MONTVALE—A Mercer County Superior Court judge postponed a decision on motions to dismiss Montvale’s legal challenge to the amended Fair Housing Act until early May. The decision, initially expected on Jan. 31, was rescheduled to May 9 as part of a case management order issued on Jan. 27.
The lawsuit challenges the amended Fair Housing Act, with the New Jersey Attorney General’s Office and the Affordable Housing Dispute Resolution Program named as defendants. The Fair Share Housing Center, a nonprofit advocating for low-income families, has been granted permission to intervene in the case.
The 27 LLRP 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.
On the same day, Judge Robert Lougy denied Montvale’s second attempt to “stay” the fourth round of affordable housing obligations. Montvale’s legal team argued that the amended law contains technical and legal flaws, but the court rejected the motion. This follows at least six legal defeats for Montvale’s claims and appeals in both Superior and Appellate courts over the past two months.
(See “Judge rejects motion to pause N.J. affordable housing law; legal battles continue,” by John Snyder, Jan. 27, 2025, at thepressgroup.net.)
In his Jan. 27 order, Lougy explained the reasons for the adjournment:
“For administrative purposes only, the Court adjourns the pending motions to dismiss to a return date of May 9, 2025. This date is subject to change based upon a multitude of reasons, including but not limited to:
(a) the return date of Plaintiffs’ motion to amend their complaint;
(b) notice that Plaintiffs do not intend to amend their complaint;
(c) the outcome of Plaintiffs’ application to amend their complaint and any supplemental briefing that may be required from same; and
(d) any order from the Appellate Division or the Supreme Court relevant to this litigation.”
Lougy also noted, “Any party or amicus may request a remote case management conference to address scheduling. The Court will make every effort to accommodate. The parties are free to propose alternative scheduling to this Court by way of a proposed consent scheduling order. This Order shall be deemed filed and served upon uploading to eCourts,” he wrote.
Affordable Housing Deadlines and Context
Most municipalities were required to adopt a binding resolution on their affordable housing obligations by Jan. 31, and upload the resolution to the state’s eCourts Affordable Housing website. [We reported Feb. 3, and this week, on how all municipalities in our coverage area voted along these lines.]
Residents interested in reviewing their municipality’s affordable housing resolutions can create a free account at njcourts.gov/courts/civil/affordable-housing. The platform provides access to uploaded resolutions and other key documents related to the process.
The following critical affordable housing deadlines are noted on the website:
- Jan. 31, 2025: Municipalities must adopt binding resolutions on fair share obligations and file with the Program within 48 hours.
- Feb. 28: Deadline for filing challenges to municipal resolutions on fair share obligations.
- March 31: Deadline for the Program to issue decisions on fair share obligations.
- June 30: Municipalities must adopt binding resolutions on Housing Element and Fair Share Plans.
- Aug. 31: Deadline for filing challenges to municipal resolutions on Housing Element and Fair Share Plans.
- Dec. 31: Deadline for the Program to issue decisions on Housing Element and Fair Share Plans.
Montvale’s Coalition Presses Forward
Despite legal defeats, Montvale and its coalition of 27 municipalities under the Local Leaders for Responsible Planning continue to press their case. Their lawsuit reflects shared concerns over the amended Fair Housing Act’s impact on local communities and governance.
The defendants argue that Montvale’s claims lack legal merit—indeed, the nonprofit Fair Share Housing Center, which Lougy approved as an intervenor, has derided the plaintiffs as “many of the wealthiest and most historically exclusionary municipalities in the state”—and have sought dismissal.
Lougy’s adjournment allows time for further procedural developments, including Montvale’s pending motion to amend its complaint, while the broader legal battles over New Jersey’s affordable housing mandates continue.