The Public Advocate and its Division of Public Interest Advocacy have worked to reform the laws that govern the use of eminent domain for private redevelopment. These reforms would ensure that the law prevents abuse and better protects the rights of tenants and property owners.  

We began our work on this project by conducting thorough legal and policy research, and engaging in extensive outreach to government officials, experts and citizens affected by eminent domain.  

In May 2006, the Public Advocate released Reforming the Use of Eminent Domain for Private Redevelopment in New Jersey, which offers a roadmap for reform.  In May 2007, the department issued a follow-up report, In Need of Redevelopment: Repairing New Jersey’s Eminent Domain Laws, that documented evidence of eminent domain abuse throughout the state.  In November 2008 we released a report, Evicted from the American Dream: The Redevelopment Mount Holly Gardens, focused on inadequate compensation and relocation assistance and the loss of affordable housing during redevelopment.  

The Public Advocate has been working closely with lawmakers to enact the key legislative reforms outlined in our reports. Those efforts resulted in the Assembly’s overwhelming passage of A-3257 in June 2006 by a margin of 51 to 18. A parallel bill, S2088, stalled in the Senate. 

Three eminent domain reform bills were intoduced in the legislature on January 8, 2008.  The Senate bills are S757, sponsored by Senate Ronald Rice, and S559, sponsored by Senators Steven Sweeney and Barbara Buono.  They were combined into Senate Committee Substitute bill for S559 and S757, which was voted out of the Senate Community and Urban Affairs Committee on June 19, 2008.  Assembly bill A1492, identical to S559, was introduced in the Assembly Commerce and Economic Development Committee on January 8, 2008.  A1492 was sponsored by Assembly members John Burzichelli, Nilsa Cruz-Perez, Douglas H. Fisher and Pamela R. Lampitt.  That bill remains in committee.  The Legislature now has a chance to enact a real reform law.

This latest comprehensive eminent domain reform bill is endorsed by the Public Advocate and Governor Corzine. 

S757/559 would tighten the definition of blight, ensure better notice to affected citizens, require a more transparent redevelopment process, provide homeowners with a meaningful opportunity to contest the taking of their homes and provide adequate compensation when homes are taken. 

The Public Advocate maintains that any reform bill must address the fundamental concerns of the definition of blight, adequate due process and fair compensation.  

The Public Advocate has also endorsed the legislative adoption of rules forbidding “pay to play” practices in the context of redevelopment activities.  Broadly defined, “pay to play” refers to the practice of awarding redevelopment contracts and redevelopment-related work to people and companies that have made campaign contributions to officials involved in awarding the contracts.  Existing laws restrict the amount of money that a redeveloper can directly contribute.  However, current laws fail to address ways in which these restrictions can be circumvented.
 
To address this problem, the Public Advocate has drafted and supported the adoption of legislation that would expand the kinds of contributions that are prohibited.  The draft legislation would invalidate any redevelopment contract signed in violation of the law.  And if the violation were knowing, purposeful, or reckless, the redeveloper and those involved in making or receiving illegal contributions could be prosecuted under the criminal laws.  The redeveloper could also be disqualified for up to four years from entering into other redevelopment contracts anywhere in the State.  In addition, private citizens would have the right to bring civil actions to enforce these laws.               

By comprehensively addressing what kinds of contributions are prohibited, and by providing government and citizens with the tools to enforce these laws, the Public Advocate’s draft legislation would meet the challenge of stopping the unseemly flow of political contributions that can taint redevelopment projects. 

Click here to read the draft legislation.

In the absence of legislative reforms, the Public Advocate has also filed “friend of the court” briefs in four eminent domain cases in New Jersey. They are:  LBK Assocs. v. Borough of Lodi, City of Long Branch v. Anzalone, City of Long Branch v. Brower, Harrison Redevelopment Agency v. DeRose, and Gallenthin Realty Development v. Borough of Paulsboro.  Each case was strategically chosen because it exposed fundamental flaws in the current laws governing the use of eminent domain.  In each of these cases, the court adopted the main reforms recommended by the Public Advocate.

Read a summary of eminent domain cases in which the Public Advocate has filed briefs