Real Estate in Spring Lake NJ and the Jersey Shore

Real Estate in Spring Lake New Jersey is a very valuable commodity.  It’s one of the most exclusive New Jersey Communities and probably the most exclusive community by the New Jersey Shore.  The proximity to the beach make this small shore community a beautiful place to live or vacation.  The New Jersey Shore area is a relaxing and beautiful place. NJ Homes for sale are a good long term buy.  Homes for sale in NJ are good to have.

Search Homes For Sale in Spring Lake NJ

Search New Jersey Real Estate

Information on The Jersey Shore

On this website you will find resources on real estate in Spring Lake NJ and a tremendous amount of information.  We are interested in assisting anyone wishing to buy sell or rent property in Spring Lake NJ.

Spring Lake NJ AND Jersey Shore News

War over land

 


Thursday, November 16, 2006

By HEATHER KAYS
HERALD NEWS

 

LODI -- On Election Day, residents in 12 states were asked to vote on a ballot question on local government's use of eminent domain to seize private property.

Voters in 10 of those states approved eminent domain initiatives by overwhelming margins.

There is widespread interest in the property rights issue, because of ongoing cases in Lodi, Long Branch and elsewhere within the state. Although 34 states so far have approved referendums limiting the reach of eminent domain, New Jersey is not one of them.

The reason, according to both activists and officials, is that the state is already addressing the property rights issue. In order to have an eminent domain question on the ballot, state lawmakers would have had to adopt a resolution or 10 percent of voters would have to petition for the measure.

However, quietly, yet diligently, residents and legislators alike have worked toward eminent domain reform in the hope of protecting residents from government abuse of the land-claiming law in counter to a landmark U.S. Supreme Court ruling last year.

FAST FACTS

Voters around the nation on Election Day cast ballots on eminent domain referendums in 12 states. Here are the results:

Arizona – approved

California – rejected

Florida – approved

Georgia – approved

Idaho – rejected

Louisiana – approved

Michigan – approved

Nevada – approved

New Hampshire – approved

North Dakota – approved

Oregon – approved

South Carolina – approved

Source: Citizens Fighting Eminent Domain Abuse

But just as entrenched is the borough of Lodi, locked in a protracted eminent domain legal joust with 250 trailer park residents on two sites along heavily traveled Route 46, land considered prime for commercial and residential redevelopment.

"I am tired of hearing about it," Mayor Gary Paparozzi said. "In general, people have the wrong impression of eminent domain."

Paparozzi has led the borough's fight against the 250 trailer park residents in Costa Trailer Court and Brown's Trailer Park on Route 46. It is now up to the Appellate Division of state Superior Court to determine whether or not the parks are turned into an upscale senior housing complex and strip mall.

Kendall Kardt, the president of Save Our Homes, the group of 150 of the trailer park residents trying to prevent the borough from taking their homes through eminent domain, said that on some level he agrees with everyone, that is, except for Paparozzi.

"A lot of people are fighting for eminent domain reform not for the purpose of saving poor peoples' homes but rather their real interest is in undermining the government's ability to regulate land use period," said Kardt, who is a strident supporter of preserving private property rights.

The argument heard by the Supreme Court in Kelo v. New London, Conn., concerned the use of eminent domain to transfer land from one private owner to another for economic development. The high court in a 5-4 decision determined that the benefits a community received from economic growth qualified redevelopment plans as a permissible "public use" under the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment.

Nevertheless, the court's decision has been roundly criticized by public officials and property owners, as a violation of property rights and as a misinterpretation of the Fifth Amendment. Eminent domain opponents have also stated that the practice would benefit corporations at the expense of individual homeowners and local communities.

"Citizens around the nation agree that property rights must be protected in the wake of the Kelo decision," said Chip Mellor, president and general counsel of the Institute for Justice, which represented the homeowners in Kelo before the U.S. Supreme Court. "The state response has been historic, but Congress needs to act and offer federal protection as well."

In the Garden State, Public Advocate Ronald K. Chen, who has intervened in both the Bergen County borough of Lodi mobile home park case as well as the Jersey Shore city of Long Branch's case, has been a critic of local governments employing eminent domain.

Residents in both New Jersey municipalities are fighting against local town councils that are attempting to have the properties condemned, declared blighted and redeveloped by private developers.

This would effectively bring in more tax dollars for Lodi and Long Branch, at the expense of ousting residents, many of whom are poverty-stricken or ill, live on fixed incomes or have no other affordable place to go. Therein lies the rub in the hotly disputed debate, eminent domain critics say.

"I think it is clear that the public is concerned about the abuse of eminent domain," Chen said via e-mail, adding it would be inappropriate to comment on details of eminent domain issues in other areas including the 12 states who voted on the legality of eminent domain Nov. 7.

"Because the circumstances in each state differ, the proper response to the issues surrounding eminent domain may also differ," Chen said, "so the fact that we are addressing this issue through legislative reform and focused litigation, rather than ballot initiatives, should not be construed as inattention to those issues."

William J. Ward of Carlin and Ward, P.C. in Florham Park, whose legal practice has focused mostly on eminent domain condemnation cases, said more attention has been paid to state Senate hearings over the past few weeks as opposed to vying for a ballot question on property rights.

"The New Jersey Senate has recently been reviewing its eminent domain laws," Ward said. "So, New Jersey is addressing that issue."

The issue of eminent domain law reform has become skewed, Ward said.

"Developers are really misusing the public's outrage over eminent domain to justify their attempts to get rid of government regulations regarding land use," he said, adding that the eminent domain ballot questions in some of the 12 states would lead to many lawsuits against the government that would benefit the same developers who are currently taking advantage of residents.

"That's wrong," Ward concluded.

An example, he said, is Howard Rich, a wealthy Manhattan real estate owner and longtime supporter of Libertarian causes, who has donated millions to support eminent domain initiatives and other campaigns that could potentially curb government and strengthen private property rights.

"I am against the abuse of eminent domain," Ward said. "But I am not against all government land use regulations such as zoning laws. People like Rich are hiding behind the issue of eminent domain."

Regardless, some still feel Garden State residents have the right to express their opinions on Election Day about government use of eminent domain.

"Basically to leave it off the ballot is like ignoring the 500-pound gorilla in a room," said Maureen Nevin, 59, an independent journalist, Asbury Park radio talk show host and supporter of eminent domain abuse victims. "This issue goes to the heart of being an American. Owning a home is at the very core of the American dream."

Nevin said if government has the right to seize private property for redevelopment projects a homeowner is "really only renting. You're like a serf."

Nevertheless, Paparozzi says people don't seem to understand that a government official has to think about the community as a whole and not an individual group with so-called special interests.

"Do you think that in this day and age, on prime real estate, people should be living in a bus?" he asked. "I mean, to each their own, but honestly, people living on a bus on Route 46. You think that's normal? You don't think there's anything wrong with that?"

The urban nature of the borough, where developable land along the bustling Route 46 corridor is at a premium, makes the trailer parks crucial to expanding economic growth, the mayor said.

"Maybe in the backwoods somewhere or on a dead end it would be less of an issue," Paparozzi said. "But that's prime real estate along a highway."

But Kardt said state lawmakers should craft a statute to shield property owners and also to allow the question to be placed on the ballot to let the voters express their sentiment on the eminent domain issue.

"We suggested it, we asked for it, but we didn't have an active campaign fighting for it,' Kardt said, referring to having an eminent domain ballot question. "But if legislators don't come through and the laws aren't strengthened, maybe next year we will."

* * *

 

Timeline

As far back as 1982

The oceanfront city of Long Branch has been locked in a legal battle regarding eminent domain. The number of property rights cases has increased and the issue has become more heated over the last couple of years since the MTOTSA homeowners (short for the Marine Terrace, Ocean Terrace, and Seaview Avenue homeowners) have been fighting to keep the city from taking their homes using eminent domain. The case, which has captured national attention, would result in the homes being replaced by upscale condos as well as town houses.

Feb. 28, 2005

In a 3-1 vote, the Lodi Borough Council approved Lodi 46 Renewal LLC as the developer to demolish Costa Trailer Court and Brown's Trailer Park off Route 46 and replace the mobile homes with 12,000 square-feet of retail space and an upscale, gated senior apartment complex with a total of 242 units.

June 23, 2005

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in the Kelo v. the city of New London, Conn., case that local governments can seize property for private economic development if officials decide it would benefit the public. The eminent domain case again cast national attention to the issue.

Aug. 14, 2005

Save Our Homes, a group of 150 Lodi trailer park residents fighting the borough's efforts to take over the two properties by using eminent domain, holds one of its many fundraisers. The money raised at a dinner dance was used to pay legal fees after Save Our Homes hired an attorney to take the borough on in state Superior Court. Save Our Homes joined the lawsuit already filed by the trailer park owners.

Sept. 22, 2005

Trailer park residents finally get their day in court after fearing for months that they may be evicted from their homes through eminent domain proceedings. Superior Court Judge Richard Donahue heard arguments from Michael Kates, the attorney for Save Our Homes, David Bole, attorney for owners of Costa Trailer Court, Jan Brody who represented the owner of Brown's Trailer Park, and several attorneys that represented the borough.

Oct. 7, 2005

Residents rejoice after Donahue rules in their favor. The Superior Court judge, presiding in Hackensack, said the borough did not provide sufficient evidence that the trailer park sites should be condemned and they did not offer a specific enough redevelopment plan. Borough officials appealed the decision.

June 22, 2006

Assignment Judge Lawrence M. Lawson ruled in the city's favor in the Long Branch case, determining that the city's actions were authorized under law. Since the Lawson decision, the residents have appealed to the state appellate court.

Aug. 30, 2006

The Arlington Va.,-based Institute for Justice joined the MTOTSA homeowners and their attorney, Peter Wegener of Bathgate, in filing an appeal with the Appellate Division of state Superior Court.

 

.

Tip #19

Home Buying Tip, Online Searching:
Searching online is a very effective way to look for real estate in New Jersey, or anywhere for that matter.  Good websites allow you to search through multiple MLS’s so you can cover a wide range.  For example here you can Search for NJ Real Estate.

After you find the house you are interested in you can inquiry with the real estate agency to find out more information or to arrange an appointment to view the house.

 

Tip #18

Home Selling Tip, Targeting Out Of State:
When you sell your home you sometimes have to put yourself in the potential buyers’ shoes.  In New Jersey many home buyers are from the surrounding area, like New York or Pennsylvania.

Knowing this can allow your agent to market your house more effectively.   If he/she will advertise in a New York publication they can describe the proximity to NY.  This allows your potential Buyer Base to expand.

NJ Homes for Sale

Homes For Sale in Spring Lake NJ