I could argue "it's neither good nor bad" but I think most people would find it, well, limiting.Taking that and putting it to the side for the moment, if you have an investor that wants to play the appreciation game then this property might work.  

I read most of Robert kiyosaki books, there are still a few I haven't read like the abcs of real estate investing and a couple others 

I have never heard about the 100 mile rule and I would argue that it is not a normal thing (my properties are all over the place).

If you ever go there, I think it would be hard to argue that there is a race problem there. 

In reading the ABC's of Rental Property Investing by Ken McElroy, Oshkosh seems to hit a few of his major investing points. 

At best, that stock is going to have an IRR of 6-8%.Please notice that I am absolutely not trying to argue with you and I just genuinely want to understand what is your point: are you saying that, in order for this to be a good deal, I should be completely ignoring the exit value the increased NOI will bring to the property, and just focus on the actual increased cash flow the increased NOI will bring me?

However, the authors argue that a 2007-style crash is not happening.

I gave them within 30 days of move-in to do so, it's been 60 with multiple reminders, and they argue now that that amount is unreasonable.

The thinking goes like this:  The LA market is very hot and may or may not continue to appreciate in the near future, in fact, many would argue that a bubble is taking place at the moment. 

Lastly there is a public hearing where you will argue the benefit to the public for the zone change.