Court Ruling Adds Wrinkle to Redevelopment Plan

A recent court decision will presumably make it even harder for the township to exercise eminent domain for the purposes of redevelopment—if it ever comes to that.

Solicitor John Gillespie cited an Appellate Division ruling earlier this month that states an area—even an area deemed in need of redevelopment—must be found to be blighted in order for a governing body to invoke eminent domain.

Prior to the Appellate Division decision, areas that met any of the seven criteria for redevelopment—per state statute—were automatically blighted, Gillespie explained Monday. “The case law says, ‘No, that’s not right.’”

Under the new ruling, an area is only considered blighted—and therefore, subject to eminent domain—if it is in such a state of “deterioration or stagnation that it negatively affects the surrounding area,” Gillespie said.

Using that definition, the areas deemed in need of redevelopment by the planning board in April—all along Route 130—are not currently open to eminent domain, since the board did not address blight in any of its findings. However, Gillespie explained that township committee could remand those areas back to the planning board and ask for a determination of blight—assuming the township wants to keep eminent domain as one of the “arrows in its quiver,” he said.

Although members of township committee have previously stated they don’t have plans to use eminent domain for redevelopment, Mayor Ben Young said Monday it remains “one of the tools in the toolbox.”

Committeeman John McCarthy questioned whether certain properties within a redevelopment area that don’t meet the definition of blight—i.e. Riggins—could be taken out of the eminent domain conversation, even if other properties within the same area were found to be blighted.

Gillespie said yes, a finding of blight could be broken down lot by lot. On the other hand, the township could also decree an entire area as blighted, even if individual properties within that area are not, he added.

“There is a way you could find that the area is so stagnant that it constitutes blight, but have within that area a piece of it that isn’t itself blight, and you could still use eminent domain,” he said. “Anything in that area could be fair game … I don’t know that we necessarily want to be the ones to run that field. But conceptually, that could happen.”

By the same token, if the planning board finds an area does not meet the criteria for blight, eminent domain would be off the table—though the area could still be deemed a redevelopment zone. 

Deputy Mayor Anthony Minniti said the township has tread in these waters before. A large section of the Route 130 corridor was previously deemed a redevelopment zone, he explained, and there were a mix of properties within that zone—some blighted, some not. Many of the unblighted properties—Chang Karate, Hathaway’s, Sleep Inn—remain.

Minniti urged committee to steer away from targeting individual properties.

“I personally prefer the approach of designating zones,” he said. “I don’t think any governing body or planning board wants to be accused of targeting individual property owners, by saying, ‘OK, yours is blighted; you’re next door, you’re not.’”

Minniti again reiterated his feelings on the benefits of redevelopment, describing it as having a “stimulative effect.”

“Once we get beyond this specter of eminent domain that everyone is concerned about … the benefits of being in a redevelopment area far outweigh any negatives that could come with something that may or may not be feasible down the road,” he said.

Gillespie said there's legislation pending that would make it even more difficult for a governing body to include eminent domain as a redevelopment tool. 

Committee will vote at its June 17 regular meeting to send the matter to the planning board, which holds its next meeting on June 25.