 |
 |
WAWONA
|
|
May 12, 2012FISH CAMP DOINGS - SAVING THE MEADOWUPDATE, May 2015: A lawsuit, brought against our water provider by now-bankrupt Los Angeles developer PacificUS, was dropped (with prejudice). A new development company now owns the meadow which remains undeveloped. The Sierra Foothill Conservancy is no longer involved in saving the meadow; the funds raised for meadow protection by them are now held by a local community services district. The Yosemite Alpine Community Services District is currently bolstering its water system against any future threats with the development of new well sites and water storage. Please see my blog entry for December 1, 2014. Hi, All – it’s Tom Bopp with the latest Fish Camp news. It’s been awhile since my last update, but the effort to do right by our little piece of Yosemite’s watershed has been going on about 12 years. WHAT’S BEEN HAPPENING: 11/15/2010: Pacificus Real Estate Group – the company seeking to build a sprawling resort on a meadow in Fish Camp – defaulted on its bank loan on the meadow property. 7/14/2011: Pacificus filed for bankruptcy, forestalling the foreclosure auction. 3/15/2012: Pacificus, amid rumors of a renegotiation of its loan on the meadow property and resolution of bankruptcy, filed an application with Mariposa County for a time-extension for their project, approval for which is slated to expire on June 14th. 4/12/2012: Pacificus lost the meadow property through foreclosure by OneWest Bank. Details from First American Title Co. (Mariposa Gazette 19 April, 2012) 4/23/2012: at Pacificus’ request, Mariposa County transfers the 3/15 request for extension to OneWest Bank’s agent. We have been informed that the bank intends to sell the meadow property fairly soon. The events above indicate an effort to keep the resort project attached to the property. Our efforts to persuade the Mariposa Planning Commission got off to a good start at last Saturday’s Fish Camp Advisory Board meeting, during which the Board voted 6-to-1 against supporting the application for extension. The Planning Commission meets on May 18th to decide whether to extend the application. If they do, the resort development plans will remain attached to the meadow property. My concern is that the previous owner will regroup under another business entity and repurchase the property, or that some other buyer will invest in the property under the misapprehension that the development plans are an asset. We’re cautiously optimistic about the future, and will be watching and working as events unfold. |
|||
