ShareThis Page

Eminent domain's disgraceful use

| Monday, Jan. 4, 2016, 9:00 p.m.

I'm a landowner in the path of Sunoco's Mariner East pipeline.

In his recent letter, James Kunz of the Operating Engineers Local 66 wrote that companies like Sunoco should be able to take private land through eminent domain (“Eminent domain a necessity,” Pamela Witmer, with the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission, said shale development is good for jobs and the economy, and that pipelines were a priority for the Public Utility Commission (“Pa.'s promising energy future” ).

I worked for Peoples Gas for 40 years. I know infrastructure is needed. I know oil prices are cyclical. Prices dropped and a lot of jobs were lost — something Witmer didn't say. What happens when oil prices go up and the gas glut is gone?

I've owned my farm since 1973. It's supposed to be my legacy. Sunoco's plans cut it and my trailer park in half, orphaning acreage. I've lost tenants. Boring could damage the park road and septic system.

I'm not anti-development, but it's a perversion of the eminent domain process to allow Sunoco to take my land this way and use it to export for profit. Doing so would prevent my ability to negotiate, and the PUC is cheering it on.

Dean Law

Salem Township

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.