Ruling a big win for
property owners
From thnt.com Online,
March 2, 2008
Eminent domain has been used neither
sparingly nor for the public good far too often in New Jersey. That has
become increasingly true in recent years, as governments have become adept at
using eminent domain as a hammer for redevelopment, often working hand in glove
with developers looking for a big windfall. Most of the time the public at
large and the private landowners in particular are kept out of this loop until
far too late.
An appellate court ruling last week is unlikely to change the trend, but we hope
it will at least force governments to hew to the law.
In the case in question, the three-judge panel unanimously overturned a lower
court decision; the appellate judges said the town of Harrison had not
adequately informed residents that redevelopment plans would mean their land
would be taken. Because the town failed to tell the residents at the time
their property was designated, the landowners are allowed to make their case to
the court, even though they are far outside the 45-day limit that applies in
other eminent domain cases.
The ruling is expected to have repercussions across the state, mostly because so
many towns proceed with redevelopment through the use of eminent domain.
"It is a very common situation that a municipality, by going through a blight
study, tries to lull the property owners by saying, "Don't worry about it. Don't
challenge it,' " Public Advocate Ronald Chen, who argued on behalf of the
landowners, said after the ruling. "They don't tell property owners that
this is the time when the municipality is going to be empowered to take the
property by eminent domain, and they have to give clear notice to the property
owners that their property is imperiled."
Of course, the ruling will not stop private developers from using their
particular hammers. In the days after the decision, it was reported that
Pinnacle Entertainment Corp. is continuing to pressure the City Council in
Atlantic City to create a redevelopment zone around its planned casino site — a
designation that would impact several small business owners in the area — at the
same time the group says it is not sure it will move forward with the proposal
because of the declining economy.
It's not clear whether Pinnacle's threat to abandon the project is a
not-so-subtle attempt to get the council to rubber-stamp its plans and to take
the privately owned land around the site. But it certainly shows what
private landowners are often up against when it comes to the ongoing whims and
big pockets of developers and business interests.
|
