July 6, 2007 - 2:14pm
News

Torricelli on Mount Laurel

The most driving legal force in our society has always been the law of unintended consequences.   The New Jersey Supreme Court in its Mt. Laurel decision intended to provide equal access to housing. The more immediate impact was to worsen the problem of suburban sprawl as every community sought to accommodate every income category.   In Abbott the Court decided that equal opportunity in education was synonymous with equivalent tax expenditures among all students and a generation chased dollars instead of accountability in our schools.   Last week the NJ Supreme Court made the point again. In limiting the ability of communities to use eminent domain for redevelopment purposes the Court intended to preserve a founding constitutional principle  involving the sanctity of private property. The reality is that a miracle of urban redevelopment that is rescuing thousands of our citizens from urban blight is in jeopardy.   A tidal wave of redevelopment has transformed deteriorating neighborhoods in Boston, Chicago, Baltimore and New York into vibrant communities. That wave has hit New Brunswick and may be ready of transform Newark, Trenton and Camden. The Court "rescued" us just in time.   Now it won't be enough to prove that an area "is in need of redevelopment" and is not being used for its "optimal manner". It's a good thing that New York didn't have this Court when it cleaned up Times Square or Maryland when Baltimore rebuilt the inner harbor. Plaintiffs in those cases could have argued that their lands were economically productive and that the owners had a right to resist better uses.   How about the right of children attending schools that need tax dollars from the more optimum uses of the land? How about people who need jobs from the new offices and factories? How about all of us who need development along mass transit corridors to protect open space and save energy?   There are no absolutes in Constitutional Law. The right of every citizen needs to be balanced against the rights of every other citizen. Somebody should have brought a school child, an unemployed worker or an overly burdened taxpayer into that court room. They have rights too.

Robert Torricelli can be reached via email at torricelli@politicsnj.com.

Comments

mt laurel


mt laurel was wrong the abbot decision was wrong---the latest nj supreme court decision was right on--property rights are more sacred than god they underlie the whole basis of a civil society---they must never be violated.all the more reason for bearing arms.

07/07/07 10:50 am

Apparently the Torch has a problem with the Constitution


but then he always has had problems obeying the laws and being loyal to the United States.

07/07/07 6:17 pm

Torricelli


Oh Yea!!!!!

Lets listen to this CROOK CROOK CROOK CROOK CROOK CROOK

CROOK CROOK CROOK CROOK CROOK CROOK CROOK CROOK

CROOK CROOK CROOK CROOK CROOK CROOK CROOK CROOK

CROOK CROOK CROOK CROOK CROOK CROOK CROOK CROOK

CROOK CROOK CROOK CROOK CROOK etc...........

Please leave New Jersey alone we don't want to hear or care what you have to say so crawl back in your HOLE that you came from years ago and DISAPPEAR!!!!!!!!!!

07/08/07 12:43 am

Price Tag


You may agree with Abbot and Mt Laurel, but its the tax payers who have to fork over the money. Middle class, hard working citizens in NJ have to pay not only for their school districts and their houses, but also the high cost of putting kids through school in Newark, JC, Elizabeth and the rest of the districts. Thats whats driving up taxes, and thats whats forcing people out of this state.

07/08/07 2:20 pm

Torricelli: another rich snob.


He's another millionaire more interested in the "rights" of his developer and politician friends than the working families he and his fellow liberals claim to be "fighting" for.

Torricelli's thinking is typical of people who have spent their entire lives "working" in government.  Other than stock tips from people who needed favors and the occasional Rolex from a constituent, has Torricelli ever made a dime that wasn't funnelled through government first?

07/08/07 3:50 pm

You cried like a little baby


You cried like a little baby on national television. What kind of man are you?? Shut up already, you should be mortified.

07/10/07 7:26 am

cry


men--real men dont cry

07/11/07 8:56 pm

What about the constitution?


Where does it say anything in the NJ or the US Constitution that people have to be supplied with jobs, healthcare, or even education? I was under the impression that your old oath of office said something to the effect that you would uphold the law of the land - if so, where do you get off thinking that the tax payers are obligated to pay for someone elses payroll? Typical NJ politician, even out of office, wants to spend the money that isn't yours, on a pet project, and to hell with the law - and you wonder why you would have been defeated, instead of staying in the race that you would have lost - coward.

07/12/07 11:54 am

RE: What about the constitution?


Where does it say anything in the NJ or the US Constitution that people have to be supplied with jobs, healthcare, or even education?

In the New Jersey Constitution ARTICLE VIII: TAXATION AND FINANCE, section 4. For the record, it states:

1. The Legislature shall provide for the maintenance and support of a thorough and efficient system of free public schools for the instruction of all the children in the State between the ages of five and eighteen years.

2. The fund for the support of free public schools, and all money, stock and other property, which may hereafter be appropriated for that purpose, or received into the treasury under the provisions of any law heretofore passed to augment the said fund, shall be securely invested, and remain a perpetual fund; and the income thereof, except so much as it may be judged expedient to apply to an increase of the capital, shall be annually appropriated to the support of free public schools, and for the equal benefit of all the people of the State; and it shall not be competent, except as hereinafter provided, for the Legislature to borrow, appropriate or use the said fund or any part thereof for any other purpose, under any pretense whatever. The bonds of any school district of this State, issued according to law, shall be proper and secure investments for the said fund and, in addition, said fund, including the income therefrom and any other moneys duly appropriated to the support of free public schools may be used in such manner as the Legislature may provide by law to secure the payment of the principal of or interest on bonds or notes issued for school purposes by counties, municipalities or school districts or for the payment or purchase of any such bonds or notes or any claims for interest thereon.

Article VIII, Section IV, paragraph 2 amended effective December 4, 1958.

3. The Legislature may, within reasonable limitations as to distance to be prescribed, provide for the transportation of children within the ages of five to eighteen years inclusive to and from any school.

The three words thorough and efficient cost us billions each year and has been litigated for decades. The NJ Supreme Court equates thorough and efficient with spending tax dollars. Of course, spending state tax dollars is outside the purview of the judicial system.

07/12/07 4:45 pm

I stand corrected - now


I stand corrected - now where is the healthcare and jobs mentioned? How about free transportation or jobs - oh wait, get elected and have pensions for life, even when shaking down boy scouts and other charitable organizations.

07/13/07 9:11 am

Crook


I'm sure the CROOK wants the urban development because he's got a piece of the action (just like Newark Airport).

07/14/07 11:19 am

Stop BLOGGING Bob!


It's open season on this guy everytime he utters a word on anything. He's quite the expert, but it doesn't matter because he's obviously hated by members of BOTH parties. I never seen a guy take a fall from grace like Bob Torricelli in the history of NJ politics.

07/14/07 8:43 pm