New Jersey towns file lawsuit seeking to overturn state’s affordable housing law

Affordable Housing Law in New Jersey Faces Legal Challenge

A group of New Jersey mayors and local officials are suing the Garden State to invalidate a new affordable housing law that seeks to spur the development of tens of thousands of low priced units.

The lawsuit, filed Monday in Mercer County Superior Court, comes just weeks before the state is set to start rolling out the affordable housing requirements that New Jersey municipalities will be expected to develop over the next ten years.

Opposition to the Affordable Housing Law

Montvale Mayor Mike Ghassali is leading the opposition effort to thwart the new measure, which was signed into law by Gov. Phil Murphy earlier this year.

Ghassali, a Republican, has threatened legal action over the new affordable housing law for months, arguing that the current mandates prevent towns from planning for “smart growth” and forces suburban towns to develop more housing compared to urban localities.

The lawsuit, backed by eight other municipalities, has the potential to throw a wrench into the state’s ambitious plan to facilitate the development of tens of thousands of affordable housing units across New Jersey.

Violation of New Jersey’s Constitution

Dubbed “Local Leaders for Responsible Planning,” the coalition of municipal leaders argued in their complaint that the state’s new affordable housing law violates New Jersey’s constitution because it exceeds a decades-old directive that sets minimum affordable housing requirements for localities.

Ghassali said the current law “prevents local leaders from leading,” adding that he is “fully confident” that they have a good case.

The governor’s office declined to comment on the pending litigation.

Supporters of the Affordable Housing Law

The lawsuit challenging the state’s new affordable housing law falls far short of the 100 municipalities Ghassali previously said were willing to sign on to a legal challenge.

However, housing advocates and elected officials who support the state’s approach to spurring affordable housing development say that the lawsuit is frivolous.

State Sen. Troy Singleton, chairman of the Senate Community and Urban Affairs Committee and author of the affordable housing bill signed into law in the spring, called the opposition from “affluent” suburban towns “nothing new – same story, different day.”

“What is incredibly offensive, beyond using taxpayer dollars to fund this politically-driven, superfluous lawsuit, is the attempt to use the legal process to intentionally delay our affordable housing laws – not by weeks or months, but years,” Singleton said.

Assemblywoman Yvonne Lopez, a Democrat from Perth Amboy, who coauthored the new affordable housing law, noted that input from local officials was taken into consideration by lawmakers when crafting the legislation.

“We worked with mayors to ensure the law is workable and will give responsible local elected officials the tools they need to accomplish this goal,” she said.

The Mount Laurel Doctrine and Affordable Housing Crisis

In New Jersey, a unique, decades-old mandate known as the Mount Laurel Doctrine, requires most New Jersey towns to contribute their “fair share” of affordable housing development. Going back more than 40 years, the Mount Laurel Doctrine has generated more than 50,000 affordable units across the state.

Starting next year, there will be a new push to build more low- and middle-income housing as New Jersey – like many states – faces an affordable housing crisis.

Michael L. Collins, whose law firm is representing Ghassali and the opposition, said Monday that the new law is at odds with the requirements of the Mount Laurel directive.

“The lawsuit contends that the new law imposes obligations that are inconsistent with what was ever intended or mandated by our courts under the Mount Laurel doctrine,” Collins said. “The law imposes affordable housing obligations for the fourth round. And now every 10 years thereafter into perpetuity.”

The Need for Affordable Housing in New Jersey

Housing experts estimate that New Jersey needs more than 200,000 affordable apartments for low-income people who are the most severely cost-burdened, oftentimes spending more than 50% of their income on rent.

In March, Murphy signed a landmark bill overhauling the affordable housing system. The measure aimed to streamline the process by formally dissolving the defunct Council of Affordable Housing, the agency previously tasked with enforcing the rules and moving the responsibilities to another agency.

Under the new law, the development of affordable housing is under the purview of the Department of Community Affairs, which uses a formula — called the “Jacobson methodology” — to determine how many housing units each municipality must build.

The formula comes from a 2018 court decision by Superior Court Judge Mary Jacobson following a lawsuit brought by two Mercer County towns over their affordable housing obligations. To come up with the methodology for how much housing a town could develop, the judge looked at estimates for job and population growth, the number of households, wealth, and the amount of available land for development.

Legal Challenges and Future Steps

The lawsuit contends that the new law violates the state constitution’s separation of powers by codifying the transfer of the handling of dispute resolution previously held by the executive branch to the judiciary.

In October, the state is set to hand out the requirements to municipalities for how much affordable housing each is expected to develop over the next decade. After receiving their obligations, towns have to come up with an execution plan and get sign off from the state by next summer.

But municipalities seeking to challenge the requirements can still take the state to court to challenge the state-issued obligations.

In July, Ghassali told Gothamist that he had a verbal commitment from 100 towns to join his cause. But the lawsuit shows that just a fraction of that amount are willing to challenge the state.

“Unfortunately, some towns are standing by. Some mayors told me flat out if you win, we win. And I think that’s terrible leadership,” he said.

But more significantly, he said that he was seeking a $20,000 commitment from each town to fund the lawsuit, which he estimated would cost north of $2 million.

Ghassali said the group has enough of a financial commitment from the towns to move forward with its lawsuit.

“We believe we have enough funding right now to start the process. And that’s where we’re at,” he said.

He said the $2 million “war chest” he previously estimated was “aspirational.”

“That was my objective at first. But in talking to the attorneys and talking to the advisors, we have enough funding right now to move forward,” he said.

Fair Share Housing Center, a nonprofit organization tasked by the state with negotiating housing plans with towns, called the lawsuit purely a smokescreen by the towns involved to “block much needed affordable housing.”

Adam Gordon, director of Fair Share Housing Center, said he’s confident the lawsuit will eventually be thrown out by the courts.

“This is a lawsuit whose aim is very clear, which is to just stop these ultra wealthy, predominantly white towns from having to build affordable homes in their towns. And I think the courts will see through it and it’s unlikely to succeed,” he said.

Gordon told Gothamist that while not named as a defendant in the lawsuit, Fair Share Housing Center “plans to get involved.”

SDGs, Targets, and Indicators Analysis

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

• SDG 1: No Poverty
• SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities
• SDG 16: Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions

The article discusses the issue of affordable housing in New Jersey and the opposition to a new affordable housing law. This issue is connected to SDG 1, which aims to eradicate poverty, as affordable housing is crucial in ensuring that individuals and families have access to safe and adequate housing. The article also mentions the impact of the law on urban and suburban localities, highlighting the importance of sustainable cities and communities (SDG 11). Additionally, the lawsuit challenging the new law raises questions about the legal framework and the role of institutions, aligning with SDG 16.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

• SDG 1.4: By 2030, ensure that all men and women, in particular, the poor and the vulnerable, have equal rights to economic resources, as well as access to basic services, ownership, and control over land and other forms of property.
• SDG 11.1: By 2030, ensure access for all to adequate, safe, and affordable housing and basic services and upgrade slums.
• SDG 16.3: Promote the rule of law at the national and international levels and ensure equal access to justice for all.

Based on the article’s content, the specific targets that can be identified are SDG 1.4, which focuses on equal rights to economic resources and access to land and property, SDG 11.1, which aims to ensure access to adequate and affordable housing, and SDG 16.3, which promotes the rule of law and equal access to justice.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

• Indicator 1.4.2: Proportion of total adult population with secure tenure rights to land, with legally recognized documentation and who perceive their rights to land as secure, by sex and type of tenure.
• Indicator 11.1.1: Proportion of urban population living in slums, informal settlements, or inadequate housing.
• Indicator 16.3.3: Proportion of victims of violence in the previous 12 months who reported their victimization to competent authorities or other officially recognized mechanisms.

The article does not explicitly mention indicators, but based on the identified targets, the following indicators can be used to measure progress:
– Indicator 1.4.2 can measure progress towards ensuring secure tenure rights to land and property.
– Indicator 11.1.1 can measure progress in improving access to adequate and affordable housing in urban areas.
– Indicator 16.3.3 can measure progress in promoting equal access to justice by tracking the proportion of victims of violence who report their victimization to authorities.

4. Table: SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: gothamist.com