MTOTSA takes fight for homes to court Cases will be heard Feb. 10 in state Superior Court BY CHRISTINE VARNO Staff Writer Attorneys representing residents in one of Long Branch’s redevelopment zones will challenge the city’s right to condemn properties in court this week. “We will be filing an answer this week and a motion to dismiss,” attorney William J. Ward said Monday. Ward, of Carlin & Ward, Florham Park, is representing two residents of the city’s Beachfront North Phase II redevelopment zone. The city of Long Branch filed a complaint in state Superior Court on Dec. 23 to condemn the residence of Francis T. DeLuca at 21 Ocean Terrace in the Beachfront North zone. DeLuca along with Louis and Lillian Anzalone, Ocean Terrace, retained Ward to fight the city’s use of eminent domain to take their properties. Ward said the Anzalones had not yet been served with a complaint as of Monday. Some 20 other property owners in the beachfront neighborhood that has come to be known as MTOTSA — Marine and Ocean Terraces and Seaview Avenue — have retained Peter H. Wegener of Bathgate, Wegener and Wolf, Lakewood, to fight the taking of their homes. In total, there are some 36 property owners in MTOTSA, a neighborhood of modest homes with ocean views situated just steps from the beach. Wegener received copies of condemnation complaints for 11 of his clients in November. In a conference call with state Superior Court Assignment Judge Lawrence M. Lawson last week, Ward said he and Wegener agreed to have the cases of all their clients heard together on Feb. 10 at the court in Freehold. Ward said the cases will be combined into one hearing in order for each property owner to have a fair judgment. “We did not want the first group to go and have the judge make a ruling, and then come in with other cases and be told we are out of luck because a ruling has already been made,” Ward said. Ward spelled out the strategy he will use to defend against the eminent domain proceedings. “We will be using three chief defenses,” he explained on Monday. According to Ward, the main argument for dismissal will be that the city is involved in a conflict of interest arising from its hiring of a law firm with an attorney on staff who has a vested interest in the developer for the zone. In April, the law firm of Greenbaum, Rowe, Smith & Davis, Woodbridge, was retained by the city to handle constitutional issues that might arise between the city and the property owners in Beachfront North, phase II. Arthur Greenbaum, senior partner in the law firm, sits on the board of directors of the designated developer of the zone, Hovnanian Enterprises, Middletown, and is a shareholder in Hovnanian as well. Greenbaum’s firm oversaw the blight studies and the passage of blight ordinances for the Pier Village and Beachfront North, phase I redevelopment zones, which Ward said is the foundation of the eminent domain proceedings that occurred in 2002 and that are occurring presently. “When Applied Developers brought in Hovnanian [as joint developer for Beachfront North, phase II], Greenbaum should have said he could not represent the city. But he did not do that,” Ward said The law firm withdrew as counsel in July, with the city and Greenbaum claiming no conflict of interest existed. “The whole process is tainted,” said Ward, who also plans to argue that the city failed to negotiate in good faith and that the property in the Beachfront North, phase II zone is not blighted. Ward said his firm has not yet arranged for independent appraisals of the properties in MTOTSA, but he has spoken with appraisers who have estimated the offers from the city came in at about half of what they should be. Because of what Ward said are below market offers, he will argue that the city has failed to negotiate in good faith, Ward said. He added that the properties in the redevelopment zone are not blighted. “These properties do not meet the criteria for blighted,” he said. According to the blight statute, Ward said an area must have vacant lots, unoccupied buildings, burned-out properties and dilapidated housing in order to be deemed blighted and in need of redevelopment. Ward said DeLuca has rejected the offer by the city to purchase her home. According to the suit filed on behalf of DeLuca, the homeowner was offered $552,000 for her oceanfront property, the amount determined by an appraisal firm hired by the city. In the complaint filed by the City of Long Branch, the city contends that it “has been unable to acquire and interests in the [DeLuca] property through separate negotiations with the owner due to disagreement concerning the compensation to be paid.” The city asks the court to find that it “has duly exercised its authority to acquire the property through the power of eminent domain.” It also asks the court to appoint commissioners “to fix the compensation required to be paid for the property as of the date of commencement of this action” in accordance with state law. Feb. 10 is the return date of the order to show cause to appoint commissioners, according to Ward, who said he and Wegener are scheduled to be heard in court that day, and will ask the judge not to appoint the commission and to dismiss the complaints. Plans for the zone call for designated redeveloper MM-Beachfront North II — consisting of co-developers Matzel & Mumford, a division of K. Hovnanian, and the Applied Cos., Hoboken — to bulldoze the neighborhood and construct three buildings containing a total of 185 upscale condominium units in its place. MTOTSA is one of six redevelopment zones in the city, two of which have already been redeveloped on the oceanfront.