There's nothing unusual about that. Most property owners whose property was taken by eminent domain was there before the project was built.Quote:
She lived there before the casino was every built and chose not to sell the property for the offered price. Her reluctance to sell is no excuse for attempting to take her property through eminent domain.
My point main point was, her reluctance to sell is no excuse for attempting to take her property through eminent domain. For goodness sake, were talking about the forced taken of someone private property to make a parking lot. It just doesn't get anymore loathsome than that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Judy
Property owners, who are targeted for traditional public use projects (roads, schools, railroads, parks), while not always happy, recognize the public good served by the project. This is not the case in redevelopment projects like this where one private owner is asked to relinquish their home or business which will be turned over to another private owner for redevelopment. All of this occurs with the municipality standing behind developer, threatening the property owner with the power of eminent domain if the property owner refuses to relinquish his private property rights. Trump's part in this was just wrong on so many levels.
That's the law in New Jersey, MW. The only reason Trump lost was because the Redevelopment Authority wasn't as prepared as it should have been when they argued the case before the NJ State Supreme Court. They needed to ready to be ready to tell the court what the limits were, parking lot for limousines or hotel expansion or both for example. Apparently they city attorney for the development authority didn't realize they needed to be prepared to answer that or include it in their brief, and that's the only reason they lost.
If Donald Trump just owned a simple hotel in downtown Atlantic City, that was just private property independent of any public works project, he would not have the right of eminent domain. But all these Casinos and hotels that were part of the Casino Redevelopment District Project had the right to secure land through the Redevelopment Authority if the situation warranted a valid public purpose. His did, but it required limits and unfortunately the Redevelopment Authority didn't have that issue addressed when they argued before the court or at least not sufficiently to satisfy the court.
The people of New Jersey have their own Constitution, their own issues, their own goals, their own rules, their own courts and are absolutely free and right to operate within those boundaries and that includes the Trump Plaza and Trump Resorts and Casinos corporation. Donald Trump wasn't buying this property personally, it was an important acquisition if it could occur for the companies who had invested billions in trying to revitalize Atlantic City and make it a nice place, sort of a Las Vegas on the East Coast.
So Donald Trump was doing the right thing by everyone, his companies, his lenders, his customers, his employees, the other businesses, the people of Atlantic City and yes even Vera Coking, who would have been far better off financially and in many other ways if her greed hadn't stopped her from taking a deal of a life-time.
Her mistake, not Donald Trump's. She was the villain, not Donald Trump.
You're so wrong on this issue, but for the benefit of the other forum readers, guess I'll let it go for now because we're just beating a dead horse issue. Oh, and Vera Coking most certainly was not the villain .... she was the private property owner that fought Trump's indirect attempt at acquiring her property through eminent domain and failed. Oh, but wait, everyone knows the Donald never fails (yeah, right).Quote:
Originally Posted by Judy
Donald Trump didn't handle the eminent domain, the Atlantic City Redevelopment Authority handled that. They failed, not Donald Trump. He walked away and bought another property for his hotel expansion. Vera Coking is the one who lost. Trump just moved on.Quote:
Originally Posted by MW
Yes, it's been a dead horse for 18 years.
He didn't handle it because he had no standing or authority to do so. However, it was at his request that the Atlantic City Redevelopment Authority did handle it. The goal was to take Coking's property through eminent domain and sell it to Trump. To deny Trump was an active participant in the whole scheme is just ludicrous.Quote:
Originally Posted by Judy
Trump wanted the property and after making no headway with Coking, he went to the Atlantic City Redevelopment Authority to get it for him through the eminent domain process. Therefore, make no mistake about it, this was Trump's failure as much as it was the Atlantic City Redevelopment Authority's failure.
These actions would be defined as strong-arm bullying tactics.
The failure was by the lawyers who worked for the government who didn't go the New Jersey Supreme Court armed with the limits of use they needed to win the case. As you pointed out, Trump didn't have standing to handle that part of it, only incompetent government could mess up their own right of eminent domain.
Wrong again. Trump failed in his ultimate goal of acquiring the property, regardless of whom he had working the issue for him.Quote:
Originally Posted by Judy
Any time you're involved with government to do a project, you can bet something will get screwed up by some incompetent. It's why redevelopment of decrepit and blighted areas is so difficult and so rarely done in our country.
Take Flint Michigan for example. Jars and jars of rust-colored government water being hauled into government offices and government officials telling these poor people it's "safe" to drink.
Our country is in such a mess, it's just unbelievable.