opinion

City Council, pump brakes on Palm Desert Country Club condo idea

The Palm Desert City Council is weighing a decision that could have serious ramifications for one of the city's oldest, most-established neighborhoods. I appeal to the council members to not approve a zoning change requested by the Palm Desert Country Club owners for their intentionally abandoned 9-hole golf course on which they propose to develop condominiums.

The next meeting on this issue is scheduled for Thursday, May 10.

Approving this request would ignore the wishes of the homeowners that will be intensely affected by the zoning change and resultant development. And it would be approving an extremely inappropriate project, a multi-walled community with an access road, condominiums, and amenities wedged onto narrow strips of land never envisioned or zoned for that purpose.

It would also favor a Canadian owner/investor over some 188 U.S. homeowners whose properties, collectively, are valued at more than $47 million. Moreover, it would be going against both the city's stated commitment to the preservation of open space and its own call for a viable alternative.

CITY HALL PATH: Council has delayed action on proposal before

BACKGROUND: Residents debate what should happen with course

VALLEY LIFE: Our traffic is like an old school video game

In my opinion, the city has already coddled the club's owners far too long while seemingly doing everything possible to silence the voices of angry homeowners. The city has held meetings on very short notice and during hot summer months when many homeowners are absent; officials have not sent notices to absentee owners; and they apparently have used mailing lists that do not reflect home ownership changes.

During these same meetings they have allowed club representatives unlimited time to state their case while holding homeowners to just three minutes each and with no opportunity to rebut any of the club's statements.

The proper action for the city now is to develop the details of the alternative proposed. A bond needs to be designed to cover the cost of keeping the course as open space. The bond is to be paid off via the property tax roll by only those homeowners affected. This alternative also proposes that it be voted on by those same homeowners, which would be a responsible way to determine which of the two alternatives is favored. The bond alternative is popular among homeowners, the majority of whom have been against the development plan from the very beginning. But whether the majority would approve an added tax remains to be seen.

It would also be appropriate for the city to qualify a recent statement that the decision on this issue would be made by "what is right for the city and not just for the 188 owners that border on the golf course." The proposed alternative was crafted so as to not involve any homeowners other than those that would be affected.

The city should also amend a recent statement about "loving our Canadians" by proclaiming that the Palm Desert U.S. homeowners that would be affected by this issue are loved equally as much and should not be ignored in the making of this decision.

The council members still have the opportunity to counter a gross misstep being made by the city. I urge them to exercise their power and vote no on the zone change.

Frederick Kent is a retired aerospace supervisor who lives in Palm Desert. Email him at biz2@fredkent.com.