Updated: March 16, 2005 3:30PM 

Hoboken residents question eminent domain for private gain

     In case you missed it, the hot topic of discussion at the March 15, 2006 Hoboken City Council meeting was the City’s attempt to use eminent domain for what many consider to be PRIVATE GAIN. 

     During most of the 4 hour marathon meeting, resident after resident passionately addressed Council members objecting to the City’s plan to seize the two operating businesses on the west side of Grand between 10th  and 11th Street through eminent domain.  The properties would then be turned over to a private developer who plans to build 150 condos. 

     When all was said and done, it appeared that yet another issue had once again emerged pitting resident-voters against their elected representatives.  In sharp contrast, while some Councilpersons expressed varying degrees of comfort with the City’s plan, not one of the resident speakers condoned the City’s use of eminent domain. 

A City Ordinance to RESTRICT the use of eminent domain for PRIVATE GAIN?

     On November 8, 2005, the voters of the Borough of Bogota, New Jersey approved a City ordinance to enact provisions consistent with the will of the voters to protect the interests of the Borough’s property owners and occupants, voters, and taxpayers now and in future years.

     The local ordinance, the only one of its kind in New Jersey, bans condemnation of private property for private development to increase tax revenues.

     The referendum was spearheaded by Bogota Mayor Steve Lonegan, in response to the Supreme Court's ruling earlier this year that allowed New London, Conn., to condemn homes for private development because it provided an economic benefit to the town.

     Historically, governments have used eminent domain to condemn private land for public use, such as schools and highways. But in recent decades, that use has expanded.

     In New Jersey, where at least 64 towns have declared areas in need of redevelopment, opening the way for eminent domain, condemnation law allows towns to take land for private development when the area in question is considered "blighted" or "underutilized."

     The Bogota ordinance limits condemnation of private properties to cases in which the land will be opened to the public or for public use.

What steps can Hoboken take to RESTRICT the use of eminent domain for PRIVATE GAIN?

     The Hoboken City Council has the power to protect the citizens of Hoboken with a restrictive eminent domain City Ordinance.  The best scenario would be for the Council to introduce and enact a restrictive eminent domain City Ordinance.  While the prospects of a Councilperson stepping up and sponsoring the legislation may be questionable at this time, the City Council also has the option of  following the lead of Bogota and putting the question before the voters.

     If all else fails and the City Council refuses to enact a restrictive eminent domain ordinance, there is little doubt that a citizens group will step forward and force the issue into binding referendum.  

Just the tip of the Iceberg?  

     The outrage and concern over the City's eminent domain policies appears to have spread to other parts of the City. 

     Several residents living in the Observer Highway area on the City's southern boundary also expressed their concerns and fears during the Council meeting.  The area encompasses the Hoboken Municipal Garage complex and the Neuman Leather Building, both slated for potential redevelopment action by the City. 

     Like the residents of the Northern Redevelopement District, the Observer Highway residents were questioning the City's plan and the potential use of eminent domain in their neighborhood. 

Doomsday scenario?

     Unless this matter is addressed and put to rest in a timely fashion, expect  to see "eminent domain" and the associated accusations of "Pay to Play" influences become major campaign issues in May 2007 Council elections.  In that election, six of the nine currently serving Hoboken City Council members will face re-election.

 

 PDF Bogota Ordinance on Eminent Domain 

BOROUGH OF BOGOTA

ORDINANCE NO. 1296

Amending the Revised General Ordinances of the Borough of Bogota to Include a New Section in Chapter II, Titled “Eminent Domain”


     WHEREAS, on November 8, 2005, the voters of the Borough of Bogota (“Borough”) approved the following public question by a vote of 1408 “yes” to 293 “no:” “Shall the Mayor and Council of the Borough of Bogota adopt an ordinance stating the Borough will not use the power of eminent domain to acquire private property, against the wishes of the property owner, for private development to increase tax ratables or tax revenue derived from the property, and that this power only will be used to acquire private property: (1) when the property is to be opened to the public or for the public’suse, or (2) when the acquisition is necessary to eliminate an existing use of the property that inflicts an affirmative harm on society”; and
 
     WHEREAS, the purpose of this ordinance is to enact provisions consistent with the will of the voters to protect the interests of the Borough’s property owners and occupants, voters, and taxpayers now and in future years.

     NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Mayor and Council of the Borough of Bogota as follows:

     Section 1:  A new Section 2-29 shall be added to the Revised General Ordinances of the Borough of Bogota, titled Eminent Domain,” which shall state as follows:

           2-29.1. Purpose.

     The purpose of this ordinance is to implement the following public question that, on November 8, 2005, was approved by the voters of the Borough of Bogota by a vote of 1408 “yes” to 293 “no:” “Shall the Mayor and Council of the Borough of Bogota adopt an ordinance stating the Borough will not use the power of eminent domain to acquire private property, against the wishes of the property owner, for private development to increase tax ratables or tax revenue derived from the property, and that this power onlywill be used to acquire private property: (1) when the property is to be opened to the public or for the public’s use, or (2) when the acquisition is necessary to eliminate an existing use of the property that inflicts an affirmative harm on society?”  The Mayor and Council adopted a resolution asking this question of the public because, on June 23, 2005, the United States Supreme Court decided the case of Kelo v. City of New London, 125 S. Ct. 2655 (2005).  The Court’s 5 to 4 majority affirmed the use of the governmental power to condemn property, known as eminent domain, to acquire privately-owned property against the owner’s will, and then transfer the property to a developer for private redevelopment, only because the proposed redevelopment will provideincreased tax revenue.  The principal dissenting opinion, authored, by Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, would permit governments to condemn and then transfer condemned property to private parties in only two circumstances: when (as with railroads) the property is to be opened to the public’s use, or when the condemnation is necessary to eliminate an existing use of the property that “inflict[s] affirmative harm on society.”  Accordingly, the Mayor and Council adopted a resolution asking the legal voters of theBorough to express their views on a proposed ordinance that would limit the Borough’s power to condemn and acquire property, as suggested by the dissenting Justices in the Kelocase. 


       2-29.2. Definitions.  In this Section 2-28 the  following definitions shall apply:

          Borough -means the Borough of Bogota.

          Eminent Domain -means the power of the Borough, whether authorized by statute, rule or regulation, or otherwise, to take or acquire private property and put it to public use through the legal process called condemnation.
     
          Mayor and Council -means the duly elected mayor and council of the Borough.

        2-29.3. Limitation on the Power of Eminent Domain.

        The Mayor and Council of the Borough shall not adopt an ordinance or resolution using the Borough’s power of eminent domain to acquire private property against the wishes of the property owner for private development to increase tax ratables or tax revenue derived from the property, and this power only will be used by the Borough to acquire privateproperty: (1) when the property is to be opened to the public or for the public’s use, or (2) when the acquisition is necessary to eliminate an existing use of the property that inflicts an affirmative harm on society. 

        Section 2:  All ordinances or partsof ordinances that are inconsistent with the provisions of this ordinance are hereby repealed, but only to the extent of any inconsistencies.

        Section 3:  The provisions of this ordinance are severable.  If any part of this ordinance is declared to be unconstitutional or invalid by any court, the remaining parts of this ordinance will remain in full force and effect.
       
        Section 4:  This ordinance shall take effect upon final approval and publication, according to law.


Introduced and passed first reading:
Passed second reading: