' 10" EAST ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID LOT 262, 70 FEET TO THE MOST NORTHWESTERLY CORNER THEREOF; THENCE SOUTH 45° 0' 31" WEST, 40 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 33° 59' EAST, 50.31 FEET, TC THE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL 5: LOT 453 OF TRACT 2137, AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN BOOK 41, PAGES 29 THROUGH 36, INCLUSIVE OF MAPS, RIVERSIDE COUNTY RECORDS. EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 454 OF SAID TRACT 2137; THENCE ALONG THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 454, SOUTH 36° 21' 15" EAST, 101.37 FEET TO THE SOUTHEASTERLY CORNER OF SAID LOT 454; THENCE NORTH 43° 10' 31" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 2 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY IN A DIRECT LINE, TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWESTERLY CORNER OF LOT 392, AS SHOWN BY SAID MAP; THENCE NORTH 80° 30' 14" EAST, 102.80 FEET ON THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER THEREOF; THENCE SOUTH 33° 04' 5B" WEST, 15 FEET ON THE SOUTHWESTERLY EXTENSION OF THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY, IN A DIRECT LINE, TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL 6: LOTS 3, 5, 6, 7 AND 466 OF TRACT 2283 AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN BOOK 42, PAGES 82 THROUGH 89 INCLUSIVE OF MAPS, RIVERSIDE COUNTY RECORDS. PARCEL 7: LOT 2 OF TRACT 2263, AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN BOOK 42, PAGES 82 THROUGH 89 INCLUSIVE OF MAPS, RIVERSIDE COUNTY RECORDS. EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 287, SHOWN BY MAP ON SAID TRACT; THENCE NORTH 86° 49' 53" EAST, 30 FEET ON THE EASTERLY EXTENSION OF THE NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT 287; THENCE SOUTH 8° 02' 43" WEST, 62.91 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 287; THENCE NORTH 32° 35' 25" WEST, 71.96 FEET ON THE NORTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT287, TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 2; THENCE ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 2, NORTH 87° 27' 23" EAST, 366.59 FEET; THENCE NORTH 28° 37' 50" WEST, 80.28 FEET; THENCE NORTH 81° 10' 50" WEST, 139.78 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 67° 45' 56" WEST, 161.33 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 40° 32' 05" WEST, 62.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL 8: LOT 4 OF TRACT 2283, AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN BOOK 42, PAGES 82 THROUGH 89 INCLUSIVE OF MAPS, RIVERSIDE COUNTY RECORDS. EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE NORTHEASTERLY CORNER OF GOT 246 OF SAID TRACT 2283; THENCE ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID LIT 246, NORTH 40° 36' 15" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 92.20 FEET TO THE NORTHWESTERLY CORNER OF SAID LOT 246; THENCE SOUTH 83° 18' 30" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 60.41 FEET TO THE NORTHWESTERLY CORNER OF LOT 248 OF SAID TRACT NO. 2283; THENCE ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 248, SOUTH 0° 00' 10" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 62.96 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL 9: LOTS H, I, J AND K. OF TRACT 4871, AS SHOn'N BY MAP ON FILE IN BOOK 77, PAGES 16 THROUGH 18 INCLUSIVE OF MAPS, RIVERSIDE. COUNTY RECORDS. EXCEPTING THAT PORTION OF LOT J OF TRACT 4871, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE MOST NORTHERLY CORNER OF LOT 166 OF SAID TRACT 4871; THENCE SOUTH 43° 27' EAST, 74.20 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH A NORTHERLY PROLONGATION OF THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 166; THENCE SOUTH 24° 09' 34" WEST, 9.89 FEET TO THE MOST EASTERLY CORNER OF SAID LOT 166; THENCE NORTH 36° 20' 44" WEST, 78.57 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. EXHIBIT A-2 TO OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT SITE MAP OF PALM DESERT GOLF COURSE �-JL---. • U1 S 7s F�iC1rJM i] �rl ;,Y� 11=ti7.YYx r;� .mac �;,�js �.Sl' :• eR.X :,7211f�LYJ 61:3rcvrlig4 GOLF COURSE IMPROVEMENT, CLUB HOUSE RENOVATION & RESIDENTIAL PROJECT f'J MAINTENANCE STANDARDS FOR THE PALM DESERT COUNTRY CLUB GOLF COURSE MAINTENANCE STANDARDS The following are the minimum standards by which the Palm Desert golf course (27 holes) will be managed: A Golf Course That Is Maintained Equal to or Greater Than: "Neat, Clean, and Green Golf Course" Everyday The Highest Quality Conditions Possible To Play The Game Of Golf Maintained Sand Traps (All with complete rakes) :- Serviced Ball Washers on carts (Clean Water and Towels) Yardage Markers at Regular Intervals Tee Markers and Cups Rotated Daily Identify Address and Remedy Work Areas (i.e., Irrigation Breaks, Cart Trails, Etc.) Report Golf Course Work (Aerification, Etc.) In Advance to Players Clean, Serviced, Sanitary Restrooms Litter Free - Serviced Trash Cans Attentive, Motivated, Uniformed Staff Trees and Shrubbery Trimmed in Accordance with recommendation of a certified arborist, or City of Palm Desert landscape management guide Consistent Mowing Patterns L Adequate Number of Clean Golf Carts - Extra Scorecards - Pencils on 2nd Tee Divot Repair Program Ball Mark Repair Program .-Adequate Communication Practice Area • Clean, Quality Practice Balls, Replaced on a Regular Basis • Turf Maintained and Rotated Tee Areas ■ Targets at Regular Intervals • Greens for the Purpose of Targets • Flags for the Purpose of Target Points • Billboards for Information • Informed, Attentive, Motivated Personnel with Name Tags ■ Adequate Communication from the Operators to the Patrons • Litter Free BASIC GOLF SHOP SET UP Informed, Attentive, Motivated Personnel with Name Tags Adequate Communications between the Operators and Patrons ■ Posted Hours of Operation • Posted Fee Schedules • Posted Golf Course Condition, "Right -to -Know" Information, (i.e. Reclaimed Water, Use of Pesticides, etc.) • Posted Pictures of Shop Staff • Posted Play Restrictions • Posted Calendar of Events • Ladies Club and Men's Club • Clean, Litter Free Area • Plants (If Space Allows) Communication of Golf Maintenance, Driving Range, and Cart Staging Area. • Score Posting Area Easily Accessed • At least one (1) full-time Property crew member shall have a current pesticide applicator's license. CLUBHOUSE, YARD AND PARKING LOT MAINTENANCE Owner shall insure that the water feature shall be operational and managed to avoid buildup of algae or mineral deposits. :- Owner shall insure that all landscaped planter areas shall be kept weeded, watered, fertilized, and raked in accordance with the City of Palm Desert Landscape Maintenance Standards. Owner shall insure that all trees and shrubs shall be pruned as necessary to provide ease of play on the course and to provide aesthetic value throughout. The crew shall replace trees damaged by wind, etc., and provide staking as necessary. Tree pruning shall be performed under supervision of certified arborist. • Owner shall insure that marred painted surfaces shall be promptly touched up to match adjacent areas. • Owner shall insure that facility be adequately managed to avoid pest infestation. Rodent and insect control shall be performed as necessary. • Owner shall insure that custodial services, including emptying of trash receptacles, replacement of soaps and paper supplies in restrooms, cleaning of spills, and mopping or vacuuming of floors shall be performed daily. • Owner shall insure that mechanical system filters shall be replaced routinely. Owner shall assure that the food and beverage facilities at the Golf Course are at all times operated in such a manner as to qualify for and maintain no less than a "Class B" rating as administered by the Riverside County Health Department. • Owner shall insure that the ventilation systems, electrical equipment, toilet facilities, and work areas shall be maintained properly to provide a decent, safe, and sanitary work area. Owner shall insure that chemicals shall be clearly labeled and properly stored in compliance with all regulations for proper disposal of materials. Owner shall resurface any cracked asphalt as necessary. Owner shall properly mark the parking lot with visible striping and signs in place. • Owner shall sweep the parking lot and keep it weeded, and free of brush, junk or trash piles. • Owner shall insure that all exterior and parking lot lights shall be operational and time controlled appropriately for the season. • Landscape maintenance shall be maintained according to the current version of City of Palm Desert Landscape Maintenance Guide. Owner shall monitor local evapotranspiration rates and provide appropriate watering solutions for the golf course after accounting for the evaporative losses. Perform repairs as needed. 1 Numeral refers to percent or pounds of active ingredient. 2 Diquat has a state label in Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Oklahoma, Tennessee and Texas for winter annual weed control in dormant bermudagrass. s Mocap 10G is labelled for commercial turf only (golf courses, sod farms), Diazinon is not labeled for use on golf courses or sod farms. 5 Triump 4E is restricted to certain soil types and several applicaiton techniques must be followed. It is labeled for use on lawns, sod farms, and golf courses (only tees, greens, and aprons). A maximum of one application per year is permitted for the higher surface insect rate and a maximum of two applications per year at least 60 days apart for the lower surface insect rate. 6 For use only by commercial lawn pest control personnel, and only on golf course tees, greens and aprons, and on sod farms. See soil restrictions Diazinon may not be used on golf courses or sod farms For use in professional turf areas such as golf courses and commercial sod. LESFFICE O CO' ALMRK'DESERT C Ma APR ` 9 PM 2: 04 4-9-2018 To: Rochelle Klassen, City Clerk, City of Palm Desert From Barbara 'Powers, 76918 Kentucky Ave, Palm Desert , CA 92211 Subject: Pictures I took from 4-6-2018 to 4-8-2018 of Palm Desert Country Club 18 hole Golf Course These Pictures are in different locations and show dead plants, trees, sand weeds, etc. Palm Desert Country Club spent $1000 of dollars on Desert Landscaping and these pictures Show how the desert landscaping and how it has not been maintained. I hope the council sees that this is how the 69 condo project will look if this company Is allowed to obtain their zone change and build 69 condos. This has been an on going problem since they installed the desert landscaping. Please see that each Council Member gets their copy of the pictures on the enclosed Disc . They will be able to in large the pictures for a better look at the weeds and dead plants. Thank You, 4441.1.1% 8 rb Powers 760-777-0065 April 18, 2018 Sabby Jonathan, Mayor of PD Susan Marie Weber, Mayor Pro Tem Jan Harnik, Council Member Kathleen Kelly, Council Member Gina Nestande, Council Member RECEIVED CI1 Y CLERK'S OFFICE PALM DESERT r 1010 APR 18 AM 9: 33 Subject: Operation and Maintenance Agreement-Dahoon Investment Co., Inc We have been informed the that the dismissal(s) from the PDCC Development LLC Bankruptcy reinstated the validity of the full Operation and Maintenance Agreement on file with the City of Palm Desert known as City of Palm Desert and Dahoon Investment Co., Inc. Open Space Action Committee Barbara Powers, Serena Illk, Kay Adamson, Cindy Stevenson CHAPTER 11 BANKRUPTCY DISMISSAL CHAPTER 7 BANKRUPTCY DISMISSAL ATTACHMENTS: EXCERTS CITIZENS' ADVISORY COMMITTEE SEPTEMBER 21, 2009 CITIZENS' ADVISORY COMMITTEE NOVEMBER 15, 2010 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING NOVEMBER 16, 2010 OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT FOR PROJECT AREA NO. FOR PROJECT AREA NO. 4 MINUTES 4 MINUTES CC: Matt Ward, MWard Law Corp Lauri Aylaian, PD City Manager Ryan Stendell, Director of Community Development Eric Ceja, Principal Planner Rachelle Klassen, City of Palm Desert City Clerk PLEASE MAKE THIS LETTER AND ATTACHMENTS PART OF THE RECORD FOR THE CITY OF PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 26, 20I8, PROPOSED. Case Nos. PP/CUP/EA/CZ 16-280, (Christopher McFaddenlMcFadden Architects, Applicant). EXCERPTS FROM MINUTES: CITY OF PALM DESERT MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION NOVEMBER 16, 2010 ROLL CALL Staff Present: Lauri Aylaian, Director of Community Development D. PROJECT AREA 4 COMMITTEE Commissioner Schmidt stated that the Committee met yesterday. The topic is still about the Palm Desert Country Club. She stated that there is a potential buyer for the note, not the club. Upon request, Ms. Aylaian clarified what that meant, stating that once the note is purchased, the owners of the debt will decide to foreclose on the golf course. It is a circuitous way of getting an end result. It could add as much as thirty to ninety days to the process. Technically, the Palm Desert Country Club LLC owns the golf course but has no desire or ability to maintain it. Wilshire Bank, who owns the debt now, still maintains a skeleton crew to keep the greens mowed and for emergency issues, but they act as though they have no intention of operating the area as a golf course Commissioner De Luna asked if they could still build homes there. Ms. Aylaian said that right now, it's only zoned to be a golf course and to build a home there would have to be a change of zone and conditions of approval. Commissioner De Luna followed up by asking if they could decide NOT to maintain it as a golf course and keep it as open space. Ms. Aylaian stated that they could. She also stated that they currently have an agreement with the City that they would maintain it to such a level as if it were to be used as a golf course, but there is nothing that requires that they actually operate it as a golf course CITIZENS' ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR PROJECT AREA NO. 4 MINUTES NOVEMBER 15, 2010 Mr. McCarthy introduced Mr. Steven Orr, City Attorney, who is monitoring the bankruptcy case. Mr. Orr reported that the bankruptcy was dismissed at the end of September for lack of participation by Mr. Case, Mr. Kosmont, and Mr. Cho, and for the failure to pay fees and failure to appear at creditor meetings. It was a punitive action by the Bankruptcy Court to dismiss, which took place on September 28. The order was signed and issued shortly before Halloween. No appeal was taken by Palm Desert Country Club Development, LLC (PDCC) during the 14-day period, which means the dismissal is final. PDCC are now fair game for lawsuits, liens, and other things. He communicated that Wilshire Bank has been the one responsible for maintaining the course. They are attempting to preserve the asset. It has $4 to $6 million invested in terms of loans for the property. The bank wants everyone to know that they are spending thousands of dollars for maintenance, and trying to keep water and power bills current. Mr. Orr stated that the bank is close to selling the note to someone who sent a representative to an HOA meeting. The sale has not been completed, which is the note that the bank has with the developer. He explained that would put whoever bought the note into the position of being the first trustee lender who could then exert pressure on the PDCC owners to give a deed in lieu of foreclosure. He stated that the bank filed a Notice of Default, which is the process that starts a trustee sale. It was filed on August 16, which 90 days runs from that date to this Wednesday. He stated that the attorney for the bank told him that if the deal does not close with Mr. Eddy Awada, that the bank intends to foreclose on Wednesday by credit bidding its note at a sale. Based on the August 16 filing of a Notice of Default, the foreclosure could not take place. He gathers that the bank is running out of patience with PDCC, and the bank may come to own the property in mid December. He said that the fact that the bank has filed a Notice of Default back in August, it brings it within the scope of the City's excellent abandoned property statute. So the City has the bank on the hook for maintenance and they know that. He noted that the owner has been non -responsive to the City getting a letter of trespass to allow the Sheriffs to go on the property. Mr. Case, Mr. Cho, and Mr. Kosmont seem to be unavailable. Mr. Orr also reported that the bank continues being active in managing the property. They have it legal in terms so it is not a public nuisance. CITIZENS' ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR PROJECT AREA NO. 4 MINUTES SEPTEMBER 21, 2009 Mr. McCarthy communicated that there are two agreements; a development agreement and an operations and maintenance agreement that was executed between the City and PDCC Development LLC with respect to the development and maintenance. PDCC Development LCC is in Chapter 11 and in default, which technically can be called a breach of contract. He stated that at this time there are certain authorities under regulatory authority to require a certain level of Code Enforcement. He noted that the development and operations and maintenance agreement are pre-empted by the court. Pre-Empted: To prevent, delay or hinder something by taking precautionary or anticipatory measures. Case 6:09-bk-23674-CB Doc 95 Filed 03/05/10 Entered 03/05/10 14:42:25 Desc Main Document Page 1 of 3 1 FILED & ENTERED 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 In re: MAR 05 2010 CLERK U.S. BANKRUPTCY COURT Central District of California BY milano DEPUTY CLERK UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 12 PDCC Development LLC, 13 14 15 16 17 Debtor(s). Case No: 6:09-bk-23674-BB Chapter: 11 ORDER DISMISSING CHAPTER 11 CASE Date: March 3, 2010 Time: 2:00 PM Location: Courtroom 303 The Court conducted a Scheduling and Case Management Conference in the above chapter 11 18 case at 2:00 p.m. on March 3, 2010 in Courtroom 303 of the above -entitled Court. Elizabeth Lossing 19 20 appeared on behalf of the Office of the United States Trustee. No one appeared on behalf of the debtor 21 and debtor in possession. 22 The Court having advised parties in interest that it reserved the right to dismiss a case at a case 23 management conference in its original June 22, 2009 "Order Setting Scheduling and Case Management 24 Conference"; and the Court having found at the March 3, 2010 status conference that: (1) the debtor in 25 26 possession had failed to file an updated status report in connection with the March 3 status conference, 27 as ordered by the Court at the December 30, 2009 status conference; (2) the debtor in possession is 28 delinquent in the payment of its quarterly fees to the Office of the United States Trustee; (3) the debtor Case 6:09-bk-23674-CB Doc 95 Filed 03/05/10 Entered 03/05/10 14:42:25 Desc Main Document Page 2 of 3 in possession has not been filing its monthly operating reports with the Office of the United States Trustee in a timely manner or at all; and (4) the only evidence of insurance that the debtor in possession has provided the United States Trustee reflects that the debtor in possession's insurance coverage has lapsed, and other good cause appearing therefor, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows: 1. The above chapter 11 case is dismissed. 2. Judgment is hereby entered in favor of the United States Trustee and against debtor and debtor in possession PDCC Development LLC in the amount of $650, representing the quarterly fees due for the fourth quarter of 2009 and the first quarter of 2010. PDCC Development LLC shall pay these amounts not later than 30 days after entry of this order. # # # DATED: March 5, 2010 -2 Case 6:09-bk-23674-CB Doc 95 Filed 03/05/10 Entered 03/05/10 14:42:25 Desc Main Document Page 3 of 3 NOTE TO USERS OF THIS FORM: 1) Attach this form to the last page of a proposed Order or Judgment. Do not file as a separate document. 2) The title of the judgment or order and all service information must be filled in by the party lodging the order. 3) Category I. below: The United States trustee and case trustee (if any) will always be in this category. 4) Category II. below: List ONLY addresses for debtor (and attorney), movant (or attorney) and person/entity (or attorney) who filed an opposition to the requested relief. DO NOT list an address if person/entity is listed in category I. NOTICE OF ENTERED ORDER AND SERVICE LIST Notice is given by the court that a judgment or order entitled (specify) ORDER DISMISSING CHAPTER 11 CASE was entered on the date indicated as "Entered" on the first page of this judgment or order and will be served in the manner indicated below: I. SERVED BY THE COURT VIA NOTICE OF ELECTRONIC FILING ("NEF") - Pursuant to controlling General Order(s) and Local Bankruptcy Rule(s), the foregoing document was served on the following person(s) by the court via NEF and hyperlink to the judgment or order. As of March 5, 2010, the following person(s) are currently on the Electronic Mail Notice List for this bankruptcy case or adversary proceeding to receive NEF transmission at the email address(es) indicated below. * Melody G Anderson manderson@hemar.com * Marc Andrews sandra.g.mcmasters@wellsfargo.com * Craig C Chiang cchiang@buchalter.com * Everett L Green everett.l.green@usdoj.gov * Whitney G Mcdonald wmcdonald@rwglaw.com * Richard A Shaffer rick@raslaw.com * United States Trustee (RS) ustpregion16.rs.ecf@usdoj.gov * Robert M Yaspan ryaspan@yaspanlaw.com, tmenachian@yaspanlaw.com II. SERVED BY THE COURT VIA U.S. MAIL: A copy of this notice and a true copy of this judgment or order was sent by U.S. Mail to the following person(s) and/or entity(ies) at the address(es) indicated below: Robert T Anderson 1950 Market St Riverside, CA 92501-1720 ❑ Service information continued on attached page III. TO BE SERVED BY THE LODGING PARTY: Within 72 hours after receipt of a copy of this judgment or order which bears an "Entered" stamp, the party lodging the judgment or order will serve a complete copy bearing an "Entered" stamp by U.S. Mail, overnight mail, facsimile transmission or email and file a proof of service of the entered order on the following person(s) and/or entity(ies) at the address(es), facsimile transmission number(s) and/or email address(es) indicated below: ❑ Service information continued on attached page -3 California Central Chapter 7 Business Bankruptcy Filings in 2010 PDCC Development LLC California Central 6:10-bk-31452 7 07/09/2010 03/25/2011 Dismissed for Other Reason 10/27/2010 Case Information Outline Case Title: PDCC Development LLC Court: California Central Bankruptcy Court (cacbke) Chapter: 7 Filed: 07/09/2010 Closed: 03/25/2011 Closed: 03/25/2011 Disposition: Dismissed for Other Reason 10/27/2010 Case 6:10-bk-31452-CB Doc 1 Filed 07/09/10 Entered 07/09/10 16:54:35 .B1 (Official Form 1) (4/10) Main Document Page 1 of 12 Desc United States Bankruptcy Court Central District of California Name of Debtor (if individual, enter Last, First, Middle): Name ofJoint Debtor (Spouse) (Last, First, Middle): PDCC Development LLC. All Other Names used by the Debtor in the last 8 years (include married, maiden, and trade names): dba Palm Desert Country Club All Other Names used by the Joint Debtor in the last 8 years (include married, maiden, and trade names): Last four digits of Soc. Sec. or Individual -Taxpayer 1.D. (ITIN) No./Complete EIN Last four digits of Soc. Sec. or Individual -Taxpayer 1.D. (1TIN) No./Complete EIN (if more than one, state all): EIN: 56-2317913 (if more than one, state all): Street Address of Debtor (No. and Street, City, and State) 77-200 California Drive Palm Desert, CA IZIPCODE 92211 County of Residence or of the Principal Place of Business: Riverside Mailing Address of Debtor (if different from street address): j ZIPCODE Street Address of Joint Debtor (No. and Street, City, and State 1 ZIPCODE County of Residence or of the Principal Place of Business: Mailing Address ofJoint Debtor (if different from street address): Location of Principal Assets of Business Debtor (if different from street address above): Type of Debtor (Fomt of Organization) (Check one box) ❑ individual (includes Joint Debtors) See F,xhibil D on page 2 of this form. ICorporation (includes LLC and LLP) ❑ Partnership ❑ Other (If debtor is not one of the above entities, check this box and state type of entity below,) I Et d 0 0 2 Statistical/Administrative Information x Nature of Business (Check one box) ❑ Health Care Business ❑ Single Asset Real Estate es defined In 11 U.S.C. § 101(51E) ❑ Railroad ❑ Stockbroker ❑ Commodity Broker Clearing Bank Other Counny Club and Golf Courses Tax -Exempt Entity (Check box, if applicable) ❑ Debtor is a tax-exempt organization under Tine 26 of the United States Code (the Internal Revenue Code) Filing Fee (Cheek one box) Full Filing Fee attached Filing Fee to be paid in installments (Applicable to individuals only) Must attach signed application for the court's consideration certifying that the debtor is unable to pay fee except in installments. Rule 1006(b). See Official Form No. 3A. Filing Fee waiver requested (applicable to chapter 7 individuals only). Must attach signed application for the court's consideration. See Official Form 38. 44 Debtor estimates that fiords will be available for distribution to unsecured creditors. ❑ Debtor estimates that, after any exempt property is excluded and administrative expenses paid, there will be no funds available for distribution to unsecured creditors, Estimated Number of Creditors 1-49 50-99 100-199 200-999 1000- 5,001- 10,001- 25,001- 50,001- Over 5000 10,000 25,000 50,000 100,000 100,000 Estimated Asset❑s] $s0,001 to $100❑,001 to 550O 1 $1,00a,001 $10,0,001 $50,t❑0,001 $10000 ,001 $5 ,001 More than $50,000 $100,000 $500,000 to$1 to$10 to$50 to$100 to$50 to$1billion $1 billion million million Inillion million million hStlmateci Llabit tttes SO to $50,001 to $100,001 to $5 001 $1,0� 1 $10,000,01 $50, ❑0,001 $10 O ,001 $500,0❑00,001 $50,000 $100,00 $50,00 to$1 to$10 to$50 to$100 to$500 to$1 billion million million million rni#lion million More Matt $1 billion IZIPCODE ZIPCODE Chapter of Bankruptcy Code Under Which the Petition is Piled (Check one box) Chapter 7 ❑ Chapter 9 ❑ Chapter 1 1 ❑ Chapter €2 ❑ Chapter 13 ❑ Chapter 15 Petition for Recognition ofa Foreign Main Proceeding Chapter 15 Petition for ❑ Recognition ofa Foreign Nonmain Proceeding (Nature of Debts ne Debts are primarily consuomerbox) ❑ debts, defined in 11 U.S.C. IZl § 101(8) as "incurred by an individual primarily for a personal, family, or household purpose." Check one box: Chapter I1 Debtors ❑ Debtor is a small business as defined in 1€ U.S.C. § I01(51 D) ❑ Debtor is not a small business as defined in 11 U.S.C. § I01(51 D) Check if: Debtor's aggregate noneontingent liquidated debts (excluding debts owed to ❑ insiders or affiliates) are less than S2,343,300 (amount subject to adjustment on .1/01/13 and every three years thereafter). Debts are primarily business debts Check all applicable boxes ❑ A plan is being filed with this petition. 0 Acceptances of the plan were solicited prepetition from one or more classes, in accordance with I I U.S.C. § 1 126(b). THIS SPACE IS FOR COURT USE ONLY G Sanknq>tcy2010 ®1991-2010, New Hope Software, inc., ver. 4.5.4-749 B1(Oft1;Ro0-i1452-CB Doc 1 Filed 07/09/10 Entered 07/09/10 16:54:35 Desc r,�,y f SC Voluntary Petition Name of Debtor(s): (This page must be completed and fried in every case)►.lain Docurnct CPDCC Development LLC. All Prior Bankruptcy Cases Filed Within Last 8 Years (If more than two, attach additional sheet) Location Case Number: Date Filed: Where Filed: Central District of California RSO9-23674-CB 6/16/09 Location Case Number: Date Filed: Where Filed: N.A. Pending Bankruptcy Case Filed by any Spouse, Partner or Affiliate of this Debtor (If more than one, attach additional sheet) Name of Debtor: NONE Case Number: Date Filed: District: Exhibit A (To be completed if debtor is required to file periodic reports (e.g., forms I0K and 10Q) with the Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and is requesting relief under chapter 11) ❑ Exhibit A is attached and made a part of this petition. Relationship: Judge: Page 2 Exhibit B (To be cotnpleted if debtor is an individual whose debts are primarily consumer debts) I, the attorney for the petitioner named in the foregoing petition, declare that 1 have informed the petitioner that [he or she] may proceed under chapter 7,11, 12, or 13 of title 11, United States Code, and have explained the relief available under each such chapter. 'further certify that I delivered to the debtor the notice required by I 1 U.S.C. >? 342(b). Signature of Attorney for Debtor(s) Date Exhibit C Does the debtor own or have possession of any property that poses or is alleged to pose a threat of imminent and identifiable harm to public health or safety? ❑ Yes, and Exhibit C is attached and made a part of this petition. `i No Exhibit D (To be completed by every individual debtor. If a joint petition is filed, each spouse must complete and attach a separate Exhibit D.) ❑ Exhibit D completed and signed by the debtor is attached and made a part of this petition. If this is a joint petition: ❑ Exhibit D also completed and signed by the joint debtor is attached and made a part of this petition. Information Regarding the Debtor - Venue (Check any applicable box) • Debtor has been domiciled or has had a residence, principal place of business, or principal assets in this District for 180 days immediately preceding the date of this petition or for a longer part of such 180 days than in any other District. [] There is a bankruptcy case concerning debtor's affiliate, general partner, or partnership pending in this District. ❑ Debtor is a debtor in a foreign proceeding and has its principal place of business or principal assets in the United Sates in this District, or has no principal place of business or assets in the United States but is a defendant in an action or proceeding [in federal or state court] in this District, or the interests of the parties will be served in regard to the relief sought in this District. Certification by a Debtor Who Resides as a Tenant of Residential Property (Check all applicable boxes) ❑ Landlord has a judgment for possession of debtor's residence. (If box checked, complete the following.) (Name of landlord that obtained judgment) (Address of landlord) ❑ Debtor claims that under applicable non bankruptcy law, there are circumstances under which the debtor would be permitted to cure the entire monetary default that gave rise to the judgment for possession, after the judgment for possession was entered, and ❑ Debtor has included in this petition the deposit with the court of any rent that would become due during the 30-day period after the filing of the petition, ❑ Debtor certifies that he/she has served the Landlord with this certification. (11 U.S.C. § 362(1)). Case 6:10-bk-31452-CB Doc 1 Filed 07/09/10 Entered 07/09/10 16:54:35 Desc 0 ,,112 131(Official Form 1) (4/10) Voluntary Petition I Name of Debtor(s): (This page must be completed and filed in every case) I PDCC Development LLC. Signatures Signature(s) of Debtor(s) (Individual/Joint) Signature of a Foreign Representative i declare under penalty of perjury that the information provided in this petition is true and correct. [If petitioner is an individual whose debts are primarily consumer debts and has chosen to file under chapter 7) I am aware that I may proceed under chapter 7, 11, 12, or 13 of title 11, United States Code, understand the relief available under each such chapter, and choose to proceed under chapter 7. [If no attorney represents me and no bankruptcy petition preparer signs the petition) I have obtained and read the notice required by II U.S.C. § 342(b). I request relief in accordance with the chapter of title 11, United States Code, specified in this petition. X Signature of Debtor Signature of Joint Debtor • Telephone Number (If not represented by attorney) Date X Sign gnature of Attorney* re of Attorney for D tor(s) ROBERT M. YASPAN 51867 Printed Name of Attorney for Debtor(s) Law Offices of Robert M. Yasvan Firm Name 21700 Oxnard Street, Suite 1750 Address Woodland Hills, CA 91367 RI R-A05-771 1 Telephone Number .7/P- 1, Date *Ina case in which § 707(bX4)(D) applies, this signature also constitutes a certification that the attorney has no knowledge after an inquiry that the information in the schedules is incorrect. Signature of Debtor (Corporation/Partnership) I declare under penalty of perjury that the information provided in this petition is true and correct, and that 1 have been authorized to file this petition on behalf of the debtor. The debtor requests relief in accordance with the chapter of title 11, United Statede, specifiecjpin this petition. Signature of Authorized Individual RANDY CASE Printed Name of Authorized individual Manager Title of Authorized Individual Date Page 3 I declare under penalty of perjury that the informationprovided in this petition is true and correct, that I am the foreign representative of a debtor in a foreign proceeding, and that I am authorized to file this petition. (Check only one box.) I request relief in accordance with chapter 15 of title 11, United States Code. Certified copies of the documents required by § 1515 of title 11 are attached. Pursuant to 11 U.S.C.§ 1511, I request relief in accordance with the chapter of title 11 specified in this petition. A certified copy of the order granting recognition of the foreign main proceeding is attached. (Signature of Foreign Representative) (Printed Name of Foreign Representative) (Date) Signature of Non -Attorney Petition Preparer I declare under penalty of perjury that: 1) I am a bankruptcy petition preparer as defined in 11 U.S.C. § 110, 2) I prepared this document for compensation, and have provided the debtor with a copy of this document and the notices and information required under I 1 U.S.C. § 110(b), 110(h), and 342(b); and, 3) if rules or guidelines have been promulgated pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 110 setting a maximum fee for services chargeable by bankruptcy petition preparers, I have given the debtor notice of the maximum amount before any document for filing for a debtor or accepting any fee from the debtor, as required in that section. Official Form 19 is attached. Printed Name and title, if any, of Bankruptcy Petition Preparer Social Security Number (If the bankruptcy petition preparer is not an individual, state the Social Security number of the officer, principal, responsible person or partner of the bankruptcy petition preparer.) (Required by II U.S.C. § 110.) Address X Date Signature of bankruptcy petition preparer or officer, principal, responsible person, or partner whose Social Security number is provided above. Names and Social Security numbers of all other individuals who prepared or assisted in preparing this document unless the bankruptcy petition preparer is not an individual: If more than one person prepared this document, attach additional sheets conforming to the appropriate official form for each person. A bankruptcy petition preparer's failure to comply with the provisions of title 11 and the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure may result in fines or imprisonment or both 11 U.S.C. §110; 18 U.S.C. §154. Case 6:10-bk-31452-CB Doc 1 Filed 07/09/10 Entered 07/09/10 16:54:35 Desc Main Document Page 4 of 12 Banbuptcy2010 01991-2010, New Hope Software, Inc., ver. 4.5.4-749 - 30213 B6 Cover (Form 6 Cover) (12/07) FORM 6. SCHEDULES Summary of Schedules Statistical Summary of Certain Liabilities and Related Data (28 U.S.C. § 159) Schedule A - Real Property Schedule B - Personal Property Schedule C - Property Claimed as Exempt Schedule D - Creditors Holding Secured Claims Schedule E - Creditors Holding Unsecured Priority Claims Schedule F - Creditors Holding Unsecured Nonpriority Claims Schedule G - Executory Contracts and Unexpired Leases Schedule H - Codebtors Schedule I - Current Income of Individual Debtor(s) Schedule J - Current Expenditures of Individual Debtor(s) Unsworn Declaration under Penalty of Perjury GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS: The first page of the debtor's schedules and the first page of any amendments thereto must contain a caption as in Form 16B. Subsequent pages should be identified with the debtor's name and case number. If the schedules are filed with the petition, the case number should be left blank Schedules D, E, and F have been designed for the listing of each claim only once. Even when a claim is secured only in part or entitled to priority only in part, it still should be listed only once. A claim which is secured in whole or it part should be listed on Schedule D only, and a claim which is entitled to priority in whole or in part should be listed on Schedule E only. Do not list the same claim twice. If a creditor has more than one claim, such as claims arising from separate transactions, each claim should be scheduled separately. Review the specific instructions for each schedule before completing the schedule. Case 6:10-bk-31452-CB Doc 1 Filed 07/09/10 Entered 07/09/10 16:54:35 Desc Main Document Page 5 of 12 CERTIFICATE OF CORPORATE RESOLUTION I, Randy Case, hereby certify that the following is a true and accurate copy of a resolution passed at a duly authorized meeting of the Board of Directors of PDCC Development LLC., held on July1, 2010 at 77-200 California Drive, Palm Desert, CA 92211: "RESOLVED, that PDCC Development LLC., a California Limited Liability Company, file a petition under Chapter 7 of the Bankruptcy Code; and IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED, that Randy Case is authorized to sign any and all papers and documents necessary to effectuate that filing; and IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED, that the corporation is authorized to hire the Law Offices of Robert M. Yaspan to file the Chapter 7 proceeding and represent the corporation." The Motion to approve the resolution was made by Randy Case, seconded by Larry Kosmont, and approved unanimously Randy Case Manager / Member Case 6:10-bk-31452-CB Doc 1 Filed 07/09/10 Entered.07/09/10 16:54:35 Desc Mein Document Pag 6 of 12 Attorney or Party Name, Address, Telephone & FAX Numbers, and California State Bar Number FOR COURT USE ONLY Robert M. Yaspan SBN: 051887 Law Offices of Robert M. Yaspan 21700 Oxnard Street, Suite 1750 Woodland Hilts, CA 91367 Telephone: 818-905-7711 Fax: 818-501-7711 is Attorney for. [Proposed Attomey For ] Debtor UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA in re: PDCC Development LLC. Debtor(s), Plaintlff(s), Defendant(s). CASE NO.: ADV. NO.: CHAPTER: Corporate Ownership Statement Pursuant to F.R.B.P. 1007(a)(1) and 7007.1, and Local Bankruptcy Rule 1002-5 Pursuant to F.R.B.P. 1007(a)(1) and 7007.1, and Local Bankruptcy Rule 1002-5, any corporation, other than a governmental unit, that is a debtor in a voluntary case or a party to an adversary proceeding or a contested matter shall file this statement identifying all its parent corporations and listing any publicly held company, other than a governmental unit, that directly or indirectly own 10% or more of any class of the corporation's equity interest, or state that there are no entities to report. This Corporate Ownership Statement must be filed with the initial pleading filed by a corporate entity in a case or adversary proceeding. A supplemental statement must promptly be filed upon any change in circumstances that renders this Corporate Ownership Statement inaccurate. 1, Randy Case , the undersigned in the above -captioned case, hereby declare (Print Name of Attorney or Declarant) under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the following is true and correct: [Check the appropriate boxes and, if applicable, provide the required information,j 1. I have personal knowledge of the matters set forth in this Statement because: • I am the president or other officer or an authorized agent of the debtor corporation ❑ I am a party to an adversary proceeding ❑ I am a party to a contested matter ❑ I am the attorney for the debtor corporation 2. a. 0 The following entities, other than the debtor or a governmental unit, directly or indirectly own 10% or more of any class of the corporation's(s) equity interests: (For additional names, attach an addendum to this form,] Dahoon Investment Company - 70% Ownership 113 Sutter Creek, Monrovia, CA 91010 b. 0 There are no entities that directly or indirectly own 10% or more of any class of the corporation's equity interest. Signature t f Attorney or Declarant Date Randy Case Printed Name of Attorney or Declarant This form is optional. it has been approved for use by the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Central District of California, April 2007 Case 6:10-bk-31452-CB Doc 1 Filed 07/09/10 Entered 07/09/10 16:54:35 Desc Main Document Page 7 of 12 STATEMENT OF RELATED CASES INFORMATION REQUIRED BY LOCAL BANKRUPTCY RULE 1015-2 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT, CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 1. A petition under the Bankruptcy Act of 1898 or the Bankruptcy Reform Act of 1978 has previously been filed by or against the debtor, his/her spouse, an affiliate of the debtor, any copartnership or joint venture of which debtor is or formerly was a general or limited partner, or member, or any corporation of which the debtor is a director, officer, or person in control, as follows: (Set forth the complete number and title of each such of prior proceeding, date filed, nature thereof, the Bankruptcy Judge and court to whom assigned, whether still pending and, if not, the disposition thereof. If none, so indicate. Also, list any real property included in Schedule A that was filed with any such prior proceeding(s).) 2. (If petitioner is a partnership or joint venture) A petition under the Bankruptcy Act of 1898 or the Bankruptcy Reform Act of 1978 has previously been fled by or against the debtor or an affiliate of the debtor, or a general partner in the debtor, a relative of the general partner, general partner of, or person in control of the debtor, partnership in which the debtor is a general partner, general partner of the debtor, or person in control of the debtor as follows: (Set forth the complete number and title of each such prior proceeding, date filed, nature of the proceeding, the Bankruptcy Judge and court to whom assigned, whether still pending and, if not, the disposition thereof. If none, so indicate. Also, list any real property included in Schedule A that was filed with any such prior proceeding(s).) 3. (If petitioner is a corporation) A petition under the Bankruptcy Act of 1898 or the Bankruptcy Reform Act of 1978 has previously been filed by or against the debtor, or any of its affiliates or subsidiaries, a director of the debtor, an officer of the debtor, a person in control of the debtor, a partnership in which the debtor is general partner, a general partner of the debtor, a relative of the general partner, director, officer, or person in control of the debtor, or any persons, firms or corporations owning 20% or more of its voting stock as follows: (Set forth the complete number and title of each such prior proceeding, date filed, nature of proceeding, the Bankruptcy Judge and courttowhom assigned, whether still pending, and if not, the disposition thereof. If none, so indicate. Also, list any real property included in Schedule A that was filed with any such prior proceeding(s).) 4. (If petitioner is an individual) A petition under the Bankruptcy Reform Act of 1978, including amendments thereof, has been filed by or against the debtor within the last 180 days: (Set forth the complete number and title of each such prior proceeding, date filed, nature of proceeding, the Bankruptcy Judge and court to whom assigned, whether still pending, and if not, the disposition thereof. If none, so indicate. Also, list any real property included in Schedule A that was filed with any such prior proceeding(s).) I declare, under penalty of perjury, that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed at . California. Dated Joint Debtor This form is mandatory by Order of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Central District of California. Revised May 2004 F 1015-2.1 Case 6:10-bk-31452-CB Doc 1 Filed 07/09/10 Entered 07/09/10 16:54:35 Desc Ma' 12 Attorney or Pony Name, Address, Telephone & FAX Numbers, and California State Bar Number FOR COU RT USE ONLY Robert M. Yaspan, SBN 51867 Law Offices of Robert M. Yaspan 21700 Oxnard Street, Suite 1750 Woodland Hills, CA 91367 Telephone: 818-905-7711 Fax:818-501-77I1 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT CENTRAL DJSTRICT OF CALIFORNIA In re: PDCC Development LLC CHAPTER 7 CASE NUMBER Debtor. (No Hearing Required) DECLARATION RE: LIMITED SCOPE OF APPEARANCE PURSUANT TO LOCAL BANKRUPTCY RULE 2090-1 TO THE COURT, THE DEBTOR, THE TRUSTEE (if any), AND THE UNITED STATES TRUSTEE: 1. I am the attorney for the Debtor in the above -captioned bankruptcy case. 2. On July 6, 20/0, I agreed with the Debtor that for a fee of $ 3500.00, I would provide only the following services: a. X Prepare and file the Petition and Schedules (includes filing fee) b, X Represent the Debtor at the 341(a) Meeting 3. The fee of $3500.00 does Ligl include any representation in any adversary proceeding or contested matter; no representation in any motion brought by Chapter 7 Trustee, creditor or US Trustee. 4. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the foregoing is true and correct and that this declaration was executed on the following date at the city set forth in the upper left-hand corner of this page. Dated: July 6, 2010 1 HEREBY APPROVE THE ABOVE: xc- Signature of Debtor- Randy Case Signature of Co -Debtor Law Firm Name By: LAW OFFICES OF ROBERT M. YASPAN Attorfrey for Debtor -- Robert M. Yaspan Rev. 1/O1 This form Is optional, It has been approved for use by the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Central District of California. F 20901.1 Case 6:10-bk-31452-CB Doc 1 Filed 07/09/10 Entered 07/09/10 16:54:35 Desc Main Document Page 9 of 12 , B203 12194 United States Bankruptcy Court Central District of California in re PDCC Development LLC. Debtor(s) Case No. Chapter 7 DISCLOSURE OF COMPENSATION OF ATTORNEY FOR DEBTOR 1. Pursuant to 11 U .S.C. § 329(a) and Fed. Bankr. P. 2016(b), I certify that I am the attorney for the above -named debtor(s) and that compensation paid to me within one year before the filing of the petition in bankruptcy, or agreed to be paid to me, for services rendered or to be rendered on behalf of the debtor(s) in contemplation of or in connection with the bankruptcy case is as follow s: For legal services, I have agreed to accept $ 3,500.00 Prior to the filing of this statement I have received $ 3,500.00 Balance Due $ 0.00 •2. The source of compensation paid to me was: Di Debtor ❑ Other (specify) 3. The source of compensation to be paid to me is: I Debtor ❑ Other (specify) 4. lJ 1 have not agreed to share the above -disclosed compensation with any other person unless they are members and associates of my law firm. ❑ 1 have agreed to share the above -disclosed compensation with a other person or persons who are not members or associates of my law firm. A copy of the agreement, together with a list of the names of the people sharing in the compensation, is attached. 5. In return for the above -disclosed fee, 1 have agreed to render legal service for afl aspects of the bankruptcy case, including: a. Analysis of the debtor's financial situation, and rendering advice to the debtor in determining whether to file a petition in bankruptcy; b. Preparation and filing of any petition, schedules, statements of affairs and plan which may be required; c. Representation of the debtor at the meeting of creditors and confirmation hearing, and any adjourned hearings thereof; N z 0 s 6. By agreement with the debtor(s), the above -disclosed fee does not include the following services: Any representation in any adversary proceeding or contested matter; no representation in any motion brought by Chapter 7 Trustee, creditor E. or US Trustee C CERTIFICATION I certify that the foregoing is a complete statement of any agreement or arrangement for payment to me for representation of the debtor(s) in the bankruptcy proceeding. f Date 1 '/'- reofAttomey w Offices of Robert M. Yaspan Name of law firm Case 6:10-bk-31452-CB Doc 1 Filed 07/09/10 Entered 07/09/10 16:54:35 Desc Main Document Page 10 of 12 B 201 - Notice of Available Chapters (Rev. 12/08) USBC, Central District of California Name: Address: Telephone: Fax: ❑ Attorney for Debtor ❑ Debtor in Pro Per UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA List all names including trade names, used by Case No,: Debtor(s) within last 8 years: NOTICE OF AVAILABLE CHAPTERS (Notice to Individual Consumer Debtor Under § 342(b) of the Bankruptcy Code) In accordance with § 342(b) of the Bankruptcy Code, this notice to individuals with primarily consumer debts: (1) Describes briefly the services available from credit counseling services; (2) Describes briefly the purposes, benefits and costs of the four types of bankruptcy proceedings you may commence; and (3) Informs you about bankruptcy crimes and notifies you that the Attorney General may examine all information you supply in connection with a bankruptcy case: You are cautioned that bankruptcy law is complicated and not easily described. Thus, you may wish to seek the advice of an attorney to team of your rights and responsibilities should you decide to file a petition. Court employees cannot give you legal advice. Notices from the bankruptcy court are sent to the mailing address you list on your bankruptcy petition. in order to ensure that you receive information about events concerning your case, Bankruptcy Rule 4002 requires that you notify the court of any changes in your address. If you are filing a joint case (a single bankruptcy case for two individuals married to each other), and each spouse fists the same mailing address on the bankruptcy petition, you and your spouse will generally receive a single copy of each notice mailed from the bankruptcy court in a jointly -addressed envelope, unless you file a statement with the court requesting that each spouse receive a separate copy of all notices. 1. Services Available from Credit Counseling Aaencles With limited exceptions, § 108(h) of the Bankruptcy Code requires that all individual debtors who file for bankruptcy relief on or after October 17, 2005, receive a briefing that outlines the available opportunities for credit counseling and provides assistance in performing a budget analysis. The briefing must be given within 180 days before the bankruptcy filing. The briefing may be provided individually or in a group (including briefings conducted by telephone or on the Internet) and must be provided by a nonprofit budget and credit counseling agency approved by the United States trustee or bankruptcy administrator. The clerk of the bankruptcy court has a list that you may consult of the approved budget and credit counseling agencies. Each debtor in a joint case must complete the briefing. In addition, after filing a bankruptcy case, an individual debtor generally must complete a financial management instructional course before he or she can receive a discharge. The clerk also has a list of approved financial management instructional courses. Each debtor in a joint case must complete the course. Case 6:10-bk-31452-CB Doc 1 Filed 07/09/10 Entered 07/09/10 16:54:35 Desc Main Document Page 11 of 12 8 201 - Notice of Available Chapters (Rev. 12i08) USBC, Central District of California 2. The Four Chapters of the Bankruptcy Code Available to Individual Consumer Debtors Chapter 7: Liquidation ($245 filing fee, $39 administrative fee, $15 trustee surcharge: Total fee $299) 1. Chapter 7 is designed for debtors in financial difficulty who do not have the ability to pay their existing debts. Debtors whose debts are primarily consumer debts are subject to a "means test" designed to determine whether the case should be permitted to proceed under chapter 7. If your income is greater than the median income for your state of residence and family size, in some cases, creditors have the right to file a motion requesting that the court dismiss your case under § 707(b) of the Code. It is up to the court to decide whether the case should be dismissed. 2. Under chapter 7, you may claim certain of your property as exempt under governing law. A trustee may have the right to take possession of and sell the remaining property that is not exempt and use the sale proceeds to pay your creditors. 3 The purpose of filing a chapter 7 case is to obtain a discharge of your existing debts. If, however, you are found to have committed certain kinds of improper conduct described in the Bankruptcy Code, the court may deny your discharge and, if it does, the purpose for which you filed the bankruptcy petition will be defeated. 4. Even if you receive a general discharge, some particular debts are not discharged underthe law. Therefore, you may still be responsible for most taxes and student loans; debts incurred to pay nondischargeable taxes; domestic support and property settlement obligations; most fines, penalties, forfeitures, and criminal restitution obligations; certain debts which are not properly listed in your bankruptcy papers; and debts for death or personal injury caused by operating a motor vehicle, vessel, or aircraft while intoxicated from alcohol or drugs. Also, if a creditor can prove that a debt arose from fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, or theft, or from a willful and malicious injury, the bankruptcy court may determine that the debt is not discharged. Chapter 13: Repayment of All or Part of the Debts of an Individual with Regular Income ($235 filing fee, $39 administrative fee: Total fee $274) 1. Chapter 13 is designed for individuals with regular income who would like to pay all or part of their debts in installments over a period of time. You are only eligible for chapter 13 if your debts do not exceed certain dollar amounts set forth in the Bankruptcy Code. 2. Under chapter 13, you must file with the court a plan to repay your creditors all or part of the money that you owe them, using your future earnings. The period allowed by the court to repay your debts may be three years or five years, depending upon your income and other factors. The court must approve your plan before it can take effect. 3. After completing the payments under your plan, your debts are generally discharged except for domestic support obligations; most student loans; certain taxes; most criminal fines and restitution obligations; certain debts which are not properly listed in your bankruptcy papers; certain debts for acts that caused death or personal injury; and certain long term secured obligations. Chapter 11: Reorganization ($1000 filing fee, $39 administrative fee: Total fee $1039) Chapter 11 is designed for the reorganization of a business but is also available to consumer debtors. its provisions are quite complicated, and any decision by an individual to file a chapter 11 petition should be reviewed with an attorney. Chapter 12: Family Farmer or Fisherman ($200 filing fee, $39 administrative fee: Total fee $239) Chapter 12 is designed to permit family farmers and fishermen to repay their debts over a period of time from future earnings and is similar to chapter 13. The eligibility requirements are restrictive, limiting its use to those whose income arises primarily from a family -owned farm or commercial fishing operation. 3. Bankruptcy Crimes and Availability of Bankruptcy Papers to Law Enforcement Officials A person who knowingly and fraudulently conceals assets or makes a false oath or statement under penalty of perjury, either orally or in writing, in connection with a bankruptcy case is subject to a fine, imprisonment, or both, All information supplied by a debtor in connection with a bankruptcy case is subject to examination by the Attorney General acting through the Office of the United States Trustee, the Office of the United States Attorney, and other components and employees of the Department of Justice. WARNING: Section 521(a)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code requires that you promptly file detailed information regarding your creditors, assets, liabilities, income, expenses and general financial condition. Your bankruptcy case may be dismissed if this information is not filed with the court within the time deadlines set by the Bankruptcy Code, the Bankruptcy Rules, and the local rules of the court. Case 6:10-bk-31452-CB Doc 1 Filed 07/09/10 Entered 07/09/10 16:54:35 Desc Main Document Page 12 of 12 B 201 - Notice of Available Chapters (Rev, 12/08) USBC, Central District of California Certificate of [Non -Attorney] Bankruptcy Petition Preparer I, the [non -attorney] bankruptcy petition preparer signing the debtor's petition, hereby certify that I delivered to the debtor this notice required by § 342(b) of the Bankruptcy Code. Printed name and title, if any, of Bankruptcy Petition Preparer X Signature of Bankruptcy Petition Preparer or officer, principal, responsible person, or partner whose Social Security number is provided above. Certificate'of the Debtor Social Security number (If the bankruptcy petition Address: preparer is not an individual, state the Social Security number of the officer, principal, responsible person, or partner of the bankruptcy petition preparer.) (Required by 11 U.S.C. § 110.) I (We), the debtor(s), affirm that I (we) have received and read this notice. Printed Name(s) of Debtor(s) Signature of Debtor Date Case No. (if known) X Signature of Joint Debtor (if any) Date RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO: City of Palm Desert 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, California 92260 Attention: Carlos L. Ortega Tele: (760)346-0611 Fax: (760) 340-0574 EXEMPT FROM RECORDING FEE PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 27383 � f DOC MI 2005--0780948 09/21/2005 08:00A Fee:NC Page 1 of 24 Recorded in Official Records County of Riverside Larry W. Ward Assessor, County Clerk & Recorder S 7 A I��I� III�I 111111110111111111 V PAGE IL 1 COPY 592E OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT by and between CITY OF PALM DESERT a California municipal corporation and DAHOON INVESTMENT COMPANY, INC. a California corporation OS :E W8 9-1J �=if j' 3 r1 r r r• POOR MF RAMC L7am/ REFUND I NCNG i EXAM , M 1 RECEIVED OCT - 6 2005 CITY OF PALM DESERT CITY MANAGER THIS OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT ("Agreement") is dated as of August 31, 2005, by and between the City of Palm Desert, a California municipal corporation ("City") and Dahoon Investment Company, Inc., a California corporation ("Owner"). The City and Owner are sometimes referred to in this Agreement, each individually, as a "Party," or collectively, as the "Parties." The City and Owner enter into this Agreement with reference to the following recited facts (each a "Recital"): RECITALS A. Owner owns certain real property located at 77-200 California Road, in the City of Palm Desert and commonly known as "Palm Desert Golf Course" ("Property"). The Property is legally described in Exhibit "A-1" and depicted in Exhibit "A-2" attached to this Agreement and incorporated into this Agreement by reference. The Property is improved with certain improvements, including, but not limited to, an eighteen (18) hole golf course and a nine (9) hole executive course (collectively "Golf Course"), an approximately ten thousand (10,000) square foot clubhouse ("Clubhouse"), a storage area and maintenance yard ("Maintenance Yard") and Parking Lot ("Parking Lot"). The Golf Course, Clubhouse, Maintenance Yard and Parking Lot are all depicted in Exhibit "A-2" attached to this Agreement and incorporated into this Agreement by reference. B. Owner and PDCC Development LLC, a California limited liability company, have entered into a Development Agreement with the City for the purpose of making certain improvements to the Golf Course and Clubhouse and to develop parcels that were formerly part of the Golf Course and other parcels surrounding the Property as 98 single family residences (collectively "Project"). C. For so long as Owner operates a golf course on the Property, Owner agrees to operate and maintain the Property according to the standards set forth in this Agreement, as required under the Development Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration and the mutual promises and covenants of the Parties set forth in this Agreement the Owner and the City agree as follows: ARTICLE 1 EFFECTIVE DATE 1.1 Effective Date of Agreement. This Agreement is dated as of August 31, 2005 for reference purposes only. This Agreement shall take effect on the date of the last of the following to occur: (1) this Agreement is approved and executed by the authorized representatives of Owner and delivered to City; and; (2) following delivery of this Agreement by Owner, this Agreement is approved and executed by the City and delivered to Owner. Owner and City acknowledge that Owner is improving the Clubhouse, the Golf Course, the Parking Lot and the Maintenance Facility pursuant to the phased redevelopment/renovation plan set forth in the Development Agreement ("collectively the "Property Improvements"). Accordingly, Owner and City agree that the operative provisions regarding the maintenance of the Property shall become effective only after Owner's completion of the Property Improvements. ARTICLE 2 OPERATION AND USE OF PROPERTY -2- 2.1 Operation and Use of Propertv By Owner. Owner intends to operate, or cause to be operated, upon the Property, a semi -private golf course facility in accordance with this Agreement in a prudent business manner consistent with the operations of an average semi -private golf course facility allowing use by both members of the public and private members, in the Palm Desert area, and consistent and in compliance with all applicable provisions of federal, state and local laws and regulations. 2.2 Capital Reserves. Owner agrees that Owner shall maintain or caused to be maintained the Capital Reserves of the Property as follows: 2.2.1 Owner shall insure that one (1) percent of the annual gross revenue will be paid into a capital reserve account for the first two years with an increase to one point five (1.5) percent in years three and four and an increase to two point five (2.5) percent in year five and annually thereafter. 2.2.2 Owner shall insure that expenditures from the capital reserve account shall be for equipment or systems that have a minimum of seven years useful life or for major retrofit of greens, tees, bunkers, fairways, cart paths, water features, etc. 2.3 Budgets and Expenditures. 2.3.1 On or before the completion of the Property Improvements, Owner shall submit its first operating budget to the City Manager. The City's review of Owner's budget pursuant to this Paragraph shall be for the sole purpose of determining that a sufficient amount of funds are being expended for the operation of the Property in accordance with the Maintenance Standards, (as that term is defined below), such that it meets the golf course facility standard set for the in Paragraph 2.1. in the event the City disputes an amount budgeted in Owner's budget, such dispute shall be resolved in accordance with the Paragraph in this Agreement entitled Conflicts/Disputes. City acknowledges that its review of the budget and the annual expenditures for the Property shall be conducted in a commercially reasonable manner at no cost to Owner. Owner shall budget and expend in the first year of operations, and increase annually thereafter, if necessary subject to the budget review process, a minimum of (i) one million one hundred thousand dollars ($1,100,000) for maintenance of the Golf Course and its facilities and (ii) $275,000 for the purpose of general and administrative which will include clubhouse maintenance. After the review of Owner's initial budget for its first year of operation pursuant to this Paragraph, the City shall have the option of reviewing the budget every year thereafter during the term of this Agreement pursuant to the terms of this Paragraph. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this Paragraph, Owner and City shall meet and discuss in detail the then existing budget every three years commencing with the third anniversary date of this Agreement and continuing every third year thereafter. Any information supplied to City by Owner pursuant to this Paragraph shall be considered strictly confidential and used solely for the purpose of evaluating Owners' performance of its obligations pursuant to this Agreement. City shall maintain the confidentiality of such information to the extent permitted by law. City shall duplicate the information only as needed for review and return all originals and duplicates to Owner, including without limitation originals and duplicates which may be in electronic form. City shall not release the information provided by Owner pursuant to this Paragraph to any third party without written notice to Owner seven (7) days prior to release of any such information to a third party. 2.3.2 On or before the City's annual inspection of the Property pursuant to this Agreement, Owner shall submit to the City Manager a report detailing the monies spent on maintenance of the Golf Course and Golf Course facilities. The City's review of Owner's -3- expense information pursuant to this Paragraph shall be for the sole purpose of determining that a sufficient amount of funds were expended for the operation of the Property in accordance with the Maintenance Standards, (as that term is defined below), such that it meets the golf course facility standard set for the in Paragraph 2.1. In the event the City disputes an amount expended by Owner, such dispute shall be resolved in accordance with the Paragraph in this Agreement entitled Conflicts/Disputes. City acknowledges that its review of Owner's annual expenditures for the Property shall be conducted in a commercially reasonable manner at no cost to Owner. After the review of Owner's initial expenditures for its first year of operation pursuant to this Paragraph, the City shall have the option of reviewing the expenditures every year thereafter during the term of this Agreement pursuant to the terms of this Paragraph at the same time it reviews Owner's budget pursuant to Paragraph 2.3.1 of this Agreement. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this Paragraph, Owner and City shall meet and discuss in detail the then existing expenditures every three years commencing with the third anniversary date of this Agreement and continuing every third year thereafter. Any information supplied to City by Owner pursuant to this Paragraph shall be considered strictly confidential and used solely for the purpose of evaluating Owners' performance of its obligations pursuant to this Agreement. City shall maintain the confidentiality of such information to the extent permitted by law. City shall duplicate the information only as needed for review and return all originals and duplicates to Owner, including without limitation originals and duplicates which may be in electronic form. City shall not release the information provided by Owner pursuant to this Paragraph to any third party without written notice to Owner seven (7) days prior to release of any such information to a third party. 2.3.3 Owner shall maintain all maintenance records for a minimum of three years and make such records available to the City for review and/or audit during reasonable business hours with five business days prior written notice, no more often than twice a year. 2.3.4 Owner shall insure that Property and Golf Course Facility maintenance costs do not include salaries of employees not performing direct maintenance functions. 2.3.5 Whenever Owner is required to provide information pursuant to this Agreement to the City for the City's review and approval, the City shall respond within thirty (30) days of the date Owner provides such information to City, and failure to respond within such thirty (30) days period shall be deemed approval. ARTICLE 3 MAINTENANCE OF THE PROPERTY 3.1 Maintenance of the Property by Owner. Upon Owner's completion of the Property Improvements, Owner shall maintain the Property and related improvements, including without limitation the Clubhouse, the Parking Lot, the Maintenance Facility and associated landscaping in accordance with this Agreement, including without limitation the Maintenance Standards for the Palm Desert Country Club attached to this Agreement as Exhibit B incorporated by this reference (the "Maintenance Standards"). 3.2 Maintenance Program/Maintenance Deficiency Procedure. Owner shall establish and conduct an ongoing maintenance program, in accordance with the Maintenance Standards. If at any time there is an occurrence where, in the commercially reasonable opinion -4- of the City, a material adverse condition on any area of the Property exists in contravention of the Management Plan and/or this Agreement, (a "Maintenance Deficiency") the City shall notify Owner in writing of such Maintenance Deficiency. Within ten (10) days of Owner's receipt of the Deficiency Notice, Owner shall in writing either (i) commit to remedy the Maintenance Deficiency in a commercially reasonable time and manner, or (ii) state that it disputes the City's Deficiency Notice. If the parties are unable to agree to the timing and/or the manner of cure, then the parties shall resolve the Maintenance Deficiency issue in accordance with the Paragraph in this Agreement entitled Conflicts and Disputes. 3.2.1 If Owner fails to remedy the Maintenance Deficiency either (a) within the time period previously agreed in writing by the parties or (b) by the date required in a written arbitration or judicial decision stating that a disputed Maintenance Deficiency must be cured, the City shall have the right, but not the obligation, to perform the necessary maintenance to cure the Maintenance Deficiency. If the City elects to cure such Maintenance Deficiency, the City shall give written notice to the Owner, setting forth with particularity the Maintenance Deficiency work to be done and the estimated cost of curing such Maintenance Deficiency. The City shall be entitled to reimbursement with respect thereto from the Owner as provided in this Paragraph. in the event the City has performed the work necessary to cure a Maintenance Deficiency, the City shall submit a written invoice to the Owner for all costs incurred by the City to perform such work, together with a statement that if the Owner fails to pay such invoice in full within the time specified, the City will pursue collection against the Owner pursuant to the provisions of this Paragraph. The City shall only be entitled to reimbursement for those costs reasonably incurred in performing the necessary maintenance to cure such Maintenance Deficiency. Such invoice shall be due and payable within thirty (30) days of receipt by the Owner. If Owner faits to pay such invoice in full within the period specified, payment shall be deemed delinquent and shall be subject to a one time late charge in an amount equal to six percent (6%) of the amount of the invoice. Thereafter the City may pursue collection by means of any remedies available at law or in equity. Without limiting the foregoing, in addition to all other rights and remedies available to the City, the City may levy an assessment against the Owner for the invoice costs incurred by the City to perform the cure of the Maintenance Deficiency, plus the late charge. Such assessment shall constitute a charge on the land and shall be a continuing lien upon the Property, which lien shall be treated as a construction lien pursuant to California law subject to foreclosure and priority as set forth in the Construction Lien Statutes. Owner hereby vests the City with the right and power to levy such assessment, to impose a lien upon the Property and to bring all legal actions and/or to pursue lien foreclosure procedures against Owner for purposes of collecting such assessment in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement. 3.3 City Richt to Enter and Inspect Condition of Property. The City, its employees, and agents shall have the right to enter the Property and all portions of the Property in order to inspect and examine the Property and all fixtures and equipment located thereon for the purposes of effectuating the terms and conditions of this Agreement . Such right of entry and inspection may be exercised during normal weekday business hours, upon forty- eight (48) hours prior notice to Owner. 3.4 Owner and City Annual Site Inspections. On an annual basis, commencing on the first anniversary of execution of this Agreement, Owner, arbitrator and representative of the City shall jointly inspect the premises including the golf course, clubhouse facilities, maintenance yard, parking lot, and incidental amenities. The purpose of the inspection shall be to verify the Owner's compliance with the requirements of this Agreement. Any defects noted shall be documented by the City within ten business days of the inspection as a -5- Maintenance Deficiency and shall be addressed by the Owner as called for in Paragraph 3.2 of this Agreement. 3.5 Owner and HOA Bi-Annual Meetinas: Forum For Complaints. Owner shall meet on a bi-annual basis with any homeowner's association of the Project ("HOA") to discuss the condition of the Property. This meeting can be part of a regularly scheduled HOA meeting. Any concerns regarding the Owner's maintenance of the Property shall be heard at such meetings. Owner shall respond to concerns relating to Owner's maintenance of the Property within fifteen (15) business days of the date the concern was presented at the meeting. 3.6 Insurance. Within ten (10) calendar days after the Effective Date, Owner shall furnish or cause to be furnished to City a certificate of insurance evidencing insurance for the Property and its operations in commercially reasonable amounts. 3.7 Mortaaaee Protection. A breach of any of the terms, covenants or conditions of this Agreement shall not defeat or impair the lien of any mortgage or deed of trust made in good faith and for value, but such terms, covenants and conditions shall be binding upon any party who is entitled to any of the Property, or any portion thereof or interest therein, acquired by foreclosure, trustee's sale, deed in lieu of foreclosure or otherwise and those claiming under any such party. 3.8 Covenant Runnina With the Land. Owner's covenants to maintain the Golf Course Property in accordance with this Agreement are covenants which shall run with the land, shall bind Owner's successor's and assign's and shall remain in effect for so long as the Property is used as a Golf Course facility. Owner shall ensure that any borrowing obtained by Owner in the acquisition of the Property, or any other interest granted by Buyer to any third party in the Property prior to the recordation of this Agreement, shall be subordinate and junior to this Agreement. ARTICLE 4 CONFLICTS AND DISPUTE RESOLUTION 4.1 Conflicts/Disputes. In the event there is a dispute in connection with the interpretation of or performance under this Agreement, including without limitation a dispute regarding a Maintenance Deficiency, and the complaining party has provided written notice to the non -complaining party detailing with particularity the claimed dispute (the "Dispute Notice"), then the City and Owner will promptly endeavor in good faith to resolve such dispute. If no resolution can be reached within fifteen (15) days of the parties endeavoring in good faith to resolve such dispute, then, the dispute shall be resolved exclusively as provided in this Paragraph 4.2 in the County of Riverside. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this Article 4 and/or this Agreement, if a dispute between the City and Owner has an amount in controversy in excess of $50,000, (which amount may include without limitation, any or all of the following: costs of repairs, cost of maintenance, and/or capital expenditures) then either party may litigate such dispute in a court of competent jurisdiction by providing written notice to the other party within the fifteen (15) day good faith negotiation period referenced in this Paragraph. 4.2 Arbitration. After complying with the provisions of Paragraph 4.1 regarding attempting to resolve the dispute in good faith, in the event the dispute has not been resolved by the parties, and provided that neither Owner or City has elected to refer the matter to litigation under the terms set forth in Paragraph 4.1 of this Agreement, such dispute shall be -6- submitted to, and conclusively determined by binding arbitration conducted by an arbitrator who shall be an arbitrator selected by the parties within five (5) days of the expiration of the good faith negotiation period referenced in Paragraph 4.1, or in the event the parties are unable to agree on an arbitrator, then the arbitrator shall be selected in accordance with the Commercial Rules of the American Arbitration Association. Owner shall supply copies of current and two previous years' annual financial statements, including balance sheet and P/L statement in any arbitration or court proceeding in which the commercial reasonableness of any budgeted or expended item for maintenance results in a Maintenance Deficiency which Maintenance Deficiency is the subject of the arbitration or court proceeding. Any copies of Owner's Financial Documents provided pursuant to this Paragraph shall be subject to a protective order. The arbitrator shall award costs and attorney fees to the prevailing party. The provisions of this Paragraph 4.2 shall not preclude any party from seeking injunctive or other provisional or equitable relief to preserve the status quo pending the parties' resolution of their dispute, and the filing of an action seeking injunctive or other provisional relief shall not be construed as a waiver of that party's arbitration rights. The arbitrator(s) shall not have the power to modify any of the provisions of this Agreement. The arbitrator(s)' decision shall be final and binding upon the parties and judgment upon the award rendered by the arbitrator(s) may be entered in any court having jurisdiction. NOTICE: BY INITIALING IN THE SPACE BELOW, YOU ARE AGREEING TO HAVE ANY DISPUTE WHICH ARISES UNDER THIS AGREEMENT DECIDED BY NEUTRAL ARBITRATION AS PROVIDED BY CALIFORNIA LAW AND YOU ARE GIVING UP ANY RIGHTS YOU MIGHT POSSESS TO HAVE THE DISPUTE LITIGATED IN A COURT OR JURY TRIAL. BY INITIALING IN THE SPACE BELOW, YOU ARE GIVING UP YOUR JUDICIAL RIGHTS TO DISCOVERY AND APPEAL, UNLESS SUCH RIGHTS ARE SPECIFICALLY INCLUDED IN THE DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROVISION. IF YOU REFUSE TO SUBMIT TO ARBITRATION AFTER AGREEING TO THIS PROVISION, YOU MAY BE COMPELLED TO ARBITRATE UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF THE CALIFORNIA CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE. YOUR AGREEMENT TO THIS ARBITRATION PROVISION IS VOLUNTARY. WE HAVE READ AND UNDERSTAND THE FOREGOING AND AGREE TO SUBMIT DISPUTES ARISING OUT OF THE MATTERS INCLUDED IN THE "ARBITRATION" PROVISION TO NEUTRAL ARBITRATION. Initials: 4.3 Relief to Preclude immediate Significant Deterioration of the Golf Course. If the City identifies a Maintenance Deficiency which the City believes in its commercially reasonable opinion will result in immediate significant deterioration of the Golf Course if not cured within a commercially reasonable time ("Urgent Maintenance Deficiency"), the City shall provide immediate written notice to Owner. If within two business days of Owner's receipt of City's written notice of the Urgent Maintenance Deficiency, Owner fails to commit to cure the Urgent Maintenance Deficiency or disputes the existence of the Urgent Maintenance Deficiency, then the City may seek injunctive relief upon proper statutory notice to Owner in addition to instituting any arbitration to resolve the dispute pursuant to the Paragraph 4.2 of this Agreement. Any judgment or award issued as a result of the injunctive relief sought by the City pursuant to this Paragraph shall contain a specific provision for the recovery of actual attorneys' and expert witness fees and costs. -7- ARTICLE 5 GENERAL PROVISIONS 5.1 Notice to the Parties. For the purpose of this Agreement, communications and notices among the Parties shall be in writing and shall be deemed to have been given when actually delivered, if given by hand delivery or transmitted by overnight courier service, or if mailed, when deposited in the United States Mail, First Class, postage prepaid, return receipt requested and delivered to or addressed as follows: To the City: City of Palm Desert 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, California 92260 Attention: City Manager Telephone: (760) 346-0611 Facsimile: (760) 340-0574 with a copy to: Best Best & Krieger 74760 Highway 111, Suite 200 Indian Wells, California 92210 Attention: David Erwin, Esq. Telephone: (760) 586-2611 Facsimile: (760) 340-6698 To the Owner: Dahoon Investment Company, Inc. 77-200 California Drive Palm Desert, California 92211 Attention: Sung Sang Cho Telephone: 626.643.7516 with a copy to: Sullivan, Hill Lewin Rez &Engel 550 West C Street, Suite 1500 San Diego, CA 92101 Attention: Madeline Clark Cahill, Esq. Telephone: (619) 233-4100 Facsimile: (619) 231-4372 5.2 Indemnity of the Citv by Owner 5.2.1 Owner shall fully indemnify, protect, hold harmless, and defend (with counsel reasonably selected and approved by the City, which approval shall not be unreasonably conditioned, withheld or delayed) the City and its elected or appointed officials, officers, agents, attorneys, consultants and employees and each of them (each individually, an "Entity" and collectively, the "Entities"), from and against all "Indemnified Liabilities" (as defined in subparagraph 5.2.2); provided however such indemnity shall not apply to a particular Entity to the extent that such Indemnified Liabilities are caused by the active negligence or willful misconduct of the City. The City shall immediately notify the Owner, in writing, of any claim for which the City seeks indemnification (an "Indemnification Claim") 5.2.2 For the purposes of this Paragraph 5.2.2 the term " Indemnified Liabilities" means and refers to any and all claims demands, damages, losses, liabilities, obligations, penalties, fines, actions, causes of action, judgments, suits, proceedings, costs, disbursements and expenses, including, without limitation, fees, disbursements and fees and costs of attorneys, consultants and experts, and all damages of any kind or of any nature whatsoever that may, at any time, be imposed upon, incurred or suffered by, or asserted or -8- awarded against an indemnified party, directly or indirectly relating to or arising from this Agreement. 5.3 Controlling Regulations/Governing Law. if a conflict arises between applicable governmental regulations relating to the operation and maintenance of the Property, the most stringent regulatory requirement shall control. The Parties hereto acknowledge that this Agreement has been negotiated and entered into in California. The Parties hereto expressly agree that this Agreement shall be governed by, interpreted under, and construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of California and if controlling, by the laws of the United States. Further, the Parties to this Agreement hereby agree that any legal actions arising from this Agreement shall be filed in California Superior Court, in the Court of Riverside, Central District or the appropriate federal court in such district. 5.4 Partial Invalidity. If any term or provision or portion of this Agreement or the application thereof to any person or circumstance shall, to any extent, be invalid or unenforceable, the remainder of this Agreement, or the application of such term or provision or portion thereof to persons or circumstances other than those as to which it is held invalid or unenforceable, shall not be affected thereby, and each such term and provision of this Agreement shall be valid and enforced to the fullest extent permitted by law. 5.5 No intent to Create Third Party Beneficiaries. The Parties intend that the rights and obligations under this Agreement shall benefit and burden only the Parties hereto, and do not intend to create any rights in, or right of action to or for the use or benefit of any third Party, who is not one of the Parties to this Agreement. 5.6 Waivers. No waiver of any breach of any covenant or provision herein contained shall be deemed a waiver of any preceding or succeeding breach thereof, or of any other covenant or provision herein contained. No extension of the time for performance of any obligation or act to be performed herein shall be deemed to be an extension of the time for performance of any other obligation or act to be performed under this Agreement. 5.7 Professional Fees. In the event any litigation, arbitration, mediation or other proceeding ("Proceeding") is initiated by any party against the other party to enforce, interpret or otherwise obtain judicial or quasi-judicial relief in connection with this Agreement, the prevailing party in such Proceeding shall be entitled to recover from the unsuccessful party all costs, expenses, actual attomeys' and expert witness fees relating to or arising out of such Proceeding (whether or not such Proceeding proceeds to judgment) and any post -judgment or post -award proceeding including without limitation one to enforce any judgment or award resulting from any such Proceeding. Any such judgment or award shall contain a specific provision for the recovery of all such subsequently incurred costs, expenses, actual attorneys' and expert witness fees. The arbitrator(s) or court shall determine who is the prevailing party, whether or not the dispute or controversy proceeds to final judgment. City and Owner expressly acknowledge that this Paragraph is not intended to in any way alter the parties' agreement regarding dispute resolution pursuant to Article 4.2 of this Agreement. City and Owner agree that the reference to litigation in this Paragraph is included so that the prevailing party can recover their attorneys' fees and costs if (a) either party files a lawsuit in violation of Paragraph 4.1 (e.g., fees and costs incurred obtaining a court order compelling mediation/arbitration); or (b) a court rules that the arbitration provision in Paragraph 4.1 is unenforceable for any reason. 5.8 Entire Agreement. This Agreement (including all Exhibits attached hereto) is the final expression of, and contains the entire agreement between, the Parties with respect to the subject matter hereof and supersedes all prior understandings with respect thereto. This Agreement may not be modified, changed, supplemented or terminated, nor may -9- any obligations hereunder be waived, except by written instrument signed by the Party to be charged or by its agent duly authorized in writing. The Parties do not intend to confer any benefit hereunder on any person,firm or corporation other than the Parties hereto. 5.9 Construction. Headings at the beginning of each paragraph and subparagraph are solely for the convenience of the Parties and are not a part of this Agreement. Whenever required by the context of this Agreement, the singular shall include the plural and the masculine shall include the feminine and vice versa. This Agreement shall not be construed as if it had been prepared by one of the Parties, but rather as if all Parties had prepared the same. Unless otherwise indicated, all references to Paragraphs are to this Agreement. All exhibits referred to in this Agreement are attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. If the date on which any action is required to be performed under the terms of this Agreement is not a business day, the action shall be taken on the next succeeding business day. 5.10 Time is of the Essence. Time and strict punctual performance is of the essence of this Agreement and each of its provisions in which a time for performance is specified. 5.11 Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in two (2) or more counterparts, each of which shall be an original, and all of which together shall constitute a single instrument. This Agreement may be executed by facsimile signatures, and each facsimile counterpart, when taken together, shalt be deemed an original. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Owner and the City hereby execute this Agreement by the signatures of their authorized representatives, as follow: OWNER: Dahoon Investment Company, Inc. a California corporation By: Its: By: Its: [Remaining Signatures on Following Page) -10- -11- iNau1niunwiwiniwi111wuraiaA STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE 7-, 2005, before me, the undersigned notary public, personally appeared , personally known to me OR proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence tel be the perso ose na - jQ:. re subscribed to the acknowledged to me tfi e/they executed the same in�„�„ capacirf, and that by • -r/t eir signatur on the instrument the perso upon . f of which the person acted, executed the instrument. W ES' my hand and off el'al. Signature of Notary Public ithin instrument and r/their authorized , or the entity ANNE E. DAVIS Commission # 1423752 Notary Public - California t Weak* County ( Comm. Expires Jun 12. 2007fi SIGNATURE PAGE TO OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT (Palm Desert Golf Club) CITY: City of Palm Desert a California municipal corporation Date: e 3/ - By: APPROVtb AS`TO LEGAL FORM: BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP By: City Attorne Buford 4/Criti:s, Mayor EXHIBIT A-1 TO OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PALM DESERT GOLF COURSE EXHIBIT A-1 PARCEL 1: LOT A OF TRACT 3860 AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN BOOK 60, PAGES 55 THROUGH 57 INCLUSIVE OF MAPS, RIVERSIDE COUNTY RECORDS. PARCEL 2: LOTS A AND B OF TRACT 4079 AS SHOWN BY MP.P ON FILE IN BOOK 66, PAGES 67 THROUGH 69 INCLUSIVE OF MAPS, RIVERSIDE COUNTY RECORDS. PARCEL 3: LOTS 72, 73, 261 AND 405 OF TRACT 2137, PS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN BOOK 41, PAGES 29 THROUGH 36 INCLUSIVE OF MAPS, RIVERSIDE COUNTY RECORDS. PARCEL 4: LOT 199 OF TRACT 2137, AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN BOOK 41, PAGES 29 THROUGH 36 INCLUSIVE OF NAPS, RIVERSIDE COUNTY RECORDS. EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 262 OF SAID TRACT 2137; THENCE NORTH 0° 8' 10" EAST ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID LOT 262, 70 FEET TO THE MOST NORTHWESTERLY CORNER THEREOF; THENCE SOUTH 45° 0' 31" WEST, 40 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 33° 59' EAST, 50.31 FEET, TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL 5: LOT 453 OF TRACT 2137, AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN BOOK 41, PAGES 29 THROUGH 36, INCLUSIVE OF MAPS, RIVERSIDE COUNTY RECORDS. EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 454 OF SAID TRACT 2137; THENCE ALONG THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 454, SOUTH 36° 21' 15" EAST, 101.37 FEET TO THE SOUTHEASTERLY CORNER OF SAID LOT 454; THENCE NORTH 43° 10' 31" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 2 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY IN A DIRECT LINE, TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWESTERLY CORNER OF GOT 392, AS SHOWN BY SAID MAP; THENCE NORTH 80° 30' 14" EAST, 102.80 FEEL' ON THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER THEREOF; THENCE SOUTH 33° 04' 58" WEST, 15 FEET ON THE SOUTHWESTERLY EXTENSION OF THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY, IN A DIRECT LINE, TZ THE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL 6: LOTS 3, 5, 6, 7 AND 466 OF TRACT 2283 AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN BOOK 42, PAGES 82 THROUGH 89 INCLUSIVE OF MAPS, RIVERSIDE COUNTY RECORDS. PARCEL 7: LOT 2 OF TRACT 2283, AS SHOWN BY NAP ON FILE IN BOOK 42, PAGES 82 THROUGH 89 INCLUSIVE OF MAPS, RIVERSIDE COUNTY RECORDS. EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 287, SHOWN BY MAP ON SAID TRACT; THENCE NORTH 86° 49' 53" EAST, 30 FEET ON THE EASTERLY EXTENSION OF THE NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT 287; THENCE SOUTH 8° 02' 43" WEST, 62.91 FEET 1'O THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 287; THENCE NORTH 32° 35' 25" WEST, 71.96 FEET ON THE NORTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT287, TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OP SAID LOT 2; THENCE ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 2, NORTH 87° 27' 23" EAST, 366.59 FEET; THENCE NORTH 28° 37' 50" WEST, 80.28 FEET; THENCE NORTH 81° 10' 50" WEST, 139.78 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 67° 45' 56" WEST, 161.33 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 40° 32' 05" WEST, 62.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL 8: LOT 4 OF TRACT 2283, AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN BOOK 42, PAGES 82 THROUGH 89 INCLUSIVE OF MAPS, RIVERSIDE COUNTY RECORDS. EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE NORTHEASTERLY CORNER OF LOT 246 OF SAID TRACT 2283; THENCE ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID L:IT 246, NORTH 40° 36' 15" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 92.20 FEET TO THE NORTHWESTERLY CORNER OF SAID LOT 246; THENCE SOUTH 83° 18' 30" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 60.41 FEET TO THE NORTHWESTERLY CORNER OF LOT 248 OF SAID TRACT NO. 2283; THENCE ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOI' 248, SOUTH 0° 00' 10" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 62.96 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL 9: LOTS H, I, J AND K. OF TRACT 4671, AS SM0''N BY MAP ON FILE IN BOOK 77, PAGES 16 THROUGH 18 INCLUSIVE OF MAPS, RIVERSIDI COUNTY RECORDS. EXCEPTING THAT PORTION OF LOT J OF TRACT 4871, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE MOST NORTHERLY CORNER OF LOT 166 OF SAID TRACT 4871; THENCE SOUTH 43° 27° EAST, 74.20 FEET TO ?.N INTERSECTION WITH A NORTHERLY PROLONGATION OF THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 166; THENCE SOUTH 24° 09' 34" WEST, 9.89 FEET TO THE MOST EASTERLY CORNER OF SAID LOT 166; THENCE NORTH 36° 20' 44" WEST, 78.57 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. EXHIBIT A-2 TO OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT SITE MAP OF PALM DESERT GOLF COURSE 0 1 MAINTENANCE STANDARDS FOR THE PALM DESERT COUNTRY CLUB GOLF COURSE MAINTENANCE STANDARDS The following are the minimum standards by which the Palm Desert golf course (27 holes) will be managed: A Golf Course That Is Maintained Equal to or Greater Than: "Neat, Clean, and Green Golf Course" Everyday The Highest Quality Conditions Possible To Play The Game Of Golf y Maintained Sand Traps (All with complete rakes) Serviced Ball Washers on carts (Clean Water and Towels) Yardage Markers at Regular Intervals r Tee Markers and Cups Rotated Daily Identify Address and Remedy Work Areas (Le., Irrigation Breaks, Cart Trails, Etc.) Report Golf Course Work (Aerification, Etc.) In Advance to Players Clean, Serviced, Sanitary Restrooms Litter Free - Serviced Trash Cans Attentive, Motivated, Uniformed Staff Trees and Shrubbery Trimmed in Accordance with recommendation of a certified arborist, or City of Palm Desert landscape management guide Consistent Mowing Patterns Adequate Number of Clean Golf Carts r Extra Scorecards - Pencils on 2"ci Tee Divot Repair Program Ball Mark Repair Program Adequate Communication Practice Area • Clean, Quality Practice Balls, Replaced on a Regular Basis ■ Turf Maintained and Rotated Tee Areas • Targets at Regular Intervals • Greens for the Purpose of Targets • Flags for the Purpose of Target Points • Billboards for Information ■ informed, Attentive, Motivated Personnel with Name Tags ■ Adequate Communication from the Operators to the Patrons • Litter Free BASIC GOLF SHOP SET UP := Informed, Attentive, Motivated Personnel with Name Tags Adequate Communications between the Operators and Patrons ■ Posted Hours of Operation • Posted Fee Schedules • Posted Golf Course Condition, "Right -to -Know" information, (Le. Reclaimed Water, Use of Pesticides, etc.) ■ Posted Pictures of Shop Staff • Posted Play Restrictions • Posted Calendar of Events ■ Ladies Club and Men's Club Clean, Litter Free Area • Plants (If Space Allows) • Communication of Golf Maintenance, Driving Range, and Cart Staging Area. Score Posting Area Easily Accessed At least one (1) full-time Property crew member shall have a current pesticide applicator's license. CLUBHOUSE, YARD AND PARKING LOT MAINTENANCE Owner shall insure that the water feature shall be operational and managed to avoid buildup of algae or mineral deposits. Owner shall insure that all landscaped planter areas shall be kept weeded, watered, fertilized, and raked in accordance with the City of Palm Desert Landscape Maintenance Standards. • Owner shall insure that all trees and shrubs shall be pruned as necessary to provide ease of play on the course and to provide aesthetic value throughout. The crew shall replace trees damaged by wind, etc., and provide staking as necessary. Tree pruning shall be performed under supervision of certified arborist. • Owner shall insure that marred painted surfaces shall be promptly touched up to match adjacent areas. • Owner shall insure that facility be adequately managed to avoid pest infestation. Rodent and insect control shall be performed as necessary. Owner shall insure that custodial services, including emptying of trash receptacles, replacement of soaps and paper supplies in restrooms, cleaning of spills, and mopping or vacuuming of floors shall be performed daily. • Owner shall insure that mechanical system filters shall be replaced routinely. Owner shall assure that the food and beverage facilities at the Golf Course are at all times operated in such a manner as to qualify for and maintain no less than a "Class B" rating as administered by the Riverside County Health Department. Owner shall insure that the ventilation systems, electrical equipment, toilet facilities, and work areas shall be maintained properly to provide a decent, safe, and sanitary work area. • Owner shall insure that chemicals shall be clearly labeled and properly stored in compliance with all regulations for proper disposal of materials. • Owner shall resurface any cracked asphalt as necessary. Owner shall properly mark the parking lot with visible striping and signs in place. Owner shall sweep the parking lot and keep it weeded, and free of brush, junk or trash piles. r Owner shall insure that all exterior and parking lot lights shall be operational and time controlled appropriately for the season. Landscape maintenance shall be maintained according to the current version of City of Palm Desert Landscape Maintenance Guide. Owner shall monitor local evapotranspiration rates and provide appropriate watering solutions for the golf course after accounting for the evaporative losses. Perform repairs as needed. ' Numeral refers to percent or pounds of active ingredient. 2 Diquat has a state label in Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Oklahoma, Tennessee and Texas for winter annual weed control in dormant bermudagrass. 3 Mocap 10G is labelled for commercial turf only (golf courses, sod farms). Diazinon is not labeled for use on golf courses or sod farms. 5 Triump 4E is restricted to certain soil types and several application techniques must be followed. It is labeled for use on lawns, sod farms, and golf courses (only tees, greens, and aprons). A maximum of one application per year is permitted for the higher surface insect rate and a maximum of two applications per year at least 60 days apart for the tower surface insect rate. 6 For use only by commercial lawn pest control personnel, and only on golf course tees, greens and aprons, and on sod farms. See soil restrictions Diazinon may not be used on golf courses or sod farms For use in professional turf areas such as golf courses and commercial sod. Klassen, Rachelle From: feathr7@dc.rr.com Sent: Monday, April 23, 2018 1:51 AM To: Jonathan, Sabby Cc: Weber, Susan Marie; Harnik, Jan; Kelly, Kathleen; Aylaian, Lauri; Nestande, Gina; Ceja, Eric; Stendell, Ryan; Klassen, Rachelle Subject: Palm Desert Country Club Change of Zone Request. April 23, 2018 Sabby Jonathan, Mayor Susan Marie Weber, Mayor Pro Tem Jan Harnik, Council Member Kathleen Kelly, Council Member Gina Nestande, Council Member Subject: Palm Desert Country Club Change of Zone Request. Staff is recommending that the City Council continue the public hearing to May 24, 2018 to allow additional time to review the Operations and Maintenance Agreement. I hereby request that the public hearing be continued until the Fall (6 to 8 months) 2018. Many of our residents have left the desert by the middle of May to avoid violations of State and Foreign Residency Requirements and return late October or November. Due to the important nature of the Proposed Project to the PDCC Community a delay until the Fall (6 to 8 months) 2018 would be appropriate. Thank you for your time and consideration. Jack Forney 76831 Kentucky Ave. Palm Desert, Ca. 92211 CC: Eric Ceja, Principal Planner Ryan Stendell, Director of Community Lauri Aylaian, City Manager Rachelle Klassen, City Clerk Open Space Action Committee PLEASE MAKE THIS LETTER PART OF THE RECORD FOR THE CITY OF PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 26, 2018, Case Nos. PP/CUP/EA/CZ 16-280, (Christopher McFadden/McFadden Architects, Applicant). 1 3-19-2018 To.: City of Palm Desert Mayor, Sabby Jonathan. Pro-Tem, .Susan Marie Weber Council Member Kathleen Kellly Counc3 Member Jan Flarnik Council Member Gina Nastende Rachetie Kiassen, City Clerk Eric Cejal, Planning Ryan Stendell, Community Service From Barbara Powers, OPEINI SPACE ACTION COMM)1 iE, Secretary Cc: Matt Ward, Attorney at Law Fred Kent ( Weser of Bond Issue) RECEIVED CITY CLERK'S OFFICE PALM DESERTr r, 2018 APR 20 AM 9: 07 WE REQUEST THAT THE CITY OF PALM DESERT CONSIDER A STUDY OF PURCHAStI G A BOND TO BUY PALM DESERT COUNTRY CLUB EXECUTIVE GOLF COURSE. At the last Council iviceting , Ryan. Stendell made a comment if we coup not come up with a better Idea for the ,closed golf course this project was being recommended For approval. On January 18, 2018, Mr. Fred Kent wrote a proposal addressed to the Council regarding the attached Bond Issue. On February 9th, 2018 I sent Eric Ceja an email inquiring as to what happened to Fred Kent's letter. On February 13, I receive a reply that the letter was presented to the City Council and he was not sure how the council feels about the proposal. Eric Ceja provided a letter dated February 13, 2018 stating he had shared this with the city Council. To this date, 4-19-2018, Mr. Kent stated to me that he has never received this reply From the City. ..have attached.. Fred..Kent's original proposal as well as Memo that we sent to our email Base. We asked them if they were in favor of a financial actuary study to be done by the city to see what the actual costs of buying the bond to purchase the property(over 30 years)and r►azntenance costs, :both to be added to our tax bill. f Maybe Wildan Company could do this like the 218 Lighting issue was studied.)'Then the residents could vote yes or no to having this all added to our tax bills. We delivered this message : ers via email and U.S. Postal -Mail , orgy starting on the 15"' of April, So this is an on going survey. We also researched the Riverside Property Tax Postponement for those that would Qualify to defer their taxes. ( attached copy form Retty Yee , California State Controller.) This might help out residents that are disabled, blind and or make under $35,000 a year. am attaching 55 signatures with more to come in. the future. These acre al.l in favor of this study. ,PLEASE CONS TlitS 4 Ek IT _SAS SPACE. Sincer , Barbara Powers, Secretary, Open Spacce Action Committee RECE1VEp CITY CLERK'S OFFICE PALM DESERT rA MI APR 20 AM 9: 07 P.O. Box 12140 Costa Mesa CA 92627 15 January 2018 Sabby Jonathan, Mayor SUsan Marie Weber, Mayor Pro Tem Jan Harnick, Council Member Kathleen Kelly, Council Member Gina Nestande, Council Member Lauri Aylaian, City Manager Ryan Stendell, Director of Community Development The City of Palm Desert 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert CA 92260 Dear Sirs: am an owner of a single family residence on California Drive that borders on the 9-hole golf course for which a residential development plan has been ceaselessly progressing through various parts of the City of Palm Desert. It has been reported to me by another affected property owner -- who took his complaint about this development plan to a City of Palm Desert employee —that he was told that by that employee that he should propose a viable alternative. I have attached what I believe is an viable alternative. It is also a good alternative in that, if put to a vote, it would conclusively determine whether the affected property owners are serious about preventing residential development on subject golf course. .Sincerely yours, /7 /6 Frederick P. Kent Atch (1) The "Do the Right Thing" Alternative (DoRight) to the "Grossly Inappropriate Proposal" (GIP) regarding residential development of the defunct Executive Golf Course (DEC) by the Palm Desert Country Club (PDCC) Recommendation: The City of Palm Desert (CPD) will: 1. Obtain ownership of DEC 2. Landscape the DEC property 3. Maintain the DEC property 4. Devise a municipal bond to cover these costs 5. Propose an allocation scheme to recover these costs as an added line item in the appropriate property tax bills 6. Get the required approval from the affected property owners 7. Issue the municipal bond In so doing CPD will also: 9. Acknowledge that the majority of owners of the affected properties have been and continue to be adamantly against the GIP 10. Acknowledge that the DoRight alternative not only is in accordance with the CPD General Plan regarding open space, but is also consistent with the surrounding area that current property owners bought into and that they rightfully expected'to stay reasonably the same Elaboration: 1.1. It has been said that CPD was offered the DEC by PDCC at no charge. It is difficult to understand why such an offer would be refused. 2.1. One of the alternative landscapes to be considered should be desert-scape, with native plants, to keep maintenance costs (water, labor, etc.)lower 3.1. Estimated maintenance expenses must be made accurately in order to properly size the municipal bond 4.1. Terms of the proposed municipal, bond (eg. size, term and interest rate) should be included in the materials provided to current property owners when they vote 5.1. The annual DEC expenses/bond paid interest expenses are to be totalr';ecovered the added bond line item on the property taxes bilis 6.1. The bond proposal needs to be put to vote with the margin of approval specified in the CPD charter or other governing documents 7.1. It is certain that the majority of the affected property owners have been opposed to the GIP since it was first proposed in 2014. What is not certain is whether these owners can and will approve of a tax added to their property tax bills. It is therefor imperative that an accurate estimate be made of the size of the added tax per property. Supporting Text: 1.1.1. If the DEC cannot be gifted to CPD, an unbiased appraisal should be arranged. That appraisal should reflect the fact that the property has been deteriorated substantially under PDCC ownership. A once viable business has been intentionally abandoned and the landscaping allowed to all die. They poor stewardship of the property they bought has certainly decreased its value. It could supported that the property is currently worth no more than 1/3 of their purchase costs (9 short course links abandoned divided by 27 total links purchased). Also the appraisal should not consider the use of the land for residential development. As has been proven by the PDCC proposal, residential structures could only be shoe -horned into that space. If the property had been intended for future for residential development, it would have had fairways sized like the rest of the area, with room for a central street with housing on both sides. 5.1.1. There is no doubt that the owners of property that directly borders the DEC would be the principle beneficiaries of the changes proposed in this DoRight alternative. But a case can also be made that other owners on the bigger course would also benefit to some extent and could share a part of the cost burden/tax line addition. 4.1.1. Pro -forma of bond details: In addition to the purchase price of the DEC by PDC, the bond would also have to fully cover the initial landscaping costs, annual maintenance costs, annual interest paid to bondholders, etc. The estimation of these costs, the sizing of the bond, etc. requires a full financial analysis. However, the following figures may help determine the feasibility of such an effort. A $1,000,000 bond issued for 30 years at 1.00% per year would require a semi-annual payment of $35,979 and a new (average.) tax on the 188 properties of $192 on the two annual property tax bills. At 296 the payment would be $38,748 and $207 on the two property tax bills. The low interest rate is justified since municipal bond interest is exempt from California income tax and the bond would be well secured by the mandatory property tax payments. # # # RECEIVED CITY CLERK'S OFFICE PALM DESERT, C 2010 APR 20 AM 9: Ol 3-19-2018 TO RACHELLE KLASSEN: ! HAVE ATTACHED THE 55 ShGN,ED RESIDENTS THAT ARE !N FAVOR OF THE BOND STUDY ISSUE. DUE TO A PRINTER PROBLEM I WAS UNABLE TO PRINT THEM FOR EVERYONE. COULD YOU PLEASE MAKE SURE EVERYONE KNOWS WE HAVE 55 SIGNED ATTACHED . WE WOULD LIKE TO SUBMIT ALL OF THESE DOCUMENTS FOR THE APRIL 26TH COUNCIL MEETING EVENE THOUGH WE KNOW IT MAY BE CHANGED TO A FUTURE DATE. Sincerely, Barbara Powers ATTENTION HOMEOWNERS ON THE EXECUTIVE COURSE: IN AN EFFORD TO SAVE OUR OPEN SPACE WE NEED YOUR HELP. PLEASE READ AND CONSIDER THIS PROPOSAL A homeowner has proposed the following: 1.The city would obtain ownership of the open space. 2. Landscape the property. 3.Maintain the property. 4.Devise a municipal bond to cover these costs. 5.Propose an allocation scheme to recover these costs as an added line item in the appropriate property tax bills. (Need figures so our homeowners know how much it will cost them on them Tax bill. 6. Get the required approval from the affected property owners 7. issue the muntctpa1 "bond. l(Over 30 years) Many more details were included. WHAT IS REALLY NEEDED TO MAKE THIS WORK: WHAT WE NEED FROM THE CITY: Have an actuary study done on forming this Bond idea. lust Like they did for the 218 Lighting District with Wilden Co. Then let the homeowners vote as To whether they want to participate. PLEASE SIGN BELOW IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO PERSUE THIS ISSUE AND ASK THE CITY TO START A PROCESS TO DO AN ACTUARY STUDY OR SEND YOUR APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL TO BarbaraPDCC@email.com , OR DROP A SIGNED COPY IN MY LOCKED MAIL BOX, 76918 Kentucky or call me for more info. 760-777-0065 TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE. Palm Desert, California 92211 ATTENTION HOMEOWNERS ON THE EXECUTIVE COURSE: IN AN EFFORD TO SAVE OUR OPEN SPACE WE NEED YOUR HELP. PLEASE READ AND CONSIDER THIS PROPOSAL A homeowner has proposed the following: ..The city would obtain ownership of the open space. 2. Landscape the property. 3.Maintain the property. 4.Devise a municipal bond to cover these costs. S.Propose an allocation scheme to recover these costs as an added line item in the appropriate property tax bilis. (Need figures so our homeowners know how much it will cost them on them Tax bill. 6. Get the required approval from the affected property owners 7. Issue the municipal bond. (Over 30 years) Many more details were included. WHAT IS REALLY NEEDED TO MAKE THIS WORK: WHAT WE NEED FROM THE CITY: Have an actuary study done on forming this Sand idea. Just Like they did for the 218 Lighting District with Wilden Co. Then let the homeowners vote as To whether they want to participate. PLEASE SIGN BELOW IF YOU WOULD UKE TO PERSUE THIS ISSUE AND ASK THE CITY TO START A PROCESS TO DO AN ACTUARY STUDY OR SEND YOUR APPROVAL Oft DISAPPROVAL TO BarbaraPDCC@gm,ail.com , OR DROP A SIGNED COPY IN MY LOCKED MAIL BOX, 76918 Kentucky or call me for more info. 760-777-006S TIME 1S OF THE ESSENCE. _.... o/NA/ r 1 kaC (.dE est i Ke i`k c k) AA �: l'�� CA e L/)jJ From: Dana Hatzenbeller Sent: Monday, April 16, 2018 4:18 PM To: Barbara powers Subject: Re: bond issue this sounds like a plan, we are for it... 76.890 Kentucky Ave Bob and Dana Hatzenbeiler On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 11:48 AM, Barbara powers <gourdpower@msn.com> wrote: If you agree and want this study please send me email To that affect and put your address on it. The city is playing games again. They may shove us Into Maya I will know on Tuesday. The city claims MCC has Some missing paperwork. barb Sent from Mail for Windows 10 p.0 a{i tio-zt.uiieic C% IN AN EFFORD TO SAVE OUR OPEN SPACE WE NEED YOUR HELP. PLEASE READ AND CONSIDER THIS A homeowner has proposed bye 1.The city would obtain ownership of the open spate. ?. 4??^ffscape the p operti!. 4.0evise aahitirial bsond to -rove hesse t.cas.s. S.Propose an allocation scheme to recover these costs as an added line item in the appropriate property tax bills. (Need figures so our homeowners know how much it will cost them on them 7. issue the municipal bond. (Over 30 ye Many CI include.. VT AT WE NEED FROM E Cr1V: oauie an actuary S urly/ done on forming taxis a ee. Like they did for the 218 Lighting District with Wilden Co. Then let the homeowners vote as To whether they want to participate. PLEA JZ. -,0il c-sIE •s19:rti&ASV, LJ,r •'7 ti Alitis A PROCESS TO DO AN ACTUARY STUDY OR SEND YOUR APPROVAL OR DtSAPPROVAL TO OR DROP A SIGNED COPY IN MY LOCKED MAIL BOX, 76918 Kentucky or call me for more info. 760-777-006 ATTENTION 1.401VMEOWNERS ON THE EX C'UTtVE COURSE: IN AN EFFORD TO SAVE OiJR OPEN SPACE WE NEED YOUR i LP. PLEASE READ AND CONSIDER THIS A -homeowner has propo tete fo'i#oweng: 1.The city would obtain ownership of the open space. 2. Landscape the property. 3. Maintain the property. 4.0evise a municipal bond to cover these costs. S.Propose an allocation scheme to recover these costs as an added Ilne item in the appropriate property tax bills. (Need figures so our homeowners know how much it will cost them on them Tax bill. �� , 9`e+�fi��$ 1���➢ �Rlc;s� .� a�`�'4ftu ?'?'a�e.'�� �? �+.1'.w��';.r`yr'�trL''?=6e; s" 7. bate the lorli,1. ``,0,Per ea-, s) Many more details were included, WHAT IS REALLY NEEDED TO MAKS THIS WORK: WHAT WE NEED FROM THE CITY: Have an actuary study done on forming this Bond idea. lust Like they did for the 218 Lighting District with Wilden Co. Then let the homeowners vote as To whether they want to participate. PLEASE S}Gw! BELOW IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO PERSUaETHIS ISSUE AND ASK THE art.. TO START A PROCESS TO .-DO AN ACTUARY STUDY OR SEND YOUR APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL TO ..0 , iikUP A SIGNED COPY iiY LUCKED MAIL BOX, 76918 Kentucky or call me fo1 more info. 760e 777.pr . _. - •" E.1 Gf J Tuck t lbITiE ESSENCE. • 3.t/1361.e,,r AMMTfON HOMEOWNERS OR THE STtVE COURSE: iN .A ! EFFORD TO SAVE OUP OPEN sP&CE WEItiSEn Y01 PROi7aStit. A homeowner leas t roposed the following: 1.The city would obtain ownership of the open space. 2. Landscape the property. 5r M .+� i n ai h 1 ". y ,✓,rv�G �Le�C,��I M,4a �.i't: +w yddt e,%. _LP LEAK READ AND Ct PISD DER TKIS 44)4av+se a mu»iaipai brood to cover these Costs. 5.Propose an allocation scheme to recover these costs as an added line item in the appropriate property tax bills. (Need figures so our homeowners know how much it will cost them on them Tsar. ?Dille 7. tissue the !approval app opal from he !p f bore. 4.O° r ado sa s) Many more details were lncl bell: WHAT ? i.r'a, ' „JfEE at,F^ TO lit0 .s p }.S WORK: liVirigaW Cvia-&O FROM THE CITY: Have an actuary study done on forming this -Sand Idea. ksst Like they did for the 218 lighting District with Wilden to. Then let the homeowners vote -as To whether they want to participate. u , ry: N �eEl 3 -a rxDL D LACE r E t ET EAN AS WEC i�t &:t .. � � dit a, e _,� � Y. �a.� ���rr. a a,d l ���J.... A PROCESS TO DO AN ACTUARY STUDY OR SEND YOUR APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL TO BarbaraPDCC iaii,coon , OR DROP A SIGNED COPY IN MY LOCKED MAIL BOX,16918 Kentucky or call me -for more ink. 750-7 7-1 • ATTENTION HOMEOWNERS ON THE EXECUTIVE COURSE IN AN EFFORD TO SAVE OUR OPEN SPACE WE NEED YOUR HELP. PLEASE READ AND CONSIDER THIS PROPOSAL. A homeowner has 4.f.-..t;t,1, ,i the foiiowing: 1.The city would obtain ownership of the open space. 2. Landscape the property. 3.Maintain the property. 4.Davise mun dpal hand to cover these costs. 5.Propose an allocation scheme to recover these costs as an added line item in the appropriate property tax bills. (Need figures so our homeowners know how much it will cost them on them Tax bill. 6. Get the required approval from the affected property owners 7. Issue the iisanktpal bond. tOver 30 years) Many more details were included. WHAT IS REALLY NEEDED TO MAKE THIS WORK: WHAT WE NEED FROM TILE CITY: Have an actuary study done on forming this Bond idea. Just Like they did for the 218 Lighting District with Wilden Co. Then let the homeowners vote as To whether they want to participate. PLEASE SIGN BELOW IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO PERSUE THIS ISSUE AND ASK THE CITY TO START A PROCESS TO DO AN ACTUARYSTU Y OR SEND YOUR APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL TO IarbaraPDCC(?gmail,com , OR DROP A SIGNED COPY IN MY LOCKED MAIL BOX, 76918 Kentucky or call me for more info. 760-777-0065 TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE. 76775 Kentucky Ave Palm Desert, CA 92211 760-289-2611 ATTENTION HOMEOWNERS ON THE EXECUTIVE COURSE: IN AN EFFORD TO SAVE OUR OPEN SPACE WE -NEEDS YOUR HELP. PLEASE READ AND CONSIDER THIS PROPOSAL. A homeowner has proposed the fo1 owing: 1.The city would obtain ownership of the open space. 2. Landscape the property. 3.Maintain the property. 4.Devlse a municipal bond to cover these costs. 5.Propose an allocation scheme to recover these costs as an added line item in the appropriate property tax bills. (Need figures so our homeowners know how much it will cost them on them Tax bill. 6. Get the required approval from the affected property owners 7. issue the municipal bond. tOver 30 years) Many more details were included. WHAT IS REALLY NEEDED TO MAKE THIS WORK: WHAT WE NEED FROM THE CITY; Have an actuary study done on forming this Bond idea. Just Like they did for the 218 Lighting District with Wilden Co. Then let the homeowners vote as To whether they want to participate. PLEASE SIGN BELOW IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO PERSUE THIS ISSUE AND ASK THE CITY TO START A PROCESS TO DO AN ACTUARY STUDY OR SEND YOUR APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL. TO BarbaraPDCCOgrnail.cor , OR DROP A SIGNED COPY IN MY LOCKED MAIL BOX, 76918 Kentucky or call me for more info. 760-777-006 TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE. ATTENTION HOMEOWNERS ON THE EXECUTIVE COURSE: IN AN EFFORD TO SAVE OUR OPEN SPACE WE NEED YOUR HELP. PLEASE READ AND CONSIDER THIS PROPOSAL. Ahomeowner has proposed -the -following: 1.The city would obtain ownership of the open space. 2 .Landscape the property. 3.Maintain the property. +.Devise a municipal bond to cover these costs. S.Propose an allocation scheme to recover these costs as an added line item in the appropriate property tax bills. (Need figures so our homeowners know how much it will cost them on them Tax bill. 6. Get the required approval from the affected property owners 7. issue the municipal bond. (Over-30 years) Many more details were included. WHAT 15 REALLY NEEDED TO MAKE THIS WORK: WHAT WE NEED FROMTHE C!T'1: Have an actuary study done on 'forming 045 dE ides. AKA Like they did for the 218 Lighting District with Wilden Co. Then let the homeowners vote as To whether they want to participate. PLEASE SIGN BELOW IP YOU WOULD LULE TO PERSUE THIS ISSUE AND ASK THE CITY TO START A PROCESS TO DO AN ACTUARY STUDY OR SEND YOUR APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL TO Rarbar'aPDCC grnail.corn , OR DROP A SIGNED COPY IN MY LOCKED MAIL BOX, 76918 Kentucky or call me for more info. 760-777-006 TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE. ATTENTION HOMEOWNERS ON THE EXECUTIVE COURSE: IN AN EfFORD TO SAVE OUR OPEN SPAGE.WE Nib YOUR H :A. $LEASED ' DER THIS PROPOSAL. A homeowner has proposed the following: 1.The city would obtain ownership of the open space. 2. Landscape the property. 3.Maintain the property. 4.Devise a municipal bond to cover these costs. 5.Propose an allocation scheme to recover these costs as an added line item in the appropriate property tax bills. (Need figures so our homeowners know how much it will cost them on them Tax bfli. 6. Get the required approval from the affected property owners 7. issue the municipal bond. ,(Over 30 years) Many more details were included WHAT IS REALLY NEEDED TO MAKE THIS WORK: WHAT WE NEE[) FROMTHE CITY: Have an actuary study done on forming this Bond idea. Just Like they did for the 218 Lighting District with Wilden Co. Then let the homeowners vote as To whether they want to participate. PLEASE SIGN BELOW IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO PERSUE THIS ISSUE AND ASK THE CITY TO START A PROCESS -TO DO AN ACTUARY STUDY OR SEND YOUR APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL TO OR DROP A SIGNED COPY IN MY LOCKED MAIL BOX, 76918 Kentucky or call me for more info. 7610-777-006 TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE. ATTENTION HOMEOWNERS Ott THE EXECUTIVE COURSE: IN AN EFFORD TO SAVE OUR OPEN SPACE' tE NEED fi t +. ADAM SIDER T PROPOSAL. A homeowner has proposed the following: 1.The city would obtain ownership of the open space. 2. Landscape the property. 3.Maintain the property. 4.Devise a municipal bond to cover these costs. 5.Propose an allocation scheme to recover these costs as an added line item in the appropriate property tax bills. (Need figures so our homeowners know flow much It will cost them on them Tax. bill. 6. Get the required approval from the affected property owners 7..Issue the municipal bond. Over 30 years) Many more details were included. WHAT IS REALLY NEEDED TO MAKE THIS WORK: WHAT WE NEED FROM THE CITY: Have an actuary study done on forming this Bond idea. lust Like they did for the 218 Lighting District with Wilden Co. Then let the homeowners vote as To whether they want to participate. PLEASE SIGN BELOW IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO PERSUE THIS ISSUE AND ASK THE CITY TO START A PROCESS TO DO AN ACTUARY STUDY OR SEND YOUR APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL TO , OR DROP A SIGNED COPY IN MY LOCKED MAIL BOX, 76918 Kentucky or call me for more info. 760-777 TIME IS OF THE ESSENC Mike Herta Pe+mDese 92211 ATTENTION HOMEOWNERS ON THE EXECUTIVE COURSE: IN AN EFFORD TO SAVE OUR OPEN SPACE WE NEED YOUR HELP. PLEASE READ AND CONSIDER THIS PROPOSAL. A homeowner has proposed the .following: 1.The city would obtain ownership of the open space. 2. Landscape the property, 3.Maintain the property. 4.Devise a municipal bond to cover these costs. S.Propose an allocation scheme to recover these costs as an added line item in the appropriate property tax bills. (Need,figures so our homeowners know how much it will cost them on them Tax bill. 6. Get the required approval from the affected property owners 7. Issue the municipal bond. (Over 30 years) Many more details were included, WHAT IS REALLY NEEDED TO MAKE THIS WORK: WHAT WE NEED FROM THE GLTY: Have an. actuary study done on-for-rning this Bond idea. lust Like they did for the 218 lighting District with Wilden Co. Then let the homeowners vote as To whether they want to participate. PLEASE SIGN BELOW IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO PERSUE THIS ISSUE AND ASK THE CITY TO START A PROCESS TO DO AN ACTUARY STUDY OR SEND YOUR APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL TO s a >°: , OR DROP A SIGNED COPY IN MY LOCKED MAIL BOX, 76918 Kentucky or call me for more info. 760-777-006 TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE. Lj .--I 1- /8 4/t2 4C ,SAP( % ATTENTION HOMEOWNERS Obi THE EXECUTIVE Cam: IN AN EFFORDTO SAVE OUR OPEN SPACE WE NEED YOUR HELP. PLEASE READ AND CONSIDER THIS PROPOSAL. A homeowner has proposed the following: 1.The city would obtain ownership of the open space. 2. Landscape the property. 3.Maintain the property. 4.Devise a municipal bond to cover these tests. 5.Propose an allocation scheme to recover these costs as an added line item in the appropriate property tax bills. (Need figures so our homeowners know how much it will cost them on them Tax bill. G. Get the required approval from the affected property owners 7. issue the municipal bond. (Over,30 years) Many more details were included. WHAT IS REALLY NEEDED TO MAKE THIS WORK: WHAT WE NEED fROM THE CITY: Have an actuary study done on forming this Bond idea. Just Like they did for the 218 Lighting District with Wilden Co. Then let the homeowners vote as To whether they want to participate. PLEASE SIGN BELOW IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO PERSUETHIS ISSUE AND ASK THE CITY TO START A PROCESS TO DO AN ACTUARY STUDY OR SEND YOUR APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL TO G31"arU''.,A=? a s. as , OR DROP A SIGNED COPY IN MY LOCKED MAIL BOX, 76918 Kentucky or call me for more info, 760-777-006 TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE. ATTENTEQN H M O RS ON i'.1`X CUT C IN. AN EFFORD TO SAVE OUR OPEN SPACE WE NEED YOUR HELP. PLEASE READ AND CONSIDER THIS PROPOSAL. A=homeowner. has proposed the following: 1.The city would obtain ownership of the open space. 2. Landscape the property. 3.Maintain the property. 4.Devise a rmRunicipat-band to corer these costs. 5.Propose an allocation scheme to recover these costs as an added line item in the appropriate property tax bills. (Need figures so our homeowners know how much it will cost them on them Tax bill. 6. Get the required approval from the affected property owners 7. Issue the mumcipal bond. (Over 30 -years) Many more details were included. WHAT IS REALLY NEEDED TO MAKE THIS WORK: WHAT WE NEED FROM THE CITY: Have en- actuary study done on -. fanning this Bond. idea. Just Like they did for the 218 Lighting District with Wilden Co. Then let the homeowners vote as To whether they want to participate. PLEASE SIGN BELOW IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO PERSUE THIS ISSUE AND ASK THE CITY TO START A PROCESS TO DO AN ACTUARY STUDY OR SEND YOUR APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL TO BarbaraPDCCPernail.corn , OR DROP A SIGNED COPY IN MY LOCKED MAIL BOX, 76918 Kentucky or call me for more info. 760-777-006 TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE. 7. 4 ATTENTION HOMEOWNERS ON THE EXECUTIVE COURSE: IN AN EFFORD TO SAVE OUR OPEN SPACE WE NEED YOUR HELP. PLEASE READ AND CONSIDER THIS PROPOSAL. A homeowner has proposed the following: 1.The city would obtain ownership of the open space. 2. Landscape the property. 3.Maintain the property. 4.Devise a murricipai bond to cover these costs. 5.Propose an allocation scheme to recover these costs as an added line item in the appropriate property tax bills. (Need figures so our homeowners know how much it will cost them on them Tax bill. 6. Get the required approval from the affected property owners 7. Issue the municipal bond. (Over 30 years) Many more details were included. WHAT IS REALLY NEEDED TO MAKE THIS WORK: WHAT WE NEW MOM 714E OTY: Have an +actuary study done on forming this Bond idea. Just Like they did for the 218 Lighting District with Wilden Co. Then let the homeowners vote as To whether they want to participate. PLEASE SLGN. BELOW IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO PERSUE THIS ISSUE AND ASK THE CITY TO START A PROCESS TO DO AN ACTUARY STUDY OR SEND YOUR APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL TO BarbaraPDCC@grnail.com , OR DROP A SIGNED COPY IN MY LOCKED MAIL BOX, 76918 Kentucky or call me for more info. 760-777-006 TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE. 4/15/2018 Fwd: Approve the Open Space Bond - Barbara powers Fwd: Approve the Open Space Bond barbarapdcc <barbarapdcc@ gmaiL.corn> sV 015/207 5:ac,b1'�/ ro.gourdpower@msn.com <gourdpower@msn.com>; ::.barbarapdcc@gmail.com <ba.rbarapdcc@grnail.corn>; Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smarwhone Original message From: Cheri Grant -Simmons <cheri3352@gmail.com> Date: 4/15/18 1:54 PM (GMT-08:00) To: barbarapdcc@grnaiLcam Subject: Approve the Open Space Bond Barbara, Please consider this my written notice to approve the Open Space Bond. We appreciate your efforts to get this done. Best regards, Cherivn Grant -Simmons Sent from my Phone https://outlook. live.comlowaRltem D=AQMkADAwATIwMTAwACOWAE6LWRIZD(tNIDACLTAwCgBGAAADTDukWZKakKRHS%2bGSOOM%2fAcAnaWEXQjd4kGP From Barbara Powers Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2018 12:37 AM To: Barbara Powers; Barbara2 Subject: Fwd: OpenSpaceActionCommittee: TIME 1S OF THE ESSENCE Barbara, thisIs another approval for the Bond Idea,' Bob Covell's Daughter. Please add her approval to your list. Thanks (Q Marilyn Forwarded message From: christine coven <coveil.gracioppo@gmail.com> Date: Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 8:24 PM Subject: Re: OpenSpaceActionCommittee: TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE To: Barbara Powers <openspaceaction@gmail.com> Approve 76834 Kentucky Christine Covets, Trustee Covell Family Trust On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 12:58 PM Barbara Powers <openspaceaction@gmail.com> wrote: ATTENTION HOMEOWNERS ON THE EXECUTIVE COURSE OR any other homeowner in the PDCC Communityllffll IN AN EFFORT TO SAVE OUR OPEN SPACE WE NEED YOUR HELP. PLEASE READ AND CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING PROPOSAL. A homeowner has proposed the following: 1. The City would obtain ownership of the OpenSpace 2. Landscape the property. 3. Maintain the property. 4. Devise a municipal bond to cover these costs. 5. Propose an allocation scheme to recover these costs as an added line item in the appropriate property tax bill. (Need figures so our homeowners know how much it will cost them on their tax bill. 6. Get the required approval from the affected property owners. 7. Issue the Municipal Bond. (Over 30 years ) Many more details were included. WHAT IS REALLY NEEDED TO MAKE THIS WORK: What we need from the City: Have an actuary study done on forming the Bond idea, just like they did for the 218 Lighting District with the Wilden Co. Then let the homeowners vote as to whether they want* participate. Please sign below if you would like to pursue this issue and ask the City to start a process to do an Actuary Study. 74,4fly keith-oci7 DROP A SIGNED COPY, INCLUDE YOUR ADDRESS, IN MY LOCKED MAIL BOX, 76918 KENTUCKY AVE OR SEND YOUR APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL TO barbarapdcc@gmail.com NEED MORE INFORMATION CALL 760-777-0065. TIME IS OF THE ESSENCEIIII l t l l l l t PLEASE SHARE WITH YOUR NEIGHBORS AND FRIENDS. THANK YOU JF{3R YOUR CONTINUED SUPPORT. OPEN SPACE ACTION COMMITTEE Signed: Jack and Marilyn Forney 76831 Kentucky Ave. Palm Desert 7G83/ jfvn,<J ATTENTION HOMEOWNERS ON THE EXECUTIVE COURSE: IN AN EFFORD TO SAVE OUR OPEN SPACE WE NEED YOUR HELP. PLEASE READ AND CONSIDER THIS PROPOSAL. A homeowner has. proposed the following: 1.The city would obtain ownership of the open space. 2. Landscape the property. 3.Maintain the property. 4.Devise a municipal bond to cover these costs. S.Propose an allocation scheme to recover these costs as an added line item in the appropriate property tax bills. (Need figures so our homeowners know how much it will cost them on them Tax bill. 6. Get the required approval from the affected property owners 7. Issue the municipal_ bond. (Over 30 years) Many more details were included. WHAT IS REALLY NEEDED TO MAKE THIS WORK: WHAT WE NEED FROM THE CITY: Havean actuary study done on forming this Bond idea. lust Like they did for the 218 Lighting District with Wilden Co. Then let the homeowners vote as To whether they want to participate. PLEASE SIGN BELOW IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO PERSUE THIS ISSUE AND ASK THE CITY TO START A PROCESS TO DO AN ACTUARY STUDY OR SEND YOUR APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL TO BarbaraPDCC[)gnall.com , OR DROP A SIGNED COPY IN MY LOCKED MAIL BOX, 76918 Kentucky or call me for more info. 760-777-006 TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE. e ATTENTION HOMEOWNERS ON THE EXECUTIVE COURSE: IN AN EFFORD TO SAVE OUR OPEN SPACE WE NEED YOUR HELP. PLEASE READ AND CONSIDER THIS PROPOSAL. A homeowner has proposed the following: 1.The city would obtain ownership of the open space. 2. Landscape the property. 3.Maintain the property. 4.Devlse a municipal bond to cover these costs. 5.Propose an allocation scheme to recover these costs as an added line item in the appropriate property tax bills. (Need figures so our homeowners know how much it will cost them on them Tax bill. 6. Get the required approval from the affected property owners 7. Issue the municipal bond. (Over 30 years) Many more details were included. WHAT IS REALLY NEEDED TO MAKE THIS WORK: WHAT WE NEED FROM THE CITY: Have an actuary study done on forming this Bond idea. Just Like they did for the 218 Lighting District with Wilden Co. Then let the homeowners vote as To whether they want to participate. PLEASE SIGN BELOW IF YOU WOULD LAKE TO PERSUE THIS ISSUE AND ASK THE CITY TO START A PROCESS TO DO AN ACTUARY STUDY OR SEND YOUR APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL TO 6arbaraPDCC c! grnail.c©mri , OR DROP A SIGNED COPY IN MY LOCKED MAIL BOX, 76918 Kentucky or call me for more info. 760-777-006 TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE. (c---/-)-7-c-/c-,/9 Age2 7>e---- /99 2-- 4) ATTENTION HOMEOWNERS ONTHE EXECUTIVE COURSE: IN AN EFFORD TO SAVE OUR OPEN. SPACE WE NEED YOUR HELP. PLEASE READ AND CONSIDER THIS PROPOSAL. A homeowner has proposed the following; 1.The city would obtain ownership of the open space. 2. Landscape the property. 3.Maintain the property. 4.flevise a municipal bond to cover these costs. 5.Propose an allocation scheme to recover these costs as an added line item in the appropriate property tax bilis. (Need figures so our homeowners know how much it will cost them on them Tax bill. 6. Get the required approval from the affected property owners 7. Issue the municipal bond. _(Over 30 years) Many more details were included. WHAT IS REALLY NEEDED TO MAKE THIS WORK: WHAT WE NEED -FROM THE CITY: Have an actuary study done on forming this Bond idea. Just Like they did for the 218 Lighting District with Wilden Co. Then let the homeowners vote as To whether they want to participate. PLEASE SIGN BELOW IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO PERSUE THIS ISSUE_ AND ASK THE CITY_ TO START A PROCESS TO DO AN ACTUARY STUDY OR. SEND YOUR APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL TO , OR DROP A SIGNED COPY IN MY LOCKED MAIL BOX, 76918 Kentucky or call me for more info. 760-777-006 TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE. 411‘13 ` /I 16 866 kcA? i uCK'( p71.1&, IQLnt (122U ATTENTION HOMEOWNERS ON THE EXECUTIVE COURSE: IN AN EFFORD TO SAVE OUR OPEN SPACE WE NEED YOUR HELM PLEASE READ AND CONSIDER THIS PROPOSAL. A homeowner'has proposed the fallowing: 1.The city would obtain ownership of the open space. 2. Landscape the property. 3.Maintain the property. 4. Devise a runicipai bond to cover these costs. S.Propose an allocation scheme to recover these costs as an added line item in the appropriate property tax bills. (Need figures so our homeowners know how much it will cost them on them Tax bill. 6. Get the required approval from the affected property owners 7. Issue the municipal "bond. {.Over 30 years) Many more details were included. WHAT IS REALLY NEEDED TO MAKE THIS WORK: WHAT WE NEED FROM THE CITY: Have anactuary study done on forming thi3 Bond idea. Just Like they did for the 218 Lighting District with Wilden Co. Then let the homeowners vote as To whether they want to participate. PLEASES GN BELOW IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO PERSUE VAS ISSUE AND ASK. THE CITY TO START A PROCESS TO DO AN ACTUARY STUDY OR SEND YOUR APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL TO BarbaraPDCCPamail.com ,.OR DROP A SIGNED COPY IN MY LOCKED MAIL BOX, 76918 Kentucky or call me for more info. 760-7.77 :U06 TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE. 1 ram- ATTENTION HOMEOWNERS ON THE EXECUTIVE COURSE: IN AN EFFORD TO SAVE OUR OPEN SPACE WE NEED YOUR HELP.. PLEASE READ AND CONSIDER THIS PROPOSAL. A homeowner has proposed the following: 1.The city would obtain ownership of the open space. 2. Landscape the property. 3.Maintain the property. 4.Oevise a ownidpal bond to cover these costs. 5.Propose an allocation scheme to recover these costs as an added line item in the appropriate property tax bills. (Need figures so our homeowners know how much it will cost them on them Tax bitl. 6. Get the required approval from the affected property owners 7.-Issue the municipal. bond. (Over 30 years} Many more details were included. WHAT IS REALLY NEEDED TO MAKE THIS WORK: WHAT WE NEED FROM TtiE CITY: Have an actuary study done on forming this Bond idea. Just Like they did for the 218 Lighting District with Wilden Co. Then let the homeowners vote as To whether they want to participate. PLFL1CF SIGN. RELOW IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO PERSUE THIS. ISSUE AND ASK THE CITY TO START. A PROCESS TO DO AN ACTUARY STUDY OR SEND YOUR APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL TO RarbaraPDCC@email.com , OR DROP A SIGNED COPY IN MY LOCKED MAIL BOX, 76918 Kentucky or call me for more info. 760-777-006 TIME IS,OF THE ESSENCE. A .6 ATTENTION HOMEOWNERS ON THE EXECUTIVE COURSE: IN AN EFFORD TO SAVE OUR OPEN SPACE WE NEED YOUR HELP.- PLEASE READ AND CONSIDER THIS PROPOSAL. A: homeownerhas proposed the Mowing: 1.The city would obtain ownership of the open space. 2. ape the property. 3.Maintain the property. 4.Devlse a municipal bond to cover these costs. S.Propose an allocation scheme to recover these costs as an added line item in the appropriate property tax bills. (Need figures so our homeowners know how much it will cost them on them Tax bill. 6. Get the required approval from the affected property owners 7_-Issue_the municipal bond. {Over 30 years) Many more details were included. WHAT IS REALLY NEEDED TO MAKE THIS WORK: WHAT WE NEED FROM THE OTT: Have ertectuery study done en forming this Rand ides. Just Like they did for the 218 Lighting District with Walden Co. Then let the homeowners vote as To whether they want to participate. PLEASE SIGNBELOWtE YOU WOULDUKE TO PERSUE-THIS ISSUE AND ASK THE CITY TO START. A PROCESS TO DO AN ACTUARY STUDY OR SEND YOUR APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL TO BarbaraPDCC@email.com ,.OR DROP A SIGNED COPY IN MY LOCKED MAIL BOX, 76918 Kentucky or call me for more info. 760-777-006 TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE. ATTENTION HOMEOWNERS ON THE EXECUTIVE COURSE IN Aht EFFORD TO SAVE OUR OPEN SPACE WE NEED YOUR HELP., PLEASE READ AND CONSIDER THIS PROPOSAL. A homeowner has proposed the fol%wJng: 1.The city would obtain ownership of the open space. 2. Landscape the property. 3.Maintain the property. 4. Devlse a municipal bond to cover these costs. 5.Propose an allocation scheme to recover these costs as an added line item in the appropriate property tax bills. (Need figures so our homeowners know how much it will cost them on them Tax bill. 6. Get the required approval from the affected property owners 7. issue the .municipal .bond. (Over ail years) Many more details were included. WHAT IS REALLY NEEDED TO MAKE THIS WORK: WHAT WE NEED FROM THE CITY: Have arc. actuary study done on forming this Bond idea. Just Like they did for the 218 Lighting District with Wilden Co. Then let the homeowners vote as To whether they want to participate. Pi E.Acr SIGN BELOW LE YOU WOULD LLKE TO PERSUE THIS ISSUE AND ASK. THE CITY TO START. A PROCESS TO DO AN ACTUARY STUDY OR SEND YOUR APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL TO 8arbaraPDCC@gmail.com , OR DROP A SIGNED COPY IN MY LOCKED MAIL BOX, 76918 Kentucky or call me for more info. 760-777-005 TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE. ivs ATTENTION HOMEOWNERS ON THE EXECUTIVE COURSE: IN AN EFFORD.TO SAVE OUR OPEN SPACE WE NEED YOUR HELP.. PLEASE READ AND CONSIDER THIS PROPOSAL. Afiomeowner°has proposed the following: 1.The city would obtain ownership of the open space. 2. Landscape the property. 3.Maintain the property. 4.Devlse a municipal bornd to cover these Costs. 5.Propose an allocation scheme to recover these costs as an added line item in the appropriate property tax bills. (Need figures so our homeowners know how much it will cost them on them Tax bill. 6. Get the required approval from the affected property owners 7. Issue the municipal bond. Over 30 years) Many more details were included, WHAT IS REALLY NEEDED TO MAKE THIS WORK: WHAT WE NEED FROM' THE OM Have nn actuary study done on forming this Bond idea. Just Like they did for the 218 Lighting District with Wilden Co. Then let the homeowners vote as To whether they want to participate. PLEASE SEG& BELOW IF YOU. WOULD LIKE TO PERSUE THIS ISSUE AND ASI(THE CLTY TO START. A PROCESS TO DO AN ACTUARY STUDY OR SEND YOUR APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL TO BarbaraPDCC@email.com , OR DROP A SIGNED COPY IN MY LOCKED MAIL BOX, 76918 Kentucky or call me for more info. 760-777 flab TIMES OF THE ESSENCE. ATTEht ON HOMEOWNERS ON THE EXECUTIVE COURSE: IN AN EFFORD TO SAVE OUR OPEN SPACE WE NEED YOUR HELP. PLEASE READ AND CONSIDER THIS PROPOSAL A "homeowner has proposed the folio+ flg: 1.The city would obtain ownership of the open space. 2. Lie the property. 3.Maintain the property. 4.Deitse a mun i ipa4 trcmtl to corer 'these costs. S.Propose an allocation scheme to recover these costs as an added line item in the appropriate property tax bills. (Need figures so our homeowners know how much it will cost them on them Tax bill. 6. Get the required approval from the affected property owners 7. 'Issue the mw icipad bond. Over 30 years) Many ?more details were included. WHAT IS REALLY NEEDED TO MAKE THIS WORK: WHAT WE NEED FROM THE Cti't : Hw#e an actuary study dane on 'touring this 'Bond idea. Just Like they did for the 218 Lighting District with Wilden Co. Then let the homeowners vote as To whether they want to participate. PLEASE StGN BELOW IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO PERSUE THIS ISSUE AND ASK THE CITY TO START A PROCESS TO DO AN ACTUARY STUDY OR SEND YOUR APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL TO BarbaraPDCC c_grnail.com , OR DROP A SIGNED COPY IN MY LOCKED MAIL BOX, 76918 Kentucky or call me for more info. 760-777-006c TIME IS OF -THE ESSENCE. a1 jm 'eL 70K aLuc' A17ENTION C OMEO fNtRSON Tl EXEC E F,E CODE: IN AN EFFORD TO SAVE OUR OPEN. SPACE WE NEED YOUR HELP. PLEASE READ AND CONSIDER THIS PROPOSAL. A homeowner has proposed the following: 1.The city would obtain ownership of the open space. 2. landscape the property. 3.Maintain the property. 4.0evise a municipal bondto cover these costs. 5.Propose an allocation scheme to recover these costs as an added line item in the appropriate property tax bills. (Need figures so our homeowners know how much it will cost them on them Tax bill. 6. Get the required approval from the affected property owners 7. Issue the municipal bond. (Over 30 years) Many more Beta is were anciuded. WHAT IS REALLY NEEDED TO MAKE THIS WORK: WHAT Wf NEED FROM THE CITY; Have an actuary study done on forming this Uond idea. lust Like they did for the 218 Lighting District with Wilden Co. Then let the homeowners vote as To whether they want to participate. PLEASE SIGN BELOW IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO PERSUE THIS ISSUE AND ASK THE CITY TO START A PROCESS TO DO AN ACTUARY STUDY OR SEND YOUR APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL TO BarbaraPDCCnRmail.com , OR DROP A SIGNED COPY IN MY LOCKED MAIL BOX, 76918 Kentucky or call me for more info. 760-777-006 TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE. Ilkaktw ili/ft4tre Martin C. Shaffer, M.D. 78915 Oklahoma Avenue Palm Desert, CA 92211 From: barbara-pdcc Sent:. Mondabh. April 16, 2ff1811:33 AM To: Barbara Powers Cc barbarapdcc@,,gmail.corn Subject: Fwd: Executive Course Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone Original message From: Alan Trotter <desertwoodline@msn.com> Date: 4/16/1S 10:28 AM (GMT=O8.00i To: Basta raPDCCGMAII..COM Subject: Executive Course 4-16-18 Barbara: My wife and I would like to add our names, signature to the municipal bond ideal We live at 76771 Oklahoma Ave. and strongly feet our view will be destroyed by condos actually above our grade level and subsinquently greatly reducing our home value! Which we had no idea of this possible change or we would have reconsidered our home purchase. We thank you for all your work as we both are very busy people and are greatful for your help in this important matter! Thank you 1! Alan & Denise Trotter My cell 76O-567=882O Get Outlook for iOS 7' 77/ Ove_,4N ilei- From: Barbara Powers Sent: Sunday, April 15, 2018 11:57 PM To: Barbara2; Barbara Powers Subject Fwd: OpenSpaceActionComrmittee: T1ME 1S OF THE ESSENCE forwarded message --------- From: Jack Fleming <flemingiamf@grnail.corn> Date: Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 6:52 PM Subject: Re: OpenSpaceActionCommittee: TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE To: Barbara Powers <openspaceaction@gmail.com> I doubt that I can voteon this as I am.. not on the Exec course (accoss the street), But I would- -Nis seems fair and reasonable tome. Why we didnt do this earlier 1 dont know. Maybe the news about the agreement aridttrie BK dismissal hetped. t am sure the Club is not happy. kind of dashes their get rich quick sceme. On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 12:04 PM, Barbara Powers <openspaceaction@gmail.com> wrote: ATTENTION HOMEOWNERS ON THE EXECUTIVECOURSE OR any other homeowner in the PDCC Comm unity t 1119 4 IN AN EFFORT TO SAVE OUR OPEN SPACE WE NEED YOUR HELP. PLEASE READ AND CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING PROPOSAL. A homeowner has proposed the following: 1. The City would obtain ownership of the Open Space 2. Landscape the property. 3. Maintain the property. 4. Devise a municipal bond to cover these costs. 5. Propose an allocation scheme to recover these costs as an added line item in the appropriate property tax bill. (Need figures so our homeowners know how much it will cost them on their tax bill. 6. Get the required approval from the affected property owners. 7. Issue the Municipal Bond. (Over 30 years ) Many more details were included. WHAT IS REALLY NEEDED TO MAKE THIS WORK: What we need from the City: Have an actuary study done on forming the Bond idea, just like they did for the 218 Lighting District with the Wiiden Co. Then let the homeowners vote as to whether they want to participate. Pleasesign below if you would like to pursue this issue and ask the City to start a process to do an Actuarf'S1udy. From: Barbara Powers Sent Monday, April 16, 2018 1:15 PM T4X Barbara Powers; .Barbara Subject: Fwd: OpernSpaceActionCornmittee: TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE Forwarded message From: Kevin Fahey <faheykevin@comcast.net> Date: Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 11:50 AM Subject: Re: OpenSpaceActionCommittee: TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE To: Barbara Powers <onensoaceaction (wrnail.corn> Barbara, Please accept this email as our ftvee'ailc*tit to support this Thanks, Kevin Kevin Fahey 77625 Michigan Drive Unit 4 Palm Desert, CA 92211 Sent from my iPhone Pr On Apr 15, 2018, at 12:04 PM, Barbara Powers <openspar_eaction@grnail.com> wrote: ATTENTION HOMEOWNERS ON THE EXECUTIVE COURSE OR any other homeowner in the PDCC Community lilt ► U• IN AN EFFORT TO SAVE OUR OPEN SPACE WE NEED YOUR .HELP.. PLEASE READ .AND CONSIDER THE ,FOLLOWING PROPOSAL. A homeowner has proposed the following: 1. The City would obtain ownership of the Open Space 2. Landscape the property. 3. Maintain the property. 4. Devise a municipal bond to cover these costs. 5. Propose an allocation scheme to recover these costs as an added line item in the appropriate property tax bill. (Need figures so our homeowners know how much it will them on their tax biG4. Get the required approval from the affected property owners. 7. Issue the Municipal Bond. (Over 30 years ) May, more details were included. rf ATTENTION HOMEOWNERS ON THE EXECUTIVE COURSE: IN AN EFFORD TO SAVE OUR OPEN SPACE WE NEED YOUR HELP. PLEASE READ AND CONSIDER THIS PROPOSAL A homeowner has proposed the following: 1.The city would obtain ownership of the open space. 2. Landscape the property. 3.Maintain the property. 4.Devise a municipal bond to cover these costs. 5.Propose an allocation scheme to recover these costs as an added line item in the appropriate property tax bills. (Need figures so our homeowners know how much it will cost them on them Tax bill. 6. Get the required approval from the affected property owners 7. Issue the rrrbond. (Over 30 years) Many more details were included. WHAT IS REALLY NEEDED TO MAKE THIS WORK: WHAT WE NEED FROM THE CITY: Have an actuary study done on forming this Bond idea. lust Like they did for the 218 Lighting District with Wilden Co. Then let the homeowners vote as To whether they want to participate. PLEASE SIGN BELOW IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO PERSUE THIS ISSUE AND ASK THE CITY TO START A PROCESS TO DO AN ACTUARY STUDY OR SEND YOUR APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL TO BarbaraPDCCCQmail.com , OR DROP A SIGNED COPY IN MY LOCKED MAIL BOX, 76918 Kentucky or call me for more info. 760-777-006 -7o G — J -i 7_. C? v 6.s TIME I OI1 THE ESSENCE. • From: barbarapdcc Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2018 7:06 AM To: gourdpower@msn.com Cc: barbarapdcc@gmaiLcom Subject: Fwd: Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone Original message From: Evelyn Garman <emgarman1214@gmail.com> Date: .4_11§/18 8:15 PM1(GMT-08100) To: barbarapdoc@gmail.com Subject: Approvai Evelyn Garman 77-625 Michigan Drive #2 Palm desert, CA 92211 Sent from Samsung tabiet 773 nicLij, )14 ATTENTION HOMEOWNERS ON THE EXECUTIVE COURSE: dN MCI EIS TO SAVE OUR OPEN SPACE'WE NEED YOUR HELP. PLEASE READ AND CONSIDER THIS PROPOSAL. A homeowner has proposed the following:. 1.The city would obtain ownership of the open space. 2. Landscape the property. 3.Maintain the property. 4.Devise a municipal bond to cover these costs. 5.Propose an allocation scheme to recover these costs as an added line item in the appropriate property tax bills. (Need figures so our homeowners know how much it will cost them on them Tax bi}I. 6. Get the required approval from the affected property owners 7. Issue the munktpat bond. (Over 30 years) Many more details were included. WHAT IS REALLY NEEDED TO MAKE THIS WORK: WHAT WE NEED FROM THE CITY: Have an actuary sty demon fanning this Bond idea. lust Like they did for the 218 Lighting District with Wilden Co. Then let the homeowners vote as To whether they want to participate. PLEASE SIGN BELOW IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO PERSUE THIS ISSUE AND ASK THE art TO START A PROCESS TO DO AN ACTUARY STUDY OR SEND YOUR APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL TO BarbaraPDCC@email.com , OR DROP A SIGNED COPY IN MY LOCKED MAIL BOX, 76918 Kentucky or call me for more info. 760-777-0065 TtM IS,OF T ,ESSENCE. /10/14/44 4/13/2018 Fwd: Executive Course. Open space - Barbara powers Fwd:,-1 utive Course. Open space barbara,pdce <batbataDdcc@gt aitcor > Fri 4/13/2018 2:53 P l -ro.gourdpower@msn.com <gourdpower@msn.com>; _:.barbarapctcc;'arnaii.com<barh rapdcc@orrail.co+n>; Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Ga'axy smar o o-e Original message From: Lynn Sopwith <lynn92651@yahoo.com> Date: 4/13/1811:48AM (GMT-08:O13) To: barbaraPDCC@gmar`f.com Subject: Executive Course. Open space Count me as a yes per proposal. Thank you, Lynn Sopwith 77100 Indiana, PD Sent from my iPad httr lIrn dfnnk :nwc rnmbKuo/9..:e.........4..1_13,...,aeA .....1 ..+ From: barbarapdcc Sent: Sunday, April 15, 2018 12:58 PM To: gourdpowergrnsn.com Cc: barbarapcfcc@gmail.corn Subject' Fwd.:Approval from Bruce &Annie Anderson &eu: ro y Vezon, Sarr,svng G.a.axy s!1-181,-.1.pfrioae Original message From: annie anderson <annulanderson@hotmail.com> Date: 4/15/18 12:45 PM (GMT-08:00) To: barbarapdccegmail.com Subject: Approval from Bruce & Annie Anderson Dear Barbara, We Absolutely APPROVE this idea Regards, Bruce And Annie Anderson 77330 Colorado Street Palm Desert CA92211 A homeowner has proposed the following: 1. The City would obtain ownership of the Open Space 2. Landscape the property. 3. Maintain the property. 4. Devise a municipal bond to cover these costs. 5. Propose an allocation scheme to recover these casts as an added line item in the appropriate property tax bill. (Need figures so our homeowners know how rnuch it will cost them on their tax bill. 6. Get the required approval from the affected property owners. 7. Issue the Municipal Bond. (Over 30 years ) 'Many -more details Were included. WHAT IS REALLY NEEDED TO MAKE THIS WORK: _)10 YA-b6 ATTENTION HOMEOWNERS ON THE EXECUTIVE COURSE: IN AN EFFORD TO SAVE OUR OPEN SPACE WE NEED YOUR HELP. PLEASE READ AND CONSIDER THIS PROPOSAL. A homeowner has proposed the following: 1.The city would obtain ownership of the open space. 2. Landscape the property. 3.Maintain the property. 4.Devise a municipal bond to cover these costs. 5.Propose an allocation scheme to recover these costs as an added line item in the appropriate property tax bilis. (Need figures so our homeowners know how much it will cost them on them Tax bill. 6. Get the required approval from the affected property owners 7. Issue the municipal bond. (Over 30 years) Many more details were included. WHAT IS REALLY NEEDED TO MAKE THIS WORK: WHAT WE NEED FROM THE CITY: Have an actuary study done on forming this Bond idea. Just Like they did for the 218 Lighting District with Witden Co. Then let the homeowners vote as To whether they want to participate. PLEASE SIGN BELOW IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO PERSUE THIS ISSUE AND ASK THE CITY TO START A PROCESS TO DO AN ACTUARY STUDY OR SEND YOUR APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL TO BarbaraPDCC@emaiL.com , OR DROP A SIGNED COPY IN MY LOCKED MAIL BOX, 7691E Kentucky or call me for more info_ 760-777-0065 TIME II19F THE ESSENCE. /v1a1"4--- ae;° "! Ue).-- CALI- t: P 66 • ATTENTION HOMEOWNERS ON THE EXECUTIVE COURSE: IN AN EFFORD TO SAVE OUR OPEN SPACE WE NEED YOUR HELP. PLEASE READ AND CONSIDER THIS PROPOSAL. Ahomeowner has ,414..1the following: 1.The city would obtain ownership of the open space. 2. Landscape the property. 3.Maintain The 1.. vvrati yr. 4.Devise a municipal bond to cover these costs. 5.Propose an allocation scheme to recover these costs as an added line item in the appropriate property tax bills. (Need figures so our homeowners know how much it will cost them on them Tax bilk. 6. Get the required approval from the affected property owners 7. issue the municipal bond. Over 30 years) Many more details were included. WHAT IS REALLY NEEDED TO IMAM THIS WORK: WHAT WE NEED FROM THE CITY: Have an actuary study done on forming this Bond idea. Just Like they did for the 218 Lighting District with Wiiden Co. Then let the homeowners vote as To whether they want to participate. PLEASE. SIGN BELOW IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO PERSUE THIS ISSUE AND ASK THE CITY TO START A PROCESS TO IX) AN ACTUARY STUDY OR sew YOUR APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL TO BarbaraPDCC@gmail.com , OR DROP A SIGNED COPY IN MY LOCKED MAIL BOX, 76918 Kentucky or call me for more info. 760-777-0065 TIME 15 OF THE ESSENCE. d-hfrAielpe 7;171.9 �n.-.4e rn a? r i s'zt / z i/ ATTENTION HOMEOWNERS ON THE EXECUTIVE COURSE: IN AN EFFORD TO SAVE OUR OPEN SPACE WE NEED YOUR HELP. PLEASE READ AND CONSIDER THIS PROPOSAL. A homeowner has proposed the foilowing: 1.The city would obtain ownership of the open space. 2. Landscape the property. 3.Maintain the property. 4.Devise a municipal bond to cover these costs. 5.Propose an allocation scheme to recover these costs as an added line item in the appropriate property tax bills. (Need figures so our homeowners know how much it will cost them on them Tax bill. 6. Get the required approval from the affected property owners 7. issue the reunlcfpal bond. tOver30 years) Many more details were included. WHAT IS REALLY NEEDED TO •MAKE THIS WORK: WHAT WE NEED :FROM THE CITY: Have an actuary study done on forming thin Bond idea. Just Like they did for the 218 Lighting District with Witden Co. Then let the homeowners vote as To whether they want to participate. PLEASE SIGN BELOW IF YOU WOULD UKE TO PERSUE THIS ISSUE ARID ASK' THE CITY TO START A PROCESS TO DO AN ACTUARY STUDY OR SEND YOUR APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL TO BarbaraPDCC@email.com , OR DROP A SIGNED COPY IN MY LOCKED MAIL BOX, 76918 Kentucky or call me for more info. 760-777-0065 TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE. C, 7JM4 4r. ze-scr7 Toil ATTENTION HOMEOWNERS ON THE EXECUTIVE COURSE: IN AN EFFORD TO SAVE OUR OPEN SPACE WE NEED YOUR HELP. PLEASE READ AND CONSIDER THIS PROPOSAL A homeowner has proposed the irrltowIng: 1.The city would obtain ownership of the open space. 2. Landscape the property. 3.Maintain the property. 4-Devise a municipal bond to cover these costs_ 5.Propose an allocation scheme to recover these costs as an added line item in the appropriate property tax bills. (Need figures so our homeowners know how much it will cost them on them Tax bill. 6. Get the required approval from the affected property owners 7. issue the munldpai bond. (Over 90 years) Many more details were included. WHAT IS REALLY NEEDED TO MAKE THIS WORK: WHAT WE NEED FROM THE CITY: Have an actuary study done on formitm this Bond idea. Just Like they did for the 218 Lighting District with Wir den Co. Then let the homeowners vote as To whether they want to participate. PLEASE SIGN BELOW IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO PERSUE THIS ISSUE AND ASK THE CITY TO START A PROCESS TO DO AN ACTUARY STUDY OR SEND YOUR APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL TO BarbaraPDCCtemail.com , OR DROP A SIGNED COPY IN MY LOCKED MAIL BOX, 76918 Kentucky or call me for more info. 760-777-0065 TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE. ® Des e,-�' ATTENTION HOMEOWNERS ON THE EXECUTIVE COUPE: IN AN EFFORD TO SAVE OUR OPEN SPACE WE NEED YOUR HELP. PLEASE READ AND CONSIDER THIS PROPOSAL A'homeovmes has proposed the fl owing: 1.The city would obtain ownership of the open space. 2. Landscape the 3.Maintain the property. 4.Devise a municipalbond to cover these costs. 5.Propose an allocation scheme to recover these costs as an added line item in the appropriate property tax bills. (Need figures so our homeowners know how much it will cost them on them Tax bill: 6. Get the required approval from the affected property owners 7. Issue the municipal bond. (Over 30 years) Many more details were included. WHAT IS REAM' NEEDED TO MAKE THIS WORK: WHAT WE NEED FROM THE Crr f: Have an actuary study done on forming this Rood Mea. Just Like they did for the 218 Lighting District with Wilden Co. Then let the homeowners vote as To whether they want to participate. PLEASESIGN BELOW IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO PERSUE THIS ISSUE AND ASK THE CITY TO START A PROCESS TO DO AN ACTUARY STUDY OR SEND YOUR APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL TO BarbaraPDCC@gmail.com , OR DROP A SIGNED COPY IN MY LOCKED MAIL BOX, 76918 Kentucky or call me for more info. Rio-777- 006S TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE. i sk, 763 7y e 4/1 5/2018 Fwd: Open Space Bond - Barbara powers Fwd: Open Space Bond barberapekc <barbafapckc Sun 4/`5/20',85:i8?v :C( To:gourdpower@msn.com <gourdpower@msn.com>; cr. barbarapdcc@gmalcorn <barbarapdcpagrnail. com>; Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smar p gone Original message From: Cheri Grant -Simmons <cheri3352@gmail.com> Date: 4/15/18 5:13 PM (GMT-08:00) To: barbarapdcc_@gmaitcom Cc: Dad & Mom Gant <f4agb.74@c tmaii.co > Subject: Open Space Bond Dear Sir or ;Madam; We request a study be `done to get the approval for Open Space Bond, for the defunct small golf course in the Paim Desert Country Club. It would be a great improvement to our subdivision. Best regards, Fred A Grant Bev J Grant Palm Desert, CA 92z Sent from my iPhone 7i Er tps:t/outlook:Eive.corniowaatte t=AQMkADAwATlwMTAwACOwMAEOLVVMZDi ACLTAwCgBGAAAOTDuk1NZK3tkKRH5%2bGSOgM%2fAcAnaWEXQjd4kGf ATTENTION HOMEOWNERS ON THE EXECUTIVE COURSE: IN AN EFFORD TO SAVE OUR OPEN SPACE WE NEED YOUR HELP. PLEASE READ AND CONSIDER THIS PROPOSAL A homeowner has proposed the following: 1.The city would obtain ownership of the open space. 2. Landscape the property. 3.Maintain the property. 4.Devise a municipal bond to cover these costs. 5.Propose an allocation scheme to recover these costs as an added line item in the appropriate property tax bills. (Need figures so our homeowners know how much it will cost them on them Tax bill. 6. Get the required approval from the affected property owners 7. Issue the municipal bond. (Over 30 years) Many more details were included. WHAT IS REALLY NEEDED TO MAKE THIS WORK: WHAT WE NEED FROM THE CITY; Have an actuary study done on forming this Bond idea. Just Like they did for the 218 Lighting District with Wilden Co. Then let the homeowners vote as To whether they want to participate. PLEASE SIGN BELOW IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO PERSUE THIS ISSUE AND ASK THE CITY TO START A PROCESS TO 00 AN ACTUARY STUDY OR SEND YOUR APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL TO BarbaraPDCC[?amail.com , OR DROP A SIGNED COPY IN MY LOCKED MAIL BOX, 76918 Kentucky or call me for more info. 760-777-0065 TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE. nOet lei-cb r .,\ cr. 17 - ex-4 CA CiZZ 1.1 ATTENTION HOMEOWNERS ON THE EXECUTIVE COURSE: IN AN EFFORD TO SAVE OUR OPEN SPACE WE NEED YOUR HELP. PLEASE READ AND CONSIDER THIS mrs" MeraC it A hrionorammar *um rorearinmati Oro fralekutiwa• 1.The city would obtain ownership of the open space. 2. Landscape the property. ,IViairitain the property, 4.0evise o municipal bond to cover these costs. 5.Propose an allocation scheme to recover these costs as an added line item in the appropriate property tax bills. (Need figures so our homeowners know how much it will cost them on them Tax bill. 6. Get the required approval from the affected property owners 7. issue the Athtniciprai bond. '(Over 30 years) Many more details were included. WHAT 15 REALLY NEF.DED TO MAKE THIS WORK: WHAT WE NEED fitO1V1 TiHE CM-. Have 15VN actuavy Study dune on ioavening this Stand idea. lust Like they did for the 21R Lighting nistriet with kiViltion 1o. then let the homeowners vote as To whether they want to participate. PLEASE SIGN SELOW l VOU WOULD UICL:TO PERSUE THIS ISSUE AND ASK THE CITY TO START A PROCESS TO DO AN ACTUARY STUDY OR SEND YOUR APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL TO riarbaraPOCCAtiTivoii.cokri , OR DROP A SIGNED COPY IN MY LOCKED MAIL BOX, 76918 Kentucky or call me for more info. 760-777-006 TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE. ATTENTION NOMEOWNEl 0 THE EXECUTIVE COURSE: IN AN EFFORD TO SAVE OUR OPEN SPACE WE NEED YOUR HELP. PLEASE READ AND CONSIDER THIS A homer has proposed fothowifig: 1.The city would obtain ownership of the open space. 2. Landscape the property. 3.Maintain the property. 44.Devise a municipal bond to caveT these costs. 5.Propose an allocation scheme to recover these costs as an added line item in the appropriate property tax bills. (Need figures so our homeowners know how much it will cost them on them 6. Get the required approval from the affected property owners. 7. issue the OnMiCipal beT4.40ver 30 yam) WHAT IS REALLY NEEDED TO MAKETHIS WORK: WHAT WE NEED FiiOMTHE CITY: Have an actuary study done on tormtng hhSBond idea. Just Like they did for the 218 Lighting District with Wilden Co. Then let the homeowners vote as To whether they want to participate. PLEASE SIGN BELOW IF YOU WOULD LIKE. TO PERSUE THIS ISSUE AND ASK THE CITY. TO START !', PROCESS TO DO AN Acrupaiv STUiV OR SEND YOU APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL TO OR DROP A SIGNED COPY IN MY LOCKED MAIL BOX, 75918 Kentucky or call TIME 15 OF THE ESSENCE. q-Y-6 CtelL jb AT/ENTION. HOMEOWNERS ON THE EXECUTIVE COURSE: IN AN EFFORD TO SAVE OUR OPEN SPACE WE NEED YOUR HELP. PLEASE READ AND. CONSIDER THIS PROPOSAL A homeowner has proposedthefottowhIg: 1.The city would obtain ownership of the open space, 2. Landscape the property. 3.Maintain the property. 4.Devise a municipal bond to cover these costs. 5.Propase an allocation scheme to recover these costs as an added line Item in the appropriate property tax bills. (Need figures so our homeowners know how much it will cost them on them Tax bill. 6. Get the required approval from the affected property owners 7. Issue the mtnlicipal bond. Myer 30 years) Many more details were included. WHAT iS REALLY NEEDED TO MAKE THIS WORK: WHAT WE NEED FROM THE CITY: Have an actuary study done on forming this Bond idea. Just Uke they did for the 218 Lighting District with Wilden Co. Then let the homeowners vote as To whether they want to participate. PLEASE SIGN BELOW IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO PERSUE THIS ISSUE AND ASK THE CITY TO START A PROCESS TO DO AN ACTUARY STUDY OR SEND YOUR APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL TO L3-JalwIrarl)-CCcom OK DROP A siGNED COPY IN NW LOCKED MAIL BOX, 7691 Kentucky or cait me for more info. 760-777-006 TIME 1060 THE ESSENC wrihaesSee. ATTENTION HOMEOWNERS ON THE EXECUTIVE COURSE: IN AN EFFORD TO SAVE OUR OPEN SPACE WE NEED YOUR HELP. PLEASE READ AND CONSIDER THIS PROPOSAL A homeowner has * the following: 1.The city would obtain ownership of the open space. 2. Landscape the property. 3.Maintain the property. 4.Oevise a municipal bond to cover these costs. 5.Propose an allocation sdiemne to recover these costs as an added line item in the appropriate property tax bias. (Need figures so our homeowners know how much it will cost them on them Tax bill. 6. Get the required approval from the affected property owners 7. Issue the municipal bond. (Over 30 years) Many more details were included. WHAT IS REALLY NEEDED TO MAKE THIS WHAT WE NEED FROM THE CITY: Have an actuarystudy done on forming this Bond idea. Just Lake they did for the 218 Lighting District with Wilden Co. Then .let the homeowners vote as To whether they want to participate. PLEASE SIGN BELOW IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO PERSUE THIS ISSUE AND ASK THE CITY TO START A PROCESS TO DO AN ACTUARY STUDY OR SEND YOUR APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL TO BarbaraPDCC@eprail.com , OR DROP A SIGNED COPY IN MY Loam MAIL BOX, 76918 Kentucky or call me for more info. 760-777-0065 TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE. 13‘ko-0 from: barbarapdcc Sent: Sunday, April 15, 2018 6:47 PM To: gourdpower@msn.com Cc: barbarapdcc@gmail.com Subject Fwd: Proposal Sit from my Vier;:o.r, Samsung ?a.? F ac"�rs�`"3%?"!.2 ,Original message -------- From: Carol Comparsi <carolcom714@aoi.com> Date: 4/15/L8 6:24 PM (GMT-08:00) To: barbarapdccgmaiLcrrn Subject: Proposal f support the Homeowner Propose regarding the former executive course issue, Carol Comparsi, homeowner 43140 Tennessee Palm Desert, CA Sent from my Wad /L JAJ % 5 5 CE ATTENTION HOMEOWNERS ON THE EXECUTIVE COURSE: IN AN EFFORD TO SAVE OUR OPEN PROPOSAL A homeowner has proposed the ifoflowfac 1.The city would obtain ownership of the open space. Landscape the property. 3.Maintain the property. 4.0avise o municipal bond to cover these C06I.5. THIS 5.Propose an allocation scheme to recover these costs as an added tine item in the appropriate property tax bills. (Need figures soow homeowners know how much it will cost them anthem Tax hiX 6. Get the required approval from the affected property owners. 7. Issue tbelneoloipsi bond. Over BO years) Many more details were included, WiiAT IS REALLY NEEDED TO MAKE THIS WORM: WHAT WE NEED FROM THE CITY Have an actuary study done on forming this Bond idea. Just Like they did for the 218 Ughting District with WIlden Co. Then Vet the homeowners vote as To whether they want to participate. PLEASE SIGN BELOW IF YOU WOULD UKE TO .PERSUE TI-US ISSUE AND ASK THE art. TO START A .PROCESS TO DO AN ACTUARY STUDY OR SEND YOUR APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL TO , OR DROP A SIGNED COPY !Ai MY LOCKED MAIL SOX, 76918 Kentucky or cast me for more info. 760-777-006_ 74 *-•• - TIME IyOF THE ESSENCE. f./ 55—EZE--- ATTENTIONHOMEOWNERS ON THE EXECUTIVE COURSE: IN AN EFFORD TO SAVE OUR OPEN SPACE WE NEED YOUR I4ELP. PLEASE READ AND CONSIDER THIS PROPOSAL A homeowner has proposed the *Mowing: 1.The city would obtain ownership of the open space. 2. Landscape the property. 3. ;Maintain the property. 4.Deviee a rnunicipoi bond to rover these costs. 5.Propose an allocation scheme to recover these costs as an added line item in the appropriate property tax bilis. (Need figures so our homeowners know how much ft will cost them on them Tax NI. 'St the required apovi kora the affected property minters 7. issue the:num-Wog boor& )(Over 30 years) Many more details were included. WHAT IS REALLY NEEDEDTO POW: THIS WORK: WHAT WE NEED FROM TH CITY: Have an actuary study done on forming this Bond idea. buSt Like they did for the 213 Lighting District with *Wen Co. Then let the homeowners vote as To whether they want to participate. PLEASE SIGIV BELOW IF YOU WOULD LIKETO .PSRSUE THIS issue. AND &St( T44c. CATV TO START A PROCESS TO DO AN ACTUARY STUDY OR SEND YOUR APPROVAL OR, DISAPPROVAL TO LAzirbaraPPCC*,.,aviali.c1.5-in OR DROP ASIGNE.Ct COPY tilt MY LOCKED MAK. 80X, 76918 Kentucky Of Cali me for more info. 760-777-006 '74 - TIME IbThE ESSEKE. , . From: Barbara Powers Sent Monday, April' 1E, 2018' 1:14 PM To: Barbara2; Barbara Powers Subject Fwd: FW: OpenSpaceActionCommittee: TIME rs OF THE ESSENCE Forwarded message From: Ince Tom <torn.'ince@forbo.com> Date: Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 9110 AM Subject FW: OperiSpaceACtionCommittee: TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE To: Barbara Powers eopenspaceaction@gmait.com> I would support this action. Tom ince 43345 Tennessee Ave PO, CA 92211 From: Barbara Powers tmailto:openspaceaction@gmail.com] Sent Sunday, April 15, 2018 12:15 PM Subject: OpenSpaceActionCommittee: TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE ATTENTION OMEOWNERS ON THE EXECUTIVE COURSE OR any other homeowner inthe PDCC Connmuiviity111 IN ANEFFORT TO SAVE OUR OPEN SPACE %MENEM YOUiELP. PLEASE READ ANO CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING PROPOSAL. A homerryner has proposed the following: 1. The City would obtain ownership of the Open Space 2. Landscape the property. 71v,u ATTENTION HQMEOWNERS ON THE EXECUTIVE COURSE: IN AN EFFORD TO SAVE OUR OPEN SPACE WE NEED YOUR HELP. PLEASE READ AND CONSIDER THIS PROPOSAL. A homeowner has proposed the following: 1.The city would obtain ownership of the open space. 2. Landscape the property. 3.Maintain the property. 4.Devise a municipal bond to cover these costs. S.Propose an allocation scheme to recover these costs as an added line item in the appropriate property tax bills. (Need figures so our homeowners know how much it will cost them on them Tax bill. 6. Get the required approval from the affected property owners 7. issue the municipal bond. (Over 30 years) Many more details were included. WHAT IS REALLY NEEDED TO MAKE THIS WORK: WHAT WE NEED FROM THE CITY: Have anactuary study done on forming this Bond idea. Just Like they did for the 218 Lighting District with Wilden Co. Then let the homeowners vote as To whether they want to participate. PLEASE SIGN BELOW IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO PERSUE THIS. ISSUE. AND ASK THE CITY TO START. A PROCESS TO DO AN ACTUARY STUDY OR SEND YOUR APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL TO BarbaraPDCC@email.com , OR DROP A SIGNED COPY IN MY LOCKED MAIL BOX, 76918 Kentucky or call me for more info. 760-777-006 TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE. C, �l� 113 s'a S' 01-21 On) ei n ATTENTION HOMEOWNERS ON THE EXECUTIVE COURSE: IN AN EFFORD TO SAVE OUR OPEN SPACE WE NEED YOUR HELP. PLEASE READ AND CONSIDER THIS AcaA rlrlc A 1 A hnmanwnar have wmnncw+i tho fnilemainm• 1.The city would obtain ownership of the open space. 2. Landscape the property. 3.Maintain the property. 4.Devise a municipal bond to cover these costs. S.Propose an allocation scheme to recover these costs as an added line item in the appropriate property tax bills. (Need figures so our homeowners know how much it will cost them on them Tax bill. 6. Get the required approval from the affected property owners 7. tssue the..munkipal bond. (Over 30 years) Many more details were included. WHAT IS REALLY NEEDED TO MAKE THIS WORK: WHAT WE NEED FROM THE CITY: Have an actuary study done on forming this Bond idea. Just Like they did for th,a 21R Lighting Mi trirt with Wilder! C. Thxz.=_ t a Gael _mnr,wrare vote s To whether they want to participate. PLEASE SIGN BELOW IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO PERSUE THIS ISSUE AND ASK THE CITY TO START A PROCESS TO DO AN ACTUARY STUDY OR SEND YOUR APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL TO BarbaraPDCC@gmail.com , OR DROP A SIGNED COPY IN MY LOCKED MAIL BOX, 76918 Kentucky or call me for more info. 760-777-006 TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE. laiett Front: bafbarapticc Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2018 7:00 AM To: gourdpower@msn.com Cc: barbarapdcc@gmail.com Subject: Fwd: Proposal ----- Original message ------- From: judypoledouris <jqdypoledotgls.e.a9j,corn> Date: 4/17/18 5:30 AM (GMT-08:00) To: barbarapdoc@onalcom Subject: Proposal I agree with the idea of a bond issue to save the golf course as an open space. Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE smartphone From: barbarapdcc Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2018 7:00 AM To: gourdpower@msn.com Cc: barbarapdcc@gmail.com Subject: Fwd: Proposal Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone Original message From: judypoledouris <judy_poiedouris@aol.com> Date: 4/17/18 5:30 AM (GMT-08:00) To: barbarapdcc@gmall.com Subject: Proposal I agree with the idea of a bond issue to save the gotf course as an open space. Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE smartphone To: The City of Palm Desert I am in support of the City of Palm Desert conducting an Actuary Study of the former Palm Desert Country Club Executive Course. Name: Nancy Greene Address: 42360 Warner Trait Palm Desert, CA, 92211 Signature: Date: 1' n 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 9226o-2578 TEL:76© 346-0611 into ciiyotpaim:icser: erg February 13, 2018 Mr. Frederick Kent Post Office Box 12140 Costa Mesa, ,California 92627 Dear Mr. Kent: Subject: Palm Desert Country Club Executive Golf Course Thank you for your letter expressing your concerns about the proposed development of the former Executive Golf Course at Palm Desert Country Club. Your Letter proposes an alternative to the development of the formercourse in which the City of Palm Desert obtain ownership of the land. Your alternative proposal will be shared with the City Council for their consideration. Sincerely, PRINCIPAL PLANNER cc: Lauri Aylaian, City Manager Ryan Stendell, Director of Community Development Ph: 760.346.061 I Direct: 760.776.6384 ecejci4cityotpairncieseri.org From Barbara powers Ernailtoliourcipo r@ .corn1 Sent Friday, February OS, 2018 102€ AWL To: Cejar Eric <eceja@cityofpalmdesert.org>; Stendell, Ryan <rstendell00,yqfpalrxle.s.ert.org>-, Sabby lonathan ,cAbiayaj.pnathaA4j.-2.4as_sqc_t4e.s..com> Subject LETTER FROM FRED KENT REGARDING A BOND PROPOSITION FOR PDCC EXECUTIVE COURSE, DATED jANUARY 18TH 2018 Eric , I spoke to you last week about Fred's letter and you said the city manager was addressing a letter to Fred Kent. saw him this morning and he has been checking his. regular mat and has; not received any response. We are concerned about it because Ryan said at the planning meeting if we did not come up with a solution this project was going to pass. Wo are nterested in this concept and wanted to know what the city thought. We will await your response. I hope Ryan had the chance to read the proposal. Barbara Powers From: Barbara powers Sent Tuesday, February 13,, 2018 412 PM To: Marilyn Forney SUbject: Fwd: 'LETTER FROM FRED KENT REGARDING ,A -BOND PROPOSITION FOR MCC EXECLMVE COURSE, DATED jANUARY 18TH 2018 Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone Original message From: Barbara powers <gpurdpower@msn.com> Date: .2113/18 4:11 PM (GtVIT-08:00) To: ecciPecityofpalmdesertorg, rstendel1@cjIyofpaimdesert.org, Sabby Jonathan ‹sabbypionathanandassoclates.com> Subject: Re: LETTER FROM FRED KENT REGARDING A BOND PROPOSITION FOR PDCC EXECUTIVE COURSE, DATED jANUARY 18TH 2018 So you and RYan had no thoughts on this. You keep telling us we need a solution. People did not go for the lighting thing because -it benefited a private party but is not that and more than several residents like the idea. Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone Original message ,F,nam:•euelaCosiAyorfpaltytelesert. Date: 4L...4/18. 3:59 PM (GMT-08:00} To: gourdpowereamsn.corn, rsteride4lfrsi4ofpalmdesert.org, sabbyckonathanaxidassociatesxorn Subject: RE: LETTER ROJO ,FRED XENT REGARDING A BOND PROPOSIT4ON FOR MCC EXECUTIVE COURSE, DATED jANUARY 18TH 2018 Hi Barbara, Thank you for following up on Mr. Kent's letter. Attached is our response. This letter is provided to the City Council. 1 am not sure how the Council feels about this proposal. Thanks, Eric Ceja Principal Planner atty T. Ye California State Controller !Property Tax eastponemen, The State Controller's Property Tax Postponement Program retumed in 2016 after being suspended by the Legislature n 2009. The program allows homeowners -who are senors, are _blind, or have a disability to defer current -year property taxes on their principal residencs if they meet certain criteria including 40. pefroent enuity in th. twyrna and an annual household income of ;535,500 or less. Aonlic:ations for 2017-18 are now available. The State Controller's team will begin processing completed applications October 1, 2017 in the order they are received. Please call (800) 952-5661 or email oostoonementaeco.ca.00v to join our matting list. Filing period extended for homeowners affected by fire.s, floods, or mudslides in Butte, inyo, Lake, Los An9eles, Mendocino, Mono, Maga, Nevada. Orange, Ban Diego, Santa Barbara, Soiano, Sonoma, Ventura, and 'Yuba counties. 'For information, please refer to the flyer in Er1011101 or en espariol For a quick reference, download a flyer in English a fiver in Spanish , a fiver in Chinese , a flver in Tagalog , or listen to the audio -version. Flyers are also available three to a_ page, double -sided in.Englisht , Soap. Cha. and Tagalog, to save paper When printing large quantities. For more detailed information, please refer to the Fact Sheet or Freouentiv Asked Questions, cal; toll - free (300) 952-5661, or email ipostoonementra.).sco.ca.acv. 7o4' County Treasurer -Tax Goliectors andand 'Oboe of Change in Probe* Status to' 73-5 10 FRED "WARING DRIVE PALM DESERT, CM-.11;QRSIA 91.7.60-Z5 7g. TUT,: 76o 31,4—o61 r^17,7.4 Febniery 13, 2016 Mr. Frederick Kent Po s.k Office Box 12140 Coats Mese, Califom2627 Dear Mr. Kent: L Subject: Palm Desert Country Club Executive Golf Course Thank you for your letter expressing your concerns about the proposed development of the former Executive Got l Course at Palm Dert Country Club. Your tenor proposes alternative to the development of the former course in which the City of Palm Desert obtain ownership of the land. Your alternative proposal Will hesitated with Me City Council for their consideration. Sincerely, ERIC CEJA PRINCIPAL PLANNER co: Lauri Aylaian: City Manager Ryan Stendell, Director of Communiti Development 0 >-( 3210 r" r%.3 rn rri rri 7t, rn tri fon 0 Ci •.9 rr, From: Barbara powers Sent Tuesday, February 13, 2018 4:12 PM To: Marilyn Forney Subject: Fvel: LETTER FROM FRED KENT REGARDING A BOND PROPOSITION FOR PDCC EXECUTIVE COURSE, DATED jANUARY 18TH 2018 Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone Original message From: Barbara powers <gourdpower@msn.com> Date: 2/13/18 4:11 PM (GMT-08:00) To: ecejaecityofpalmdesertorg, rstendell@Crtyofpatrridesert.org, S-abby Jonathan csabbygjonathananciassodates.com> Subject: Re: LETTER FROM FRED KENT REGARDING A BOND PROPOSITION FOR PDCC EXECUTIVE COURSE, DATED jANUARY 18TH 2018 So you and RYan had no thoughts on this. You keep telling us we need a solution. People Oki not go for the fighting thing because it benefited a .private party but is not that and -more than several residents like the idea . Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone Original message crow: ,ecejaesiNgfpaimeiesert. Date: g.1.3118 3:59 PM (GMT-08:00) To: gourdpowerffimsn.corn, rstendellecityofpahndesertarg,Rbjnaionathanandassociarzs,corn Subject: RE: LETTER FROM ,FRED KENT REGARD,ING A 430ND PROPOSMON FOR POCC EXECUTIVE COURSE, DATED jANUARY 18TH 2018 Hi Barbara, Thank you for following up on Mr. Kent's letter. Attached is our response. This letter is provided to the City Council. I am not sure how the Council feels about this proposal. Thanks, Eric Ceja Principal Planner Ph: Jk0=346061l_ Direct: 740.776.6384- eceja:4, ci i yofpalrndesert.org. Barbra,powers[mailtolourd rerJrrisn:com] Sent Friday, February 09, 2018 10:26 Ali. To: Ceja, E.ric<eceja'cityafpalmdesert.org>; Stendell, Ryan <rstendeliQcitXofpalmde.sert,©rg>; Sabby Jonathan <sabb @ianathanandassociates.cam> Subject: Lfi its iP . FRED KENT REGARDING -A'B€ tD PROPOSIPON `FOR PI3CC'ES TIVE COURSE, DATED JAN•UMY 18TH 2018. Eric , I spoke to you fast week about Fred's fetter and you said the city manager was addressing a .letter to Fred Kent. I saw him thismorning and he has been checking his regular maii<and has not received any response. We are concerned about it because Ryan said at the planning meeting if we did not come up with a solution this project was going to pass. We are interested in this concept and wanted to know what the city thought. We will await your response. i hope Ryan had the chance to read the proposal. Barbara Powers atty T. Ye California State Controller Property Tax i'-ostponem The State Controller's PropertyTax Postponement Program retumed in 2016 after being suspended by the Legislature -in 2009. The program allows homeowners who are -seniors, are blind, or have a disability la defer current -year property taxes on their principal residence if they meet certain criteria including 40perr.,ent. equity in 'Ina 4110111,31 and an annual household income of $35,500 or less. Applications for 2017-18 are now available. The State Controller's team will begin .processing completed applications October 1, 2017 in the order they are received. Please call (800) 952-5861 or email postponementesco.ca.coy to join our mailing list. Filing period extended for homeowners affected by fires, floods, or mudslides in Butte, Inyo, Lake, Los Angeles, Mendocino, Mono, Nap, Nevada. Orange, 'San Diego, Santa Barbara, Bolan°. Sonoma, Ventura, and'Yuba counties. 'For information, please refertothe flyer in English or ta_ espangl . For a quick reference, downhad a flyer in Enolish fiver in Spanish , a fiver in Chinese , flyer in Tagalog , or listen to the audio version. Flyers are also available three to a page, double -sided io English , 3tansh., Chigead. , and TaQaloQ to save paper when printing large quantities. For more detailed information, please refer to the Fact Sheet or Frequently Asked Questions, call toll - free (800) 952-5661, or email bostponementa)soo.ce.bcv. or County Treasurer -Tax CoBectors nd Assessors Notiq of Ohanoe in Property Status