Legislature should curb eminent domain

It's the little guy that needs protection from the government, and that's what the true issue in the New Jersey eminent domain abuse cases is all about.

The New Jersey Supreme Court has ruled it was OK for Mount Laurel to use eminent domain against a "for profit" developer.

The developer had obtained approvals to build 23 homes on 16 acres of land.

The builders league would like to frighten the private property owners to action on behalf of builders and developers, while all along they have been threatened by the very same group.

I am a property owner fighting eminent domain in a development called Broadway Arts Center in Long Branch. I see it differently and cannot agree with the builders league.

For one, the builder in the Mount Laurel case does not live on the 16 acres. He wants to make money off the open land. The municipality there wants to preserve it.

To ensure the public's interest in that 16 acres, the deed of the property once transferred into the city's name should reflect that these lands shall remain protected as open space for all to enjoy and at no time into the future shall they ever be converted to housing or commercial use. The deed should be restricted and the courts should have mandated that.

The Schneider Administration was confronted a number of years ago in regard to a parcel of preserved natural habitat land called the "Ranch." The city balked at preserving it as open space, while all the citizens of Long Branch requested it. Schneider could have used his powers of eminent domain in that matter, but he refused to.

However, in populated beachfront homes he cut down the taxpaying, multigenerational families with no thought, and many misleading remarks through the approval process in the 1990s.

The Long Branch use of eminent domain is actually an abuse of eminent domain.

Less than 10 percent of the state of New Jersey agrees with the Schneider use of eminent domain against perfectly good properties that are in great condition and occupied, many for 40-plus years.

Presently there are 30 some-odd single-family homes in the MTOTSA [Marine Terrace, Ocean Terrace and Seaview Avenue] area, that the Schneider plan wants to demolish and replace with close to 200 luxury condos. This after already adding over 500 new townhouses and high-end apartments in the same area.

It seems a little peculiar to me that eminent domain on one end is OK to apply to preserve open space and thwart high-density sprawl, while on the other hand, it is just as valid to remove 30 homes to replace them with 200. This oxymoron in and of itself should have the Legislature realizing that the application of eminent domain for development purposes is not what the Founding Fathers intended.

New Jersey needs to roll the clock back and only permit the use of eminent domain for roads, schools, bridges, preservation and real public use and operated projects.

As for the developer who lost in the Mount Laurel case, they will locate another project and build and make a profit.

As for the elderly citizens in MTOTSA and myself on lower Broadway, the chances of us replacing what may be taken by the Schneider eminent domain plans, with the paltry offers we are made, is slim.

Let's not forget Bruce MacCloud, whose 17-room Victorian home was seized in 2002 for $140,000. He protested the amount and got an appraisal of $630,000, yet he is homeless and his compensation trial keeps getting postponed.

If the New Jersey Legislature does not protect the little people in the state, then the little people should vote them out of office next November, when every Assembly and Senate seat is up for grabs.

As for Mr. Schneider, I think it's time for him to retire, even if he needs to be recalled to motivate that decision.

Kevin Brown

Long Branch