Eminent domain: report "blighted"
Posted by the Asbury Park Press on 05/21/06
The public advocate released a report Thursday that concluded what 
everyone already knew: The eminent domain laws in this state must be 
changed. Unfortunately, the report's recommendations fall short of 
what is needed to protect the rights of property owners.
In a preface to his recommendations, Ronald K. Chen detailed the 
abuses that prompted his call for reform. Those abuses warrant more 
than reform. They scream out for a complete ban on the seizure of 
any owner-occupied private property — residential or commercial — 
for private economic redevelopment.

The report noted state law allows municipalities to declare 
virtually any area "blighted," a prerequisite for using eminent 
domain for private redevelopment. It also pointed out how the 
definition of "blight" over the past 40 years has shifted from four 
narrowly drawn criteria to seven broader ones. The report said the 
Legislature's interpretation of the state Constitution's blighted 
area clause "has expanded to the point where it provides virtually 
no limitation on taking private property."

The report recommends tightening the definition of blighted, 
providing greater public notice when towns are contemplating the use 
of eminent domain and increasing compensation for seized property. 
But it still leaves the door wide open for the seizure of private 
property for economic redevelopment. It doesn't provide fair value 
for those who are being forced from their homes and it doesn't 
prevent property owners whose homes are not blighted from being 
subject to eminent domain if they live in neighborhoods that are 
classified as blighted by the governing body.

The use of eminent domain in New Jersey has reached epidemic 
proportions. Its spread has been accelerated by the scarcity of 
developable virgin land in the suburbs and rural corners of the 
state. A New Jersey Builders Association report says redevelopment 
accounted for more than 50 percent of the building permits issued in 
the state last year. For the first time in eight years, Ocean County 
failed to lead the state in new permits. Urban Hudson County headed 
the list, followed by Middlesex, Essex and Bergen counties. Ocean 
County was fifth and Monmouth County, which had ranked second in 
permits issued from 2000 to 2003, was sixth.

The pressure to acquire land belonging to others for private 
redevelopment will continue to intensify, not only in the cities but 
along the Jersey coast. Along with it will come fierce lobbying by 
developers and many public officials to head off major modifications 
to eminent domain law.

In dealing with this issue, the choice facing the Legislature is 
not, as some suggest, between allowing or not allowing the 
redevelopment of blighted neighborhoods. Rather, it is whether 
redevelopment will be handled as a partnership among property 
owners, the community and developers or shoved down property owners' 
throats. Redevelopment can proceed without eminent domain. It may 
not be as pretty. But when it comes to private property, individual 
rights should take precedence over being pretty.








------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
Everything you need is one click away.  Make Yahoo! your home page now.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/AHchtC/4FxNAA/yQLSAA/Y2tolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-> 

 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AsburyPark/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 


Reply via email to