The Facts About Affordable Housing And Middletown

This evening I participated in a virtual Candidate Forum against Middletown's sitting mayor, Tony Perry, that was sponsored by the League of Women Voters. I did an extremely amount of prep for the event that I'm happy to say paid off because most of what Tony Perry had to say I was ready for. One of the topics of the forum that came up concerned the issue of Affordably Housing in Middletown and how that affects residents. 

Tony Perry and the Middletown Republicans have long been opposed to providing affordable housing options in Middletown, often exaggerating the amount of mandated housing that is needed and crying about "unfunded" Trenton mandates. Perry pretty much reiterated that opposition this evening. 

Below is a research paper, with the facts, that I put together to prepare myself to tonight's forum. I think you'll find it informative and I hope it answers questions that residents may have as opposed to taking Perry's over exaggerated, misrepresentative and often inflammatory objections. 

I'll be sharing a couple more research papers that I prepared tomorrow a long with a link to where you can watch a recording of tonight's LWV Middletown Committee Candidate Forum.

Enjoy!

Middletown, NJ’s Opposition to Affordable Housing

 

Middletown, NJ has long opposed state mandates to build affordable housing, a sentiment that has been amplified by local leadership, especially Mayor Tony Perry. In recent years, Perry has made exaggerated claims to fuel public opposition, most notably asserting that Governor Murphy’s mandate for 1,500 affordable units will lead to 6,000 new homes and apartments in Middletown. Perry claims that for every affordable housing unit built, developers are allowed to construct four market-rate units, causing alarm among residents about potential overdevelopment. However, a closer look reveals that Perry’s statements are both exaggerated and misleading.

 

History of Affordable Housing in New Jersey

 

New Jersey’s affordable housing debate dates back to the *Mount Laurel* decisions in the 1970s and 1980s, where the state’s Supreme Court ruled that municipalities must provide their “fair share” of affordable housing. These landmark cases sought to prevent exclusionary zoning practices, which allowed wealthier towns to use zoning laws to avoid building affordable housing. 

 

To enforce the court rulings, New Jersey established the Council on Affordable Housing (COAH) in 1985. COAH was tasked with setting quotas for affordable housing and ensuring that municipalities complied with the court’s decisions. From the start, COAH faced pushback from suburban towns resistant to state mandates, particularly from wealthier communities concerned about changing their local character and increasing density.

 

Republican leadership in the state, particularly during Governor Chris Christie’s administration, was often at odds with these mandates. Christie went as far as refusing to appoint new commissioners to COAH, leaving the agency defunct and throwing affordable housing planning into disarray. When Governor Phil Murphy took office in 2018, he dissolved COAH entirely, recognizing that it had been rendered ineffective. Murphy sought to re-energize the state’s commitment to affordable housing, but he encountered fierce resistance from municipalities like Middletown.

 

Middletown’s Recent Opposition and Tony Perry’s Claims

 

Middletown has consistently pushed back against affordable housing requirements, with Mayor Tony Perry leading the charge. His claim that the town will need to build 1,500 affordable units has been used to stoke fears of overdevelopment. However, it is unclear where Perry came up with this number. The claim appears to misrepresent the long-term housing projections for Middletown.

 

A 2016 consultant report, which is not official but provides a planning framework, offers a more nuanced picture. On page 96 of the report, it estimates that Middletown would need to build 1,461 affordable units between 1999 and 2025—a multi-decade projection, not an immediate requirement. Perry’s suggestion that the town faces an imminent mandate to build 1,500 affordable units is an exaggeration. This number spans decades, meaning it is a long-term goal, not a sudden demand that would overwhelm the community.

 

Additionally, Perry’s assertion that developers are automatically allowed to build four market-rate units for every affordable one is misleading. In reality, the affordable housing process in New Jersey is much more complex. The state operates on a credit system, which provides flexibility for municipalities. For example, towns receive extra credits for senior housing, assisted living, and rental units, which can reduce the overall number of market-rate units required in an affordable housing development. The notion that each affordable unit automatically translates to four additional market-rate units oversimplifies the process and inflates the numbers, fueling unnecessary fears among residents.

 

Builder’s Remedy Lawsuits: The Cost of Opposition

 

Middletown’s refusal to comply with affordable housing mandates has led to a number of *Builder’s Remedy* lawsuits. A *Builder’s Remedy* occurs when a municipality fails to meet its affordable housing obligations, allowing developers to sue the town and gain approval to build larger projects than the town might otherwise allow. These lawsuits have become costly for Middletown, leading to settlements that often favor developers and include more housing units than if the town had been proactive in planning for affordable housing. 

 

The financial burden of these lawsuits falls on local taxpayers. If Middletown had complied with affordable housing requirements early on, it could have avoided these legal battles and maintained greater control over the size and scope of new developments. Instead, the town’s resistance has led to expensive settlements and larger developments, the very outcomes Perry claims to oppose.

 

Conclusion

 

Middletown’s opposition to affordable housing, driven by exaggerated claims from mayor Tony Perry, reflects a broader resistance from suburban towns across New Jersey, particularly those with Republican leadership. Perry’s alarmist claim that Middletown faces a mandate for 1,500 affordable units, which could lead to 6,000 new homes, misrepresents both the timeline and the mechanisms of affordable housing. His statements stoke fear about overdevelopment, but the reality is far less dramatic. The 1,500 units are projected over multiple decades, and the credit system provides flexibility that Perry’s narrative ignores.

 

Middletown’s refusal to engage constructively with the state’s affordable housing mandates has led to costly *Builder’s Remedy* lawsuits, placing a financial burden on taxpayers and resulting in larger developments than would have been necessary had the town been proactive. By complying with affordable housing requirements, Middletown could regain control over its future development while ensuring that it meets its legal obligations to provide affordable housing. Perry’s exaggerated claims do more to stir opposition than to address the real issues facing the town, and ultimately, they leave Middletown in a worse position both financially and developmentally.

Upcoming Candidate Forums / Debates

(Info provided by MiddletownDemocrat.org)

NJ WATCHDOG: Lt Gov Debate - Snooze or Big News?

For Immediate Release:


The upcoming debate between New Jersey Lt. Gov. Kim Guadagno and challenger Milly Silva could be one of the most boring political occasions of this election year.

Or it could be one of the most revealing events yet. It all depends on what questions are asked Friday evening at Kean University in Union.

For three years, the GOP lieutenant governor has dodged inquiries about her involvement in a pension scandal, first reported by New Jersey Watchdog.

False statements by Guadagno as Monmouth County sheriff enabled a top aide to improperly collect $85,000 a year in retirement pay in addition to an $87,500 salary.

The controversy is the focus of a hush-hush state criminal investigation that began in 2011. Guadagno, Gov. Chris Christie and the attorney general have all declined comment through their spokespeople.

Despite an abundance of public appearances and photo opportunities, Guadagno has never held a press conference, as noted by the Philadelphia Inquirer's Matt Katz. The debate could put her on the spot for the first time.

Democrat Silva may be reluctant to tackle Guadagno on pension issues.

A newcomer to the political stage, Silva is executive vice president of 1199SEIU – a labor union that represents nearly 400,000 workers in government and the private sector.

The other person who could bring up the pension issue during the debate is the moderator, Luke Margolis of News 12 New Jersey.

As a public service, New Jersey Watchdog offers a step-by-step primer on the Guadagno pension affair, along with documentation. Click on the links to see the supporting records:

1) In 2008, then-Sheriff Guadagno hired Michael W. Donovan Jr. as “chief of law enforcement division” at a salary of $87,500 a year. She announced the appointment in a memo to her staff. The sheriff's official website identified Donovan as "sheriff's officer chief," supervising 115 subordinate officers and 30 civilian employees.

2) Donovan was already collecting an $85,000 a year state pension as a retired investigator for the county prosecutor. While double-dipping is often legal in New Jersey, this case was different.

3) Since the position of sheriff's officer chief is covered by the pension system, Donovan should have been required to stop receiving benefits, re-enroll in the retirement plan and resume contributions to the pension fund.

4) Instead, county payroll records, the oath of office and a news release by Guadagno identified Donovan as the sheriff's "chief warrant officer" – a similar sounding, but low-ranking position that's not in the pension system. A chief warrant officer is responsible for serving warrants and other legal documents.

5) Yet on Guadagno’s organizational chart, Donovan was listed as chief of law enforcement. The position of chief warrant officer was not on the chart.

6) While sheriff's chief, Donovan pocketed $227,000 in checks from PFRS. Since he did not re-enroll in the pension plan, he avoided another $18,000 in contributions. If the state decides Donovan violated pension law, he could be forced to repay $245,000.

7) Guadagno is also at risk. Under state statute, "Any person who shall knowingly make any false statement or shall falsify or permit to be falsified any record or records of this retirement system...shall be guilty of a misdemeanor."

8) The attorney general's Division of Criminal Justice began an investigation in May 2011 at the behest of a pension board, according to a sworn statement by a state official.

9) Rather than use his constitutional authority to appoint an independent investigator, Christie allowed DCJ to run the case – an apparent conflict-of-interest. Guadagno is a former DCJ deputy director and now Christie's second-in-command. She sits in the governor's cabinet alongside the attorney general, who is in charge of DCJ.

10) Unless there are criminal charges – an extreme unlikelihood given the political circumstances – DCJ will not comment or release records of the investigation, according to a sworn statement by Deputy Attorney General Anthony A. Picione.

11) If Guadagno and Christie get their way, the case will be swept under the rug.

Any questions?

# # #

The story is now online at http://newjersey.watchdog.org. For media inquiries, contact Mark Lagerkvist at Mark@Lagerkvist.net.

There's No Debating The Obvious

by Josh Levitt
Buono for Governor



At tonight's debate, Governor Christie will attempt to do the impossible: defend his failed economic record. No matter how Governor Christie tries to duck and dodge away from his record, he cannot hide from the facts. It's clear that Governor Christie's ineffective trickle-down economic policies have decimated New Jersey's economy, leaving the middle class and working poor without quality opportunities and struggling to make ends meet.

The economic figures paint the sorry picture of New Jersey's economy under Chris Christie. Over the past four years, New Jersey has one of the worst rates of job creation of any state in the country. With 400,000 residents out of work, New Jersey's unemployment rate currently sits more than a point above the national average and is one of the highest in the region. In the past two months alone, New Jersey lost a staggering 12,000 jobs.

Instead of building an economy that works for all New Jerseyans, this Governor has prioritized millionaires and big corporations over workers and families. Governor Christie has staunchly protected millionaires from paying their fair share, all while raising taxes on low-income New Jerseyans by slashing the Earned Income Tax Credit and vetoing an increase of the minimum wage. It's no surprise that the poverty rate in New Jersey recently reached a 52-year high.

To top it off, New Jerseyans have been crushed by skyrocketing property tax rates during Christie's time in office. On average, property tax rates have increased by 20 percent over the past four years as Governor Christie has cut essential relief programs and diverted revenue away from municipalities.

With a record like that, there is no debating the obvious: Governor Christie's economic policies have failed New Jersey.

PALLONE FOR SENATE CALLS FOR MULTIPLE DEBATES

“Multiple debates will allow voters throughout the state to see all of the candidates and reach their own, unfiltered, conclusions”

Frank Pallone

LONG BRANCH ¬ With less than two months to go in the accelerated special Democratic Primary campaign for United States Senate, the Pallone for Senate campaign today released the following statement calling for multiple debates across New Jersey.

“With the special Primary Election Day coming up quickly on August 13, we believe it is critically important that New Jersey’s Democratic voters be afforded the opportunity to make a clear, rational decision on our party’s nominee for the United States Senate based on how the declared candidates would handle the important matters confronting the nation as opposed to having that decisions based solely on slick TV ads and twenty second sound bites.

The accelerated schedule to fill the seat vacated with Senator Frank Lautenberg’s passing has created a unique situation in which voters will only have a matter of weeks to determine who is best qualified to join Senator Menendez in the fight for New Jersey’s middle class. With issues like immigration reform, gun safety, job creation, a minimum wage increase, marriage equality, climate change and school reform all at the forefront, New Jersey’s Democratic voters need to make sure they have the critical information necessary to make that decision.

Today we are proposing multiple debates in order for New Jersey voters to be afforded the opportunity to choose the Democratic nominee for United States Senate based on substance and ability. Multiple debates will allow voters throughout the state to see all of the candidates and reach their own, unfiltered, conclusions so it is the hope of Pallone for Senate that the other three candidates for the Democratic nomination- Cory Booker, Sheila Oliver and Rush Holt- will all agree to this request for debates today.”

Middletown Twp Committee Candidate Massell Says NO to Debate

by Linda Baum

The public has a right to hear the candidates discuss their plans to better our Township.


“Do you want a match race?!!” That battle cry from the movie Seabiscuit was used to flush out the competition to take part in a 2-horse race to see which horse was better. Finally, after a series of excuses, the competition acquiesced, and we all know the outcome.

When I hear that the local candidates in Red Bank and Manalapan have held debates, I wonder when it will happen in Middletown, the largest municipality in Monmouth County.

The sheer size of our town – 42 square miles and nearly 67,000 people – means that even the most dedicated candidate can’t visit every household and talk to every resident. That makes a one-on-one debate between the local candidates that much more important. If we can’t get to you, you should at least be given the opportunity to come to us to hear what we have to say so that you can make an informed decision on Election Day.

Earlier this month, the Chairman of Middletown’s Republican Party turned down my debate challenge, issued via letter from my own Party Chairman. The excuse given was that a debate was already scheduled for Tuesday, Oct. 23rd, 7 p.m., at the Lincroft School.

However, the Lincroft event is not a one-on-one debate but rather a question and answer session for all local and county candidates – at least 8 people this year. That works out to just 10 or 15 minutes per candidate at most. And unlike a debate, there is no opportunity for any candidate to respond to comments made by another.

Further, residents who live in the northern parts of the Township might be more likely to attend, and would be better served, if a more centralized location were available.

During public comments at the end of the Oct. 15th Township Committee meeting, I again issued the debate challenge to Mr. Massell. He replied, “I’m happy to debate you, Ms. Baum…,” followed by a string of excuses why he wouldn’t.

Why couldn’t a debate have been held a couple of months ago, Massell wanted to know – that is, when no one was paying attention yet. That’s an odd comment since it’s common knowledge that debates are typically held close to an election.

Mr. Massell insisted this was all so secretive, referring to the Library meeting room being reserved ahead of him getting formal notice of the debate challenge. It was necessary to go ahead and reserve the room early because it was quickly booking up. The reservation could always be cancelled.

It is ridiculous to say the debate was a secret, especially coming from one of the two participants who would need to be there and therefore would HAVE to know about it.

In attempting to respond to each of these points, I was cut off from speaking, as usual. That is something they would not be able to do at a debate. Perhaps that’s the real reason they want to avoid it. Here’s the link to the 10/15 meeting video: http://archive.org/details/10-15-12TownshipCommitteeMeeting. Advance to time 90:50 (1:30:50) for the debate discussion. You may have some trouble hearing me because the public’s microphone wasn’t working that night. Intentional? You decide. There was nothing wrong with the microphones on the dais, of course.

A note about the Library room reservation. I filled out the reservation form myself on behalf of the Middletown Democratic Party. But again, the purpose was just to reserve the room. In order for the debate to have occurred, the Library required that it be jointly sponsored by both Parties. That was also a requirement of the League of Women Voters, which was asked to moderate. Had the challenge been accepted, joint sponsorship would have been established in advertising material.

The email that Mr. Massell refers to in the video was sent by the Library Director upon review of the room reservation regarding the need for joint sponsorship of the debate. Her email was received ahead of our letter being received. Regardless, notice was received and it should be obvious that the email and letter crossed in the mail, so to speak. It’s silly to be feigning such offense over it as reason not to participate in the debate.

Mr. Fiore states in the video that the debate was to be unmoderated. Not true at all. The moderator and the format were details to be worked out later, after the debate challenge was accepted. Since it wasn’t, how can the Republican Party know anything about how the debate would have been run?

If, like me, you feel that the public has a right to hear the issues and where the candidates stand on them from the candidates themselves – in lieu of nonsense from anonymous commenters or those on the dais – then you should demand a match race. There’s still time.

It may also interest you to know that Manalapan televised its debate on local cable access channels. There is no reason why we can’t do that in Middletown.

LD12 Senate Candidate Bob Brown invites opponent to "Snack Summit" to discuss Double Dipping

Old Bridge, NJ – State Senate candidate Bob Brown is inviting his opponent in the November election, Assemblyman Sam Thompson, to join him in a “Snack Summit” at the Bagel Boy Deli in Old Bridge. Brown, a former N.J. police officer shot in the line of duty, has called for Thompson to stop receiving a public pension while also drawing a legislative salary, a practice known as “double dipping.” He is inviting Thompson to “snack” together to speak publicly and candidly about the issue.

“Voters need to hear what Sam Thompson has to say about double dipping,” said Brown, who receives a disability pension but has pledged to give it up if he is elected to the Senate. “I’m a Jets Season Ticketholder and a big fan of Jets Coach Rex Ryan. One of Coach Ryan’s famous sayings is ‘Let’s go get a snack.’ I’m saying the same thing today to Sam – let’s sit down, eat a snack and talk about the issues. I just hope that he doesn’t double dip his chips with the onion dip – it’s not ok while eating, and it’s definitely not ok to continue to ‘double dip’ with taxpayers’ money.”

Brown is willing to meet with Thompson any day, Monday through Friday, as long as it’s after 2:00 pm. – to avoid the Bagel Boy Deli lunchtime rush. Thompson thus far in the campaign has refused to explain why he’s double dipping, has failed to apologize for offensive comments he made about retired police officers and will not agree to a public debate.



For any additional information, please contact:
Philip Swibinski, campaign spokesman, at 201-978-8651

or philip.swibinski@vmmi.net.

Support Holt At Today's Debate

Please come out and show your support for Congressman Holt this Monday at his second debate with his Republican opponent. We are expecting them to bring a significant number of people so it is imperative we have a good crowd to show how many people are truly behind Congressman Holt's message and record. Tickets are first come first serve, so I would recommend arriving between 5:30-6:00. If you need a ride we can try to organize transportation, please let me know and invite whomever you want. Debate details are below and attached.

I look forward to seeing you there.

Best,
Justin Braz
Team Holt
justin@rushholt.com

Debate at Young Israel East Brunswick: October 18, 2010 Doors Open at 6:30
193 Dunhams Corner Rd., East Brunswick, NJ

Primary Challenger Avallone Responds To Scharfenberger, While Gerry Ducks From Debate

In yesterday's Asbury Park Press, in an article about the Middletown Primary, Mr. Scharfenberger is quoted as saying that " I have a lot to learn". This is actually pretty funny, because for the past 2 weeks, I have written letters and called his office almost daily for a debate or a meet and greet.

To date, I have not had the decency of a return call. If I have "so much to learn" why is Mr. Scharfenberger afraid to debate me!

It's probably because, I have a MBA; I have been a resident of Middletown for over 25 year's; I have owned and managed a business for over 22 year's; have had to meet a payroll every Friday for 22 year's; have had to balance a budget for 22 year's; and been an active member of the community and our church.

What have we had with Mr. Scharfenberger in charge; a municipal tax rate that has gone up 16% over the last three year's.

And, he thinks "I have a lot to learn".

There is still plenty of time left before the June 8th primary, and I challenge you Mr. Scharfenberger to a debate. In fact you can name the venue, you can pick the moderator, and you can select the questions. Just let me know where and when. I will be there, and this time I hope you show up!

Tony Avallone

Republican Candidate for Middletown Committee

Middletown's Patrick Short Answers The Question " How Do You Plan To Deal With COAH ?"

Back on Oct. 14th the Lincroft Village Green Association held a candidates debate at the Lincroft Village School. The 3rd question of the night dealt with COAH and basically asked the candidates how they intended to deal with the issue of affordable housing in Middletown.

Part of the question which was asked specifically to Mr. Short and Freeholder candidate Sean Byrnes asked why, as members of the Middletown Township Committee, they voted against a resolution that addressed COAH. If you weren't there you to hear the answer for yourself, you missed how Patrick Short knocked the question out of the park and then turned it around on his republican opponent.

Short said the reason why he voted against the resolution was because it was grossly inaccurate and misstated the number of affordable housing units that needed to be built in town by Thousands and that he refused to but his name to a document that was clearly untrue.

Short then added a huge zinger that won him the question when he stated that his republican opponent Steve Massell, as a member of the township planning board, was responsible for drawing up the township's master COAH plan, a plan that Massell stated in his response that he would oppose if he was elected to the township committee!

Listen for yourself below to hear how Patrick Short answered the question: