JUNE 9 UPDATE ON CRANBURY TOWNSHIP’S COAH OBLIGATION

[Guest]

http://www.mycentraljersey.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080612/NEWS/806120392

BRIDGEWATER —Township officials are fighting proposed Council on Affordable Housing regulations in the courtroom and in the Legislature, saying the requirements are too steep and taxpayers will have to pick up the tab.


COAH's housing requirements state that New Jersey needs 115,000 new units by 2018. This is the third round of requirements issued by COAH, which uses a formula to calculate how many affordable housing units are needed based on the amount of vacant land and the rate of growth — measured by development and new jobs — within a municipality.

In Bridgewater's case, it would mean an additional 900 units by 2018, Mayor Patricia Flannery said.

"The land available in Bridgewater wouldn't permit the numbers with its current zoning," Flannery said. "They're forcing this density on us."

Under current regulations, Bridgewater has about 1,200 affordable housing credits — that's 300 more than are required, Township Administrator Jim Naples said.

On May 19, the Township Council authorized $10,000 in legal fees to join an 18-town coalition, led by Clinton Township Mayor Nick Corcodilos, fighting the proposed COAH rules, Naples said. The township has also spent $500 to join the League of Municipalities litigation fighting the proposed regulations.

Flannery testified May 22 against Assembly Bill 500, a similar measure that would revise affordable housing laws, in the Assembly Housing and Local Government Committee. The committee passed the bill.

In May, a collection of 25 officials from Hunterdon, Somerset and Morris counties met in Peapack-Gladstone to determine how best to fight the COAH rules. The political leaders also agreed that filing a group lawsuit was likely their best bet at overturning — or at least delaying — the Council on Affordable Housing guidelines.

[wcody]

Letter sent to our legislators.

To the Honorable State Senator Bill Baroni
To the Honorable State Assemblywoman Linda R. Greenstein
To the Honorable State Assemblyman Wayne DeAngelo

I have deep concern regarding the upcoming A-500 and S-1783 affordable housing legislation for its potential negative impact on the State. I strongly support the need to provide affordable housing for New Jersey but it is important that the rules are fair to towns and not hurt the State. I am sure you are getting a lot of feedback on this legislation, I will share some thoughts on an important element of the bill.

The bill provides an affordable housing fund with a 2.5% fee on commercial development along with some general state funding. There is a new housing commission to administer that funding. The bill also prohibits towns from collecting funds on commercial development for affordable housing. By reading the bill, I have not been able to determine if that prohibition eliminates requirement for towns to build affordable housing based on commercial development, or, if it only means that towns cannot charge fees to commercial developers to help build affordable housing. If towns are no longer required to build affordable housing based on commercial development, this bill would make some sense. I would hope the new commission worked fairly and efficiently allocating raised funds for affordable housing. If the bill means towns cannot assess new commercial development fees to support affordable housing, but are still required to build affordable housing based on that commercial development, it would be a disastrous for many towns in the State and could cause a cascading chain of economic problems. Towns would have major demands to build affordable housing based on commercial development that would need to be paid for either entirely by taxpayers or by massive building using the builders remedy. Neither are good solutions. This will discourage some towns from accepting commercial development because of COAH expenses. Commercial developers will be reluctant to build in New Jersey because of the resistance from the towns and fees they are required to pay.

This legislation will cause issues in many towns in the State. For example, my town of Cranbury has consistently met its COAH obligations. The town has about 1,200 households currently and the revised round 3 COAH regulations require about 500 new affordable houses to be built primarily based on commercial development. When the commercial area is totally built out, another 500 houses could be required to be built. It is unreasonable to expect the taxpayers to fund housing and associated services to almost double the housing in Cranbury. The builders remedy would cause a 400% increase in housing in the town, completely destroying the small town. Many other towns have similar issues.

A good solution is to make amendments, if necessary, to ensure the bill does not require towns to build affordable housing based on new commercial development. Towns need to provide a fair amount of affordable housing as a percentage of total housing in the town, something in the range of 15-20% would be reasonable. The new housing commission would use the funding from the commercial development fees and determine where best to invest those funds for extra affordable housing required because of jobs created by that development. I am looking for your support to help amend that bill if necessary to make it fair. If the bill is not amended thusly, I would hope you to support your constituents and vigorously oppose this bill that would be seriously detrimental to many of the towns you represent. I would appreciate an understanding of your position on this legislation on your interpretation on the requirements for affordable housing based on commercial development. We all need to pull together to help save New Jersey. Thanks for your attention.

Win Cody
Cranbury, NJ

[Cranbury Conservative]

Here is my letter to our State Representatives. Hopefully others will share their letters here as well...

To State Senator Bill Baroni
To State Assemblywoman Linda R. Greenstein
To State Assemblyman Wayne DeAngelo

I am contacting you because I am deeply concerned with Assembly Speaker Roberts proposed affordable housing legislation A-500 and S-1783 and the negative impact it will have on the State of New Jersey.

Personally I support the need to provide affordable housing in New Jersey, however I also feel it is important to have smart growth and to utilize our resources where they are needed and where they make sense

It is also very important that the rules for affordable housing are fair to every municipality in New Jersey.

One of the key points of concern is in legislation A-500 and the abolishment of “Regional Contribution Agreements”, (RCA’s).

Regional contribution agreements have allowed for affordable housing dollars to be used where they are needed. There are many municipalities in New Jersey which have benefited from this valuable tool. The important point to make is that RCA’s are “Agreements”. Municipalities are not forced to take money from RCA’s, they however have taken the money so they can improve the conditions for the people in need in their communities. This tool has been a win, win for New Jersey and Assembly Speakers Robert’s plan to do away with them does not make sense.

In fact doing away with RCA’s directly contradicts another piece of this legislation which calls for Transit Villages. Transit villages make sense. It appears that through Transit Villages Assembly Speaker Roberts is of the belief we should be re-investing in our urban centers in New Jersey, cities such as Newark, Trenton, and Camden. Where there is existing transportation infrastructure and a readily available supply of low income housing which could use refurbishment as well as low cost real estate which could be purchased and have affordable housing built for those that need it. This approach would also allow for the protection of our already limited existing open space in New Jersey.

By supporting this legislation New Jersey State Government will be supporting suburban sprawl and will be working against sound urban planning by ignoring the fact that the majority of the new COAH obligations to be built will leave the people who occupy these new affordable homes far away from public transportation and force them to drive to work, the grocery store and for other day to day needs. With gas at $4.00 a gallon and rising this does not make financial sense for these people of modest means who will occupy these homes.Beyond the short term financial impact are we stopping to think of the long term environmental impact of destroying additional open space as well as potentially adding thousands of more automobiles to the roads of our already congested state?

I implore you to find a way to help save the State of New Jersey from this dangerous and destructive legislation and to consider at the very least amendments which will help keep RCA’s in place for all municipalities in New Jersey.