Affordable Housing Update Lesniack Bill S-1 as of 6/3

[David Cook]

Hello fellow Cranburians.
I am posting an update regarding the S-1 Bill sponsored by senator Lesniack as ammended on June 3rd 2010. This Bill may be voted on as early as this month and can give us a good idea of how the State may proceed on affordable housing.

I want to stress that there is push back from Fair Share housing Groups and the bill may change in its language. But I do believe it is a good indicator of where the state wants to go on this subject.
Thank you
Dave Cook

SENATE ECONOMIC GROWTH COMMITTEE
STATEMENT TO
SENATE COMMITTEE SUBSTITUTE FOR
[First Reprint]
SENATE COMMITTEE SUBSTITUTE FOR
SENATE, No. 1
STATE OF NEW JERSEY
DATED: JUNE 3, 2010
The Senate Economic Growth Committee reports favorably a
Senate Committee Substitute for Senate Bill No. 1 (SCS/1R).
This committee substitute revises and reforms many of the statutes
relating to affordable housing in New Jersey. Mount Laurel I
established that a developing municipality has a constitutional
obligation to provide, through its land use regulations, a realistic
opportunity for a fair share of its region's present and prospective
needs for housing for low and moderate income families. In response,
the Legislature passed the "Fair Housing Act," P.L.1985, c.222
(C.52:27D-301 et al.) to administer the requirements of Mount Laurel
I, establish a housing policy and provide a safe haven from the judicial
builders remedy. The intent of this committee substitute is to establish
a simple method of compliance with the constitutional requirements
set forth by Mount Laurel I. This substitute provides that certain
municipalities that have taken action to provide a variety and choice of
housing would be deemed to have satisfied their constitutional
obligation. All other municipalities, through set-aside requirements
and zoning variances, would be required to provide a realistic
opportunity for providing for affordable housing needs.
This committee substitute repeals the "Statewide Non-Residential
Development Fee Act," sections 32 through 38 of P.L.2008, c.46
(C.40:55D-8.1 et al.). The substitute removes statutory references to
the Act, and prohibits municipal imposition of development fees on
non-residential development. The substitute also does away with
provisions permitting the Council on Affordable Housing ("council"),
which was established by the "Fair Housing Act," to authorize
municipal development fee trust funds.
The substitute abolishes the council, and transfers any remaining
authority of the council to the Department of Community Affairs.
This bill amends the findings and declarations sections of the "Fair
2
Housing Act" to eliminate references to the Council on Affordable
Housing. This bill charges the Department of Community Affairs with
assisting municipalities to facilitate opportunities for affordable
housing.
This substitute for Senate No. 1 would do away with Stateimposed
calculations of affordable housing need. Instead, the
substitute provides that a municipality is deemed to have fulfilled its
housing obligation if seven and one-half percent of the municipality's
housing stock is price restricted, or 33 percent of the housing stock is
multi-family housing and mobile homes. Price restricted housing
includes deed-restricted affordable housing units and dwelling units
that have received State and federal financial assistance. In addition,
under the substitute, a municipality may be deemed inclusionary upon
filing a housing plan demonstrating how the municipality plans to
implement the set aside, described below, in the municipality. This
legislation also does not continue or authorize regional contribution
agreements.
This legislation would require all municipalities to set aside 10
percent of the units in any residential development project resulting in
more than 20 units as low- and moderate income housing. Five
percent of the units in small residential development projects resulting
in more than five and fewer than 20 units would be reserved for lowand
moderate income households. Although inclusionary zoning can
be cumbersome, this legislation allows a municipality to provide for
indirect economic incentives to a developer. These incentives include
payments in lieu of construction, off-site construction, the provision of
accessory apartments and Elder Cottage Housing Opportunity Units,
and rehabilitation for residential development projects that include
affordable units. It is the committee's understanding that this
legislation permits municipalities to tailor the incentives to their
specific needs to encourage development and make projects
economically viable. A zoning board of adjustment would be required
to approve any alternatives approved by the developer.
A municipality would be permitted to give households containing
persons who work and reside in the municipality a preference for
occupancy of half of the affordable units produced as part of a
residential or small residential development project. The bill provides
incentives for the creation of special needs and adaptive housing. The
substitute provides that special needs housing will be double-counted
for purposes of determining whether a municipality is inclusionary and
whether the municipality has met the set-aside requirement. In
addition, the substitute requires that 13 percent of the monies annually
expended from the Affordable Housing Trust Fund be utilized for
housing projects serving very low income households.
The substitute provides that the application for a variance will be
reviewed by the planning board. This modification is intended to
ensure provision of opportunities for affordable units and provide a
3
check on an individual municipality's discretion to use land use
regulation to exclude citizens desiring to live in the municipality. The
alternate procedure would not be available in a municipality that has
been deemed inclusionary. In addition, in a municipality deemed
inclusionary, the zoning board of appeals, in reviewing a d. variance
application, would not have to treat affordable housing as an
inherently beneficial use.
The committee substitute also authorizes municipalities to impose
and collect residential development fees. All payments collected
would be deposited in a separate trust fund to be spent for activities
facilitating housing for low- and moderate-income households.
This committee substitute also forgives unmet housing need from
prior rounds or periods in time before the effective date of the act. To
give municipalities time to comply with the new procedures, the
committee substitute provides a 365 day safe harbor from litigation.
The bill also prohibits municipalities from changing the zoning of
parcels that have, by court order or other judicial process, been
designated for affordable housing.

[Guest]

Dave,

Thanks. Not to sound stupid, but can you give us some idea about how this bill affects Cranbury specifically or is it too early to tell?

The Fair Share group is extremely problematic for anyone who has paid attention to the COAH debate. They have no problem filing suits, are well funded and have a lot of influence in Trenton including with many sitting judges who will be the ones hearing this legislation.

[Dan Mulligan]

Thanks for the update Dave, this appears to be potential good news for Cranbury.

[Guest]

[David Cook]

Update:
The S-1 Senator Lesniak Bill on Affordable Housing passed the Senate with a 28 to 3 vote. It now goes in front of the Assembly Housing and Local Government Committee to be heard. The Governor and Senator Lesniak would like it to be signed into law by June 30, 2010. Keep your fingers crossed.