Shades of the past?

In 2003, an article in The New York Times recounted how Asheville developer Stewart Coleman and his brothers hired an accounting firm [that] promised them “bulletproof” tax shelters. When the IRS rejected the scheme, the Colemans sued the accounting firm.

I see similarities in our current situation: The county [commission] gave Coleman a sweetheart deal, basically promising the developer a bulletproof way to build luxury condos that would crowd the landmark City Building and redesigned park.

Now that Coleman’s Parkside condo project is in jeopardy, Coleman has announced he will chop down a century-old magnolia tree unless the city and county pay him—millions more than he originally invested—to abandon the project. Without resorting to a lawsuit, Coleman’s threat is a strategy to leverage a big payback for what Coleman perceives as damages owed him for his failed real-estate venture. Sadly, those extra millions would come directly from us, the taxpayers.

When the rest of us risk money in real-estate ventures, we lose if the project fails. Why should Stewart Coleman be any different? He should not receive a public bailout simply because his project didn’t succeed.

Our leaders should either invoke eminent domain or enforce local development ordinances (for a change), and stop the Parkside project. History suggests Coleman will likely sue, which may eventually cost as much as the buyout Coleman demands, but at least our leaders won’t be giving up our hard-earned money without a fight. Handing millions of taxpayer dollars to Coleman to make his project go away sends a message to other developers that they can do the same.

— David Lynch


Before you comment

The comments section is here to provide a platform for civil dialogue on the issues we face together as a local community. Xpress is committed to offering this platform for all voices, but when the tone of the discussion gets nasty or strays off topic, we believe many people choose not to participate. Xpress editors are determined to moderate comments to ensure a constructive interchange is maintained. All comments judged not to be in keeping with the spirit of civil discourse will be removed and repeat violators will be banned. See here for our terms of service. Thank you for being part of this effort to promote respectful discussion.

2 thoughts on “Shades of the past?

  1. Barry Summers

    Excellent point – this goes right to the heart of it. Mr. Coleman attempted a very risky and speculative land deal, and now that it’s gone bad he expects to walk away with a profit. He’s a clever man, and has been a developer here for many years. He knew very well the outrage that a building inside the park would inspire. How can he claim victim status, and then demand that the public pay his bills and forgive him for the attempt?

  2. travelah

    If the Pack family’s suit succeeds, Mr. Coleman’s recourse will be against the title insurance company that guaranteed the transaction. If the property is taken through eminent domain, he has no recourse. (according to an attorney I discussed the issue with)

Leave a Reply

To leave a reply you may Login with your Mountain Xpress account, connect socially or enter your name and e-mail. Your e-mail address will not be published. All fields are required.