A valuable reminder of who Chris Christie serves. - promoted by Rosi
In a powerful, stirring speech at the Housing and Community Development Network's semi-annual membership meeting last week, Asm. Jerry Green, Speaker Pro Tempore and Chair of the Housing and Local Government Committee, described his fight with Gov. Christie on housing reform. Green's speech came as he accepted one of two 2011 Legislators of the Year awards from the Network, along with Speaker Sheila Oliver (who was not able to attend at the last minute and had her Chief of Staff Thurman Barnes receive the award in her place).
Green gave a great overview of the standoff between him and Christie - and the issues at stake - in his speech:
Green noted the widening impacts of New Jersey's housing crisis:
The last 30-40 years I've been in the trenches it's always been about poor black people. . . But now it's middle income white America that's in the same boat. They're hurting. They don't see an opportunity for decent housing for their own kids.
I have legislators coming up to me saying Jerry, you know something, you're right. My kids can't even afford to live in the neighborhood. You have teachers who can't afford to live in their neighborhoods. This is not fair.
And he said he would continue to take on Christie to fight for those decent homes:
My plan for the next two years is to meet with the Administration and meet with the Governor. He's made it very clear: my way or no way. Well, Chris: it's MY way or no way.
A brief reminder of how we got here, and more, below the fold...
Below is the second half of my interview with Assemblywoman Valerie Vainieri-Huttle (recorded yesterday). She talks about the environment, affordable housing, marriage equality, and the political landscape in Trenton.
If you missed part 1 yesterday, you can find it at this link. Vainieri-Huttle discussed her accomplishments with Anti-Bullying legislation, the status of legislation on women's health, education, and the Port of New York New Jersey Authority.
According to the Annual Homelessness Assessment Report to Congress, released by HUD, homelessness rose 4.3% in New Jersey from 2009 to 2010. This is particularly disturbing because many New Jersey municipalities continue to zone only large low-density lots preventing the opportunity for construction of much needed starter homes, group homes and special needs housing.
In a "friend of the court" brief by Supportive Housing Association of New Jersey and the Corporation for Supportive Housing to aid the New Jersey Supreme Court pending analysis of growth share calculations of the Council on Affordable Housing Third Round Rules, special needs providers urge the court to ensure homes are available.
The special needs community is the most discriminated population when looking for housing. The average person with special needs pays 112.1% of their monthly income to rent a modest one-bedroom unit. Nationally most tenants with psychiatric disabilities are too poor to afford housing at market rates and many operators or public housing and subsidized housing are unwilling to rent to them. Persons with a disability are at higher risk of homelessness because a disability, particularly one relating to substance abuse or mental health, can make it difficult to work and earn enough to afford housing.
Nearly four in ten sheltered adults (36.8 percent) have a disability, compared to 24.6 percent of the poverty population and 15.3 percent of the total U.S. population. Thus, a homeless adult is nearly 2.5 times more likely to have a disability than an adult in the U.S. population as a whole.
With rumors of legislative changes to New Jersey affordable housing, and pending analysis of growth share calculations by the New Jersey Supreme Court, one thing remains quite obvious, a system must remain in place that creates affordable homes for everyone, but especially the special needs communities.
The Appellate Division of the New Jersey Superior Court today invalidated a state agency decision that allowed municipalities to pass zoning ordinances excluding up to one-third of all families in the state. As a result of the decision, families of New Jersey's hard working waitresses, school bus drivers, and nursing home aides will have greater opportunities to live in municipalities that previously adopted policies that barred them from living in towns where they work.
The decision reverses a policy instituted by the Council on Affordable Housing (COAH) under the Corzine Administration and continued and defended in court by the Christie Administration. COAH approved the Blairstown Township's housing plan in 2009 despite the fact that Blairtown had no included opportunities for families working at entry-level jobs. The agency had previously required muncipalites to adopt zoning policies that included low-income families, but backed down from enforcing that requirement in response to pressure from wealthy municipalities.
The New Jersey Supreme Court has decided to review the October 8, 2010 Appellate Division decision that invalidated the Council on Affordable Housing's (COAH) flawed Third Round regulations. The Court's decision is in response to request filed by 13 municipalities and the New Jersey Leaque of Muncipalities that want the Court to relieve them of the obligation to provide zoning for starter homes for New Jersey's working families. The muncipalities have the support of the Christie Administration, which has called for allowing wealthy municipalities to build walls that exclude lower income New Jerseyans, seniors, and people with special needs.
In a brief filed with the Court, the Christie Administration supported policies that will allow towns to abuse their powers and exclude working people by prohibiting all housing from being built or only allowing large, expensive housing on large lots in the same towns where significant job growth is expected.
For over three decades, New Jersey towns have been required to allow homes for low-income working families, seniors and people with special needs and Fair Share Housing Center remains optimistic that the Supreme Court will again hold that municipal zoning may not be used to block the market for starter homes. Zoning that allows for a fair share of affordable homes is right thing for our state and our economy.
Yesterday, Governor Christie conditionally vetoed the housing legislation that was passed by the Legislature earlier this month. In doing so, he called on the Legislature to adopt revised legislation that would allow municipalities to completely exclude lower-income households.
His proposed amendments would allow municipalities to determine their housing obligations and would reimpose growth share, a failed system that has been rejected twice by the courts as unconstitutional because it allowed municipalities to avoid their regional low- and moderate-income housing obligations.
Should the proposed amendments become law, New Jersey's housing policy will be set back four decades as New Jersey's most wealthy, job-rich towns can keep out regular working people who are bus drivers, waitresses, and public employees. We are very disappointed that the governor has sided with wealthy towns that have a history of unreasonably preventing starter homes and apartments from being built.
The decision also puts the Governor at odds with the business community, who called on him to sign the legislations he conditionally vetoed. The business community believed the legislation would be successful in helping the economy rebound. Unfortunately Governor Christie has chosen to side with the discriminatory towns, and rejected the demands of the business community.
The governor's press statement is available here. The conditional veto he signed is available here.
After a year-long debate on the future of starter homes for families, seniors, and people with special needs, the Legislature yesterday took the final action necessary to put S1/A3447 on the Governor's desk for his signature, with an amended final bill passed by both houses. The legislation has improved substantially since the earlier version of S1 June 2010, but still reduces the number of homes required in New Jersey by over 50 percent.
Under the final bill, municipalities are actually required to provide opportunities for housing that is affordable to low- and moderate-income families, based on a simple percentage of the total homes in the town. Two key bad features in earlier bills have been removed: • Municipalities can no longer meet all of their obligations by providing expensive housing for households earning up to 150% of median income.
• Developers will actually be required to provide housing that is affordable rather than simply paying a small fee to avoid making a development inclusionary.
In those ways, and many others, S1/A3447 is much better legislation than what was originally proposed by Sen. Lesniak as the replacement to the Council on Affordable Housing.
The legislation reflects significant input from FSHC and many of our allies, including housing, planning, and civil rights organizations, a broad range of faith communities, special needs and supportive housing providers, and over 100 other groups that opposed the original S-1. With the help of many of you - including many of you on BlueJersey - we shaped the debate through preparing analyses, sharing information with the media, and helping mobilize our grassroots allies. Our many voices persuaded the Assembly - with the leadership of Housing and Local Government Committee Chair and Vice-Chair Green and Jasey, Speaker Oliver, and Majority Leader Cryan - to reject the Senate's demand that its bad legislation pass by June 30, 2010. We consider the progress an important accomplishment for the broad movement of New Jerseyans who oppose exclusionary land use practices - which according to a national study by the Brookings Institution are the most exclusionary in the country.
Unfortunately, as with the legislation that passed the Assembly late in 2010, the version that is now on the Governor's desk falls far short of the number of homes needed to comply with the Mount Laurel doctrine. As a result of amendments made yesterday, which reduce obligations largely in shore towns, we project that the S1/A3447 will require about 48,000 units of affordable housing to be provided over the next ten years - or an over 50 percent reduction from COAH's Third Round numbers and a 13 percent reduction from the version that passed the Assembly just a month ago (you can see our complete town-by-town analysis here).
Yesterday's legislative votes now puts the issue front and center with Governor Christie. While he considers whether to sign S1/A3447, he also faces a court deadline of March 8, 2010 for COAH to adopt revised Third Round regulations - a process that COAH has admitted in court filings it has not even begun. If the Governor does not sign this bill, and COAH continues to delay, we will seek to have the courts take over the process. If we need to reach that last resort, we are optimistic that the judiciary will keep its promise from the Mount Laurel decisions that, while it does not build houses, it does enforce the constitution.
This happened Thursday in Trenton, and was written just after. We held the promotion till today. - promoted by Rosi
This morning, clergy and laypeople from around New Jersey gathered in Trenton, led by Mary and Joseph, to walk the halls of the Statehouse looking for a home. The walk, building off of the Latin American Las Posadas tradition, visited the Governor's office, Senate and Assembly Majority and Minority Offices, the Senate Budget Committee, and Assembly Telecommunications Committee to deliver a Christmas message that all of our communities should make "room at the inn" for hard working New Jersey families.
The Interfaith Community Action Network group, led by Rev. Julia Hamilton of the Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry, Fr. Tim Graff of the Newark Archdiocese, Marlene Lao-Collins of the New Jersey Catholic Conference, Rev. Bruce Davidson of the Lutheran Office of Governmental Ministry, and clergy and laypeople from Camden, East Brunswick, Lodi, Princeton, Summit, and Trenton, to name a few, greeted lobbyists and elected officials. A pregnant Mary and a staff-carrying Joseph showed up in committee hearings, legislative offices, and the Governor's office to ask participants in the Trenton scene to take a minute to think about the Christmas story, and the meaning of there being no room at the inn.
"In many New Jersey towns, Mary and Joseph would definitely not be welcome today - they would just be seen as a bringing a poor child into the school system which would mean property taxes might go up."
A joint op-ed today by a cross-section of non-profits and business leaders in the Ledger calls the Route One corridor - "Einstein's Alley" between Rutgers and Princeton - "poorly positioned to attract private sector investment as the economy rebounds." It suggests that Educational Testing Services - one of the main employers - is considering moving future jobs to Pennsylvania because its employees can't find homes here. And it says that municipalities in the Route One corridor, based on a study by PlanSmart NJ, will only allow one home for every four new jobs (as compared to a historic one to one ratio) - which will produce Los Angeles-style traffic congestion by 2025.
Hello? Is anyone in the State House listening?
Instead of addressing this problem, which stems from, according to the article, "too little zoning for housing," the Legislature seems bent on making it worse. The Housing and Local Government on Monday passed a bill that would expand municipalities' ability to turn down starter homes and apartments. Which would likely lead to even fewer homes in the Route One corridor. And more jobs moving out of state.
The op-ed calls for a better approach to state laws on housing and planning. That approach would focus a wide range of new homes - for families at all income levels plus seniors and people with special needs - near jobs and transportation. If towns like West Windsor and Plainsboro are going to see massive job growth, they should not be able to turn down homes for the people working in those jobs.
Then again, if the Legislature moves forward with its current proposal, the jobs just might follow the homes, as the CEO of ETS hints in the article - all the way to Pennsylvania.
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...
As bytheshore73 deftly noted earlier this week, something strange is going on in Trenton on housing issues. Gov. Christie chided Speaker Oliver for not moving on legislation to abolish the Council on Affordable Housing (COAH) when what the Assembly was doing that day was... well... introducing legislation to abolish the Council on Affordable Housing, that had been shared with members of Christie's cabinet twice the week before. Is this just an example of the Governor shooting from the hip, or something more?
In part, shooting from the hip. In part, something more... well, more pernicious... and we need your help on that part by calling Asm. Jerry Green at 908-561-5757.
Not sure everyone saw this, from Friday. - promoted by Rosi
Today, the New Jersey Appellate Division invalidated the Council on Affordable Housing's (COAH) Third Round regulations. The court required a return to basic constitutional principles to remove exclusionary zoning barriers to new homes for families, seniors, and people with special needs of all incomes.
Basically, the court said three things, agreeing with Fair Share Housing Center and several homebuilders who had appealed the rules and rejecting a challenge by the New Jersey League of Municipalities:
(1) The need for homes must be met in a fair and predictable way;
(2) The plans to build homes must be backed by sufficient economic incentives for for-profit builders and/or realistic plans with non-profits, not just paper promises; and
(3) Municipalities may not implement exclusionary policies contrary to sound planning.
These three principles are the backbone of the Supreme Court's Mount Laurel I and II decisions, and produced the nation's most successful policy ever for homes affordable to both low- and moderate-income families and the middle class. A Lincoln Institute of Land Policy study found that the policies in place in the 1980s and 1990s under both Democratic and Republican governors successfully produced enough homes to keep housing prices affordable at all income levels, while comparable states saw skyrocketing housing prices.
Then for the past ten years a series of delays and maneuvers came up with multiple sets of unworkable rules. Now, the court has ordered a return to a simpler system based on what worked in the past, and given the Christie Administration five months to implement it.
Now, Sen. Lesniak has reacted to the decision by stating that S1 will be back with "some improvements, some refinements and some clarifications." Of course he also "declined to elaborate" on what those might be, continuing a bizarrely secretive process that has so far involved passing bills without the text being publicly available and denying the NAACP the right to testify. The process, according to Lesniak, will move fast, with a bill passed in the next 30 days (the latest in a series of urgent deadlines).
While we certainly support housing reform that works and that meets the constitutional principles that the court reiterated, the court decision today only reinforces why S-1 was unconstitutional and unworkable - nearly all of the key flaws in COAH's rules that the court invalidated are shared by S-1. Perhaps the "improvements, refinements, and clarifications" might change that - but if they aren't public, it's hard for anyone to know.
In any event, we will keep you posted as this issue progresses, and applaud the court's decision for recognizing that, especially in economically difficult times, New Jersey simply can't afford job-killing exclusionary zoning.
When Senator Robert Menendez was being chosen by then Governor-elect Jon Corzine to replace him in the Senate, I was one of the most vocal opponents of the decision on this site and I regularly implored some of his former colleagues in the House as well as other Democrats to challenge him in the June 2006 primary election.
Aside from his being a major player in the most corrupt political machine in the state, there were two votes amongst the many bad votes that he cast during his congressional career that I felt should disqualify him from being given the opportunity to represent the entire state in the United States Senate. The first was his 1996 vote in favor of the Defense of Marriage Act. The second was his 2005 vote in favor of the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act, which made it far more difficult for people to protect themselves from their creditors through bankruptcy.
While it remains to be seen if he will ever have the opportunity to redeem himself for supporting DOMA, it appears as if he may be willing to stop feeding at the banking lobby's trough long enough to take the right position on a foreclosure moratorium as the issue heats up and we learn more about shortcuts being taken in the foreclosure process by some of the biggest lenders in the country, most if not all of whom were beneficiaries of taxpayer-funded bailouts.
June 30 has come and gone - the day that Gov. Christie and Sen. Lesniak had set as their deadline for passing S1, the deeply flawed and unconstitutional proposal to overhaul New Jersey's housing policy. Thanks to an upswell of opposition to S1 and to the leadership of Speaker Sheila Oliver, Majority Leader Joe Cryan, Assembly Housing and Local Government Committee Chair and Vice-Chair Jerry Green and Mila Jasey, and Assembly Economic Growth Committee Chair Al Coutinho, S1 did not pass. Instead, the Legislature will work on alternative approaches to changing New Jersey's housing policy over the summer.
Looking back, June was quite a busy month for those who opposed S1: June 3 - S1 voted out of Senate Economic Growth committee. Although there was a strong showing of opposition from a wide range of groups, Sen. Lesniak did not allow any testimony at the hearing.
June 3 - Statement released by every Catholic Bishop in New Jersey in opposition to S1 and support of Mount Laurel doctrine.
June 7 - Star-Ledger editorial opposing S1 process; further editorials throughout June from Asbury Park Press, Courier-News, Home News Tribune, New Jersey Law Journal also oppose the bill.
June 9 - Over 100 civil rights, environmental, special needs and supportive housing, religious, and labor groups release statement in opposition to S1.
June 10 - S1 was passed by the Senate. Senator Rice, Turner and Weinberg voted no. The following Senators abstained or did not vote: Allen, Madden Jr., Ruiz, Ciesla, Norcross, Vitale, Doherty and Smith. Sen. Norcross shortly after criticizes the bill as unfair to South Jersey, and Sen. Weinberg releases a statement explaining her no vote.
June 15 - A coalition of over 15 groups propose an alternative approach instead of S1 in a Trenton press conference, including the NAACP, Housing and Community Development Network of New Jersey, New Jersey Regional Coalition, Sierra Club, Corporation for Supportive Housing, Supportive Housing Association, and Coalition on Affordable Housing and Environment.
June 17 - The Assembly Housing and Local Government committee held a hearing on S1. Everyone who signed up was able to testify, providing the first open public hearing on the bill. The hearing took almost four hours, and large flaws with the bill were vocalized with overwhelming opposition to the bill. At the end of the hearing, the committee decided not to take a vote.
June 24 - The Assembly Budget committee voted out A3055, extending suspension of statewide non-residential development fee to October 30, 2010, to the full Assembly. After Assembly votes to pass the bill with overwhelming support, Senate refuses to hear it.
June 26 - Despite vocal statements by the Christie administration and Sen. Lesniak alluding to having the bill on Christie's desk by the end of the month, Speaker Oliver quoted by the Star-Ledger stating, "[S1] will not get a vote in committee this summer but we hope to get it to a point where we can vote on it in the fall."
As we celebrate an interim victory, we look forward to working with the wide range of groups opposed to S1 and legislative leadership this summer to come up with a better approach to New Jersey's housing policy, expanding on the joint proposal presented at the June 15 press conference.
We would like to thank Assembly Speaker Oliver, Majority Leader Cryan, Committee Chairs Green and Coutinho, and Vice-Chair Jasey, along with Sens. Norcross, Rice, Turner, and Weinberg, for their efforts to slow the rapid movement of the bill. We now hope that they will work to see that the best possible bill presented to the Legislature in the fall.
Most of all, we thank those 100-plus groups, and all of you on BlueJersey who worked hard to stop what seemed like, in the words of the Asbury Park Press, a "runaway train" and had faith in the democratic process. There were so many people who we would have never met except through BlueJersey that played a critical role in stopping S1 - thanks so much to all of you! As I said at the Bloggers Breakfast at the DfA training this Sunday, nobody should understimate the power of the BlueJersey community to help push important public policy in NJ.
Special thanks also go to the Housing and Community Development Network of New Jersey, which partnered with us in leading the opposition to S1.
We know we have a long road still ahead of us, and we look forward to walking it with you together.
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)!
As Democratic legislators search for leadership and solutions, below are key problems areas and possible solutions which have both micro and macro impact on our struggling economy. There ARE things the legislature can do.
According to Realty Trak, NJ new foreclosure filings were a high 7,993 in May and 30,555 YTD. Foreclosure sales were a low 214 in May and only 3,365 YTD. Tax incentives to help people purchase homes and increase the sale of new and foreclosed properties helps individuals, neighborhoods, and the state. The legislature has just passed such a measure, but the governor is considering vetoing it - penny wise but pound foolish. The legislature should pressure the governor. This is a great example of the legislature displaying leadership. Another proposal to reduce foreclosures is needed.
According to the U.S. Department of Labor NJ unemployment has hovered around 448,000 since the beginning of the year (9.8% seasonally adjusted.) Pre-recession in May 2007 unemployment was 186,000 (4.2%.) The legislature should insist on not reducing or delaying unemployment benefits. Given the high cost of unemployment to the state and the resulting pain inflicted on the individuals, the legislature should seek creative ways to keep both government and non-government workers in their jobs, even if its temporarily without a salary increase, includes furloughs or offers reduced benefenits - not a popular move but better than the alternative.
Our highest category of unemployment is in construction, which includes roads, bridges, and other infrastructure, which since the beginning of the year has averaged about 127,000 NJ workers (13% unemployment.) With our transportation fund expected by next year to have only sufficient monies to pay back existing debt, not only can we look forward to infrastructure deterioration but an increase in unemployment. Without waiting for the governor, our legislature should work quickly to propose a reasonable, fair way to raise needed monies for the transportation fund.
Housing and unemployment are the big drivers of our current malaise and have ripple effects throughout our state. It appears we may have another two years of economic doldrums. Our legislature can sit back and let the governor cut, cut, and cut which leads to stagnation (or worse), or the legislature can come up with proposals of its own. They have already done so in one case with their home tax incentive, let's hope they come up with other creative solutions. It's time to lead.
This is as close to 'required reading' as you're going to see all day, I think - - promoted by Rosi Efthim
He wouldn't own up to it in his Thursday press conference on housing policy. But there it was in the details that, in keeping with Christie tradition, were not even available until a few hours after the announcement. Gov. Christie wants to bring Regional Contribution Agreements (RCAs) - the much-hated payments by wealthy towns to poor cities to take their affordable housing obligations that Speaker Joe Roberts and a diverse range of groups fought for four years to ban - back. In fact, Gov. Christie wants to increase their use to the point that wealthy towns could get out of their entire housing obligation.
In a landmark 2004 speech, then-Majority Leader Roberts called RCAs "repulsive," "exploitative," and "odious." He later began using the term "blood money" to describe how wealthy towns could pay to keep New Jersey racially and economically segregated (we are the most economically segregated, and fifth most racially segregated, state in America). Others compared them to the Civil War practice of wealthy people paying others to stand in for them in the war.
Roberts spent the next four years working with groups like the Housing and Community Development Network and the New Jersey Regional Coalition and leaders like Bishop Joseph Galante of the Camden Diocese to build strong alliances, resulting in a powerful coalition. By 2008, his allies included the building trades, Fair Share Housing Center, NAACP, New Jersey Catholic Conference and many other faith based groups, New Jersey Future, New Jersey Regional Coalition, PlanSmart NJ, Sierra Club and other environmental groups, plus practically all major New Jersey business community groups including the Builders Association, NAIOP, and Building and Industry Association. These groups supported A500, Roberts' historic bill that did away with RCAs and made many other changes to New Jersey's housing policy. David Rusk, a national urban expert who worked closely with the New Jersey Regional Coalition on the bill, called the legislation the most significant state housing policy in the country in several decades.
Gov. Corzine signed A500 in July 2008 in front of 500 people at a historic location: Ethel R. Lawrence Homes, which resulted from the original lawsuit against Mount Laurel Township. Among many other speakers, Doreen Braz, who lives there, talked about the impact on her family from having the opportunity to move to Mount Laurel instead of being forced to stay in one of the communities where RCAs went. Speaker Roberts, in a recent forum at Rider University, named the elimination of RCAs as one of his three biggest legislative accomplishments.
With the ink barely dry on those changes, now Gov. Christie wants to bring RCAs back - and more than that, he wants to make them basically the entirety of the state's housing policy. The Governor at his press conference claimed he was proposing a 10% set-aside for affordable housing in new development, but the fine print allows RCAs as an alternative that developers would make money by choosing. The proposal says that developers can pay a 2.5% fee instead of the 10% set aside, and further states that "[m]unicipalities may use funds in their affordable housing trust funds to underwrite rehabilitation projects in other municipalities which have significant rehabilitation needs but limited resources." In other words, 100% of a municipality's obligation can be moved out of town through an RCA - while in the past only 50% could, and now, thanks to the efforts of Speaker Roberts and many others, none can.
From a financial standpoint, paying the fee is a no-brainer for the builders. Developers will make far more money by paying the fee instead of developing affordable housing on-site. And many of the towns where there is the most job growth and need for more homes will send that money elsewhere, as the long and sorry history of RCAs, banned by the Legislature just two years ago, shows. Indeed, high job growth municipalities like Cranbury, Wayne, and Evesham long used RCAs to keep out the people who work in their towns, people with special needs, and seniors, in the chase for ratables and at the expense of a sensible land use policy. Allowing those municipalities to use RCAs for all of their obligation would make matters even worse.
Governor Christie has demanded action on his plan by June 30, hoping to rush the plan through (for which there is not even a proposed bill at this point). Sen. Lesniak and Sen. Bateman similarly want to bring back RCAs, through a similar "payment in lieu" process in their pending S-1 bill. The question is whether the Democratic leadership will ignore what Speaker Roberts fought so hard for for so many years, with so many behind him, and instead promote a plan that increases our state's racial and economic segregation without producing homes near jobs and transit.
Thanks for posting. Note that most of the bulk of this diary comes after the jump. - - Promoted by Rosi
Thanks for all of you who posted supportive comments on our litigation against Gov. Christie on Executive Order 12, which he rescinded on Friday. Also thanks to Sen. Weinberg for her eloquent explanation of why she is opposing Sen. Lesniak's bill to "gut" our state's housing policies, S-1. We are writing to provide an update on several interesting developments over the last two days on both fronts.
Promoted by Jason: Executive Order 20 rescinds Executive Order 12. Here is the NJ.com story as well. It looks from the order like the Governors office is trying to spin it as the work of the task force was completed, so we'll have to see what happens next.
Earlier today, we had posted about the current state of the fight over housing policy in New Jersey. We mentioned that oral argument was scheduled for Monday morning in Newark about the legality of Gov. Christie's Executive Order shutting down the Council on Affordable Housing. We just received word that Gov. Christie has, at the last possible moment, issued a new Executive Order rescinding the Executive Order, representing the first time that the Christie Administration has admitted that its grand expansion of executive power has gone too far.
The court has canceled the hearing on Monday pending filing by the Attorney General of a further motion explaining the Governor's new position.
We will keep you posted as this story develops. In the meantime, have a great weekend!
The Appellate Division of the New Jersey Superior Court today issued an order enjoining Gov. Chris Christie's February 9 Executive Order that had placed an indefinite hold on the state's housing policies.
Democratic Assembly Speaker Pro Tempore Jerry Green called for this to be an opportunity for the governor to work with the legislature:
Creating a workable affordable housing plan - especially in New Jersey, the most densely populated state in the union - will take teamwork, compromise and the combined efforts of the Executive and Legislative branches of government.
Well, it's obvious that teamwork is not Christie's Plan A, but perhaps this Court ruling will make him go to the legislature. Meanwhile, the court battle will continue.
