Abuse of the word 'blight' in New Jersey
Of the many abuses surrounding the issue of eminent domain, one of the worst is the manner in which properties are deemed blighted - one of the chief rationales for seizing land. The liberal interpretation of that word, and the wide latitude given to local government to establish large areas in need of redevelopment that can include nonblighted homes and residences, allowed Long Branch to lump many well-maintained homes in the northernmost part of the beachfront area into a redevelopment zone. That's a disgrace.
If New Jersey is looking for a model to guard against such abuses in the future, it should take a look at Georgia, which recently approved an eminent domain reform law that substantially tightens the defintion of blight and requires that individual parcels, as opposed to areas, be designated as blighted in order to be subject to condemnations. The bill also states that economic development is not a ''public use'' that justifies the use of eminent domain.
If New Jersey is looking for a model to guard against such abuses in the future, it should take a look at Georgia, which recently approved an eminent domain reform law that substantially tightens the defintion of blight and requires that individual parcels, as opposed to areas, be designated as blighted in order to be subject to condemnations. The bill also states that economic development is not a ''public use'' that justifies the use of eminent domain.
posted by Randy Bergmann at 9:16 AM
3 Comments:
The Fifth Amendment says "...nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation." The way it is usually explained today is: "The government can take private property for public use as long as just compensation is awarded." However, from the original words, one gets the impression that the framers were not big on the idea at all, but were saying if it must occur, then it must occur justly. Today's interpretation seems to be that the government is welcome to do it, as long as there is just compensation. I see an important difference. Don't you?
i know this is not a popular opinion about this subject, although there are a couple better maintained homes in MTOTSA, for many others, they are worn out rental properties.
When is eminent domain for economic development and not labeled as such? Take the rutkus about the West Front Street bridge project. The whole story that is not being told is that this is eminent domain for the entire area or someone who is just hoping to get rich while the public pays for a project we just don't need. By raising the bridge and dredging the channel you make an environmentally sensitve area with 6 endangered and threatened species vunerable while at the same time pushing out the homeowners of both Red Bank and Middletown. who will no longer be able to afford to live there. When the peices are put together(MON. CTY. Engineers plans,Bayshore Strategic Plan, NJ & Fed Wildlife reports, and Americal Littoral society) you get just that.It doesn't have to be labeled Eminent Domain for Economic Redevelopment to be just that.
Post a Comment
<< Home