BCT Editorial – 12/19/04

This page was last updated on December 19, 2004.

Smart move; Editorial; Beaver County Times; December 19, 2004.

Below is a detailed critique of the subject editorial.

“We’re going to make a prediction: A few years from now, residents of Pulaski Township are going to wonder what all the fuss was over zoning.

“On Monday, Supervisors Donald Moore and Mark Wagle voted to enact a zoning ordinance for the township. The 42-page plan includes a zoning map dividing the township into six districts: single-family residential, two-family residential, multifamily, commercial, industrial and conservation.

“Some township properties are divided between districts.

“Moore and Wagle deserve credit for doing what is best for the long-term good of the community they serve.

“Zoning has been proposed in the past but was shot down because of public opposition.

“But sometimes what is popular is not necessarily right, and such was the case of zoning in Pulaski - and Raccoon Township.”

[RWC] The editorial conveniently skips over the fact that zoning is a partial takeover of private property. How? By restricting the use of a person’s property after he purchased it, government could be reducing the value of the land. Restricting the use of a person’s land is a form of eminent domain in my opinion.

“In the late 1980s, that municipality went through a zoning fight that made what took place in Pulaski look like a tea party.

“Today, zoning is accepted throughout the community. Look for the same thing to happen in Pulaski.”

[RWC] What does “accepted” mean? Can the Times provide proof that the overwhelming majority of Raccoon Township citizens currently favor zoning?