It's traditional

Some libertarians are incensed that a "Wealthy village plans to seize local golf course, open it up to all residents."

I think that the village will win any condemnation suit hands down and be able to acquire the golf course. There are many courses owned by local government. They are often part of a "Parks and Recreation Department." Owning and operating a course is an ordinary, typical governmental function. Some of them  are very very good: Torrey Pines in San Diego and Beth Page Black on Long Island.

Clearly, buying land for a new public course is so far inside the line that it's not legally debatable. So condemning an existing course should be no different.

I am not saying it's good or bad public policy (though actually it doesn't really bother me particularly.) But I can see the black humor.

Just bear in mind that one of the lines (grudging I am sure) from libertarians when Kelo came down last spring was that eminent domain might be OK for traditional public purposes like roads, schools, and parks but not for redevelopment schemes (and I completely agree.) So there you are. A golf course is a special kind of park.