Paulsboro case could impact landowner rights statewide

RELEASE: April 20, 2007 – Volume XXXVII, No. 16

New Jersey’s Supreme Court will soon hear a case that, depending on its outcome, could severely undermine our growing knowledge and understanding of the value of open space.

The case is Gallenthin Realty Development, Inc. v. Borough of Paulsboro, and it involves a 63-acre parcel of land along the Delaware River and bordered by Mantua Creek. Although the owners expressed their desire to develop the property in the future, it is currently undeveloped.

Paulsboro Borough decided to condemn the Gallenthin tract under the ‘blight’ provision of the Local Redevelopment and Housing Law, based on little evidence – the opinion of their planner, backed by one report, that this and other adjacent undeveloped parcels would be more beneficial to the community if they were developed and generated higher local tax revenues. The Appellate Division upheld this decision.

The stakes could not be higher. Under the Appellate Division’s interpretation all undeveloped land in the State, including forests and fallow farmland, would be subject to condemnation and development.

This is a shockingly dated view of the value of land. Historically, tax revenue was only one of several numerical measures of land value, but today there is an increasing body of knowledge about the comparative values of natural land versus development, and the real economic benefits of open space.

For example, a study by Burlington County’s Office of Land Use Planning, found new residential units in Mansfield required $1.48 for services for every tax dollar generated. In contrast, farmland costs only $0.27 in services for every tax dollar generated. In other words, residential development is a net LOSS to the municipal budget – costing between $1.04 and $1.67 in services for every new $1 in taxes by some estimates. And service costs continue in perpetuity, becoming more-and-more expensive.

Open space also adds value through harder-to-quantify environmental benefits and services – things like drinking water purification, air purity, controlling flooding and providing habitat for wildlife. A 2004 study by the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection’s Division of Science, Research and Technology estimated these services to be worth at least $140 million statewide, based on what it would cost to have environmental services done by artificial means.

In fact, these public values are recognized – even if not as neatly quantified – to the point that federal and state governments have at least 13 separate programs to provide landowner incentives for enhancing the natural resource value of their land.

Even if you are not a fan of land conservation, this case should send a chill down your spine. Whether it was pre-Revolutionary War British kings or post-World War II communist economic plans, taking land through condemnation in the U.S. is not done lightly. The Appellate court ruling expresses a philosophy fundamentally contrary to the American values of individual freedom and rights. Perhaps Paulsboro wishes to store its tea on the Gallenthin property…

Almost 40 percent of New Jersey’s total acreage is developed and an additional 20 percent is public open space. Privately-owned, undeveloped land like the Gallenthin tract is the largest portion of the remaining 40 percent. This is the kind of land that will determine the fate of New Jersey’s quality of life over the next few decades as we reach full ‘build out.’

Unless the Supreme Court intervenes, open spaces in New Jersey would be open to government seizure for new development. The high court must overturn this dangerous precedent, protect New Jersey’s open spaces and restore sanity to the use of eminent domain. I hope you’ll contact me at info@njconservation.org, or visit NJCF’s website at www.njconservation.org, for more information about conserving New Jersey’s precious land and natural resources.

Return to SWI Columns