“Be it ever so humble, there is no place like home”
“Home, sweet home”
“A man’s home is his castle”
The subject of a government taking personal property is highly emotional; the American lexicon is replete with the notion that the place we live is sacred and safe from intrusive government. To a certain extent this is true; laws do favor the homeowner in most instances when circumstances cross the property line. Provisions in the Fifth, Fourteenth and Forth Amendments to the US Constitution prohibit the confiscation of private property for public use without just compensation or for uses that do not benefit a large portion of the public; likewise in Article One, item twenty of the New Jersey State Constitution. The sticking point comes in when the homeowner does not want compensation in lieu of their property. In these instances, the courts decide the outcome.
The legal maneuver to confiscate the property in question is “Eminent Domain” and has been used on a national scale down to the local level. Often times, cities will confiscate property in blighted areas to make way for infrastructure (such as highways, museums or parks) that enhance the quality of life in the city, as a means of economic growth or for the safety of citizenry and property as will be explored here.
In the wake of Superstorm Sandy a push was on to install sand dunes the length of the Jersey shore to prevent or alleviate some of the damage in the event of a similar occurrence. One of the hardest hit was the town of Mantoloking, New Jersey. Situated 50 miles south of New York City on the barrier island between the Atlantic Ocean and Barnegat Bay, it suffered eight breeches where sea water was driven from the beach to the bay and the loss of over 260 homes.
In 2007, the US Army Corps of Engineers developed a comprehensive plan of dunes and other flood prevention measures but did not receive the unanimous approval of the township’s residents. The plan was revisited and the town’s mayor has the consent of 121 of the 128 oceanfront homeowners. Efforts thus far to convince the holdouts that the safety of the entire town is more important than the loss of an ocean view have not proven effective.
Some of the homeowners have stated that they will lose beach access and use of some of their property. Their argument may be as much monetary as aesthetics; conceivably, property values could be lowered with the loss of the intrinsic value of an ocean view and the usable area of the property will be greatly reduced with a 22 foot tall sand dune situated 35 feet in from the rear property line on a typical 75’ x 225’ lot.
Whatever the compensation, does it justify the taking personal property to construct a preventative measure against an event that may or may not occur, to the magnitude of the preparation this plan predicts? Is the greater good served at the expense of a reluctant few enough to justify such action? I guess it depends on which side of the property line you stand.
zoningthegardenstate 