Housing and Growth in New Jersey:
The Case for a Comprehensive Statewide Policy
One of the most controversial areas of public policy in New Jersey is affordable housing. And, it has been a particularly unproductive controversy. This is because policy-makers have been fixated not on housing in general or even on the outcomes they want, but instead on the aftermath of two New Jersey Supreme Court cases decided in 1975 and 1983, which have become known as the Mt. Laurel Doctrine.
The Doctrine can be summarized as the obligation for municipalities to provide a reasonable opportunity for the development of housing for low and moderate income households. It is an "obligation" because the Court decided that zoning is a police power which is delegated to municipalities in order to protect the general welfare. It is, therefore, unconstitutional to use zoning to accommodate only those who can afford expensive housing. Zoning must be used to provide housing opportunities for everyone.
In 1985, to mitigate the effects of Mt. Laurel on municipalities, the Legislature adopted the Fair Housing Act, which set up the Council on Affordable Housing (COAH). Since the Mt. Laurel Doctrine was associated with growth and the Court had recognized that good planning should precede growth, the Legislature followed the Fair Housing Act with the State Planning Act, which set up Cross-acceptance as the means to develop a statewide plan for growth with municipal participation.
In spite of these efforts, controversy over housing and growth continues to this day. The controversy recently took on a new twist when COAH issued its third set of rules last August. The proposed rules redefine the municipal obligation to be very small in relation to a real estimate of the need, and the rules provide many new ways for municipalities to avoid planning for family housing. Municipalities thus have been delighted to embrace these rules, but housing advocates have threatened to take COAH back to Court.
As important as good COAH rules are (and RPP is advocating substantial changes to the proposed rules), COAH focuses primarily on the private sector developing and subsidizing housing. New Jersey's housing problems are far too varied and far-reaching for the private sector to address all of them. What we need is a comprehensive set of statewide policies addressing housing and all its associated issues.
What should such a set of policies look like? First, of course, policies must address the issues directly related to housing itself - the price and quality of the housing stock. But it must also have policies on the amount, type and location of the housing. These latter policies are associated with the economy, transportation and the environment: they affect the labor force available for economic growth, the auto-dependency of people who live in the housing to access jobs and other destinations (affecting, in turn, air quality, congestion and the cost of living), the amount of land that is consumed (the density), and the concentration of poverty and people of color in declining urban areas.
In addition, housing policy is entwined with fiscal policy. This is especially
true in New Jersey, where local government is more dependent on local property
tax revenue to provide services and schools than almost any other state.
As towns seek to balance their budgets, they try to attract commercial
development (high revenue, low service costs) and shun housing (low revenue,
high service costs).
The significance of residential development to land use patterns has been demonstrated
by trends over the last century, as housing moved out with advances in transportation - first
trolleys and then the automobiles. Then, the jobs followed the housing further
and further from urban cores.
The attached tables provide a few glimpses at recent housing trends. Without adequate housing in the right locations, New Jersey will continue to experience unreachable housing prices and choking levels of congestion until the labor force, then the jobs, leave the state. Furthermore, without adequate housing in the right locations, New Jersey will continue to be one of the most economically and racially segregated states in the country.
Understanding this, New Jersey officials should develop a comprehensive housing policy that will produce the following outcomes:
Improve housing quality and choice:
- Opportunities are provided for low and moderate income families - particularly those of color - to move to places near jobs, with safe neighborhoods and good schools.
- Dilapidated housing stock is brought up to standard.
- Incentives to provide housing - through tax reform, for example - are increased.
- Special needs housing is provided.
- Homelessness is reduced.
Promote economic growth to all:
An adequate labor force is provided to meet the needs of the economy.
- Existing concentrations of poverty are reduced.
Protect the environment:
- Housing is located to reduce the consumption of land and resources.
- Housing is located to reduce the need for single-occupant vehicle trips.
Stop Sprawl:
- A generous supply of housing is located near jobs or connected to jobs by adequate public transportation.
The Regional Planning Partnership is the oldest non-profit in New Jersey dedicated to enhancing the quality of community life through sound land use and regional cooperation. RPP President Dianne Brake was a member of the Council on Affordable Housing from 1990-1995 and of the New Jersey State Planning Commission from 1996-2001.