New Jersey's housing policy should prioritize helping individuals build wealth.

As New Jersey approaches a critical gubernatorial election, affordable housing emerges as a pressing issue. The state’s Constitution mandates local governments to provide affordable housing, yet many communities struggle to meet this need. Families earning under $100,000 annually face a significant demand for more affordable rental and ownership options.

Housing prices have surged, with renting a three-bedroom apartment in some suburbs now exceeding $4,000 per month. Home ownership is out of reach for more New Jerseyans than ever, exemplified by the cost of a single-family home in Union Township, which skyrocketed from around $300,000 in 2016 to $800,000 by 2025. Areas like Hudson County lack sufficient affordable housing, leading to the displacement of long-time residents who are forced to move to neighboring towns and counties. To address these challenges, New Jersey needs strong leadership and a robust, affordable housing plan over the next 25 years by learning from the shortcomings of the past 25 years. As remote work changes living preferences, towns in southern New Jersey, which have seen population declines, can be revitalized by renovating homes and developing vacant lots. This could attract new residents and businesses, significantly improving the community’s quality of life. With many areas across the state poised for growth, the gubernatorial candidates must present compelling housing solutions.

New Jersey’s municipal land use laws make it hard to develop affordable housing. Developers must include affordable units only when they ask for special permission, known as variances, under zoning laws. To avoid this process, wealthy developers create redevelopment plans for underused areas. They can modify existing zoning rules to permit higher density and taller buildings. Once the city council approves the plan, it becomes the law. Developers then seek approvals under the new plan without needing variances. This is just one of the problems with housing policy in New Jersey.

Innovative development could attract more people to underinvested towns and encourage new businesses to grow, ultimately benefiting working families and improving the quality of life for everyone. At one time, some towns had more than double their current population, indicating that there is still room for growth. There are many places like this across New Jersey.

Suburban New Jersey faces significant challenges in providing affordable housing. One major issue is the reassessment of Regional Contribution Agreements being proposed, which allowed wealthier towns to shift some of their responsibilities for building affordable housing to poorer urban areas while only paying a small portion of the costs. This system permitted richer areas to escape their fair share of obligations and avoid building affordable housing. Additionally, many local committees, even those that lean democratic, have resisted efforts to increase affordable housing in their towns for decades and have taken legal action to block these initiatives. This situation creates tension and hinders development in New Jersey, making it more challenging to meet the demand for affordable housing.

It is crucial to rethink redevelopment strategies in underinvested rural and urban areas, and to help affluent townships recognize the importance of building affordable housing within their communities. This idea was temporarily embraced during the pandemic, but the commitment to address these issues appears to have waned since then. Unfortunately, appreciation for essential workers quickly faded once the immediate crisis passed.

Rapidly expanding municipalities should learn from the experiences of communities that have not fully harnessed available development opportunities, often benefiting developers more than local residents. Developers frequently find ways to bypass the inclusion of affordable housing, even when their high-value projects possess the financial capability to accommodate such provisions. This oversight may lead to the displacement of long-term residents as neighborhoods undergo transformation.

Moreover, developers may take advantage of builders' remedy provisions to facilitate high-density development. In instances where municipalities lack legal protections, developers might pursue legal action if their zoning applications—intended to include affordable housing—are rejected. As a result, municipalities may be compelled to approve the construction of 300 housing units merely to satisfy the requirement of providing 10% affordable housing or 30 units, as stipulated by the Mount Laurel Doctrine. Zoning appeals typically favor developers under the assumption that affordable housing is an inherently beneficial use.

Although towns have had the opportunity to engage in more strategic planning for over five decades, many have not taken action, resulting in a decreased availability of land. Furthermore, municipalities often hesitate to fulfill their obligations by developing 100% affordable housing due to NIMBY (Not in My Backyard) sentiments; however, they are now reassessing this stance as inclusionary development and the requisite density have proven to be problematic.

The COVID-19 crisis is over, but we still face challenges with affordable housing. If you believe everyone deserves access to affordable housing—regardless of their political views—please sign below so that we can make sure both candidates take this issue seriously if they are elected.  

Sign the Petition for Better Housing Policy