Global warming fears pit neighbor against neighbor at Jersey shore

Neighbor to neighbor: Cave into federal coastal land grab or we won’t sell you cheese.

The New York Times reports:

Anchor Produce Market sells homemade mozzarella, its own fresh salsa and what many regulars swear is the best sweet corn on Long Beach Island.

“Federal taxpayers will be paying to protect these properties, but some homeowners want municipal money for lost ‘views?’ There is no sense of shame left in this country. “

But, a sign on the counter declares, it will not sell anything to the owners of 63 Long Beach Boulevard, 7 Coast Avenue, 12 Sea View Drive South or 34 other nearby oceanfront properties.

Those owners have refused to grant easements to allow the federal government to build a massive dune along a 50-mile stretch of the Jersey Shore. Without the protective ridge of sand, engineers predict it is only a matter of time before homes, neighborhoods, even entire communities are wiped out by rising seas — a reality brought into stark relief by the devastation from Hurricane Sandy.

So until they sign the easements, holdouts should buy their groceries elsewhere.

About these ads

5 responses to “Global warming fears pit neighbor against neighbor at Jersey shore

  1. Dodo: Ah, say, do you have a match?
    White Rabbit: Must go. Goodbye. Hello. I’m late, I’m late, I’m late!
    Alice: Wait! Please wait!
    Dodo: Ah, young lady! Do you have a match?
    Alice: No, I- I’m sorry, but… mister Rabbit!
    Dodo: No cooperation, no cooperation at all?

  2. And why are we paying to maintain property values in New Jersey?

  3. The Jersey Shore is a vulnerable area regardless of climate change or stability. Storms, rarely hurricans and frequently other kinds, have eroded the shore for millenia. Perhaps the dune is a good idea, perhaps not — I don’t know enough about the terrain to have any opinion. The landowners have a right to hold out on the easement, as far as I’m concerned, and their neighbors have the right to be miffed.
    Normally, though, a public accommodation has to have a very good reason to exclude any potential customers. If a bakery in Colorado can be sued for declining a gay wedding on religious grounds, surely the property owners to be excluded here have a cause of action for wanting to hold their own property.

  4. Well now; didn’t someone recently go out of business for refusing to bake goodies for a Gay wedding?
    They’d better make sure they aren’t refusing any potential customers that are members of protected groups.

  5. I am reading all this crap about peoples rights and the fact they they assume the risk when refusing dunes. No one seems to mention that when all hell breaks loose, first responders, police and fire personnel have to put themselves at serious risk to protect these “rugged individualists” and their property. The bottom line is that the Dunes were empirically tested and found to work quite well and significantly reduce the damage to life and property. The holdouts are self centered . and or greedy individuals and its that simple

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s