Saturday Open Thread [5.11.13]
Today’s NJ has a piece by Adam Taylor explaining the stakes in the upcoming meeting regarding rezoning several areas of the Beaver Valley holdings of the Woodlawn Trustees. I’ve seen alot of Facebook energy on this, but this is the first I’ve seen the issues spelled out.
In all, the plans call for 200,000 square feet of commercial space that would be housed in several buildings and residential developments with a total of 432 houses and townhomes, Green said.
The commercial development would be called Concord Commons, an age-restricted community would be called The Mews at Concord and the other residential development would be called The Preserve at Concord.
Nothing about this seems like conservation. And conservation is about more than preserving recreational options. And certainly this is one more opportunity to increase traffic and congestion on roads that were not built for their current capacity.
These ladies are not letting Swarthmore off of the hook for dealing with sexual harassment. Mothers of daughters — this Mother’s Day weekend, please show this to your kids and tell them it is OK to raise hell when you are mistreated. And if they need any help here, I’m always in for raising hell. Just call me.
The new Baz Luhrmann movie — an adaptation of The Great Gatsby — opened yesterday to mostly not-so-good reviews. Has anyone seen it? One thing to check out is this hysterical book report on The Great Gatsby by someone who only saw the movie. “Because of the shirts”, FTW.
What interests you today?
Agreed, Cass, that it doesn’t look like conservation, but it’s consistent with the Woodlawn Trustees’ M.O. for generations. They periodically sell off developable portions of their holdings to generate the cash needed to maintain the land and other assets that they own. Case in point, going back 40-50 years: Woodbrook, Sharpley, Edenridge, Tavistock. More recently, I believe, the land along the west side of Concord Pike near Naamans Road that’s now packed with restaurants, hotels and big box stores.
A reliable source told me the other day that Woodlawn is planning improvements to the 600 or so rental units it owns on Wilmington’s West Side — between Union St. and Bancroft Parkway.
I’m with you in that I’d rather not see that land in Pa. developed, but if it is, my money is on Woodlawn to come up with something that’s more attractive than what you now see on the west side of 202 between the state line and Smith Bridge Road. And, if they use some of the revenue to improve the quality of moderate income housing in Wilmington, I’d say that’s a good thing.
I think we’ve got to know a little more before we jump to conclusions.
A comment rescue –
I am involved in the Beaver Valley issue that I know you are familiar with. Adam Taylor did a piece about it today in the News Journal but missed a lot of points. One area I am focusing on is Woodlawn Trustees. I sent the Adam a letter with the following points (another example of the Delaware Way). Your thoughts? do you have any experience/info on Woodlawn?
I wanted to provide some context for the perception that Woodlawn is some sort of benevolent nonprofit. I have heard them described as a wolf in sheep’s clothing. Anyone who buys a house near land that has signs saying it is a “Wildlife Refuge,” only to see that land sold to the highest bidder, can relate to that characterization.
Here is some relevant research provided by the Hagley Museum:
http://www.hagley.org/library/collections/manuscripts/findingaids/Woodlawn_Trustees_Records.pdf (especially pages 9-12, and page 16. Also worth noting is that records under 25 years old are closed with a time seal)
While Woodlawn is a Delaware nonprofit corporation (not exactly difficult to do in Delaware as we know)….they are NOT a tax exempt 501c3 organization under IRS regulations. In fact their tax exempt status was revoked in 1963 because the Trust was “receiving revenues from a business unrelated to its original purpose—namely, profits from real estate rentals and sales.” They were mired in legal issues on the subject, won some court battles but ultimately decided they could not operate under IRS regulations so.they decided to pay all taxes going forward. Bottom line…they are a real estate developer.
Woodlawn’s noble goal of providing low income housing also has a checkered background. They were sued by Mrs. William duPont and challenged by the Wilmington and Philadelphia Friends Meetings because of discrimination in their housing developments. Do you know the scope and quality of their housing now? Is it really the central reason they sell land as they would have us believe? Can we ascertain this information or do we have to rely on their statements alone? Since they don’t have to comply with IRS regulations, their salaries, benefits, perks, etc are not subject to public scrutiny.
I do find it disturbing that they SELL land along the Brandywine for the national park and are lauded as heroes and then also sell land adjacent to the park to developers (our project).Is the Delaware tract adjacent to the national park next?
I realize Woodlawn is a well connected Delaware institution, but it should not escape public scrutiny for its actions and motives.
Rob
I agree with Rob – wouldn’t it be a benefit if Woodlawn would prove that it is keeping faith with its dual mission to both preserve the lands and provide affordable housing. What’s it done on the housing front lately? And why is Saul Ewing its business address in several places online?
They undoubtedly do use money gained from land sales to maintain low income housing, BUT at what level? Clearly, they would not meet the test of a tax exempt organization and so they are not one and do pay taxes. All that is fine, but don’t pretend you some benevolent nonprofit preserving land and building low income housing. Its a perfect cover story for a developer. They are doing some of both, but mainly looking out for their best interests not that of the public. Tax exempt organizations have to disclose…they do not.
Go to savethevalley.org for more info!
First, Woodlawn, the benevolent, won’t reveal for how much it sold the land to the Mount Cuba Conservation Trust. Much of that land, too, could not be developed anyway. Unloading the 1,100 for what is probably a very large sum and then greenwashing the public into thinking they were actually fulfilling Bancroft’s vision should constitute fraud in a civilized country . Now if they had donated the land, that would be a different story. And how is it that Woodlawn, which has acquired close to 6,000 acres over its existence, was able to flout Bancroft’s intentions and “develop” over 3000 acres of it. Now it has only 710 acres left and despite the “propagrandizing” on their website, they’re going to build on that, too.
Second, The Trust in the 60s and 70s installed many hundreds of “Wildlife Refuge” signs thoughout its holdings. During the same time, it started builiding dozens of miles of trails, and allowed other trails to develop naturally from use by the public. It required its leasees and renters to abide by stewardship rules on how the renters could “protect” the land. I’ve attached a pic of one of these rules. What kind of a “Trust” does these things to protect the land and then paves it over?
Third, If you look at the plans, they cover over/split in half some of the best trails in the valley. And does a viewshed not count when considering paving over a man’s legacy?
Fourth, Concord Township’s website touts the open space and trail system of Woodlawn as a great thing for the people of Concord even as they plan to destroy it. Cluster homes or not, the view is gone, the feeling of an unspoiled landscape is gone, the emptiness of the valley is gone. http://www.townshipofconcord.com/sitecontent/index/page/Park%20Information Interestingly, much of the land that Concord Twp has “preserved” lies under high tension wires or along sewer right of way or in wetlands.
Fifth, the winery is not accessible by the public. It is fenced in and there are no trails going through it. And based on Woodlawns lies in the past, there is no guarantee that it would protected when its lease expires.
Sixth, much of the land they are leaving as open space, can’t be developed anyway because of slope or wetlands. If this were flat land, you could be assured that they would be building on all of it.
Seventh, most of the current supervisors have construction businesses or family ties to them. They have also presided over the biggest land grab is Concord Twp history. The 2000 census listed the population of Concord as 10,000. Now it is 18, 000 in just 13 years. Now they would add at minimum 1000 residents with the stroke of a pen.
Eighth, Woodlawn has led land sellers to believe their land would be protected. Merlin Brubaker, who sold Woolawn 51 acres at the top of Beaver Valley in 1981, believed his land was being conserved. The letter from S. Clark president of Woodlawn confirms this. Other residents of Beaver Valley (like Bill Derrickson) who sold to Woodlawn believed this to be the case as well.
Ninth, if Woodlawn is really in the land preservation business as a not for profit, how can a guy like Vermin Green afford such expensive shoes?
A reliable source told me the other day that Woodlawn is planning improvements to the 600 or so rental units it owns on Wilmington’s West Side — between Union St. and Bancroft Parkway.
I’ve heard this too, MW. And these folks do about the best job in the city with their low income units. I’m interested in more information about what they plan on, but in addition to the traffic concerns, you’d think that this would be critical habitat to protect this watershed. Some of (not all) of the increased costs for water in NCCo are because the increased treatment needed of water that has known point sources all the way to Downingtown. Degrading this watershed just means we all pay more for water eventually. The cheapest way to protect a critical watershed is to maintain or increase its forested cover. While I’ve no doubt that the developers will win the day here, it would be really nice if our government would think long term enough to start capturing some of the increased costs that the rest of us pay by assessing these developers as they think about building.
Great comments Rob! One quick clarification, though. Woodlawn Trustees are NOT a non-profit corporation, despite years of telling the public that they are. The Delaware Division of Corportions website clearly lists them as a “General” corporation – just like Acme or Stoltz. Delaware took legal action back in the 1960s for back-taxes, after the IRS initiated their lawsuit which resulted in Woodlawn losing their 501(c)(3). Or “voluntarily giving it up”, in their words.
In response to mediawatch’s comment regarding improvements to the Woodlawn flats: a more likely scenario than improvements is bulldozing and building upscale homes to replace the flats. Check out the new castle county website. Many of the flats parcels have now been consolidated into fewer, much larger lots. Once Woodlawn evicts their “non-compliant” tenants, they can replace the flats with better revenue generating units.
Gail…I stand corrected. I just checked the DE Division of Corporations site and indeed they are listed as a General corporation. Yet, the opening line from the News Journal article states – “A Delaware nonprofit real estate company that turned over land for Delaware’s national monument…” Thanks Gail
Hertz Car Rental is moving it’s world headquarters from New Jersey to Florida. That’s 700 jobs with average pay of 102k going South. Please remind our legislators there is no Fisker Car Rental.
Spoken like someone with income security. Snark is cheap but we need jobs.
Delaware is mostly at the mercy of the national economy and doesn’t have many options other than trying to attract employers.
I want our governor making investments in attracting companies here. It is a sometimes risky business and you sometimes lose, but if it were a sure thing everybody would be doing it.
The lesson of Astra Zeneca and Fisker is to make smaller investments and not get too far out on a limb.
Hertz Car Rental also got $19M+ in “incentives” to move to Florida. And since Hertz bought Dollar rentals too, it is moving jobs from there to Florida too. Companies move all of the time. Especially when states dangle lots of money in front of them.
Woodlawn Trustees are NOT a non-profit corporation, despite years of telling the public that they are. The Delaware Division of Corportions website clearly lists them as a “General” corporation […]
And this means what? Woodlawn seems to describe themselves as a “not-for-profit (but paying taxes)” organization. Paying taxes is reasonable, and not for profit just means there are no owners collecting profits.
What it means is that they have been able to get away with the same type of behavior half the county has villified Stoltz for, because they are “non-profit” and supposedly are doing it for the good of low income people. Except what exactly have they done for low income people lately? Their rents aren’t cheaper than the going rate in Wilmington. And per the comment above, they intend to flatten the “Flats” and build more upscale housing in it’s place! Is that the action of a charity?
Oh sweet jeebus, it’s THE HERTZ CORPORATION. A DELAWARE Corporation, as explicitly expressed in their one-sided super-fine-print rental agreements. Headquartered in Park Ridge, NJ(for now), chartered in DE, major operations in Oklahoma City, OK.
I worked there for a LONG time. It has not been run well since at least the early 1980s. It existed for decades as a money losing write off for mega-corporations like RCA prior to then. (Yes, kiddies, there was a time when RCA was a mega-corp. Look it up.)
I witnessed several ownership and management changes, lots of branding changes & NO REAL CHANGE where the rubber meets the road. Hertz, and other big companies like it, are a recent MBA grad’s wet dream. And that’s exactly why they suck. NO ONE takes a long view. NO one. It’s all about the next quarter. Go ‘Merica! Capitalism rules!
Gail-
FWIW, I’m against Woodlawn Trustees’ plan to sell their land to developers.
That said, Woodlawn has presented itself as a NOT FOR PROFIT corp for more than 40 years, and their mission is fairly well laid out on their web site. What’s the problem?
So you think it is acceptable that Woodlawn present themselves as a NOT FOR PROFIT corp when in fact, they are nothing of the sort? That they use the public misconception that they are a NOT FOR PROFIT charity to ram as much development down the public’s throat as Stoltz does, without having to face the same repercussions? Bet Stoltz would LOVE to be able to pull that one off! Woodlawn is a FOR PROFIT REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, nothing more, nothing less. Yes, I absolutely see that as a problem!
Roland, regarding Woodlawn – Whats the problem you ask. They fuel the perception that they are some sort of benevolent nonprofit. What other real estate developer posts signs calling property they own a “Wildlife Refuge”. What a joke! Its the same property they are selling to developers. People bought homes nearby based on those signs and the reputation Woodlawn has carefully cultivated. The website you refer to says they are about preserving open space and helping people of modest means find housing. The first line of the article today refers to them as a nonprofit that turned over land in to order to form a national park. They SOLD the land and they are not a nonprofit. We are just highlighting the fact that they are a developer pure and simple and need to be called on it.
Except what exactly have they done for low income people lately? Their rents aren’t cheaper than the going rate in Wilmington.
Some of them are, and the places are definitely on the nicer and safer end of housing for low and moderate income people. Just maintaining a safe and clean development is worth it not just to the tenants but also to the neighbors.
And per the comment above, they intend to flatten the “Flats” and build more upscale housing in it’s place! Is that the action of a charity?
Right. An anonymous, non-sources comment on the internets is the TRUTH. There’s always at least one person so bent on an argument that they’ll believe anything. This is usually the wingnuts among us.
There are perfectly good reasons to oppose this action by Woodlawn and investing in bad information, stupidity and conspiracy theories isn’t going to help you.
To Cassandra: And rudeness and insults aren’t going to help yours! To state that Woodlawn is a FOR PROFIT company isn’t bad information, nor stupidity. One can go directly to the State of Delaware Division of Corporations website for confirmation of that FACT. And one can go directly the New Castle County open webpages for confirmation of them consolidating their holdings in the Woodlawn Flats. Perhaps you should do a little research of your own before sniping at others who actually have done the research to back up their statements!