newjerseynewsroom.com

Measure opposed by activists moves to Assembly

BY TOM HESTER SR.

NEWJERSEYNEWSROOM.COM

UPDATED

Bipartisan legislation which would replace abolish the state Council on Affordable Housing (COAH) and give cities and towns more of a role in deciding the amount of affordable housing within their borders was approved 28 to 3 by the state Senate Thursday.

The bill (S-1), which is strongly opposed by the majority of affordable housing organization, moves to the Assembly for consideration. Proponents of the measure want to see it approved and sent to Gov. Chris Christie before the Legislature recesses for the summer at the end of the month.

When he campaigned for governor, Christie vowed to eliminate COAH. Aides said the Senate legislation delivers, at least in part, on his campaign promise.

"The legislation passed by the Senate today eliminates COAH and goes a long way toward fundamentally reforming the affordable housing system which New Jerseyans have long demanded and that I have promised to deliver,'' Christie said. "We will continue to work with members of both parties in the Legislature to bring the COAH nightmare to an end and replace a broken system with a common sense, predictable and achievable process. I want to thank Senators Lesniak, Bateman and Van Drew for their work on this issue and the Senate as a whole for the bipartisan support the bill received. I look forward to working with Assemblymen Green, Prieto and Rible to ensure sound and sensible affordable housing policy becomes law."

Staci Berger, Housing and Community Development Network of New Jersey director of policy, thanked Senators Loretta Weinberg (D-Bergen), Ronald Rice (D-Essex) and Shirley Turner (D-Mercer) for what she described as their principled and courageous opposition to the bill.

"Unfortunately, many of their colleagues chose, instead, to turn back the clock on New Jersey's housing policy by more than three decades,'' Berger said. "New Jersey residents need homes they can afford, near where they work and close to public transportation. In order for our state to rebuild our economy, so that everyone can thrive, our elected leaders need to craft policies that will help balance the housing market. We need more starter homes, and more family rental choices. S-1 does not adequately address our state's housing imbalance, and will not help us recover economically. Equally distressing, this bill penalizes towns that have complied with the state's rules and rewards those that have not.

"We look forward to working with leaders in the Assembly to correct S.1, so that every community does its fair share to provide housing opportunities and create the homes people need,'' Berger said. "New Jersey must build new homes, as well as rehabilitate existing ones, so that we can have a prosperous and sustainable future in every corner of our state."

William G. Dressel, director of the New Jersey State League of Municipalities, commended the Senate for passing the legislation.

"Municipalities have long called for reform to the Fair Housing Act, and the promulgation of COAH's July 2008 regulations further demonstrated the need for reform,'' Dressel said. "COAH's regulations contained significant errors in its vacant land analysis; substantial errors in their projection of growth and allocation of its growth to municipalities; artificially inflated the statewide needs; and lacked sufficient compliance mechanisms and funding. The end results were unattainable projections and insufficient resources, which in turn push costs on to municipalities and our taxpayers.''

Dressel added, "We do have some remaining issues and concerns and will work with the sponsors and legislative leaders to advance legislation in the Assembly. Today's vote is an important step to reform.''

The Sierra Club of New Jersey joined housing activists in opposition to the measure.

"This bill gives the power to developers to determine how towns will meet their affordable housing obligations,'' Jeff Tittle, the director, said. "This legislation unfairly targets rural and environmentally sensitive towns. It includes no environmental criteria and puts our natural resources at risk. The bill exempts growing, suburban towns from affordable housing requirements, encouraging sprawl and overdevelopment. The Sierra Club plans on fighting this legislation in the Assembly.

"While the Sierra Club strongly supports affordable housing in New Jersey, it should not be used as a tool to undermine environmental protections or promote growth in inappropriate places,'' Tittel said. "Housing should be located where the jobs are, helping to prevent sprawl and pollution while providing people with economic opportunities. Affordable housing should not be used to promote development in rural and environmentally sensitive areas like the Highlands and Pinelands.

"This bill is scary,'' Tittel said. "It turns planning and zoning on its head. The bill targets rural and environmentally sensitive areas for development while letting growing, suburban towns off the hook. This bill got rid of COAH only to give all the power to the developers."

The legislation would replace COAH with what is described as a two-pronged approach to creating housing.

The first part would require that 10 percent of all houses built in a development of five or more houses be reserved for low- and moderate-income families, and five percent of developments with less than five units be reserved.

Half of the affordable houses would be set aside for low-income housing, for families whose income is equal to or less than 50 percent of the median gross household income within the region, and half would be set aside for median-income families, who make between 50 and 80 percent of the median gross household income within the region. For the purposes of meeting the set-aside requirements, one special needs unit would count as two units towards the affordable housing requirement on a development.

Developers would be permitted to satisfy their affordable housing requirements through off-site construction or rehabilitation of existing units or by paying a fee of 2.5 percent of the equalized, assessed value of the project to a municipality's affordable housing trust fund, or the purchase or subsidization of houses that are subsequently sold or rented to low- and moderate-income families.

Cities and towns would be able to reserve half of the low- and moderate-income units for families in which one member works or resides in the municipality. Municipalities would be required to make a reasonable effort to facilitate the economic viability of inclusionary developments.

The bill would establish inclusionary zoning standards for municipalities in what is described as an effort to foster greater affordable housing. A municipality would be deemed inclusionary if it has at least 7.5 percent of its overall housing stock in the form of price-restricted units, or if 33 percent of the overall housing stock is in the form of multiple dwellings, townhouses, other attached units or mobile homes. The bill requires half of these attached units to be rental units, and the state Department of Community Affairs (DCA) would have the authority to exclude luxury units from the inclusionary calculations.

If a municipality doesn't already meet the inclusionary standards in the bill for existing development, it would still be able to meet the inclusionary requirements by adopting an ordinance that zones at least 20 percent of its developable land for workforce housing, which would be available to families making less than 120 percent of the median gross household income within the region.

Barring an inclusionary determination by DCA, either through existing units or new zoning rules, municipalities would be required to consider any affordable housing development applying for a variance as "inherently beneficial," and granting zoning relief so long as the unit is shown not to be a substantial detriment to the public good.

Finally, the bill provides that any funds collected in municipal affordable trust funds that are not committed to projects within two years would be transferred to the State Affordable Housing Trust Fund. The state funds would be used in the county of origin, while funds from a municipality which has not met the inclusionary standards would be used for projects within that municipality. Municipalities would be prohibited from imposing any affordable housing fees on non-residential property or construction.

"New Jersey is not living up to its affordable housing responsibility," Sen. Raymond Lesniak (D-Union) the prime creator of the bill, said "COAH has been an abject failure, and as a result, municipal officials have been saddled with unattainable, unrealistic mandates for housing, and little affordable housing has been built. This bill creates a fairer standard, and will result in more housing with less bureaucracy.

"This bill will produce affordable housing and jobs, without the job-killing fees and mandates imposed under the old system," Lesniak said. "We have to take a global view of affordable housing in New Jersey, and its impact on the economic well-being of the State. The mandates and fees imposed under COAH have choked out any possibility of development and redevelopment in our communities, and this bill is intended to break the logjam, create housing opportunities and put people back to work."

Sen. Jeff Van Drew (D-Cape May), a co-sponsor, said "For years, New Jersey's efforts to provide affordable housing for its residents have been a dismal failure. As a result, we have a serious affordable housing shortage, and people simply cannot afford to live where they work. This bill would expand our affordable housing stock and make sure we're creating real housing opportunities."

"The inclusionary standards in the bill recognize that New Jersey's municipalities still have a responsibility to create housing opportunities for everyone, not just the economically well-off," Lesniak added "By complying with the inclusionary standards or the d-variance alternative, municipalities will meet the mandate established by the Mount Laurel decisions without COAH's unwieldy, and ultimately, unproductive mandates. At the same time, we'll be able to create new housing opportunities for a segment of the population that is often overlooked under the current system — the working class families who still cannot afford a place to live in New Jersey."