In a panel discussion at Monmouth University this week, former Justice James Zazzali provided some commentary on the Gallenthin opinion he authored as well as the future of redevelopment:

“There can be little question that the exercise of eminent domain has received a bad name lately,” said Zazzali, author of the state Supreme Court decision.  The jurist described himself as “somewhere in between” builders who support the use of eminent domain, and critics of the power.  As for the question of redevelopment and its link to eminent domain, he said: “Maybe some might call it a mess. I do not.” 

Despite a growing public perception that individual property rights were being “trampled” in some redevelopment cases, “we did not voice an opinion about whether redevelopment was good or bad,” said the chief justice.

“There are restraints in the exercise of the authority. “In my view, the court acted appropriately” in deciding Gallenthin in a way that provides a measure of protection to property owners,” Zazzali said. “The court did not decide what sort of redevelopment was appropriate,” and is neither driven by pro- or anti-redevelopment forces, he said. 

“At the end of the day, redevelopment and eminent domain can still play a valuable role in the revitalization of the urban landscape,” Zazzali said.  Requiring more than a cursory report to prove an area is blighted “will in all likelihood reduce the number of redevelopment projects,” Zazzali conceded. “The answer is not to abandon redevelopment in these areas. . . . If we do it right, it can be a win-win-win situation for developers, municipalities and their citizens. I plead for cooperation and conciliation.”

For the full article from the Asbury Park Press, click here.