The Lower Southampton Township Board of Supervisors appears to be in a land grabbing frenzy. The Board has been threatening and passing condemnation resolutions on property owners as a strong-arm negotiation tactic. And an added bonus of the tactic is the way they can avoid paying their fair share of transfer taxes to the state.
[UPDATE: Bucks Right reader "RLD" has a serious problem with my presentation of the story. The reader states the Eminent Domain resolution was passed after the supervisors had agreed to buy the Hagopian property as a way to help Hagopian avoid taxes on the transaction. That is not the impression I got based on the Courier's story on the transaction. I, personally, have a problem with Eminent Domain being invoked for any reason other than the most pressing matters of public need. I do not see either a pipe to water a lawn or a community center no one seems to want as pressing matters of public need. Either way, "RLD" seems sufficiently knowledgable about the issue to warrant a second look on my part, and I felt it would be a service to readers to have this alternate view of the issue represented in the main article so that readers could decide for themselves.]
The intent of Eminent Domain statutes is to ensure that a governing body such as the Township can acquire the land they need to provide necessary services to residents. Examples include installation of power lines and roads.
What are the necessities that Lower Southampton Township is using to intimidate property owners into relinquishing their land, often for less than it is worth? A sprinkler system for the lawn of a tony swim club on Township-owned land and a multi-million dollar community center it hasn’t yet funded.
All from the township that recently stormed the private property of its residents looking for “illegal” storm drain hook-ups.
This spring, Lower Southampton Township threatened to condemn 5,000 square feet of land owned by Harry Hackert of KS Sports in order to water the lawn at its swanky Dolphin Swim Club property. Hackert wanted about $90,000 for the land ($18 per sq/f), but the Township was able to find an appraiser that valued the land at $7,000 ($1.40 per sq/f). Hey, if land is going for $1.40 per square foot in Lower Southampton Township, I want in. That’s about $62,000 per acre. Right now, Realtor.com has small parcels of land in Lower Southampton Township listed up to $400,000 per acre.
Unsurprisingly, Hackert chose to sell the land to the Township rather than have it ripped from him at $1.40 per square foot. Now the pretty, pretty lawn at Dolphin Swim Club will be nice and green.
Last week, the Township again threatened eminent domain on a land owner, this time to get 9.65 acres for the multi-million dollar Community Center it doesn’t even have the money to build.
After confirming the “sale,” solicitor Michael Savona bragged about getting the land for under market value. It’s amazing what kind of deals you can get when you threaten and strong-arm the seller with the full force of a Township coming down on him.
And the eminent domain intimidation tactic allows a loophole for the Township, which never saw a tax it didn’t seek to impose or raise on its residents, to evade about $20,000 in state transfer tax. Hey, it’s good to be king.
“We are getting an appraisal update that will support the amount we are paying.” Savona said. “Actually, the property is probably worth a little more than the sales price, but we are buying at $1,060,000. The appraiser has indicated the amount is not an issue.”
Lower Southampton adopted a resolution last week stating that the township is willing to take the property by eminent domain, but since the township has a signed sales agreement, there will not be a taking, Savona said.
“Having adopted the resolution, however, will permit us to take title by accepting a deed in lieu of condemnation from [land owner] Hagopian, and there is no real estate transfer tax to be paid under those circumstances. That will save a little over $20,000 in the transaction,” he said.
Tagged
Bucks County, Eminent Domain, Lower Southampton TownshipRelated Posts
7 Responses to “Lower Southampton Township in Eminent Domain Frenzy”
Comments posted are the opinions of the individual poster and do not reflect the views of Bucks Right. Comments are only moderated to prevent spam. No legitimate opinions are altered for content, although we reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason.
1JMB on Jul 23, 2008 at 4:13 pm:
One thief hands your property to another, and then he says to you “look I have nothing of yours.” and then this second thief hands it back to the first, and now he says “look here, I also have nothing of yours.” - Suvate - It is finished.
2RLD on Aug 24, 2008 at 10:03 am:
If you are going to post, post correctly.
The fields being watered at the Dolphin Club are athletic fields that the Township built for the benefit of the kids in our Township. It isn’t for some swanky lawn for a swanky swim club. A little fact-checking might be nice. Oh, also, the easement was valued at $7,000 because it was just that - an EASEMENT. That means all the Township wanted was the right to run a water line through the property (in an area, by the way, that was completely within a setback and could never be used for anything anyway). I am sure, in your infinite wisdom, you would gladly pay six figures for the right to run a water pipe through useless ground. Sign me up for THAT deal.
As far as the community center - the property is being acquired for a storm water basin and a possible community center - the Board made that clear at their last meeting. I didn’t realize that solving storm water problems in a township plagued with storm water issues was a sin. Who knew? Oh, and once again, check your facts. The Township and the owner signed the sales agreement at the price the property owner ASKED FOR before the owner started squaking about not wanting to sign. HE NEGOTIATED more than $100,000 increase over the original offer. If he was being taken advantage of, he has no one to blame but himself. I guess it was the Township’s “strong arm tactics” that kept him from increasing his haul by more. At the rate things are going in LST, I sure hope the Township comes looking to take my property. They’ll either give me exactly what I want or pay me for something I could never use anyway.
Give me a break …
Steven Reply:
August 24th, 2008 at 11:46 am
You are welcome to provide your side of the story here - I want all opinions represented.
Here’s the purpose of this site: I comment on news articles I find interesting, and then readers comment on my comments and add their own. I thank you for your participation.
The BCCT presented this information about Eminent Domain, and quotes from township representatives backed up it being used. I found it odd that LS had two instances of this being used in just a couple months, and did a quick search about other local towns using it for non-essential things like lawn watering and community centers, and found none. That makes it an anomaly, and therefore interesting to me. Unless you’re an apartment dweller, just the words Eminent Domain should be chilling to you.
1 Did the Township or did the Township not pass a resolution stating they were willing to take the Hagopian property by Eminent Domain at a previous meeting?
2 Did the Township or did the Township not specifically tell Mrs. Madrigale that the Township did not threaten to take the property by condemnation at the most recent meeting, despite #1?
3 Is the Township or is the Township not getting Mr. Hagopian’s property for below market value?
4 Is the intent of Eminent Domain to get land for things you want to do, like water a lawn or build a community center, or for things you need to do, like provide electricity or sewer service? A lot of rights are swiped these days in the name of “the kids.”
5 Contrary to what you’ve stated, at the most recent meeting two supervisors (couldn’t see their names on TV - they were on the right) stated that they only voted to buy the Hagopian land because they were told it was for storm water mgmt, while the remainder of the panel that night loudly admonished them for stating this saying that they were fully informed it was being purchased as a possible site for the Community Center no one but you seems to want.
“Increasing his haul?” It’s HIS land! Some of us believe in individual property rights and are offended by Eminent Domain being used for non-essential services. In Mr. Hackert’s case, regardless of whether he had a use for the property (which is really no one’s business but his), it does not appear he wanted to give up that piece of land. 5,000 square feet is a pretty large “EASEMENT,” don’t you think.
In the past couple weeks alone, Lower Southampton has had 2 of their firefighters arrested for arson and a guy getting beaten silly in his own driveway. Maybe it’s time to prioritize a little.
RLD Reply:
August 25th, 2008 at 1:40 pm
The Resolution on Mr. Hagopian’s property was approved AFTER the Resolution approving the Agreement of Sale. I went to the library and checked the DVD of the meeting, just to be sure. AND, the solicitor clearly explained that they were passing it to save $20,000 in taxes on the transaction. Turns out, Mr. Hagopian would have to pay the transfer tax on the sale, since the Township is exempt, and the Resolution saved him losing that money. But I guess in your world, people should actually pay MORE taxes. Funny, I thought you were a Republican.
I think you should do a little research on eminent domain. I did - the purpose is to allow government to achieve goals that are public purposes - like building community facilities. Is a road or sewer pipe any more a community facility than a community center? Wake up. The US Constitution specifically authorizes eminent domain, so long as the property owner is paid just compensation. You do read the Constitution, don’t you?
In any case, the Township didn’t exercise eminent domain against either property owner. They paid, or are paying, for the property and the owners have, or are, agreeing to the price. Seems like the only person who has a problem with any of this is you … and we KNOW you don’t have any ulterior motives. Right?
Steven Reply:
August 25th, 2008 at 2:08 pm
You’re arguing the Township spin down to the letter, and I have an ulterior motive? What’s your motive? I have never seen a private citizen argue FOR more Eminent Domain.
In my world, people should pay the taxes they owe, Republican or Democrat. The way to lower taxes is to pass laws that lower taxes, not to find ways around the taxes that exist.
I’m wide awake. I was awake enough to see that township meeting on television packed with residents who do not want a community center. What’s the “public purposes” of something the public doesn’t want and lawn watering?
It sounds like you have more of a problem with the Courier’s coverage of the story than my reaction to the Courier’s coverage. I had no idea about these two back-to-back Eminent Domain issues in Lower Southampton until I read about them there.
That said, in the interest of fairness, I have put a paragraph into the original story that reflects the alternate view of the situation. If there’s a question about the order of things, I’m more than happy to have it be reflected in the information.
3RLD on Aug 25, 2008 at 5:48 pm:
Thanks for your update. While the “interest of fairness” is hardly served by the inserted language, at least you acknowledge that you may have been relying on a less than credible source.
I will refrain from any further commentary regarding the “spin” contained in this website or in your postings. Never a more blatant “tool” have I seen.
I’ll merely say this: Just because I differ with your view and your ideological rantings doesn’t mean that I am arguing the Township “spin.” I personally think the idea is foolish and that the community will ultimately reject the community center because it will cost too much. What I don’t agree with is that the use of eminent domain is evil and that government has “gone crazy” when it uses that power. As I said before, its in the Constitution, pal. Get used to it. If our elected representatives abuse that power, we have elections to change that. Demonizing a legitimate government power is not the way to bring about that change. Debate the merits of the decision, not the fact that the power to make the decision exists.
Would you like to follow your theory to its logical end? Perhaps debate the wisdom of having an army or navy at all instead of the merits of taking particular military actions. Maybe have a discourse about eliminating police, judges and juries instead of complaining about the results of a particular criminal case. Do you follow my point?
Ours is not to debate the merits of the Constitution - it exists and we must live within its terms. Your “yellow” journalisitic style is too coy and cramped by far. Debate the use of the powers of government … that is our right. Demonizing the Constitution is nothing short of treasonous.
Steven Reply:
August 25th, 2008 at 6:08 pm
The Bill of Rights exists to give THE PEOPLE rights and to tell the GOVERNMENT what it CAN’T do, not the other way around.
The 5th Amendment to the Constitution says “nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.” It DOESN’T say “It’s great when the government takes people’s property and gives them just compensation” or “The Government should take as much of people’s property as they want and then give them just compensation.” It says what it means and it tells the Government what it cannot do.
It is interpretation that has taken it to mean “run right up to the limits of what the 5th Amendment might possibly allow.” And I think that’s a mistake.
To say questioning interpretation of a Constitutional provision is “treasonous” is over the top and bizarre. I guess the Supreme Court is a body of “treason.” If it is not “ours” to determine what the limits should be, then who should be doing that? Do you really think it is not upon the citizenry to determine what the limits of using “governmental powers” should be? If we don’t debate it, then how are we represented by our elected officials anyway?
And I’m not “demonizing a government power.” I am questioning its (over) use by people.
I follow your straw man argument just fine, thank you very much. The difference is the Military and Judicial System are proactively proscribed in the Constitution.