Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Coatesville oversteps bounds [regarding comdemnation of Saha home in order to build golf course]
The Philadelphia Inquirer ^ | 5/20/02 | Bob Martin

Posted on 05/20/2002 3:28:47 AM PDT by calvin sun

Casting outside its borders for a recreational complex is legal but bad policy.


It takes a sense of history to understand the uproar now surrounding the city of Coatesville.

Napoleon Bonaparte and Lyndon Johnson come to my mind. Both were successful at home before dooming themselves in ill-fated foreign ventures.

Coatesville, by comparison, has done much within its borders to stem its postindustrial decay. It sold its water authority for a handsome profit, and has used the money to cut taxes. It worked with the Chester County Housing Authority to raze a public housing slum, and is busy with redevelopment projects that will bring hundreds of homes and apartments to the old industrial city.

Now, though, its escapade into neighboring townships to take property for a 210-acre recreational complex brings to mind Napoleon in Russia or Johnson in Vietnam.

At the center of the dispute is Coatesville's taking of 42 acres from the Saha family in neighboring Valley Township. To measure the intensity of this protracted battle, consider these events in recent weeks:

The family's son was charged with making terroristic threats on a councilman during a Coatesville City Council meeting.

A fire discovered on the Saha property May 12 has been declared an arson.

The city's two-page advertisement/promotion in a local newspaper was decried as "objectionable misdirection and misrepresentation" by Chester County Court Judge William P. Mahon. He's the same judge who ruled in January that the Saha condemnation was a proper exercise of the city's eminent domain powers.

Though I understand the public outrage over the taking of this property, I can't question the legality of Coatesville's action, either in its taking the property or in its moving outside its borders to do so.

But so what if Coatesville has a right to do this? It's just bad policy.

How many other municipalities in Pennsylvania - especially poor towns of 10,838 people - are building and managing a $60 million recreation complex? Coatesville is not aware of any.

Where is the market for an 18-hole golf course in a county that already has 13 public courses? Will the revenues from it and the proposed roller and ice-skating rinks, bowling center, hotel and a multiplex movie center justify the costs? Coatesville officials say that the market research says they will. Then why haven't private developers, always quick to seize the opportunity, pounced on the idea?

Is it the purpose of local government to run what normally is left to private enterprise? Indeed, Coatesville saw the wisdom in getting out of the water business, so why is it now taking the big dive into the highly speculative recreation market?

Finally, will this venture's success justify the damage it has done to the neighboring communities, where several families have sold property to Coatesville? Normally, citizens who are angry at public officials can express their feelings at the ballot box. Affected landowners in Valley Township and West Caln, however, have no such option.

The city's actions of late have only heightened hostility. In its recent two-page newspaper ad, it announced its plan to condemn the entire 48-acre Saha property, including the homestead. That would violate its long-term vow that it would take no one's home for the recreation complex.

Then at its meeting last Monday, the council sought to block any public discussion on the new condemnation plan because Mahon had issued a gag order and the council had taken the item off the agenda. Ultimately, the public was allowed to vent on the issue - but not until the end of the meeting.

When Coatesville won its condemnation ruling in January, it lost on a seemingly minor point: that before it could take a portion of the property, it would have to submit a proper subdivision plan for the overall tract. But rather than filing that plan with Valley Township with the force of a court order behind it, it chose instead to appeal that portion of the order. And since then, it has been unable to reach any agreement with the Sahas on what shape their remaining property should take after the condemnation.

Coatesville's behavior has even led Mahon to publicly question the correctness of his ruling that the city "acted reasonably and with proper motives."

That won't cause him to rewrite his opinion. But it should jolt Coatesville into looking at what it has wrought: an angry adversary in court for the long haul, angry neighbors and a judge whose patience is wearing thin.

Meanwhile, it wants us to believe that this is going to be a successful business venture. I prefer to be skeptical about that.


Bob Martin is the Pennsylvania commentary editor. His e-mail is rmartin@phillynews.com.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: Pennsylvania
KEYWORDS: coatesville; eminentdomain; landgrab

1 posted on 05/20/2002 3:28:47 AM PDT by calvin sun
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: calvin sun
I have been following this struggle for several years. Button This city of Coatesville has a school district that has overspent millions. The elitists think a recreation complex will bring needed jobs. Baloney it will. Jim Furyk is supposed to design this course. I believe that this course will never stay in government hands. I think it will be sold for millions to some private investors. Coatesville can't do anything right these days. It is suffering and this magical fix by a newcomer smells to high heaven. Government taking land to get into the business of running a golf course to be in direct competition with the many privately owned, taxpaying courses is a slap in the face of all the businesses that bought and built and do business in Chester County Pennsylvania. We have emailed Jim Furyk. We have let the city know that golfing on stolen land is revolting. I am sure that they would appreciate any help and support.

We golf and we will not use this course and will encourage our guests not to use it.


2 posted on 05/20/2002 3:55:45 AM PDT by oldironsides
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: oldironsides
There are a number of steps that could be taken. Selling it off is probably not one of them, after all, there are already a number of other golf courses.

What they will likely do is make those other, private, courses illegal first as we saw another township do last year.
3 posted on 05/20/2002 4:29:34 AM PDT by Maelstrom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: oldironsides, Calvin Sun
Greetings from a fellow Chester County Freeper!

It's sad to see what's happening to Coatesville (I grew up in Wagontown). Unfortunately, the citizens are going to suffer because of the embezzlement and ill-management of the CASD.

Sounds like the entire City of Coatesville needs to figure out what their priorities are...

4 posted on 05/20/2002 4:31:44 AM PDT by Slim Pickens
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: calvin sun
Then why haven't private developers, always quick to seize the opportunity, pounced on the idea?

Good question. City governments do NOT belong in the golf business, it hurts private enterprise and favors big government over small business ventures. Often, golf courses are not built because land costs are too high in favorable locations. City governments building a golf course can overcome this because once the course is built, no taxes are owed and maintenance costs can be pooled with other city services (ex. use of city equipment, manpower for special projects, etc.). It's a racket and all citizens should make their voices heard about their city getting involved in any type of recreation, but especially the golf business.

5 posted on 05/20/2002 5:17:23 AM PDT by PLK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PLK
Previous threads on this subject:

Fires at farm likely were set, officials say

Vehement about domain, family fights for its land

6 posted on 05/20/2002 6:03:01 AM PDT by calvin sun
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Slim Pickens; oldironsides
Coatesville city council has a meeting on Tuesday May 28 at 7:30. Hope you can attend.
7 posted on 05/20/2002 6:07:20 AM PDT by calvin sun
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: *landgrab;countrydummy;editor-surveyor;madfly
fyi
8 posted on 05/20/2002 9:09:27 AM PDT by Free the USA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Free the USA
Land grabs are the rage these days. The township supervisors of East Nottingham Twp will take a vote to abolish R1 zoning from 62% 0f the township next week. Three supervisors will take it upon themselves to vote on placing all of the remaining township in agriculture and forever end the R1 zoning. What does that mean to the people that own land in this 62%? The land bought as a farm or as an investment will be worth 1/4 of what it would be worth if a builder were in the picture. The Amish will be the only ones wanting to live in the township and the land will be drasticlly devalued. The voters never paid attention to the Democrat liberal lawyer running for supervisor. He is working with the Amish to stop all building. You will not be able to cut off one or 2 acres for an offspring. Government at it's worst. The bulk of the school tax will be put on the shoulders of the 38%. The farms already get a tax break not to subdivide. One Democrat announced at a township meeting we must all be stewards of the land. I told him that is fine. Come over and mow my orchards and lawns and pay my taxes. You can be stewards doing that. Until you pay my mortgage, taxes and upkeep your stewardship is strictly BS
9 posted on 05/27/2002 6:11:36 PM PDT by oldironsides
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: oldironsides
bttt
10 posted on 05/28/2002 8:50:44 AM PDT by Free the USA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson