Evergreen Country Club owner wins court battle against Evergree...

Southside Dan wrote:

First, how many posters on this forum have even seen the property in question--10%, at best?

That has nothing to do with the principle of property rights.

Southside Dan wrote:

Second, opponents of big government usually tend to be NIMBYs, as well (even though new development is almost always the work of the private sector). If the property was developed, the same sort of people would gripe about additional traffic, roadwork, demands on village infrastructure and services. Add housing (a Home Depot doesn't need that much land) and you have more kids in the school, school funding tax referenda, etc.
If you have ever seen the golf course, you would know that is bordered by two lane (mostly) residential streets to the south and west, one four lane street to the east and private property to the north.
Home Depot would want to locate on Western Avenue, the only commercial street of the three. This would add to the traffic congestion from the Evergreen Plaza located a half mile away.
What about the rest of the land (we're talking about over 100 acres)? Does it get developed as commercial? Then who among the nearby residents wants to look out their windows to see store parking lots and neon signs? Who wants thousand of cars driving past their homes every day? If it is developed as residential, how many kids will enroll at the small neighborhood school at 91st and California? What about the additional fire and police protection required?

A whole list of reasons that are NOT GOOD ENOUGH to take away a person's consitutional and God given rights.

Southside Dan wrote:

Oh I know--in a perfect world, the jobs and tax revenues from Home Depot will offset the costs the community. Same with the new houses; additional property tax revenue will make everything right. To bad, developers usually extract all kinds of concessions from small communities.

In your perfect world where everybody "Sieg"s and "Heil"s. In a perfect world property tax would not exist. Thats the way feudalist people thought in the Dark Ages.

Southside Dan wrote:

The village was right in their efforts to preserve green space and control over-development and traffic congestion. They were wrong in their low-ball offer and threats to use eminent domain.

You are right it is about control. People like you simply want to control other people and are willing to use government as a weapon against your fellow citizens. You are of the very same philosophical strain as the people who have been on the wrong side of every human struggle.

Do you really think that overseeing the trains to the death camps will save you from being on the last truckload?

Simmer down wrote:

Sharon D seems personally invested in this and has the time to respond to everyone's post...maybe related or something...working at the course today? Don't be so angry, it's a pretty day out.

You should thank her for standing up for your rights. If more of us stood up and said 'No Sir, we will not go to the back of the bus.' maybe we could have REAL change in this country.

Clark Kent wrote:

<quoted text>
Repeal the 16th amendment, get rid of income tax all together.
I'm all for taxing everything and fairly, but I think it would be really difficult to tax a not-for-profit and that would yet create more tax law. As far as religions go, that would kind of go against the 1st amendment. Religion is expression. The government can't charge for people to organize and express their views.
Just my thoughts.

Big fan of repealing the 16th Amendment. No argument from me there. However, if we're going to have it, I want the same rate for everyone, period, no exemptions or exceptions. Hell, if you've got kids, you're a BIGGER drain on the system. If anything you should pay more, not less.

I'm not sure how taxing churches would violate the 1st Amendment. It wouldn't establish a national religion, it would just require any religion to pay taxes on property owned like any corporation or citizen. It also would not prohibit citizens from freely practicing (or choosing not to practice) any particular religion. Too much has been read into the establishment clause, IMHO.

Shannon wrote:

This is a perfect example of people only doing things for themselves and the lack of consideration for others. I dont care how old this woman is, she cant possibly believe that this park will remain open for public use after she sells it for $25 million. I dont blame the community for trying.

Check the facts before you post.

First, the property isn't a park - it is a golf course, where people PAY MONEY to play golf. It is not "open for public use."

Second, she had no intention of selling it for the purpose of become a park or any other public use. She was going to be paid $25 million for the land to be developed into a Home Depot and residential housing. The municipality blocked the re-zoning, then tried to seize the land from her and pay her 1/5th of what the private developer would have paid.

Simmer down wrote:

Sharon D seems personally invested in this and has the time to respond to everyone's post...maybe related or something...working at the course today? Don't be so angry, it's a pretty day out.

Did you have something to say about this case or about eminent domain, or about the content of my posts, or do you just like to take pot shots at people?

Yeh, SharonD is personally invested in civil rights. Too bad everyone isn't!

This mayors an idiot to think you can use your powers to take advantage of people reminds me of a couple of mayors and public officials that are sitting in jail. You abused your power and if it was my choice i would counter sue this town and take them to the cleaners. You don't own the town just cause your mayor and i am sure we could find some dirt on this guy and get him removed from office.

WOW, this James Sexton is an unbelievable POS. Although this is not the first case of official attempted abuse of a law, drafted initially to help a township with acquiring land for say a middle or high school, if there were no other options for space.

Good for this old gal....there's some spunk I'll tell ya.

Way to go! I'm glad for her! Ahern's Golf course, was one of Chicago's first Golf course, that let African Americans play golf, in Chicago. The Lord has your back, Ahern! Now charge evergreen up the kazoo! That Nazi community needs to pay! Double the price! or sell the course to an African American. That'll show em! Could you imagine the faces on the Nazi's, if a Blackman ended up owning the Golf course! WOW! Red ain't the word for it!

Golf course owner has town jerks by the balls.

YESSSSSSSSSSS!!!!!!!!!!

Cant get on at the cheap courses at Burnham woods or Calumet city, river oaks anymore because all the blacks think theyre Tiger Woods!

Cadillac wrote:

Cant get on at the cheap courses at Burnham woods or Calumet city, river oaks anymore because all the blacks think theyre Tiger Woods!

Doesn't matter White or Black, watching men hit a little ball all over a lawn is FUNNY try a real sport..

Babe Ahern is a Whack Job of the highest order. She always has been. What's wrong with keeping a public golf course less than 30 minutes from the Loop? If she ever decides to die, which is not likely in our lifetime, she'll probsbly leave the land to Little Co. of Mary Hospital. It will never be entirely rezoned for development. Medical facilities -yes, housing-no, Big box-Hell no! Green space, park disatrict golf course-definately. Long Live Jim Sexton and GOD BLESS THE IRISH!!!

If Mrs. Ahern wanted to sell her property to Home Depot, that's her right! It's HER property, NOT "the community's". I'm so sick of "preservationists" and "green lovers" and other assorted socialists and communists trying to take people's property away from them via eminent domain. It's an abuse of government power. Thank God in this case the property owner won.

Born Raised Evergreen wrote:

Babe Ahern is a Whack Job of the highest order. She always has been. What's wrong with keeping a public golf course less than 30 minutes from the Loop? If she ever decides to die, which is not likely in our lifetime, she'll probsbly leave the land to Little Co. of Mary Hospital. It will never be entirely rezoned for development. Medical facilities -yes, housing-no, Big box-Hell no! Green space, park disatrict golf course-definately. Long Live Jim Sexton and GOD BLESS THE IRISH!!!

I lived across the street from the golf course from 1952 till 1965 to me it was the most beautiful place in the world. We played baseball there all summer,golfed in the evenings,football in the fall and sledded all winter.Took our girlfriends there at night. Babe would send her men to kick us out every week but we were always right back,she even called the police a few times but nothing would stop us it was our park.In those days know one was litigious although we were told it was risky being there.So I hope it remains a park or a golf course.She got her money at 101 I suppose she will give ot to the hospital.I would really hate to see it destroyed.

I lived across the street from the golf course from 1952 till 1965 to me it was the most beautiful place in the world. We played baseball there all summer,golfed in the evenings,football in the fall and sledded all winter.Took our girlfriends there at night. Babe would send her men to kick us out every week but we were always right back,she even called the police a few times but nothing would stop us it was our park.In those days know one was litigious although we were told it was risky being there.So I hope it remains a park or a golf course.She got her money at 101 I suppose she will give ot to the hospital.I would really hate to see it destroyed.

It is her right to sell it to Home Depot but the city also has the right to say we don't want Home Depot there we've had the golf course here for 90 years so come up with a beter plan.Haven't we paved enough of this planet?

tom wrote:

It is her right to sell it to Home Depot but the city also has the right to say we don't want Home Depot there we've had the golf course here for 90 years so come up with a beter plan.Haven't we paved enough of this planet?

I believe that you forgot to add "Dude" and "Man" to your response you worthless communist scum.

UPDATE:
300 plus oak trees, some estimated to be over 100 years old, on the Evergreen Park golf course were ripped down by the developer Sterling Bay (Penny Pritzker funded) this past weekend, to make way for their planned 450,000 square foot Meijer & Menards anchored strip mall. The developer strategically chose the Easter break to rip down the trees and throw them in a chipper, making a mountain of mulch that made the sledding hill look like a sledding bump.
This green space is going to be paved over with non-permeable cement and asphalt, to accommodate the 2000 plus parking spaces. This is the worst possible type of development. It will be poured concrete type structures that add no architectural significance and have become the dinosaurs of the retail community, in the worst possible times. It's a money maker for the developers, make no doubt about that. It has been reported that the Sterling Bay developers only have letters of intent from Meijers & Menards, and they don’t even have any other of the 11 proposed outlots leased, so you know that lower tiered stores will eventually become the tenants, if built.
The Evergreen Plaza has recently been in talks with developers who plan a similar strip mall type development as the Sterling Bay development. Potentially, 1.5 million square feet of new retail space in a neighborhood centered community that does not support these types of businesses. From 91st & Western to 99th & Western will become a sea of strip malls. Have we not learned anything from the past?
Start Managing Area Resources Together, get SMART and be successful now and in the future, not just for the moment.
Just because they destroyed the trees does not mean that it’s over. Visit www.thebia.org to find out what you can do to stop the waste of open space.“They Chopped, So Now We Won’t Shop”, unless they get SMART.