Officials threatened to condemn M’ville Gardens
August 19, 2008
By JOEL LANDAU
Staff Writer MILLVILLE — The city threatened to use eminent domain when negotiating the sale of Millville Gardens with its owners, but there’s a difference of opinion how committed the city was to using the controversial tool.
City officials previously downplayed suggestions it had threatened to seize the run-down apartment complex, but a letter obtained by The Daily Journal through the state’s public records law indicates otherwise.
City Solicitor Richard McCarthy sent a letter May 6 to Vineland attorney Jeff DiLazzero, who represented the ownership group 102 West Foundry Street Inc., saying the use of eminent domain was on the table for the 102-unit complex. Eminent domain, also known as condemnation, involves government seizing ownership of private property to benefit the public.
The letter stated the city wanted to reach an agreement at the “fair market value” of $2.7 million.
“The city prefers to acquire the property through mutually accepted agreement,” the letter said. “However, if it is unable to reach a negotiated agreement with the owner at the aforementioned fair market value, the city is authorized by law to resort to statutory condemnation proceedings. We trust the aforesaid offer of compensation will be acceptable in lieu of condemnation proceedings.”
The same afternoon DiLazzero received the city’s letter, he faxed a response confirming an agreement of the sale. In the letter, he wrote the property was “under threat of condemnation.”
A few hours later, the City Commission voted to approve a $3.6 million bond ordinance to cover the cost of acquiring and demolishing the West Foundry Street location.
DiLazzero did not return a call seeking comment Monday, nor has he returned any messages from The Daily Journal since negotiations began with the city.
After details of the deal were hammered out, the commission voted Aug. 5 to accept the sale. The city, which could take ownership by October, plans to seek a developer to construct a mixed-use facility on the six-acre lot.
At the May 6 meeting, several city officials downplayed DiLazzero’s mention of eminent domain in his letter, which was made available to the public. The solicitor’s letter was not made public at the time.
Mayor James Quinn said eminent domain is important for the city to protect itself from “greedy” property owners trying to unfairly raise a sales price, but said the negotiations with Millville Gardens’ property owners never reached a point where the option was realistically considered, because the negotiations went so well.
Quinn said language about eminent domain was added to documents at DiLazzero’s request so “it would be on the record.”
“He wanted to have it in there” to show his clients and their financial backers “if they do not cooperate this is what could happen,” the mayor said. “It never even got to the point that we would invoke” eminent domain. “They were very cooperative.”
City Commissioner Jim Parent said eminent domain is rarely threatened with negotiations, but should be used in extreme circumstances. This case was one of those extremes, he said.
“We can’t be afraid to use whatever resources we can to move along the project,” Parent said. “This was such a blight to the neighborhood and the entire city.”
McCarthy said the last time the city used eminent domain was a few years ago for the Union Lake Crossing shopping center project. The first step of any eminent domain process would be to mention it during the negotiations, he said.
But the letter to DiLazzero wasn’t merely a negotiation ploy, McCarthy said.
When asked if the city was serious about using eminent domain on the property, McCarthy referenced the letter.
“That’s pretty serious isn’t it?” he asked.
http://www.thedailyjournal.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080819/NEWS01/808190312/1002