State of New Jersey
Department Of The Public Advocate
240 West State St.
P.O. Box  851  
Trenton, NJ 08625-0851
Phone: (609) 826-5090    Fax: (609) 984-4747
JON S. CORZINE
Governor

For Immediate Release: 
July 24, 2007		 RONALD K. CHEN
Public Advocate

Contact: Nancy Parello:
609-826-5054
     609-815-0531 (cell)

If a town wants to declare an area blighted, it must produce substantial evidence to support that decision, under an Appellate Division ruling handed down today.

Merely citing superficial flaws, such as overgrown grass or chipping paint, is not enough to prove an area is blighted and to seize private property through eminent domain so it can be developed by a private entity, the court ruled.

The case centered on two trailer parks located on about 20 acres along the south side of Route 46 in Lodi.

“This decision is consistent with the recent Supreme Court ruling that held that local governments overstepped their authority when declaring certain areas blighted,” said Public Advocate Ronald K. Chen, whose department had filed an amicus brief and presented oral arguments in the Lodi case.

The Public Advocate is also involved in other eminent domain cases: two in Long  Branch, which are still pending, and another in Paulsboro, in which the New Jersey Supreme Court recently issued a decision.

That decision, which is cited in the Lodi ruling, essentially said that for municipalities to declare an area blighted, that area must be deteriorated or stagnant and harmful to the surrounding community. It is not enough merely to show that a property can be put to a better use. Recent rulings involving cases in Newark, Belmar and Hackensack also relied heavily on the Paulsboro decision.

The Lodi ruling also makes it clear that if the town fails to produce substantial evidence of blight, then its decision is no longer entitled to the deference typically afforded local government actions, Chen said.

The case in Lodi began last year when Superior Court Judge Richard Donahue in Bergen County ruled that the borough had not acted properly when it condemned the properties. The borough appealed the Superior Court decision earlier this year to the Appellate Division.

Since then, new leaders were elected in Lodi. The borough council voted recently to withdraw the appeal, but the court issued the decision before a formal motion to withdraw was made to the court.

Chen said he will continue to push for more comprehensive reforms to New Jersey’s redevelopment laws. While the recent court wins have addressed a primary concern by narrowing the definition of blight, other problematic areas remain.

“These court rulings are a victory for the rights of property owners across the state,” Chen said. “But people should not have to fight these battles in court. The other remedies—fair notice and hearings, adequate compensation and relocation assistance – should be addressed through comprehensive legislative reform.”

Read the Lodi decision.