 Posted: Wed, May 27 2009, 4:34 pm EDT Post subject: COAH NEWS: 2 attorneys to present at conference |
|
| 2 attorneys to present at conference
May 27, 2009 Two GluckWalrath attorneys have been invited to present at the New Jersey Association of Counties Annual Conference in Atlantic City. The conference will be held at Bally's Park Place Hotel and Casino on June 16-19. Attorneys Andrew Bayer and Cindy M. Perr will present June 18 on "2009 COAH Update: Legislative and Litigation Issues." The seminar will provide an update on the implementation of the new COAH regulations, the newly passed legislation, and the status of pending lawsuits. Bayer is a resident of East Windsor. Perr is a resident of Medford. http://www.courierpostonline.com/article/20090527/BUSINESS01/905270322/1003/business |
|
| Posted: Wed, Apr 22 2009, 7:07 am EDT Post subject: Re: COAH news |
|
| Is that grant available to Cranbury residents? Would it help us meet our COAH goals? | |
| Posted: Wed, Apr 22 2009, 1:40 am EDT Post subject: GOP Gubernatorial Candidate Holds Town Hall Meeting |
|
| GOP Gubernatorial Candidate Holds Town Hall Meeting
By Joe Hart Chris Christie, one of five Republican candidates hoping to challenge Gov. Jon Corzine in November, held a town hall meeting in Court House with local Assembly candidates Mike Donohue and Christie, one of five Republican candidates hoping to challenge Gov. Jon Corzine in November, held a town hall meeting in Court House with local Assembly candidates Mike Donohue and Frank Conrad. Christie’s main message of the evening was his wish to make New Jersey more friendly for taxpayers and businesses. “How many of you feel overtaxed?” he asked to a round of applause from the crowd of more that 100. Christie said he would look to cut state payrolls and work with small businesses to coordinate tax incentives to would work best with them. He said he’s dedicated to significantly reducing state spending by cooperation or conflict. He said he’ll need Donohue and Conrad in the Assembly to back him up and said they had a great chance against the reportedly vulnerable First District Assemblymen Nelson Albano and Matthew Milam. He said Corzine and his administration are out of touch with ordinary New Jerseyans. “He (Corzine) doesn’t realize that people are forced to decide which bills can be paid this month and which to pay next month,” Christie said. He said residents are leaving New Jersey for other states because they can’t afford it here anymore. If elected Governor, Christie said he would initiate a red tape task force that would keep an eye on existing and reduce any future bureaucracy. He said the state DEP (Department of Environmental Protection) has become a “four letter word.” “They (DEP officials) don’t understand that they are public servants,” he said. They make people wait for years for approval, charge exhorbient fees and giant fines, he added. He said he understands that the agency is trying to protect the state’s environment, “but you can do it without being hostile to business.” He said the problem was that the current DEP funding structure allows the agency to keep the revenue generated by fines – “more fines, fund more employees and more employees can charge more fines and so on…” If he becomes Governor, he said the DEP would no longer keep their fine money, but rather have to go to the legislature with their budgets like the other departments. Christie said he was willing to make the tough decisions to cut programs, and reduce spending “even if some of those in this room like those programs.” He said he is willing to accept only four years if some of the tough calls he makes are too tough for voters. When asked about affordable housing, Christie called the state’s current COAH rules “wild, zealous and overreaching.” He said that the state’s current goal of 115,000 affordable units and over 500,000 market price units as unbelievable and said it could do unspeakable damage to the environment He said the development would mean new schools, new roads and more use of the area’s water supply. “When I get to Trenton, I’ll gut COAH,” he said. Conrad related that as a local businessman he’s had to “jump through hoops every day” because of COAH regulations. He said municipal solicitors and engineers not doing their real work. Instead, they are forced to work on COAH regulations. Conrad called the 2.5 percent COAH tax on businesses outrageous “especially in the hardest econ times we’ve ever seen.” Donohue noted that he and his partner coined the term “COAHagmire” regarding the current affordable-housing mess the state is in. ............................ http://www.capemaycountyherald.com/article/49035-gop+gubernatorial+candidate+holds+town+hall+meeting |
|
| Posted: Wed, Apr 22 2009, 1:31 am EDT Post subject: Edison fund offers grants for repairs to help keep people in their homes |
|
| Edison fund offers grants for repairs to help keep people in their homes
By LALITA ALOOR AMUTHAN • Staff Writer • April 20, 2009 EDISON — Residents Tony and Nancy Eggert will finally get a much-needed update to their home's heating system, thanks to a $5,000 grant from the township's Affordable Housing Trust Fund. The township has made the grants available to qualified applicants in the Clara Barton-Amboy Avenue Neighborhood Preservation Program (NPP) area. "We've needed a new heating system for a long time but did not want to dip into our retirement savings," said Tony Eggert, 69, a 30-year resident of the Clara Barton area and the grant's first applicant. The extended Cape Cod's 30-year-old heating system was not efficient anymore, he said. "We would turn on the thermostat and shut off two rooms and the winter months were brutal," Eggert said. Sharon Gray, NPP coordinator, said the township has set aside $500,000 for 100 similar loans, which will be doled out on a first-come, first-served basis to qualified applicants. The grant funds can be used by eligible residents to finance substantial repairs or replacement of major systems in their homes such as roofs, weatherization, and plumbing, heating and electrical systems. There is no repayment required on the grant if the applicant lives in the area for 10 years after getting the grant, Gray said. Eggert said he and his wife are happy to stay, considering their biggest problem — expensive heating bills — has now been alleviated. "Our church is here, friends are here, we didn't want to give all that up if there was some way we could stay here," he said. To qualify for the grant, income requirements have to be met — income of less than $44,800 for one person, $51,200 for two people, and increasing in proportion as family size increases. Gray said the grant would enable the township to meet its COAH obligations. COAH obligations require that homeowners make a minimum of $10,000 in home improvements. As part of a joint partnership between the township and Provident Bank called the Clara Barton-Amboy Avenue Neighborhood Home Loan Program, applicants who receive the grant can also apply for a loan for the remaining amount. Eggert said he planned to apply for a bank loan of $5,000 from Provident Bank to offset the remaining costs of the new heating system. Lalita Aloor Amuthan: 732-565-7271; laloor@mycentraljersey.com http://www.mycentraljersey.com/article/20090420/NEWS/904200365/-1/newsfront |
|
| Posted: Mon, Mar 30 2009, 4:19 pm EDT Post subject: Re: COAH news |
|
| I am so sick of builder's remedy!!!!!!!!!!
How about taxpayer's remedy? Whereby we keep the builder's out of the countryside and MAKE them (through legislation) fix up "brownfields" and the inner-cities of our state. I've been watching Newark and New Brunswick try to fix themselves up for 25 years now. They still have a long way to go. Maybe, high-density city-living is the way to go in the 21st century. Use more public transport and shop at Mom & Pop stores and make the cities safer places for people to live and work. Maybe, that is a brainstorm of an idea????????????? Why should we plow over beautiful farmland and forests just so some builder can live in his Tony Soprano McMansion? Hey...........I know some builders alright...............they ain't no boyscouts. BADA-BOOM-BADA-BING. |
|
| Posted: Fri, Mar 27 2009, 2:03 pm EDT Post subject: Re: COAH news |
|
| Sounds interesting and perhaps something that Cranbury should be backing. Perhaps this will negate or push back our COAH obligations. | |
| Posted: Thu, Mar 26 2009, 3:35 pm EDT Post subject: Freeholders back bill to abolish COAH |
|
| Freeholders back bill to abolish COAH
Assembly members in 11th, 12th and 13th districts also support bill BY DANIEL HOWLEY Staff Writer The Monmouth County Board of Chosen Freeholders has joined a growing chorus of state and local lawmakers who are seeking extensive changes to the way affordable housing is handled in the state. During its March 11 meeting in Freehold, the board voted 5-0 in favor of a resolution supporting state Assembly bill A-3570, which calls for the abolition of the state's Council on Affordable Housing (COAH) because of what the board perceives as hardships the agency's mandates place on county municipalities. "The freeholders have joined many lawmakers in New Jersey in supporting the bill to abolish [COAH]," William Heine, county director of public information, said last week. "This does not mean they do not support affordable housing," Heine explained, adding, "It merely means that they feel COAH has overstepped its authority." According to the approved resolution, "COAH has unlawfully extended its regulatory power far beyond what was authorized in the original enabling legislation of 1985 and subsequent legislation." The freeholders further charge that COAH has "consistently ignored legislative directives and attempts by the Legislature to impose limits on [the agency's] regulatory powers, in effect becoming a fourth branch of state government that refuses to answer to the Legislature or the people of the state of New Jersey." The resolution also criticizes COAH's revised round-three regulations, which call for the statewide construction of some 115,000 units of affordable housing by 2018. Previous regulations required municipalities to provide 52,000 affordable housing units. "The recent Third Round Regulations issued by COAH have placed unreasonable, destructive and costly state mandates on New Jersey municipalities that were never intended or authorized by the Legislature," the resolution reads. "These state mandates serve no purpose but to exacerbate the existing high property tax burden imposed on New Jersey residents and also serve to accelerate the flight of middle class residents from the state." Introduced to the state Legislature in January, and sponsored by Assemblymen Richard Merkt (D-25th District) and Peter Biondi (D- 16th District), bill A-3570 would see COAH completely dissolved and all of its responsibilities turned over to the Legislature. Some 26 Assembly members have thrown their support behind the proposed measure, including District 11 Assembly members Mary Pat Angelini and David Rible, District 12 AssemblymanDeclanO'Scanlon andAssemblywoman Caroline Casagrande and District 13 Assemblywoman Amy Handlin. Local towns are also endorsing the proposed legislation. Middletown Deputy Mayor Gerard Scharfenberger, who has been a vocal critic of COAH, said the township will take up a resolution in support of the bill. "I can't speak for everybody, but I know that there definitely is support for this," Scharfenberger said. "We are trying to draft a resolution right now." Scharfenberger said there are ways affordable housing could be administered and constructedwithout intervention by a government agency. "It's actually pretty easy," Scharfenberger said. "We can bring in private firms such as Habitat for Humanity that use private funds and work with the people who are actually moving into the homes." He added that there are ways that affordable housing units could be built without using taxpayer money to fund them. The Holmdel Township Committee unanimously approved a resolution in support of the bill at the Township Committee meeting March 19. "The recent Third Round Regulations issued by COAH have placed unreasonable, destructive and costly state mandates on New Jersey municipalities that were never intended or authorized by the Legislature," the resolution reads. Although A-3570 was introduced in January, officials with the state Department of Community Affairs (DCA), which oversees COAH, said they had not yet been made aware of the proposed bill. "We have yet to see this legislation," DCA spokesman Christopher Donnelly said last week. "In the meantime, COAH will continue to move forward with the implementation of its third-round rules and with providing New Jersey residents with the affordable housing they need and deserve. "[DCA Commissioner Joseph] Doria's door is always open should either assemblymen [Merkt or Biondi] wish to discuss ways in which they can help, not hinder, efforts to provide affordable housing," Donnelly said. Under the proposed bill, state and municipal affordable housing obligations would be determined by the Legislature rather than COAH, which Rible said has ignored lawmakers' calls to make changes to its revised round-three regulations. Additionally, the Legislature would reinstate the use of regional contribution agreements (RCAs) by state municipalities. Abolished in June 2008 by Assembly bill A-500, RCAs allowed municipalities to pay other towns to assume a portion of their affordable housing obligations. The receiving town would use the amount paid by the sending town to support the rehabilitation or construction of affordable housing units. The method was ultimately abolished because it was seen as a loophole being used by municipalities that sought to forgo the construction of affordable housing units within their borders. "The RCAs were effective for a lot of communities," Rible said. "If towns didn't have the space they could allocate the money to other towns. "At the end of the day … it's providing affordable housing," Rible said. "Some people say it's skirting the issue. I don't see a problem with the way [the RCAs] were working." Although supportive of the proposed bill, Rible said he does not believe it will move forward in the Assembly. "It's been introduced; it still has to go to a committee," Rible said, adding that becauseAssembly Speaker Joseph Roberts is a firm supporter of the agency, the bill will more than not proceed in the Assembly. COAH was established in 1985 by an act of the state Legislature in response to a series of state Supreme Court rulings known as the Mount Laurel Doctrine. According to the Department of Community Affairs, COAH has the power to define housing regions, estimate low- and moderate income housing needs, set criteria and guidelines for municipalities to determine and address their own fair share numbers, and approve and review housing elements and fair-share plans for municipalities. If municipalities do not construct their fair share of affordable housing as determined by COAH, they can be subject to a builder's remedy lawsuit. Builder's remedy lawsuits are filed by or on the behalf of a developer to challenge a town's failure to comply with its mandatory affordable housing obligation. If the town is found to be at fault, the builder can be granted the opportunity to construct a project and must designate 15 to 20 percent of the units in the project as affordable housing, according to COAH guidelines. Since its inception, COAH has had three iterations of its fair-housing plan. Round one of the plan focused on creating reasonable opportunities for affordable housing through municipal zoning ordinances. The second round focused on the rehabilitation of existing housing stock. COAH's third round focuses on the establishment of a uniform growth share element for the state's municipalities. Affordable housing, as defined by the state, is housing that can be bought or rented with 30 percent or less of an individual's income. Contact Daniel Howley at dhowley@gmnews.com. http://independent.gmnews.com/news/2009/0326/front_page/014.html |
|
| Posted: Fri, Mar 20 2009, 1:22 pm EDT Post subject: Re: COAH news |
|
| Contact our representatives here
http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/SelectRep.asp Tell them no more taxes! |
|
| Posted: Fri, Mar 20 2009, 12:41 pm EDT Post subject: Re: COAH news |
|
| MUNICIPALITIES APPROVE OF BILL TO FIX AND POSTPONE AFFORDABLE HOUSING MANDATES DURING BAD ECONO
Assemblymen Scott T. Rumana, John Amodeo and Vince Polistina welcomed approval from the New Jersey State League of Municipalities on their proposal to suspend affordable housing mandates during the poor economy, which would also require the Council on Affordable Housing, or COAH, to fix its rules. “Municipal advocates are already under tremendous stress to hold the line on property taxes without implementing these unrealistic affordable-housing burdens,” Rumana, R-Passaic, Bergen and Essex, said. “Unlike Governor Corzine, we believe this is not the time to place more mandates on towns that will further exasperate property taxes.” The three legislators sponsor a measure, A-3255, that would suspend towns’ affordable housing mandates during the housing crisis. During the delay, COAH would be required to find a realistic way to assess towns’ affordable housing obligations. “This legislation provides the perfect opportunity for Governor Corzine to stand with middle class property taxpayers by rectifying his faulty affordable-housing policy, which will force towns to grow beyond reason and drive up property taxes,” Amodeo, R-Atlantic, said. Added Polistina, R-Atlantic: “This would be welcomed relief to middle class taxpayers that Governor Corzine’s budget would punish with higher property taxes and a new plan to tax those property taxes,” Polistina said. “Proceeding with this flawed plan makes no sense now.” http://www.politickernj.com/arep/28265/municipalities-approve-bill-fix-and-postpone-affordable-housing-mandates-during-bad-econo |
|
| Posted: Thu, Mar 19 2009, 3:17 pm EDT Post subject: Re: COAH news |
|
| Housing challenge dismissed
By dlevinsky@phillyBurbs.com PhillyBurbs.com Levittown - Medford's bid to overturn the state's new affordable housing regulations suffered a setback Wednesday as the state Council on Local Mandates ruled that it did not have the authority to void the regulations. Medford had filed a complaint with the council this past summer arguing that the state's new Council on Affordable Housing regulations created an unfair burden on taxpayers and towns because the regulations required towns to provide additional affordable housing units but did not provide adequate funding to pay for the development. Under state law, the council has the authority to overturn laws that impose such unfunded mandates. Representatives of COAH argued the new rules were not unfunded mandates because participation is voluntary and the rules only require additional affordable units in the event that other growth occurs. Patricia Myer, the council's executive administrator and coordinator, said the council decided Wednesday to dismiss Medford's claims on grounds that the laws Medford challenged were exempt from the council's oversight because they involved the New Jersey Constitution. There is no right to appeal the council's dismissal. State Department of Community Affairs Commissioner Joseph Doria and New Jersey Public Advocate Ronald K. Chen cheered the decision and claimed it validated the COAH rules. "From the beginning we have stressed that the COAH process is completely voluntary and does not and has not imposed any mandates on New Jersey municipalities," Doria said in a press statement. "Now, instead of squandering taxpayer funds defending a repeatedly validated process, hopefully we can move forward with the production of much-needed affordable housing." The Department of Community Affairs oversees COAH and its regulations. Medford officials and other COAH critics promised to continue to fight the new rules in the Appellate Division of Superior Court. "We will aggressively pursue our case with the Appellate Division, which deals with a full range of issues with COAH regulations," said Medford solicitor Richard Hunt. The New Jersey League of Municipalities also has challenged the rules in court and had supported Medford's complaint before the Council on Local Mandates. League executive director William Dressell said Wednesday he was not discouraged by the complaint's dismissal, arguing that the council simply ruled it did not have appropriate jurisdiction and did not address the substantive issues. "We're not discouraged at all. The [council] simply felt it didn't fall within their purview," Dressel said, adding that some 250 New Jersey towns have pledged to support the league's legal challenge of the rules. Under the new regulations, called the COAH Round 3 rules, each New Jersey municipality is required to provide one affordable housing unit for every five market-rate housing units constructed in their towns. They also call for one affordable housing unit for every 16 new jobs created by commercial or industrial development in the municipality. Based on those guidelines, COAH expects about 115,000 new affordable housing units will be built by 2018. Medford and other towns complain the rules will require them to spend substantial funds to build the required affordable housing within their borders. They also argue that the methodology used by COAH to calculate each town's required affordable housing quota was flawed, and, in some cases, counted preserved properties or other lands on which the developments cannot be built. Eighth Legislative District lawmakers Scott Rudder of Medford and Dawn Marie Addiego said they disagreed with the council's decision to dismiss Medford's complaint. "The council's decision is an insult to the property taxpayers of Medford and everywhere else in New Jersey," Rudder said. "[The] council's ruling is an infuriating injustice and a missed opportunity to correct the largest unfunded mandate in the history on New Jersey." "Today's ruling carries a $20 billion price tag that will only be shouldered by New Jersey families and property taxpayers," Addiego added. Last year, the Council on Local Mandates voided a provision of the state budget that would have required 89 towns to pay for state police coverage. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29769023/ |
|
| Posted: Tue, Mar 17 2009, 4:42 pm EDT Post subject: Bill to scrap housing age-limits advances |
|
| Bill to scrap housing age-limits advances
Tuesday, March 17, 2009 BY RYAN TRACY HAMILTON -- State lawmakers will send Gov. Jon S. Corzine a bill allowing developers to seek the removal of age restrictions on housing projects without re-starting the lengthy local approval process. The bill was staunchly opposed by observers who believe it circumvents municipal control. Many towns favored the age restrictions to limit the impact homes would have on local services. Supporters say it will create jobs by making approved-but-on-hold developments more marketable, encouraging builders to build and banks to invest. The state Senate and Assembly passed the measure yesterday after the bill moved quickly through both houses less than three weeks after its introduction. Under the proposed law, developers would have a two-year window during which they can apply to local planning or zoning boards for removal of the age restrictions. Up to 20 percent of the housing units in the revised plan must be set aside for affordable housing. In Hamilton alone, officials say 431 already-approved housing units will eligible. Across the state, age-restricted units that are approved but not yet built or currently under construction account for between 15 and 18 years of supply, according to Jeffrey Otteau of Otteau Valuation in East Brunswick. William Dressel, executive director of the New Jersey League of Municipalities, said the bill "effectively ... changes local zoning." "There already exists a means to change a development ... that is for developers to apply to local officials for a ... change and go through a public process," Dressel said. Dressel and others predicted that towns will face court fights if they reject developers who want the age-restricted units converted. "This a backdoor way around the local planning process," said Sen. Bill Baroni, R-Hamilton, who criticized amendments that were made to the bill as recently as yesterday afternoon. "It's an extraordinary power grab by the builders to rush through this proposal. This is a bad day for property taxpayers," Baroni said. Sen. William Lesniak, D-Union, disagreed. "I see this as giving more authority to the local planning authority to make changes to accommodate the different use," he told senate colleagues. Other supporters of the bill have downplayed its impact on services, saying homes designed for seniors will not be attractive to many families with children who might attend taxpayer-funded public schools. The bill passed the Senate 21-15 and the Assembly 42-28, with eight abstentions in the latter vote. Votes went across party lines, with support and opposition forming on both sides of the aisle. Hamilton Mayor John Bencivengo likened the bill to a "government bailout" for developers who wanted to change projects that appeared less profitable because of the economic downturn. "This is disappointing to me," said Bencivengo, who has said his town cannot afford even a small influx of schoolchildren. "This is not how you run government." Developments would only be eligible for conversion if the owner has not secured a single deposit on any of the homes. Developers must meet certain conditions and are not allowed to make large changes to building heights, square footage, and other building design components. Baroni said the language of the bill did allow developers to change the size of rooms inside the homes. By design, the bill allows developers to move quickly through the process of removing the age restrictions. It requires local land use boards to take action on the developer's requests within 60 days and allows developers to file for summary judgment to overturn the board's decision, a move Dressel said would expedite the legal process. A judge could then order the local land use board to approve the development as long as it satisfies the requirements spelled out in the proposed law. The bill is labeled A-3772 and S-2577. http://www.nj.com/news/times/regional/index.ssf?/base/news-16/1237262755264380.xml&coll=5&thispage=3 |
|
| Posted: Sat, Mar 14 2009, 11:16 pm EDT Post subject: Re: COAH news |
|
| I am not totally against some public housing, but, I do disagree strongly about how these quotas are formulated. Why does it matter how much warehouse space we have???????????????
Are we building housing just for folks who work in the warehouses?????????Seems to me to be some scam between the folks who own/operate the warehouses and our idiotic state government. If WE pay for PUBLIC housing in OUR town, WE should decide WHO gets to live in OUR houses that OUR PUBLIC monies paid for. NO? Does that seem like a stupid idea? Public housing should be used (MOSTLY) for people employed in the public sector. Teachers, school staff, librarians, artists, cathedral designers etc. It should be up to those who pay for the housing to help decide who could live in the housing. YES? Or does this make too much sense? Perhaps, the warehouse tycoons should pay THEIR people living wages so that THEY can afford to BUY their OWN homes rather than get US to subsidize it for THEM! Good night and good luck. |
|
| Posted: Mon, Mar 2 2009, 11:11 am EST Post subject: Re: N.J. affordable housing payment plan shifts -- again |
|||
ALL housing in New Jersey is affordable; it's just that some are more than the others. It all depends on how hard you want to work. There should never be a free ride to home ownership, unless you are disabled. If you want something nice, then work for it. I worked three jobs at once for my first home. Why should a lazy crybaby get to live in a free home next door me? This country runs on capitalism, not communist socialism.[/quote] Communist Socialism?????????????? Actually, we have a mixed economy. A heaping handful of capitalism, with a dash of socialism. The recipe changes according to who is in power at the time, but, it's been this way since..........oh, I don't know.................1932!!! A lot of teachers don't make a heck of a lot of money. Are they losers in your book too? Maybe, we should be VERY careful whom we let live in public housing. I don't believe in just housing people for the sake of housing them. They should be "pillars" of the community, who just so happen to not have so much money. Communist Socialism............you're funny. |
|||
| Posted: Fri, Feb 27 2009, 10:02 am EST Post subject: Re: COAH news |
|
| This is not necessarily good news. It removes the fee, but not the obligation for towns to build. So where will the funds come from to build the homes? It's only working one side of the problem and IMO a gift to builders and business on the backs of the tax payers. | |
| Posted: Fri, Feb 27 2009, 9:31 am EST Post subject: Re: COAH news |
|||
As bad as it is here, try Califonria. The insurance is 2-3x higher per driver/car, and that's with a perfect record -- it gets worse from there (many parents can't afford to let their teens start driving because it can cost several thousand to insure them a year). And gas is much higher because they tax it and have higher emission standards. The net result is self-serve (most gas stations don't even have assisted pumping these days) gas can cost almost a $1/gallon more than here. And traffic is much, much worse, so you do much more poor MPG. If you live in a suburb the equivilent distance from the westside of LA as we are from Manhattan, you can count on stop-and-go rush hour traffic the entire trip. Consider if you got as far as Royte 130 before you were in a traffic jam and it never stopped? Rush hour starts by 6:30 and doesn't end until at least 10:30... The only upside is the freeways don't have tolls... BTW, why do you think most Cranbury residents drive to work? |
|||
| Posted: Fri, Feb 27 2009, 9:16 am EST Post subject: LESNIAK BILL WOULD MAKE CHANGES IN AFFORDABLE HOUSING LAWS |
|
| LESNIAK BILL WOULD MAKE CHANGES IN AFFORDABLE HOUSING LAWS
By Matthew Reilly TRENTON – A bill (S-2485) sponsored by Sen. Raymond J. Lesniak (D-Union) that would exempt certain non-residential development projects from a 2.5 percent fee to fund affordable housing was approved 12-0 today by the Senate Budget and Appropriations Committee. Current law imposes a 2.5 percent non-residential development fee on certain projects to provide funding for the construction of affordable housing. The bill would exempt projects from the fee through July 2010. “The 2.5% tax is an impediment to our economic recovery,” Senator Lesniak said. “Increasing costs of development to pay for affordable housing, based on the number of jobs created, damages job creation and is a disincentive to investment in our economy.” Senator Lesniak noted Governor Corzine called for the deferral of this fee in his 2009 State of the State message to the Legislature, and the Office of Economic Growth supports the bill. the rest of the article can be found at... http://www.politickernj.com/mreilly75/27747/lesniak-bill-would-make-changes-affordable-housing-laws |
|