TRENTON—A new state Senate bill could significantly reduce the number of affordable housing units towns are required to build, setting off a fresh debate over housing obligations in New Jersey.
Senate Bill S4065, introduced on Jan. 30 by Sen. Anthony Bucco (R-25th District) and co-sponsored by Sen. Kristin Corrado (R-40th District), proposes a new formula for calculating regional housing needs that would generally lower municipal obligations.
The bill “adjusts the method of determining regional need for affordable housing (and) permits timeline extension for municipalities to determine and plan for adjusted fair share obligations based on revisions to regional need,” according to its text.
At the Feb. 11 council meeting, Hillsdale Councilman John Ruocco said the legislation, if passed, would drastically reduce his town’s Fourth Round (2025–2035) affordable housing obligation from 220 units to 45.
“The impetus for this bill is to stop and hopefully reverse the unreasonable requirements imposed on us by the Legislature in a purely partisan way,” Ruocco said.
While acknowledging the need for affordable housing, he said it should be addressed with care, regardless of a town’s political leadership.
Ruocco said the new bill was discussed at a Bergen County League of Municipalities meeting that day. He said almost all of the mayors favored the legislation, except for one who supported the state’s new formula.
Most towns statewide have adopted resolutions — due by Jan. 31 — that stated their affordable housing obligation number for the Fourth Round (2025 through 2035). Objections can be filed up to Feb. 28, said state DCA officials. Moreover, towns have put their affordable housing resolutions on their municipal website, as required by law.
Towns must submit their Housing Element and Fair Share Plans by June 30. The final opportunity to challenge these plans is Aug. 31.
To view affordable housing resolutions and attachments, visit the New Jersey Courts website at njcourts.gov/courts/civil/affordable-housing/bergen.
Currently, 52 of 70 Bergen County towns have posted resolutions. It was not clear why some others had not filed, though so-called “urban aid” municipalities are exempt from filing and building new affordable units. Mostly, urban aid towns are required to rehabilitation current low-income housing, referred to as “present need” or housing to be rehabbed.
In the Pascack Valley, Park Ridge had the highest present need, or rehabilitation obligation, at 137 units.
Housing Advocates Push Back
The Fair Share Housing Center, which has long fought for the enforcement of affordable housing requirements, is closely reviewing town filings and may formally challenge some before the Feb. 28 objection deadline.
“We are taking a close look at each of the town’s filings to determine which of them warrant an objection,” said executive director Adam Gordon. “In any case, we’re pleased that more municipalities are participating in the process than at any time in the 50-year history of the Mount Laurel Doctrine. This process validates the intent of New Jersey’s new affordable housing law—making the process more transparent, reducing litigation costs, and ultimately encouraging more municipalities to participate.”
The organization has vocally opposed S4065, warning that it could exacerbate New Jersey’s already severe housing shortage.
“This (legislative) proposal is a recipe for making New Jersey an exclusive enclave that only the ultra-wealthy can afford,” Gordon said. “That’s not the future that the vast majority of New Jerseyans want. Anyone who looks at our disastrous housing crisis and thinks the solution is to drastically reduce the amount of affordable housing is out of touch with the lived reality of New Jersey families and communities.”
The bill outlines a new method for determining affordable housing obligations:
- If a region’s population increased, towns would be required to build low- and moderate-income housing.
- If the population remained flat or declined, the town’s obligation would be zero.
- The Department of Community Affairs (DCA) would also factor in new residential construction, excluding replacement housing, to estimate how many affordable units a town could realistically accommodate.
- The bill does not include town-by-town projections under the new formula, leaving local officials uncertain about its full impact.
- While lawmakers debate changes to the system, some New Jersey towns—including Montvale—are fighting their Fourth Round obligations in court.
- A 27-town coalition, Local Leaders for Responsible Planning, is challenging the obligations in Mercer County Superior Court, arguing they are unreasonable and unconstitutional. The participating towns listed on the litigation include Township of Washington, Norwood, Parsippany-Troy Hills, Franklin Lakes, Cedar Grove, East Hanover, Holmdel, Wall, Little Falls, Montvale, Allendale, Westwood, Hanover, Wyckoff, Wharton, Mendham, Oradell, Denville, Florham Park, Hillsdale, Mannington, Millburn, Montville, Old Tappan, Totowa, Closter and West Amwell.
- Judge Robert Lougy has denied two prior requests to block the Fourth Round obligations, and state appeals courts have upheld his rulings.
- A motion to dismiss the towns’ lawsuit, filed by the state Attorney General’s Office and Fair Share Housing Center, is pending a ruling in May.
- Montvale’s coalition has also signaled its intent to take the case to federal court, though no amended complaint has been filed in NJ eCourts.
Woodcliff Lake’s council previously supported an effort by the state’s Institute of Local Government Attorneys to change the affordable housing formula. That effort proposed calculating obligations based on a percentage of certificates of occupancy issued over the prior 10 years.