Eminent domain deadline comes, but family stays put...

[Planogirl]

found it.

http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=...&ll=40.547404,-74.439615&spn=0.005046,0.01339

Based on what I'm seeing around that property, I think that any type of farm might have been history. That is one crowded area.

 

[NewJersey]

That is one crowded area.

Ah, welcome to Middlesex County.

 

[Teejay32]

...so the town gets built up around this old property, and they ran out of space, so they need this piece of property...?

If I've gotten that right, it's kinda ridiculous.

 

[Charade]

]...so the town gets built up around this old property, and they ran out of space, so they need this piece of property...? [/B]

If I've gotten that right, it's kinda ridiculous.

Pretty much.

 

[Teejay32]

hey look, there's more...

In court decisions issued over the last seven years, the township won the right to take possession of the property, but the family has disputed the amount of money it should be paid. In 1999, the Halpers were given close to $4.4 million, which township officials estimated was the land's value then. The Halpers said they were due at least $12.9 million, the amount of an appraisal announced last year.

The state Supreme Court ruled the money must be left in the bank untouched pending an appeal with the township on the value of the farm.

ETA: from an amicus brief filed in a related case to the Ohio Supreme Court:

In New Jersey, the Halper family lost its 75-acre farm in Piscataway Township after fighting township officials for six years. (Diane Walsh, "Appeals Court Awards Halper Acreage to Piscataway," The Star-Ledger, March 23, 2004.) During that time, the township cited a string of unrelated uses for the property, including use as open space, a park, or for private development. (Id.; "Piscataway Proceeds With Condemnation Of Farm," SierraActivist.org, April 2, 2004.) Even as the Halpers lost their farm, three government officials were indicted for their role in allegedly "shaking down" the Halpers for campaign contributions in exchange for allowing them to keep their land. (Diane Walsh and Suleman Din, "Middlesex County Counsel Says He Is One Of The Officials Named," The Star-Ledger, July 8, 2004.)

1 source I found backed this up, from morelaw.com

Description:

Piscataway Township sued Mark Halper, et al. on an eminent domain theory to acquire all rights, title and interested of the defendants in a 75-acre farm that they owned that was taken by the Township on September 3, 2004. Defendant landowners claimed that the farm had a fair market value of $23 million. The Township claimed that the fair market value was $13.6 million. The Township sought to acquire the property to be developed into 133 lots for single-family home.

 

[BuckNaked]

Yeah, I don't feel sorry for that oh so poor developer who wants to turn a 30 acre plot into yet another strip mall, or another set of overpriced McMansions.

Then why shouldn't the county compete in the open market to buy the land?

I wonder if you'll be so cavalier about property rights when you actually own property...

 

[barkley]

This is such a slippery slope and we're already seeing the effects of it. In Texas, communities are starting to use eminent domain fdr commercial reasons such as a mall or a Wal-Mart all in the name of giving the area an economic boost. People are fighting back against such nonsense but it's difficult.

So where does such reasoning end? What will people who call this farm a blight say when their community decides to build a road through their backyard or throws them off their property so that Wal-Mart can build another location?

we have a neighboring city wherein eminent domaine is being used to keep walmart OUT. a family owns a peice of open land that is zoned for commercial. they entered into a lease with option to purchase with walmart. the "city" does'nt want "that kind of elemement" in their community so after they lost all their court battles to block it they pulled out eminent domaine to seize the property.

 

[NewJersey]

Then why shouldn't the county compete in the open market to buy the land?

I wonder if you'll be so cavalier about property rights when you actually own property...

Good point and I agree they should. Will they? Probably not. But I enjoy when eminent domain is used against things like Wal-Mart, as people have posted on here.

 

[noodleknitter]

Then why shouldn't the county compete in the open market to buy the land?

I wonder if you'll be so cavalier about property rights when you actually own property...

No kidding!

Emminent Domain is wrong. Pure and simple. I hope each of the advocates has to deal with it at some point. I have. We fought and won to keep my in-laws farm. It was "needed" to make a sweetheart deal for a stupid company that people wanted in the area.

 

[BuckNaked]

Good point and I agree they should. Will they? Probably not. But I enjoy when eminent domain is used against things like Wal-Mart, as people have posted on here.

Got it. So you enjoy the notion of the government taking someone's private property so long as it damages someone or something you don't like.

We'll see how you feel if it used against you or something you do care about someday.

 

[noodleknitter]

One other point...My in-laws discovered that there was an issue re. their land when the saw it on a map on the local news. It was shown as the area that this company was going to relocate.

 

[BuckNaked]

No kidding!

Emminent Domain is wrong. Pure and simple. I hope each of the advocates has to deal with it at some point. I have. We fought and won to keep my in-laws farm. It was "needed" to make a sweetheart deal for a stupid company that people wanted in the area.

I won't say I'm against imminent domain in all cases. I think there are cases where it is necessary, i.e., public transportation, the public good, etc.

But for "open spaces"? Please If the government wants open spaces, then let them offer enough money that the property owner will sell. And to use it to keep a property owner from selling to whom they want to sell (Wal-Mart seems to be the favorite whipping boy at this point) is just wrong, IMO.

 

[noodleknitter]

Fair enough. We live in a rural area, and between issues like this, and the National Forest hovering like a vulture over us, I get a bit paranoid!

 

[Belle1962]

"They" will probably be going after Walton's Mountain next.

 

[MareQ]

...so the town gets built up around this old property, and they ran out of space, so they need this piece of property...?

If I've gotten that right, it's kinda ridiculous.

Yup. Here in NW NJ another town tried the same thing to another family farm as they needed to build a new high school. It eventually fell through but it was silly to begin with and everybody felt so much for that poor family and all they went through.

The town RAPIDLY became "overpopulated" in a very short period of time due to several very large home building projects that built 100's of new homes in a very short period. The TOWN knew what was going on - they were issuing all those construction permits - they knew there as going to be an issue with the schools very shortly - yet they did not prepare themselves. Their solution was to go after a large piece of property with ED (As all the other pieces of property that would have been suitable had long been sold off and developed in this expansion) to help themselves out of the problem they themselves created. Caused a huge uproar... now they are forced to expand on their current high school which they didn't want to do for some reason - oh well for them.

 

[ducklite]

Yup. Here in NW NJ another town tried the same thing to another family farm as they needed to build a new high school. It eventually fell through but it was silly to begin with and everybody felt so much for that poor family and all they went through.

The town RAPIDLY became "overpopulated" in a very short period of time due to several very large home building projects that built 100's of new homes in a very short period. The TOWN knew what was going on - they were issuing all those construction permits - they knew there as going to be an issue with the schools very shortly - yet they did not prepare themselves. Their solution was to go after a large piece of property with ED (As all the other pieces of property that would have been suitable had long been sold off and developed in this expansion) to help themselves out of the problem they themselves created. Caused a huge uproar... now they are forced to expand on their current high school which they didn't want to do for some reason - oh well for them.

Was this the mess in North Brunswick with the Otken farm? For those not aware of this one, the Otken family had a farm which was about 100 acres that they wanted to subdivide and sell to developers. The property was zoned industrial with a grandfather clause for agriculture. The Otkens wanted a zoning change so that the property could have 400 single family homes built on it by US Home (A division of Lennar). The town refused, partially due to concerns about already over capacity schools. Ultimately the town took the land for open space to prevent any development. IMHO they could have simply refused the rezoning and building permits to avoid a costly legal battle. In that case the Otken property was not derelict and a hazardous nuisance like the Halper property was. I did not believe that the town acted properly with teh Otkens.

The politics in North Brunswick are so ridiculous that the last election I was eligible to vote in there I wrote in "Dead Squirrel" as my mayoral vote. In all honesty I figured a dead squirrel would be more intelligent and fester less.

Back to the point. If it is NB you are talking about. the approval of the debacle known as "Renassaince" was very much to blame for the overcrowding in the schools, as was the project that went in on 130 on the southwest side of Adams Station that was supposed to be owner occupied condos and they ultimately ended up renting them out as apartments because they couldn't sell them, which was not what they were zoned or approved for?

Anne

 

[MareQ]

Was this the mess in North Brunswick with the Otken farm?

Anne

No this was in NW NJ - Sparta Township to be exact. The farm they were trying to seize was not from a family that was trying to sell the land to be developed. They wanted to just continue on with their life and keep their land. The town wanted the land because there were no other appropriate large parcels of land left for them to use or buy to build a new high school. All of the other appropriate pieces of land that were available for sale had been snapped up and built on by developers already. The township didn't prepare themselves buy buying one of those available parcels so they tried to take one from somebody that was unwilling to give up their property.It fell through at the very end and the family was able to keep their farm.

 

[Planogirl]

I also see nothing wrong with government entities purchasing land for parks and other facilities. But they should have to compete on the open market and pay fair market value. The Nature Conservancy has being doing this for years. If they can cut a good deal, more power to them but I can't support just taking the property and certainly not paying well below market value against the owners' wishes.

 

[BuckNaked]

I also see nothing wrong with government entities purchasing land for parks and other facilities. But they should have to compete on the open market and pay fair market value. The Nature Conservancy has being doing this for years. If they can cut a good deal, more power to them but I can't support just taking the property and certainly not paying well below market value against the owners' wishes.

ITA and well said!

 

[Geoff_M]

I happened to hear the story on Hannity's program yesterday....

For starters, emminent domain should not be a rememdy for an "eye sore". If there are health concerns there are laws that can deal with environmental issues, demolitions can be ordered for unsafe structures, etc.

The family has been put in an unfair situation. As pointed out, all money related to the seizure is locked away under court order until the case is resolved via appeal... but the eviction has been allowed to proceed. So unless the family wishes to drop its claim, it'll be forced off of their property without the financial means to acquire a new property. If the money has been locked up pending appeal, then the eviction should also be placed on hold. The family has been placed in a legal squeeze play... accept the lower figure now, or live with nothing until all the appeals are completed at some time down the road.

As pointed out, the property won't be legally restricted for open space. The city could opt to flip the property to commercial development in the future if it wishes... at a nice premium, no doubt.

Also, even as an open space it will benefit commerical development as it will then count towards development-to-green space set-aside legal requirements. Additional green space = additional allowable commercial development elsewhere in the city. The family's lawyer stated that such development will financially benefit political friends of the city administration.

The lawyer also mentioned an attempted extorsion that occured with the condemation. A figure approached the family early in the process and said that if money were paid to certain politically connected people, the family's money problems would "go away". An investigation resulted in an indictment and a later plea bargin with the individual. People locally may think the place "smells", but it appears that a lot of the condemnation also stinks to high heaven.