The Restrictive Covenant Revealed.
Startling information this news cycle from a totally fresh source, published on a modest and quiet blog, GOPMom, "From Tony to Barack, Part 1," that points to documents that reveal the full explanation as to how Barack Obama and his fixer Tony Rezko hatched and executed the complex deal to purchsase the Obama mansion between January and June 2005. Revealed for the first instance, to my knowledge and to the encylcopedic information of the gifted site, The Real Barack Obama, is the fact of a restrictive covenant that was placed on the mansion at 5046 South Greenwood Avenue that the Obamas bought from the Wondisfords. The restrictive covenant was placed on the lot next door, at 5050, in July 200o as a condition for the sale of the house from the Winslow estate to the Wondisfords. The restrictive covenant gave the owners of the house the right to restrict the developer of the lot adjacent to the house to constructing only a single family unit rather than a multiple family unit. This protected the value of the house at 5046, which the Wondisfords purchased for $1.65 million in July 2000. If the lot next door had allowed for a multiple dwelling unit, the value of the house would decline sharply. The Wondisfords were only protecting themselves, shrewdly, and they took the additional step in August 2000 to purchase the lot, encumbered with the restrictive covenant, for $415 thousand.
The Obama Rezko Maneuver
When Barack Obama and Tony Rezko walked over the property in early January 2005, the dilemma they faced was how to bid low on the house that was offered at $1.95 million and yet still protect the house from the lot should it fall into someone else's hands. The conversation is unknown. However Tony Rezko (right) is speaking in torrents to the U.S. Attorney now, and there is good reason to believe the house/lot deal is a major concern. What did happen we can list. The Obamas bid on the house three times between January 15 and January 23, and the third bid, of $1.65 million, was accepted by the Wondisfords. Meanwhile on January 19, the Wondisfords's realtor, Donna Schwann, listed the lot at 5050 South Greenwood Avenue for $625 thousand for a single-family development. Wildly overpriced. Tony Rezko, through the cut-out of his wife without funds wife Rita Rezko, bid on the lot at $625 thousand. What had cost the Wondisfords $2.o65 million was now sold for $2.275 million. Mr. Obama has claimed repeatedly when asked that there was no collaboration between him and the Rezkos. The story had long been that Tony Rezko was looking for an investment property. But why would Tony Rezko want a lot that could not be developed past a single-family dwelling? Not until now did we know that Mr. Obama was less than candid, and how he was less than candid, because we didn't know about the restrictive covenant. The rule is four to one, house to property, so the single family house that Tony Rezko or anyone else could built on the restricted 5050 lot would have been on the market at $2.5 million. Extremely unmanageable and unlikely right jammed up next to a mansion worth $1.65. This may explain why on April 1, 2005 the Wondisfords abrogated the restrictive covenant and permitted the lot to be listed as suitable for multiple dwelling development. Surprised? Why would Mr. Obama agree to give up the restrictive covenant protection for his house's value? Because he and Tony Rezko had already hatched a deal. Either Mr. Rezko agreed not to develop on the lot, or, Mr. Rezko agreed to sell the ten-foot strip to Mr. Obama that would inhibit development. Either way, Mr. Obama had a measure of control over his environs, and this was before the indictment of Mr. Rezko in October 2006, so there was reason to believe at the time, spring and summer of 2005, that the lot would remain undeveloped indefinitely. The lot still is undeveloped, less the ten foot strip sold to Mr. Obama, though it has passed through the hands of Tony Rezko's attorney and is now in the possession of a Chicago resident who has not indicated his plans.
Why Does This Matter Now?
A fun mystery of GOPMom blog is how did the writer(s) (J.T. Galt) know how and where to look for such vital information as the restrictive covenant and its abrogation? It is public record, yes, but a micro needle in the macro stack of public documents in Chicago. The Wondisfords have kept mum. The sellers realtor Donna Schwann has kept mum. The Obamas have kept mum. Tony Rezko is talking, but that is grand jury stuff and dangerous to know about. So who or what is GOPMom? I do not at this time have the answer. I know the answer is vital. There is indication that it is much more organized and educated than meets the eye in a site that says, "Mom knows best." This prodigious and dumbfounding piece is part 1. I am onboard for this thriller. We are looking at the crucial documents that have been the hands of the prosecutors for at least two years, and have have been guiding the grand jury at least since February 2006. All those grand juries will need these same documents if and when the discussion turns on the newly sworn in Senator Barack Obama's disclosure form to the U. S. Senate in 2005, and if and when this same disclosure process is part of the record of the 44th POTUS in 2009. Or a presidential library in 2017.
(1)
OBAMA'S HOUSE. THE ONLY HOUSE THAT DID NOT GO UP IN VALUE BETWEEN 2000-2005.
All across the US, house prices soared between 2000 thru
2005. Yet, the house Obama bought in 2005 for $1.65M was sold 5 years earlier for the same price. How is this possible?
Clearly, the sale of the lot was tied into the sale of the house. That is, the lot gave the Wondisfords a $210K profit. If they hadn't known they would make $210K on the lot, they would not have sold the house for $1.65M. That is because the $1.65M paid for the Obama house gave the Wondisfords no profit at all.
Bottom line: The purchase of the lot by Rita Rezko was a gift to Obama -- not unlike the gifts Ted Stevens was just found guilty of accepting.
It's too bad the grand jury in Chicago doesn't work with the speed of those in Alaska.
THE SALE OF THE SMALL LOT TO OBAMA MAY HAVE RESTRICTED WHAT COULD BE BUILT ON THE REZKO LOT -- EVEN W/O A RESTRICTIVE COVENANT.
The lot Rita Rezko bought next to the Obama house was 9,000+ sf. She sold 1500 sf (10'X150') to Obama. This left a lot that was roughly 7500+ sf.
W/o knowing the zoning, one can't know what can or cannot be built. But is not unreasonable to assume that a 9K sf lot might allow multiple houses while a 7k sf lot might not.
In any event, it is clear that the sale of 1/6th of the Rezko lot to Obama was worth more than the 1/6th price that Obama paid.
This still isn't exactly a smoking gun.
It actually IS a smoking gun
I disagree. Especially when you consider that the seller had as much of a relationship with Resko as did Obama.
If you believe that Resko's motives in the deal to be questionable, which also hasn't yet been proven, it seems pretty clear to me that Wondisford wanted to sell and there was not a plethora of buyers. So did Resko get involved to help the Obamas buy or the Wondisfords sell?
In other words, if this is a smoking gun, which gun is actually smoking?
It helps to learn that the Obama campaign now admits for the first time, though not in print yet, that there was a restrictive covenant. Why conceal the covenant all this time if there is nothing inconvenient about its fact? The covenant enhanced the value of the house. Lifting the covenant devalued the house. The fact that the property was listed as single family dwelling lot on Jan 19, and then Rezko bid on it at $625k, and then it was enhanced by the lifting of the covenant, and Rezko still bid $625k is odd. However it is clear that Obama had to agree to the lifting. Obama has said more than once that he and Rezko did not collaborate. Why did he say such an obvious falsehood. What else is not yet revealed? A third party? More soon.
Not about smoking anything. Likely presidential lore. Jack Kennedy in Vegas with the mob before the White House. Glamour to hang out with crooks, do deals with crooks. Then again. There is a grand jury. Rezko is talking. The bank records are at issue. How did Rezko get a $500k loan on the lot form Mutual Bank? Where did Rezko get the $125k cash downpayment? Where did Obama get the $165k earnest money and the whole $330k downpayment? Questions have answers. Third party? Fourth party? How many banks? Who satisfied the Wondisfords? Why are the Wondisfords so silent? Do they have attorneys?
"Why Does This Matter Now?"
It doesn't. Even if everything claimed is true, the revelations go nowhere. No lost election (it's too late for that). No investigation in an Obama DoJ. No grand jury beyond January 2009. No impeachment from a Democratic Congress. Zippo. As usual with the Republicans, too little too late to compel MSM attention. Does anyone here (in the Republican party) know how to play this game? In the immortal words of Gen. Geo. Washington to the Continental Congress as read plaintively by Charles Thomson in 1776, "Is anybody there? Does anybody care?"
What about the explanation that was put forth on No Quarter? The "vacant lot" was originally the side yard of the house? The side yard was separated from the house to make the house more affordable so the Obamas could buy it? Does anyone know anything about this?
That explanation makes no sense. It was two separate lots when Wondisford bought the house. It was two separate lots when Wondisford bought the side lot. And it was two separate lots when the Obamas bought the house and Resko bought the side lot.
What does make sense is that Wondisford wanted to sell badly which is why he accepted a low bid from Obama. And the removal of the covenant on the side lot would make it more valuable to Resko, explaining the price premium.
Maybe there was something dubious going on, but the facts presented don't indicate it.
It was not two lots when the purchase was made. The Winslows tried to separate for the first time in summer 2000, but sold both house and lot to Wondisfords. WInslows created restrictive covenant to protect Wondisfords and gate the high price of $1.65 million in July 2000. Sold lot for $415k August 2000. When Schwann listed house in 04, she put price at $1.95 million, which included owning the restrictive covenant that limited the lot development to a single family swelling, radically inhibiting the lot's sales worthiness. Obama started bidding on the house Jan 15, low at $1.3 million. Schwann the listed the lot, for the first time ever, as a single family development lot at the swollen $625. Nevertheless, Obama final bid on house of $1.65 accepted on same say as Rezko bid on single family lot at $625. Still, all sides anxious. With Obama's permission, Wondisfords abrogate restrictive covenant on April 1, 2005, allowing the lot to be developed for multiple dwelling. This radically devalues house, but Obama maintains bid -- though he has been deprived of what he bid on and was accepted for in January.
Rezko later sold Obama the ten foot strip. This moots issue of multiple dwelling unit, because the remaining lot is too small for a substantial multiple dwelling unit. And then the market collapsed.
Obama and Rezko traded property rights. Obama told the ChiTrib and ChiSunTimes that he and Razko did not collaborate or coordinate. What do you think?
And no one in the Obama campaign or in the media has ever before reported the "restrictive covenant." Completely concealed till now. Why?
Let me tell you why. Because Rezko is talking and the grand jury has it all and it is coming. This isn't about the court of public opinion. This is about Rezko talking. When does Obama hire lawyers to deal with question of what he did not say on his Senate disclosure form about trading property rights with his fixer and fund-raiser who had profound interests in the senator's authority in Illinois?
In the fullness of time. Smile.
John,
You made the following comment: The fact that the property was listed as single family dwelling lot on Jan 19, and then Rezko bid on it at $625k, and then it was enhanced by the lifting of the covenant, and Rezko still bid $625k is odd.
If I understood the GOPMOM article correctly, Senator Obama actually said that Rezko entered into a contract on the land first. The article suggest that Rezko would have already been under contract prior to the actual listing. Therefore, Rezko could not have bid on the $625K listing.
The article suggests that the listing appears to be for the purpose of finding a residential developer who would accept the property for that price with the restriction. When they could not find one because it was a overpriced as a residential lot, Rezko moved forward with the purchase and they agreed to release the restrictive covenant. This in turn led to the need for the second deal.
What is your take on this part of the GOPMOM article?
TPET
TPET: There is no evidence that Rezko bid on the land prior to Jan 19 listing as single family unit zoned. There are several statements that Obama and Rezko bid on the house and the lot with simultaneity, because the sellers did not intend to sell the lot without selling the lot. The heretofore unknown restrictive covenant meant that the owner of the house controlled the fate and worth of the lot. Rezko and Obama walked over the property in early January. Schwann was fully conversant with both of them. All parties knew everything. The claim by Obama is that he and Rezko did not coordinate their bids. This statement was intended to mitigate the suspicion that Obama received a discount on the house (from $1.95 million to $1.65m accepted bid) because Rezko was bidding $625k on the land. The fact of the restrictive covenant makes this explanation by Obama facile and illogical. The lot as zoned for single family was not worth anything close to $625k. That may be why the whisteblower suit from a former employee of Mutual Bank that did the loan to Rita Rezko in June. The lot may not have been worth $625k as a...
Fill in the blanks. There was collusion. There was a scheme. What more was there? Why the deception on the restrictive covenant? And you do not need to answer. The grand jury has all this, has had it more than two years. Rezko is talking about more then the Phillies.
This may also be part of the manipulation of appraisals that are part and parcel of the Conner lawsuit against Mutual Bank. Building covenants are established to protect owners of individual properties as well as entire neighborhoods which in turn protects mortgage issuers and their investors. I also agree with you Mr. Batchelor that Mr Fitzgerald has known of these facts for some time and basically gave the nod for the Conner suit to be filed to give Rezko additional incentive to talk.