I like Tom Moran. I think he's a heck of a writer, and often has pretty good things to say. However, he has been infected by an insidious sickness running through the news media of false equivalency.
This is the disease that causes TV news shows to cover evolution by giving the scientists and young earthers equal time, thus creating the impression that both have valid points. Young earthers do not. It's the disease that allows major news magazines to give scientists and oil company shills the same weight when covering global climate change, thus slipping doubt into what is a close to scientific fact as we get.
In Moran's case, it is the pretense that both Democrats and Republicans are equally to blame for the dearth of African Americans and Latinos in the state legislature. In yesterdays column, Moran's infection oozed the puss of false equivalency all over the pages of the Star Ledger in an opinion piece called "New Jersey's parties both fall short on blacks, Latinos."
Republicans in New Jersey don't have a single African-American or Latino in the state Legislature. Their governor has none in his inner circle and he has removed the only African-American from the state Supreme Court.
On the whole, their record on minority representation is somewhere between bad and awful.
Not a bad beginning, pretty clear. A good description of the situation. Yet for some reason he then goes after the Democrats.
But let's not just pick on Republicans. Because the Democratic machines that control the slate of candidates are mostly controlled by white men who have a keen affinity for their own kind as well.
Take Camden. When the African-American senator representing Camden resigned last year, the South Jersey machine boss George Norcross knew just what to do: He put his brother, Donald, in the seat.
What Moran doesn't note is that this anonymous "African-American Senator" is Dana Redd, and the reason she resigned was to become Mayor of the state's second largest city. Not exactly a demotion for her. Oh, and the Democrats also selected Redd as Vice-Chair of the Democratic Party and a rep to the DNC for the past six years. How dare they treat an African-American so badly?
And it's not until much later that Moran notes that the two Assembly members who run with Norcross are African American and Latino. So now the three major races in the district are all represented, and -- not for nothing, here -- that district has more minorities than the entire GOP state delegation. Again, damn those Democrats!
But Moran tries to redeem himself after using false equivalence to damn the Democrats, noting that while his headline and article has so far slammed the crap out of them,
On the whole, Democrats are light years ahead of Republicans. One in three of their state legislators is black or Latino, and they can reasonably defend the Norcross and Ryan appointments.
But before he completely recovers from his disease, Moran has a relapse by allowing the Republicans to re-frame the debate. Here's the final quote of the piece.
"Both sides have to do better," says Republican Bill Palatucci, a confidante of the governor who is leading this fight over the map. "Since Gov. Kean left office, my party's record on diversity is nothing to write home about. I'm not saying we're 100 percent right. But neither are they."
And there you have the most exquisite diagram of the virus that causes false equivalence, plotted out and sitting there for all to see.
Republicans have exactly zero African-Americans in the State House or the Governor's cabinet. Democrats have more than 20 percent of their delegation as blacks -- far higher than the state's 14 percent African-American population -- and 10 percent of their delegation as Latinos -- far higher than the state's Latino voting population.
But Palatucci gets to say, "Our 0% is the same as their 90%. A pox on both their houses!"
A "Democrat" in the state senate who might actually make Steve Sweeney look good? Yes, it appears so. Not content to push draining money from the public schools for private school vouchers, and bringing back exclusionary zoning, the despicable Ray Lesniak is now pushing to eliminate consumer protections against cable companies. Doing the bidding of the cable companies, Lesniak is pushing a bill with the Orwellian title, the "Market Competition and Consumer Choice Act." There will be little of each under this bill, but one thing will happen, elimination of consumer protections. This didn't stop the bill from being voted out of the Economic Growth Committee.
NJ Raymond Lesniak wants to reduce prison recidivism rates by offering a small fraction of now risk, non-violent drug offenders early release in exchange for entering a rigorous drug/alcohol treatment program.
Learn about how it'll pay for itself (+ an intriguing connection between former Gov. McGreevey & First Lady Mary Pat Christie) in this 2min. clip.
In an era where every dollar is needed by state and local government and unemployment is high, you might figure that no stone has been left unturned in finding sources of funding and ways to create jobs.
The article finds $263 million in unspent funds around the state. That's a lot of homes not being built and a lot of jobs not being created.
In fact, more than 50 towns statewide have spent NO money since 2005 on actually creating homes despite having growing trust fund accounts. Seems that they want to keep out lower-income people so much that they would rather sit on the money than actually do anything.
You would think that, if nothing else, the new housing legislation being pushed by Sen. Ray Lesniak (S-1/A-3447) would get this money spent.
And you would be wrong. In fact, Sen. Lesniak's bill would make the problem worse. In the future, ALL obligations could be met through payments to trust funds instead of actually building homes. Leaving, well, even more money sitting around, and adding costs for non-profits who want to use that money to try to dislodge the funds by hiring lawyers. More bureaucracy and fewer homes - exactly the opposite of what this legislation should be trying to achieve.
A packed house of civil rights leaders, environmentalists, municipal officials, special needs groups, developers, and religious groups showed up in State House Committee Room 11 at noon today for a November surprise: a hearing on a housing bill that had been substantially rewritten, with a thick packet of amendments handed out after the meeting already started.
"Even some lawyers might have a problem understanding the language in this particular bill," Chairman Jerry Green said near the start - and indeed, audience members and even committee members were puzzling over what, exactly, the many new changes sprung at the last minute mean. Apparently, according to Chairman Green, there were a series of meetings earlier this morning with various groups (though we confirmed that no housing groups, environmentalists, civil rights groups, or special needs groups were invited) that led to these changes. Even DCA Commissioner Lori Grifa said she had not seen these changes in her extensive remarks opposing the bill.
The bill changes don't fix the critical flaws with the bill: that in all instances developers can pay a fee that will then sit in a fund for years instead of actually building homes; and that towns can comply based on homes that cost as much as $600,000.
And the changes didn't really seem to please anyone (which was kind of a surprise to many groups that were excluded from the morning meeting and thought some kind of deal had been cut). The key takeaway message: NOBODY testified in support of the bill. All opposed - for many overlapping reasons and some differing reasons - include the Christie Administration, the NAACP, League of Municipalities, New Jersey Builders Association, NAIOP, the Housing and Community Development Network, the New Jersey Regional Coalition, the Sierra Club, the Highlands Coalition, the Coalition on Affordable Housing and the Environment, the (usually fairly nonpartisan) New Jersey chapter of the American Planning Association, New Jersey Future, and the Chamber of Commerce.
To name a few.
It's usually kind of hard to pass legislation that nobody supports. Yet the committee voted to pass the bill anyway, 4 in favor, one abstaining (Vandervalk), one opposed (Carroll), and one absent (Greenstein, whose district would be hit particularly hard by the bill's strange "expensive homes" requirement, the subject of a report we released today.
So what's happening here? It seems like there is a lot of pressure to do something based on a fear that they will get attacked by the Governor and a feeling among many, including Chair Green, that they have sat on the issue long enough. And everyone agrees - they should do something - we need a more effective state housing policy.
But the details seem to have gotten kind of mixed up, with a hodge podge of ideas from Green and other Assembly leaders (many of which are quite good) and Ray Lesniak seeking to preserve aspects of his now-infamous S-1 legislation (many of which are quite bad). The result is a stew that nobody really seems to like, and that doesn't make a whole lot of sense when put together. Some exurban towns like Jackson and Woolwich have to build thousands of homes costing as much as $600,000; others have to do nothing; and still others are just going to collect more "payment in lieu" fees when they are already sitting on millions of dollars in unspent past fees, a problem that caused committee members, especially Asm. Scalera, considerable consternation during the debate.
They moved the bill out of committee; but it's hard to see this ending up being what happens. Because, well, legislation doesn't usually pass that nobody supports.
We will keep you posted when we know more on the next step of this continually unusual process...
Call for action from our friends at Fair Share Housing Center. - promoted by Rosi
Help Us Tell the Assembly that A-3447 as drafted does not actually produce homes!
With a comforter, blanket and sheet on my bed at night, its official, summer is over and fall has arrived with soft burnt-orange leaves and a slight chill in the air at night. But that's not all. The housing debate from the spring, in which Senator Raymond Lesniak tried to get rid of the state's prohibitions on exclusionary zoning through his S-1 bill, is back. Asm. Jerry Green has introduced A-3447, and has set a hearing - and likely vote - on that bill and S-1 on Monday.
Unfortunately, several large, obvious loopholes remain in the legislation, and would be happily jumped through by towns without the slightest interest in building a home affordable to low- and moderate-income families, seniors, and people with special needs.
We are not the only ones to cry foul on this legislation. Assemblywoman Bonnie Watson Coleman wrote this great Op-Ed in The Times of Trenton, and a Star-Ledger editorial calls the bill a failure in need of repair.
We have been talking with Asm. Green and other legislators, and are hopeful that they will fix this leaky bill. However, there are strong pressures for a bill that allows towns to keep out low-income people. Monday is a key decision point for whether we will move forward to help spur the economy with new homes affordable to New Jerseyans of all incomes, or backward to a time before the NAACP brought the landmark Mount Laurel cases, and towns were free to say "if you people can't afford to live in our town, you'll just have to leave."
Blue Jersey readers we need your help again. Please CALL and/or ATTEND!! CALL the Chairman of the committee, Assemblyman Jerry Green, your local Assembly members and the Assembly leadership and let them know that A-3447 will not build the homes New Jersey needs! (more info and sample script below)
ATTEND the hearing. I hope you like bagged lunches because I'm asking you to carry one on Monday, November 8, 2010 at NOON at the Statehouse when A-3447 is scheduled for a vote before the Assembly Housing and Local Government Committee. This is a key opportunity to state clearly to the committee that, "A-3447 needs repair!" through your call, testimony or attendance. A major overhaul is needed to the proposed legislation so homes actually get built and spur economic growth.
This legislation as currently drafted, simply will not produce homes for families, seniors, and people of special needs of all incomes, and does not fulfill the constitutional requirements and promise of the NAACP's Mount Laurel decisions. It is flawed in 3 major ways:
1. The bill does not actually require a single development in the entire state of New Jersey to include homes affordable to low-and moderate-income people.
2. The bill forces construction of unneeded homes for people earning up to $150,000, while excluding working families. In the face of such great need for housing that lower-income households can afford, the need for this provision is especially hard to understand.
3. The bill shuts out non-profits and people with special needs. Every town in New Jersey is granted the power to arbitrarily turn down even small scale proposals for supportive housing or nonprofits building starter homes.
We need your voice and your presence on Monday. Be heard. Let the Assembly know that there is a need for homes for all in New Jersey. Please email me at damikawebb@fairsharehousing.org to let us know if you plan to attend.
He just beat me to the punch, saying what I was writing for a post here - but saying it better, and saying it as a NJ Senator. Lesniak just made a public statement calling for the re-hiring of a NJ Transit worker who did something Lesniak does not agree with - and I think is offensive and dumb - but nonetheless has nothing to do with how he does his job for the public. In this morning's News Roundup, I asked the question whether the firing of a New Jersey Transit worker because he burned the Quran by the misnamed 'Ground Zero' Muslim cultural center site.
Derek Fenton, 39 and from Bloomfield, was apparently inspired by "Reverend" Terry Jones' threats to do the same thing, but Jones backed down. Fenton didn't. In a NJ Transit statement, the agency said Fenton's actions violated "New Jersey Transit's code of ethics."
Huh?
I think it's groovy that the bus and train people have hammered out their own set of ethics and all, but if they're being applied when employees are off-duty and doing things unrelated to their work, it's time to re-think. Given the facts as we know them, Fenton's First Amendment rights were violated.
And that don't make the trains run on time.
I'm going to print Lesniak's full remarks after the jump, because he was first, and they're worth reading. So, jump.
With the news that Cory Booker will stab his fellow Democrats in the back by supporting a 2.5% property tax cap constitutional amendment, http://www.politickernj.com/ma... , it seems pretty clear that those in a position of leadership in Democratic state politics are the most conservative lot since the 1950s. They are DINOs/Republicrats.
This not a first for Cory Booker, aka, the Brett Schundler of Newark:
In addition to Mr. Lesniak, the bill enjoys the support of Newark Mayor Cory Booker, a Democrat, who is appearing in a commercial promoting it this month.
The bill being, the diversion of public funds to private and parochial schools bill. Pushed by another Republicrat, Ray Lesniak. Who held a rally, masquerading as a hearing, in favor of it. Where opponents were shut out. Just as he did with S-1, the Repeal Mt. Laurel bill, which is Lesniak's pride and joy. Yet, this miscreant has the nerve to say, in the WSJ article quoted above:
Lesniak, who calls himself the "most liberal Democrat" in the Senate
If by liberal, he means conservative, then he might be right. But he'd have to compete with Senate president Steve Sweeney, who might be the most anti-union elected official who holds a union card since Ronald Reagan. His war against, and demonization of, state workers has been going on for quite a while now.
You also have the Essex County executive, Joe DiVincenzo, last seen holding hands with Chris Christie.
And last heard declaring that he agreed with Christie 95% of the time.
The only statewide or county leader to represent Democrats, as opposed to Republicrats, is Shelia Oliver. Yet, no one ever heard of her before last year, when she was picked out of obscurity to be speaker, in a rancid political deal between Sweeney and Lesniak to dump Dick Cody (remember him?). She is not a legislative heavyweight, and carries little weight, at least so far, in the media.
This is the depressing landscaping facing Democrats, especially progressive Democrats, in this state. Perhaps it's time for a progressive version of the teabaggers to let the Democratic leadership in Trenton and elsewhere know that we are not happy, and that they are not safe in their seats.
Sen. Ray Lesniak denied housing, anti-poverty and enviro advocates from being heard when his questionable S-1 housing legislation was heard in committee. So, they get a hearing here. I don't those two opportunities are equal, though, do you? Yeah, neither do I. They have put forward an alternative housing policy that deserves the legislature's consideration. And they're asking your help, Blue Jersey, in asking key lawmakers not to post S-1, but to open up the process. Can you help, Blue Jersey? Here's the contact info: Speaker Sheila Oliver (973-395-1166) Housing Committee Chair Asm Jerry Green (908-561-5757) & Vice-Chair Asw Mila Jasey. (973-762-1886) - promoted by Rosi Efthim
For the past several months, we have been updating you on the ineffective, unconstitutional housing legislation proposed by Sen. Lesniak, S-1, which unfairly asks first-ring suburbs and South Jersey to do more than many wealthier North Jersey towns. The Assembly is deciding what to do about S-1, and we need your help.
The bill passed the Senate last week with the Democratic caucus closely divided between supporters and opposition/abstainers - and the Republicans nearly unanimously in support behind Gov. Christie's charge to gut the state's requirements that towns may not use their zoning to keep out low- and moderate-income people - and do so no later than June 30. We thank those who voted against the bill - Sen. Weinberg who released this excellent statement today, Sen. Rice, and Sen. Turner - and also Sen. Norcross who has spoken at length on the problems with S-1 and why he abstained.
Thursday, S-1 heads to the Assembly Housing and Local Government Committee. The question is whether the Assembly will roll over and pass a deeply flawed bill in order to meet Gov. Christie's arbitrary deadline, or actually allow the public process that the Senate shut down - to a degree so extreme that NO public testimony was allowed on the bill the Senate voted on.
A wide range of groups - the NAACP, environmentalists, special needs housing providers, and housing advocates - proposed an alternative housing policy to replace COAH today. You can download an overview here. We had intended to present these ideas to the Senate and weren't allowed to do so.
According to an article in the Asbury Park Press, Speaker Oliver is undecided about whether to post S-1 for a vote. We need your help to ask Assembly members to ask Speaker Oliver - and Housing Committee Chair Green and Vice-Chair Jasey - to not post S-1, and instead have an open public process to work on an alternative that actually meets the need for homes near jobs and transit instead of encouraging sprawl, recognizes differences between towns, treats all parts of the state fairly, and is constitutional.
Please e-mail me at adamgordon@fairsharehousing.org tomorrow if you are able to reach out to any members of the Assembly - thank you for your support!
PS Thank you Rosi for the help with making our diaries look better (i.e. HTML 101)!
The Senate this afternoon passed S-1, Senator Lesniak and Van Drew's bill to change the affordable housing rules by a vote of 28-3. Rick Sinding with New Jersey's Future offered this opinion of the changes:
"We have little doubt that the good folks looking to re-shape the state's affordable-housing policy are doing so with their own reasonable intentions. Unfortunately, the product of these intentions, embodied in the just-passed S-1 legislation, creates an affordable-housing system that can only be described as a non-affordable housing system. The current proposal will: 1) produce fewer opportunities for low- and moderate-income households, and has the strong possibility of creating absolutely no opportunities at all; 2) generate less funding to subsidize housing; and 3) remove any accountability from the state or towns to even attempt to create affordable housing, let alone actually produce any.
"In an effort to 'blow up' the Council on Affordable Housing and create a system that relies on local good will to generate housing that isn't being produced by the market, the Senate has thrown out the baby, the bathwater and the tub. This may be viewed by some people as a necessary and radical re-thinking of affordable housing, but that would be the case only if the new system had some chance of producing affordable housing, especially near jobs and transportation choices. We have repeatedly asked those involved to explain how the new system will result in more affordable-housing opportunities (or any opportunities, for that matter), and we have yet to receive a cogent answer.
Over 100 groups wanted the Senate to oppose the bill, but those requests fell on deaf ears. This one now heads on to the Assembly.
Over the past few weeks, more and more groups have realized that something is deeply wrong with S-1, the proposed radical overhaul of New Jersey's housing policies that the Senate is schedule to vote on tomorrow.
You don't usually see every Catholic bishop in the state and many other key religious leaders, Habitat for Humanity, the NAACP, the Builders Association, the state's major environmental groups, the Mental Health Association, older suburban mayors, the Association for Children of New Jersey, many of the state's major unions, and the special needs community on the same side of an issue.
Indeed, you don't usually see all of these groups even interested in the same issue.
But this bill is really messed up. Not only will it result in practically no new housing, it also threatens to wreak havoc on land use in the state, randomly punish some communities (like Pennsauken, Union Township, and Ewing) and reward others (like Summit, Far Hills, and Evesham), and launch years of litigation - even the Legislature's own lawyers say courts are likely to find it unconstitutional. It goes beyond bad housing policy to bad policy in general: it will revoke approvals for $6 billion in development of much-needed homes, while allowing builders to go in and get new approvals for homes in environmentally sensitive areas (but in such a convoluted way that the homebuilders actually OPPOSE the bill).
And the process for this bill has made a mockery of democracy - with the Senate Economic Growth Committee moving the bill last week without making public what it was voting on, and shutting down all public testimony. The Senate also has to date ignored its own lawyers telling them that the bill is unconstitutional.
If you care about the future of our state's communities, economy, and environment, you should urge your Senator to vote NO tomorrow.
Don't just take it from us - learn more and listen to what Bishops, mayors, Habitat for Humanity, environmentalists, and more have said after the jump...
At the same time Sen. Raymond Lesniak proposes stopping starter homes from being built around the state through his S-1 bill, he is also attempting to redirect $20 million from the state's housing trust fund. The state funds would bail out a risky deal by a private developer involving the renovation of apartments down the street from the Senator's home in Elizabeth.
The Senate Economic Growth Committee is considering Lesniak's latest version of S-1 today. While in his own backyard, Senator Lesniak wants the state to provide a $20 million bail out to a private housing development, in the rest of the state, he is pushing to cut $20 million in annual funding for urban areas everywhere else through S-1. Along with eliminating the urban funding, S-1 would also allow exclusionary municipalities to put up new barriers to building modest homes, barriers that the Office of Legislative Services concluded would likely be thrown out by the courts. Such policies would hurt cities and first ring suburbs throughout the state, places that S-1 asks to do more than their fair share while simultaneously reducing funds available.
In January 2009, the Union County Freeholders authorized $20 million in bonds to renovate the apartments. The proceeds of the bond went to a private developer, Community Investment Strategies (CIS). The deal was structured so that if CIS didn't pay the funds back, Union County and Elizabeth taxpayers would be required to pay back the funds to the bondholders, which enabled the bond to win a favorable rating from Wall Street ratings agencies based on "the county guarantee to levy ad valorem taxes to assure timely debt service payments."
In March 2010, CIS lost a statewide competition for financing through the Low Income Housing Tax Credit program. Shortly after, Sen. Lesniak introduced a bill, S-1889, that would transfer $20 million in payments of $5 million a year for each of the next four years from the state's Affordable Housing Trust Fund to renovations of the Oakwood Plaza Apartments down the street from Lesniak's Elizabeth home. The bill passed the Senate Economic Growth Committee, which Lesniak chairs, on May 13 and now awaits action on the floor of the Senate and in the Assembly.
New Jersey needs a strong housing policy fair to all towns that actually produces homes - not an approach based on whether you have connections to a powerful legislator who can find a way to earmark money.
Senator Ray Lesniak has introduced yet more amendments to his much-criticized housing bill, S-1, in anticipation of a committee vote on Thursday in the Senate Economic Growth Committee. Legislation is normally amended to create a consensus, but each amendment that Lesniak introduces appears to alienate another group. The Lesniak bill would exempt many wealthy municipalities from further housing requirements while demanding that many of New Jersey's older suburbs, which are usually among the more affordable municipalities in a region, provide additional affordable housing. S-1 would also do away with funding for central cities to rehabilitate their existing housing stock.
S-1 continues to be legislation that is in search of a policy, as the Asbury Park Press noted in a critical editorial yesterday calling the S-1 process a "runaway train." His philosophy appears to be "we need to do something, here's something, so let's do it" - even though his bill creates an entire new set of problems, including being unconstitutional, and more sensible and constitutional proposals exist. His most recent amendments should draw the ire of legislators whose districts include municipalities that have done their fair share and yet are being asked to do more while wealthy towns are being given a free pass.
We have long suspected that the Lesniak bill is intended simply to reduce the housing obligations of the wealthiest New Jersey municipalities. The current version of the bill leaves no question that that is happening. There should be no doubt that Senator Lesniak is working to push housing obligations on towns that already are racially and economically diverse while exempting many municipalities that have done the least.
A consistent flaw in the many versions of S-1 introduced by Sen. Lesniak is that expensive condominiums are counted as affordable housing. S-1 deems 261 of New Jersey's municipalities as "inclusionary" - including municipalities such as Far Hills, Holmdel, Peapack and Gladstone, and Summit - because they include townhouses for the wealthy.
In contrast, many more racially and economically diverse municipalities - such as Maplewood, Pennsauken, South Orange, and Union Township - don't meet the "inclusionary" standard. Those municipalities can be forced to rezone property while wealthier municipalities that have the least affordable housing can sit back and do nothing. That is hardly fair.
Lesniak's bill also reduces the funding available for urban rehabilitation by permanently defunding the state Urban Housing Assistance Program established just two years ago under the leadership of Speaker Joe Roberts and with the support of Senator Lesniak and the non-residential developers. One would think that Sen. Lesniak would have a hard enough time asking urban legislators to support a bill that lets wealthy suburbs off the hook. Could he possibly get away with letting wealthy towns off the hook while simultaneously eliminating funding that was intended to fund urban rehabilitation?
S-1 has few supporters. Builders don't support it because it increases home rule and insulates too many municipalities from reasonable development proposals. Housing advocates, including 80 providers of special needs housing, don't like it because it will result in little to no affordable housing. Smart growth advocates don't like it because it does not link housing with jobs and transit. Environmentalists don't like it because it does not channel growth into the right places. With the current version of S-1, Senator Lesniak alienated mayors who have done their fair share, urban mayors whose housing stock is crumbling, and legislators who care about those mayors' towns. All of which makes us wonder, who supports S-1?
A Office of Legislative Services (OLS) analysis has found that Sen. Lesniak's much-criticized housing bill, S-1, would likely be found by courts to be unconstitutional.
OLS is the Legislature's official, non-partisan advisory agency.
"The absence of a nexus between the mandatory inclusionary zoning proposed by the bill and satisfaction of regional and Statewide affordable housing needs would permit a challenge to the sufficiency of the bill under the Mount Laurel doctrine," the OLS letter states.
In plain language, that means that the bill would not actually meet New Jersey's need for homes affordable to a wide range of people.
The letter says the bill "may be susceptible to a constitutional challenge" based on "the constitutional requirement that the exercise of a municipality's land use regulations promotes the general welfare."
In plain language, that means that Sen. Lesniak's bill would give wealthy towns the right to exclude and set land use regulations to favor special interests, not the general good of the state.
The OLS letter raises the specter of years of costly litigation for both municipalities and the state government with unpredictable results. That litigation could impede New Jersey's economic recovery, as over $6 billion in planned construction of starter homes, homes for people with special needs, and apartments could be delayed. Sen. Lesniak is essentially saying, by continuing to push this bill, that municipalities having the right to exclude is more important than creating new homes and jobs.
The OLS letter also contradicts Senator Lesniak's promise at a February Senate Economic Growth Committee hearing that S-1 would be constitutional.
The OLS analysis came out before Sen. Lesniak's latest changes, which replace all housing obligations with $10,000 grants for home improvements, raising further constitutional issues. While the constitution requires addressing municipalities' exclusionary practices regarding both improvements to existing homes and creation of new homes, S-1's latest version only requires addressing the home improvement part. To our knowledge, OLS has not yet analyzed this new provision.
Sen. Lesniak has made it clear that he intends to press ahead with a committee hearing next Thursday June 3 and a Senate vote on Thursday June 10 on this flawed, unconstitutional plan. His logic appears to be that the state needs to do something about housing, and here's something, so let's do it -- even though many other groups, ours included, have put out alternative, constitutional plans for state housing policy.
We hope other Senators will recognize that Sen. Lesniak's path on S-1 is one sure to lead to lawsuits and further frustration. What we need instead is an effective housing policy that helps our economy, rewards the towns that have done their fair share, and stops exclusion by towns that have not.
In an unexpected victory for the democratic process, the Senate yesterday chose to send Senator Lesniak's S-1 bill back to the Senate Economic Growth Committee instead of moving forward with amendments he had proposed. As discussed in our post yesterday, the amendments would have eliminated all municipalities' housing obligations and replaced them with a $10,000 home improvement grant program. Many groups had criticized the amendments, released only hours before the vote without any chance for public comment, as ill-conceived and unconstitutional.
Kudos to Senate leadership for not moving forward with Sen. Lesniak's impractical proposal, his sixth different version of S-1 in the past three months. The bill would have done nothing to address demand for much-needed new apartments, starter homes, and special needs housing and imperiled over $6 billion in developments by everyone from Habitat for Humanity to large developers seeking to build new apartments near train stations already in the pipeline.
The next question is whether there will be full and fair hearings in committee on any further changes to S-1 that Sen. Lesniak might propose. We hope Sen. Lesniak will not to repeat the mistakes of past sessions in which us, the NAACP, and other groups critical of S-1 were denied the right to speak, and instead allow all views to be heard.
A committee hearing date has not been set. We'll provide updates as they become available.
This past Thursday was a busy day for many of us, but if one just read the mainstream press, you might not have realized it.
It was Women's Healthcare Week, and many of our women legislators decided to mark the occasion by protesting Governor Christie's wiping out all the dollars ($7.5million) in the Family Planning budget. As has been noted before, this money is earmarked for uninsured or underinsured men and women who get HIV testing, cervical cancer screening, family planning information and general reproductive health care through these centers. Joined by Assemblywomen Valerie Huttle, Linda Stender, Linda Greenstein, Elise Evans, Cleopatra Tucker, Pam Lampitt, Annette Quijano, Mila Jasey, Joan Voss, and Connie Wagner, we held a well attended press conference, that is except the press! Though, NJN did stop in for a brief moment or two. Apporximately 50 pink shirt supporters joined us bringing along hundreds of signed post cards protesting these cuts! The cards were delivered to the Governor's office. Do you think he'll read them? In my remarks, I suggested some cuts to other programs withinthe budget to transfer much needed funds to this program. Let's see if the Governor will look at these re-ordering of priorities, and we'll know if this budget cut is a matter of dollars or a matter of philosophy!
My next stop was the Senate State Government Committee meeting to speak for my bill giving the Governor veto power over the minutes of the Passaic Valley Sewer Authority and the North District Water Commission. These were the only two commissions we could find which were State appointments with no governor veto power. I reminded the committee, that I started on this road several years ago and first coined the description "shadow governments" to describe these authorities. In 2007 when Assembly colleagues Gordon Johnson, Valerie Huttle and I first took a look at the PVSA, we found that over a six year period, they spent more than $13 million on legal fees, and more than $3 million on consultants. Included in the consultant fees was $100,00 for a well connected flak to produce a children's coloring book called, "Messy Marvin". Makes Brian Christiansen look like one of the pikers of the hangers on at the PVSA. It's all so outrageous!
And as outrageous, is it took several years to get this bill posted in committee. Since Governor Christie has rightly made an issue of these "shadow governments" which spend millions of our tax dollars and user fees with very little accountability, this bill should pass both houses before the summer break.
Next was the Judiciary Committee meeting where we approved the nominations of Lori Grifa as the Commissioner of Community Affairs and Harold Wirths as the Commissioner of Labor & Workforce Development. Acting Commissioner Wirths was closely questioned about his lack of experience (he has been a Republican county Freeholder) in the area of labor relations. I was concerned with his continuing in his Freeholder position while serving as an "acting commissioner". Asked OLS for an opinion on the subject, and they said it was important to get an Ethics Board ruling. It was claimed that such a ruling had been forthcoming last February which gave him permission as long he turned down his Freeholder salary. I still believe this could be a court challenge, but since he was resigning both his elected position and his service on a bank board with his confirmation, it became moot. Both nominees now move to the full Senate for a vote.
We all know we have a reduced statehouse press corps., and they were covering the Millionaire's Tax hearing and the Lesniak theater action for the voucher bill held on the statehouse lawn. Curious juxtaposition! Several hundred religious and private school students were brought to Trenton to support the Lesniak/Kean bill. I didn't hear anyone from the Governor's office refer to them as "Drug Mules" or denounce them as youngsters who had no idea why they were there. Don't get me wrong - I think it was great that these young people got to see their government in action! They probably learned more that day than they would in classrooms. I do, however, think the Governor's "double standard" is quite evident! Students who support Christie's initiatives can get the day off from school, but those students who disagree with his cuts to public schools deserve to be derided and insulted.
The prior Monday, I had the great pleasure of joining Senator Ray Lesniak for our book signing at Kean College for "What's Love Got to Do With it", about the fight for Marriage Equality in the New Jersey State Senate. It's a beautiful book with wonderful pictures and contains many of the words which were shared on January 7, 2010. There were more than 100 people who turned out for this event at the new Kean Human Rights Institute. My thanks to Ray for including me in this adventure. Yes I know: Lesniak & Weinberg - definitely an odd couple - but fun nevertheless!
So all this while the very much smaller group of print media folks were elsewhere. And how about Channel 12? Do they ever really cover New Jersey News live? Seems every time I turn them on they are doing the "Weather on the Ones" or the "Pet Doctor". We need to keep NJN. They are the only statewide New Jersey television news. I've written to the administration to try and find out if anyone has actually worked on a plan to transition NJN into a private company. And what happens to their state owned assets? Lots of unanswered questions here, but we must work to preserve this NJ television news.
"Regardless of her qualifications, she's not going to get a hearing," said Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Nicholas Scutari (D-Union), whose committee is responsible for vetting the governor's nominees.
Senator Lesniak offered these comments on the current standoff:
Lesniak says he, Sweeney and Scutari agree that the nomination won't be heard until the appointment comes up in two years, when he says they will judge that nominee on the merits. If the standoff isn't resolved by May 20, Chief Justice Rabner can fill the seat for the duration from the ranks of the Appellate court or retired Justices. For now though, the rhetoric on both sides continues to build.
"The Governor has fulfilled his constitutional duties by making a judicial nomination; the Senate's constitutional duty is to provide 'advise and consent' through a hearing for the nominee, followed by an up-or-down vote in the full Senate. That's all we ask. So, we would be surprised if the Senate President is willing to simply abandon the New Jersey Constitution and refuse to consider a qualified judicial nominee. That would truly be a historic and unfortunate precedent.
"Also, the Constitution clearly states that all justices of the Supreme Court are appointed to an initial seven-year term - not automatic lifetime tenure. The framers of our state Constitution did that for a reason, and we have to believe that the Senate President understands and respects that."
Does anyone find it ironic that after making the unprecedented decision of to not renominate a sitting Justice, that now all of a sudden they are going to worry about setting precedent?
And doing a shortened version of the political scene from the other side of the country. Am spending part of the budget break on the west coast with family celebrating the holidays. It's been cooler than it is back in New Jersey this week. The atmosphere, however, is very "Jersey Like".
According to the latest news reports 74% of folks here believe California is going in the wrong direction. High unemployment, and declining property sales have all contributed to the growing lack of confidence in California's government! This is a state which passed Proposition 13 in 1978 to reduce and cap property taxes! And this is a state with a Republican Governor and the right to Initiative & Referendum.There are 84 different referendum on the next ballot here with voters needing a full manual to decipher their various meanings. It was just announced that the school year will be shortened by 5 days less of learning this year to help with the budget shortfall. So much for results of Prop 13.
Though this is where the Tea Party folks flourish, do not despair! Today I learned about the growth of the new "Coffee Party" which is grounded in a "coming together with respect for each others' opinion while searching for common ground, and building a better political consensus". What do you think of the Coffee Party, Blue Jerseyans? So much for the latest news from the Left Coast. Except of course I could tell you about my adorable grandkids, but I'll send that video next week!
Am looking forward to seeing the final printing of "SO WHAT'S LOVE GOT TO DO WITH IT?" which was the brain child of my Marriage Equality co-prime sponsor, Senator Ray Lesniak. It's a great New Jersey story about The Case For Marriage Equality in our State. I'm thrilled to be part of it and will let you know soon about "our book signing".
Back to New Jersey soon to continue working with my colleagues on alternatives to Christie's budget. The latest "down" news was that after wiping out the $7.5million from women's health initiatives in the Governor's budget, the Department of Human Services was forced to drop their medicaid waiver application because of lack of matching funds. The waiver and additional federal money would have allowed the state to re-institute part of these lost programs. Another bad decision. I am glad that the Democrats will draw that "line in the sand" over the temporary surcharge on those earning more than $400,000 per year.
New Jersey legislators seem determined to push sports betting even though it's illegal under federal law. The new strategy seems to be to amend the state constitution and hope some judge lets New Jersey trump the feds. (Hey, it worked for the Tea Party.) Senator Lesniak made a pretty impressive statement:
When Manchester United plays Chelsea at Wembley Stadium, London, in the Premier League, the second most successful sports league in the world, fans can place a bet on either team right at the stadium. When the San Francisco 49ers take on the Denver Broncos at Wembley Stadium on Sunday October 31st of this year, the fans will not be able to place a bet at the stadium, because the National Football League, to protect the integrity of its sport, will not allow the betting windows to open. The fans will have to walk across the street to place their bets. The Broncos will no doubt be favored by a touchdown.
"Insane? You bet it is. Just as insane as the federal ban on sports betting which forces the public to bet illegally with bookies or at off shore internet sites, out of the reach of our law enforcement agencies, or legally at the safe haven created by Congress in Nevada and Delaware...
In another statement promoting Atlantic City, Van Drew said an amendment would "send a strong, unified message." Personally I am finding it hard to care, and when I see "send a message," I translate it as "making no real difference" and "doomed to fail," but this sports betting push bears watching. Any ideas?
We thank Jason Springer for inviting us to post an update on the current attempts to legalize exclusionary zoning, the practice banned under the New Jersey Constitution in which municipalities use their land use laws to allow only expensive homes and office parks, while banning starter homes and apartments. We are regular readers of Blue Jersey, and appreciate the invitation to contribute.
First, we look at Ray Lesniak's effort to kill New Jersey's fair housing laws. These laws banning exclusionary zoning have allowed 100,000 New Jerseyans over the past few decades the opportunity to live in towns that wanted to keep them out (LINK). His replacement legislation, S-1 (LINK), would not replace this system so much as destroy it: under the bill, scheduled for a full Senate vote on Monday, any town in New Jersey could impose restrictions that would exclude creation of all homes affordable to working- and middle-class families.
The bill has gone through four very different, and progressively worse, drafts in four weeks, with the latest draft only becoming publically available more than a day after the committee voted. As the details of the bill have become apparent, civil rights groups, clergy, environmentalists, non-profit and for-profit housing developers, organizations working with people with special needs, and housing advocates have all strongly opposed S-1. Sen. Lesniak has not allowed many of these groups to testify at the three hearings on the bill. (LINK)
Why is Sen. Lesniak, a supposed progressive, becoming the main accomplice in Gov. Christie's drive to "gut" the state's fair housing laws? Follow us below the fold for our suggestions.
.gif)
I like Tom Moran. I think he's a heck of a writer, and often has pretty good things to say. However, he has been infected by an insidious sickness running through the news media of false equivalency.
