Responding to Anonymous

 I received the following comment from a Middletown resident concerning My Statement On The Results of The 2024 Election in a previous post. I thought the comment was worth sharing here with everyone because it was both respectful and thoughtful. People need to engage more civilly each other and tone down the hostilities when expressing their ideas or opinions that run counter with other:

Anonymous, November 9th 2024 at 8:34 PM:

 Thank you for caring about our community, and for offering your service. I did not vote for you, being very pleased with the job Tony Perry has done serving as our mayor. I do wish you well in future endeavors.

I would like to say, however, that some of the issues you mentioned are NOT unique to Middletown, nor are they all to the credit or blame of our leaders. Housing is NOT affordable in most places in New Jersey. This is a very expensive place to live, and with raging inflation in the past few years, it has become MORE expensive and out of the reach of many. But the remedy suggested of building more "affordable" housing on our limited footprint of available spaces is perhaps the least desirable solution. More overcrowding on our roads, in our schools, and overtaxing our infrastructure? Loss of what little open spaces we have? No thank you. Most residents moved here or stayed here because they like the character of this town. Turning it into a crowded city is not a solution that is palatable to Middletowners.

Nor is social engineering that turns our town into a very different place. I hope our mayor and council will focus on keeping costs in control, minimizing need for budget busting tax increases, while continuing to deliver essential services to people who bought in here months, years or decades ago, to enjoy the lifestyle Middletown offered. Not everyone can afford to live in every town in NJ. Thats a fact of life. As with EVERY SINGLE SUBURBAN TOWN, some can afford to live here, others cannot and might have to live elsewhere. Just like everything else in life.

Here is my response:

Thank you for your thoughtful comment. I appreciate you taking the time to share your views, even if we don’t see eye-to-eye on everything. Open conversations like this help us understand each other and make our community better.

You’re right that affordability is a big issue across New Jersey, not just here in Middletown. The rising cost of living has made it tough for many families, and while local leaders can’t fix everything, they do have a role in managing how our town deals with these challenges.

I understand your concerns about affordable housing. No one wants to see our roads clogged, schools overcrowded, or open spaces disappear. But adding affordable housing doesn’t have to mean sacrificing what makes Middletown special. With smart planning, we can find ways to grow responsibly—focusing on areas that can handle new developments and making sure infrastructure keeps up.

One important point to consider is the future of our children. Many young adults who grew up here are finding it nearly impossible to stay in the community because housing has become unattainable. Affordable housing isn’t about low-income developments; it’s about giving people—especially the next generation—the chance to attain the American dream. That means having a shot at homeownership or finding a place to live in the town they love without being priced out.

The idea that only people who can afford the current cost of living should stay in Middletown is tricky. A community thrives when it’s diverse. Teachers, first responders, young families, and seniors are all important to our town. Making it easier for them to live here isn’t about “social engineering”; it’s about keeping Middletown a place where everyone has a chance to belong.

I also agree that keeping taxes in check and managing the budget wisely are essential. No one wants unnecessary tax hikes. But we can’t cut corners on things like schools, infrastructure, and public services. If we invest wisely now, it will pay off later, helping Middletown remain a great place to live for everyone.

Thanks again for sharing your perspective. It’s clear you care deeply about our town, and I hope we can continue this conversation to find solutions that work for all of us.

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.

Patch: Meet Mike Morris, Running For Middletown Township Committee

 The Middletown Patch has posted my Candidate profile, a simple Q&A that consists of several inquiring questions that Middletown residents should find interesting. I'm going to post a snippet of the online publication here and encourage you all to follow the link to finish the article. 

My only gripe (and it's minor) with this article is that regardless of how many times its pointed out that Tony Perry, like myself, is running for a seat on the Township Committee, where if reelected, he can be appointed once again as Mayor. It always seem to come across as if we're both running for Mayor. Middletown does not elect it's own Mayor. The person assuming the mayorship is  appointed to the position by the other four sitting members of the Township Committee... Rant over 😊 

Here is a little bit of what i had to say: 

Give a brief bio on yourself. Age, education, occupation. 

 I’ve lived and raised my family in Middletown for 34 years. I’ve stood up for working-class taxpayers, special-needs families, affordability and transparency in government. Since 2008 my watchdog blog “MiddletownMike” has kept residents informed about township policies, issues and events. I am a proud graduate of Brookdale Community College and have worked in the chemical industry for 30 years. 

Why are you running? 

 Middletown's government lacks a clear vision for our town's future. They rely on outdated strip malls and large developments without a strategy for organic growth. We need better commuting options, including walkability, bike lanes and transit connectivity. But, instead of addressing traffic congestion, the Township Committee keeps building car-dependent communities.

Growth is inevitable, but how we manage it defines our future. We can't grow sustainably without attracting new residents and businesses. Unfortunately, Middletown has an affordability problem: Young professionals, working-class families and seniors are being priced out. There are no more affordable housing options for those that wish to stay in our community. 

The annual reassessment of Township property values has driven massive tax increases for the average homeowner. According to Middletown's CFO, the average property assessment has risen 47 percent over the past five years. That’s great if you're about to sell your home. If not, the tax increases associated with it will put you into the poorhouse! 

Despite higher taxes, we're getting less value. Brush and leaf collection has been reduced, storm clean-up is lacking, our roads and sidewalks are in terrible condition. We can do better! We must commit to fixing our broken streets and sidewalks to promote and restore our walkable neighborhoods. 

Can you pinpoint any failures on the Middletown Township Committee in the past few years — specifically point to things you would have done differently? What do you see are mistakes they've made in running the Township? 

Over the years its been the perception that the Township Committee is more interested in maintaining the status quo than actually leading. Instead of looking forward to the future and embracing the changing world around us, its members look to the antiquated past of days gone by. Instead of living in the 21st century, they look back to the last century and yearn for the days of the 1950s. They are reactionary as opposed to visionary....

You can finish reading on the Middletown Patch

Team Pallone: It's Frank 30s

 Friends, 

We all know Frank Pallone as one of the most effective Members of Congress. That’s why it's important to  spread the word about the Congressman’s accomplishments and making sure that  nothing is left  on the field this upcoming election. 

Frank Pallone are working for accessible health care, taking on price gouging, fighting to make housing more affordable, and advocating for the environment.

 

Vote 411 Candidate Profile

 If you want to know a little about myself and the issues that I feel are import for Middletown voters to be concerned over then I suggest checking out my Candidate Profile available at VOTE411.ORG

For those curious, I answered the following 4 questions concerning Middletown below are partial answers to these questions. Hit the Candidate Profile link above to read my complete answers:  

1. What are the major challenges facing the community, and how would you propose to face these challenges if elected? 

 Middletown's government lacks a clear vision for our town's future. There is no strategy for organic growth; We need better commuting options, including walkability, bike lanes, and transit connectivity. Growth is inevitable, but how we manage it defines our future. We can't grow sustainably without attracting new residents and businesses. Unfortunately, Middletown has an affordability problem: young professionals, working-class families, and seniors are being priced out. There is no more affordable housing options for those that wish to stay in our community....

 2. How has your personal and professional expirience prepared you to serve in the municipal government? 

I’ve lived and raised my family in Middletown for 34 years. I’ve stood up for working class taxpayers, special needs families, affordability and transparency in government. Since 2008 my watchdog blog “MiddletownMike” has kept residents informed about township policies, issues and events. Working in the Chemical industry has prepared me to expect the unexpected and prepare for the 'what if'.  

 3. What polices, if any, would you pursue to help mitigate the effects of climate change and promote and preserve environmental quality in the community? 

Unlike many naysayers, I believe that climate change is real. I believe that we have to rely on science and commonsense to help alleviate its impact on our environment. We need to embrace Green technologies like solar & wind power, alternative fuels and green building practices. The Township's Planning and Zoning boards need to place an emphasis on sustainability when approving projects or development...

4.  If elected, how would you address the issue of affordable housing in the community? 

 As stated already, I believe Middletown has an affordability problem. There are no more affordable housing options for those that wish to stay in our community; young professionals, working-class families, and seniors are being priced out of our community. The annual reassessment of township property values has driven massive tax increases for the average homeowner. According to Middletown's CFO, the average property assessment has risen 47% over the past five years....   

American Properties Sues Middletown To Overturn Taylor Lane Denial

Interesting article in this week's Independent concerning the proposed Taylor Lane housing development that was turned down by the Middletown Planning Boarda few months ago.  The developer American Properties, is suing Middletown in Superior Court to overturn the ruling by the Planning Board.

After reading the article, a portion of which is printed below, I don't see how legally, Middletown has much of a leg to stand on and will surely lose in court.  Middletown's zoning process seems to be hap-hazard at times without a lot of thought placed into it.  The deficiency in the process then leads to court cases like this one which Middletown has a history of losing.

MIDDLETOWN — Iselin-based developer American Properties has sued the township of Middletown and the township Planning Board over the unanimous denial of the company’s plan to build 245 town homes on a 31-acre site. 

Citing “arbitrary, capricious or unreasonable” regulations and rulings by both bodies, American Properties is asking a state Superior Court judge to overturn the denial of its application and strike down a local ordinance cited in the decision.

The developer is also seeking a ruling on whether Taylor Lane is a public or private roadway, which could require the township to forcibly acquire any private ownership rights to the road that bisects the development site. 

Attorneys for the township and the Planning Board said no court hearings had taken place as of May 5. 

Ronald Shimanowitz, the attorney for the American Properties application and the appeal, did not return a call seeking comment. 

In the appeal, filed on Feb. 28, the developer states that the proposed development of 196 market-rate town homes and 49 affordable housing units fully complies with the township’s zoning for the vacant site. 

The Planning Board’s unanimous resolution of denial, which came after 11 lengthy Planning Board hearings spanning all of 2013, stated that Taylor Lane is a “collector road” according to local and state regulations. 

As a result, the board said the proposed development must be set back 50 feet from Taylor Lane, a two-lane road that runs south from Route 35 past a residential community. 

“The applicant’s plan is too crowded, too tight to a busy road,” read the resolution of denial. “Locating homes within 25 feet of a busy collector road is just not good planning. “
Professionals for American Properties testified that Taylor Lane is actually a local road that would require a setback of only 10 feet. The application called for a 25-foot setback. 

In the suit, American Properties officials say the Planning Board did not decide that Taylor Lane was a collector road until the 11th and final hearing for the application, and did not mention the need for a variance prior to that night.

The board’s determination was also partly based on a Middletown road ordinance that is “arbitrary, capricious, unreasonable and ambiguous” and needs to be voided, the complaint alleges. 

The ordinance, cited in the board’s denial, lays out specific criteria for a collector road, including the number of vehicles it carries, the number of lots it provides access to and whether it is “utilized by traffic other than residential in nature.” 

However, the board also recognized that the road ordinance “is not crystal clear,” referring at points to the township master plan, which does not designate Taylor Lane as either a local or collector road.

 Continue reading

1-22-13 Township Committee Meeting

Last Monday night's Middletown Township Committee meeting was unusual. Unusual in the sense that it deviated from the norm of the past 2 years; The meeting took nearly two hours from start to finish, whereas the norm lately has been just under 35 minutes. So to be honest, I skipped through the video quickly and still reviewing it, but thought that I should post it for others to view as well.

The reason for the exceptional length of Monday night's meeting was due to a number of residents speaking out about several ordinances that were introduced at the previous meetings. Chief among them were the lease of the facilities at the Croydon Hall property to a private school - even though the Township has not decided where the Parks and Health Department employees will be relocated and the transfer of property (25 minutes into the video)to a non-profit to build group homes for the blind in the Navesink section of town. Several residents spoke out in opposition of the ordinance and the debate got rather heated. The ordinance however was unanimously passed by the Township committee. It is well worth the time to watch. Later during Public Comments, the executive director of the organization that will be building these group homes spoke to say that there should not be any concerns about the residents living in the homes and that the organization plans on holding a public meeting sometime in the future to address area residents concerns.

Committee Comments started at 1:10 into the meeting, comments by those on the committee were brief (lasting about 6 minutes) then moved right into the Public Comments portion of the meeting.

A couple of residents ask about the Middletown Library. The first asking about the feasibility of transferring the Middletown Library system to the County, to have it included as part of the Monmouth County Library system. The second resident later (1:48:39) asked about the current crisis  facing the Middletown Library regarding closure of library branches  charge backs for health insurance the Township imposed on the Library by the Township Committee. She was arrogantly told that it was a Library issue and to speak to the Library Board about it during a shouting match between her and Tony Fiore.

A lengthy discussion (1:30) took place about the flooding of a creek along Highlands Ave. in Leonardo and whether or not it could be dredged, followed by a question about the new FEMA flood maps.

And finally, the Township refused to accept free recordings of Township Committee meetings claiming a previously submitted DVD was unplayable and reportedly contained a virus. They could not identify which DVD presented the problem.




As always, you can download a copy of the meeting agenda that contains the discussion items and the proposed resolutions and ordinances that were voted on or presented during the meeting. A box around an item is a link, bringing you further into the document to that resolution or ordinance. At the end of the resolution there will be a link bringing you back to the agenda. Attached to this agenda is also the monthly bill list, so that everyone can see how the Township is spending our tax dollars

Gov. Chris Christie Exceeded His Constitutional Authority When He Abolished COAH

Now what?

From the Asbury Park Press:

Gov. Chris Christie exceeded his constitutional authority when he abolished the Council on Affordable Housing last year, a three-judge Appellate Court panel decided.
In its decision, released earlier today, the panel ruled that the state’s Executive Reorganization Act did not give Christie the power to unilaterally abolish independent agencies created by the Legislature. 

COAH was created by the Fair Housing Act, in response to several affordable housing decisions rendered by the state Supreme Court.  

 “Strictly construing the Reorganization Act, we conclude that it does not grant the Governor the power to abolish a legislatively created, representative, independent authority that is ‘in but not of’ the Executive Branch or any department in that branch of the government. Applying this rule here, we determine that the Governor exceeded his authority under the Reorganization Act in abolishing COAH,” the court wrote.  

 Affordable housing advocates hailed the decision.

As A Matter Of Fact...Financing the American Dream

August 16th, 2011 | Published in NJPP Blog: As a Matter of Fact …

By Sarah Stecker, Policy Analyst

Last month, in order to facilitate a deal that the state had already cut, Governor Christie signed a bill significantly expanding two programs that provide tax subsidies for developers, the Economic Redevelopment and Growth grant and the Urban Transit Hub Tax Credit.

One section of the bill (S2972/A4161, P.L. 2011, c. 89) changes state law for the benefit of a single developer, the Canadian firm Triple Five Group. The deal made by the state, worth up to $350 million in tax breaks on the company’s more than $1billion investment, enticed Triple Five to resurrect the five-year-old, on-again-off-again eye sore previously known as Xanadu. The developer rebranded the half-finished mega mall as the American Dream at Meadowlands and said that in addition to “high-end” retail the mall would include an indoor ski slope, skating rink and a wave pool. The state estimated that upon completion the project would generate a whopping 35,000 permanent jobs.

The change in the law was required because Triple Five was not eligible for the grant the governor had promised many months earlier. Even though significant parts of the state – up to 80 percent of the municipalities – were eligible to host an ERG project, the area of the Meadowlands where the development was taking place was not covered by the original legislation.

The final grant amount to Triple Five depends on an analysis by the Economic Development Authority of the American Dream proposal. ERG grants can total up to 20 percent of a developer’s investment and can be paid out for up to 20 years as a portion of the tax revenues attributed to the project.

Another section of the bill amends state law requiring residential developers to produce affordable housing units in addition to market-rate units as a condition of receiving Urban Transit Hub Tax Credits. The change means developers will no longer have to put aside 20 percent of the residential housing they build for low and moderate income people. The law was meant to provide developers an incentive at the same time it would address the dire lack of decent, affordable housing in many areas of New Jersey. Municipalities now will make the decision about how much low-income housing – if any – will be included in a project.

The law also now allows developers to use any unused credits to reduce the developers’ taxes for up to 20 years from when the credit was given. At the same time, the new law increases the tax credit available to 35 percent, up from 20 percent, if a residential developer builds any housing in one of nine mass transit-accessible cities designated under the Hub law.

The change to the Urban Transit Hub Tax Credit illustrates the good that public subsidies could do (incentivize transit-oriented development) versus the risk of corporations abusing these tax breaks.

For instance, the Urban Transit Hub Tax Credit is available to corporations as well as residential developers. Campbell Soup, located ¾ of a mile from the Walter Rand Transit Center in Camden, received a $41.2 million credit in February of this year to renovate its headquarters, including more than $6 million to furnish the refurbished office space. In its application for the credit, Campbell’s officials said they would bring 95 workers to the city as a condition of the award. Four months after the grant was awarded and made public, Campbell’s announced it would lay off 130 of the 1,200 workers at its headquarters in Camden.

The layoffs are unlikely to jeopardize Campbell’s state subsidy because the Urban Transit Hub Tax Credit is aimed primarily at supporting capital investment. To qualify, companies must invest more than $50 million in capital improvements and employ at least 250 full-time workers. Campbell’s is complying with the law, but the state’s taxpayers might rightly raise the question of why they are subsidizing the company’s newly renovated headquarters even as Campbell’s increases the state’s unemployment rate.

New Jersey is providing hundreds of millions of dollars in tax subsidies to corporations, developers and businesses in the hopes of stimulating the state economy and creating private sector jobs. But there is a policy trade-off and it is evident in this single piece of legislation. The Administration, abetted by leaders in the Legislature, is choosing corporations over individuals: high end retail over low-income housing; renovating corporate suites over rebuilding public schools. That is short-sighted. The long-term policies of a prosperous state must address the needs of its citizens, not just its corporations.

The state Economic Development Authority expects to approve rules implementing the new legislation at its September Board meeting.

N.J. Senate panel considers plan to transfer affordable housing control to towns

(Question - How would this new proposal be enforced to ensure that towns did not shirk their responsibilities to provide affordabled housing and if RCA's are reinstated how do you ensure that wealthier towns make timely payments to the towns receiving the compensation?)

NJ.Com -
By Lisa Fleisher/Statehouse Bureau

TRENTON -- The state Senate began work today on a bill to transform the way affordable housing is handled in New Jersey, including transferring control to towns and abolishing a council that has been criticized as ineffective.

The proposal, still a very much a draft, would disband the controversial Council on Affordable Housing and turn its powers over to the State Planning Commission, ending 25 years of state power over municipal planning.

The goal is to create a standard level of affordable housing and allow municipalities to determine for themselves whether they meet that standard, said Sen. Ray Lesniak (D-Union), the bill’s sponsor.

“This bill is an attempt to simplify the process,” Lesniak said, noting he’s never met anyone who was happy with the council, known as COAH.

New Jersey’s current approach stems from the state Supreme Court’s 1975 and 1983 Mount Laurel decisions, which are named for the Burlington County township that was sued. The court said every resident is entitled to access to affordable housing.

A decade later, the state passed the Fair Housing Act and created COAH to implement policy. Critics of the policy say the models for determining the need for housing are outdated and saddle cities and towns with unnecessary extra housing and residents — and the accompanying cost of providing services to them.

Municipalities without enough housing would be able to offer builders incentives to make 20 percent of their developments affordable.

Under the legislation, builders still can legally challenge towns on whether they provide their required affordable housing. That provision allows developers the right to build units against a town’s wishes.

Dozens of people who came to testify at today’s hearing were cut off as time ran out, but Lesniak said they would have many more chances to speak. The committee will hold another hearing on the bill Monday but does not expect to vote.

Critics of the bill say it is a giveaway to developers, would allow municipalities to shirk their responsibilities and could endanger housing for the disabled. Lesniak said disabled residents would be protected in the legislation’s final version.

Low-income housing advocates say the bill would return New Jersey to pre-Mount Laurel practices and needs to be more targeted toward economic development goals.

“It’s shortsighted. It’s narrow-minded,” said Joseph Picard, spokesman for the Housing and Community Development Network of New Jersey. “We need to be thinking in terms of building housing near jobs and transportation.”

The bill also would temporarily bring back agreements between municipalities that allow towns, in essence, to sell off their affordable-housing requirements to other cities or towns. That practice was outlawed in 2008 with 5,000 units worth $116 million in the pipeline. The bill would allow those stalled deals to move forward if they are approved by the state by the end of 2011.

Though Lesniak said he has not spoken with Gov. Chris Christie, he thinks the proposal will have a “better opportunity” to pass than it would have under the Corzine administration. Christie has said he wanted to “gut” COAH but yesterday said he did not know enough about the bill to comment.

Democrats on right side of affordable housing debate; Republicans only offer re-establishment of regional contribution agreements

The following commentary appeared in today's Asbury Park Press and was written by Vincent Solomeno. Vincent is a life long bayshore area resident and a Monmouth County Democratic committeeman from Hazlet.

For those of you who do not know Vincent, he was named one of “50 Rising Stars in New Jersey Politics” by Politicker New Jersey, he has managed or worked on local, state, and national campaigns. He has worked for Congressman Frank Pallone.

In 2006, Vincent became a Truman Scholar and in 2007, he was selected as a J. William Fulbright Scholar to the Netherlands where he earned a Master of Arts in European Studies at the University of Amsterdam. A Distinguished Military Graduate (DMG), he is a Second Lieutenant in the United States Army Reserve and is training to become a Combat Engineer. 

So when Vincent has an opinion about something it's worth listening to, he is not some loony liberal trying to push mandates down our throats. He is an extremely intelligent and distinguished member of the Monmouth County community who's thoughts and ideas  should be considered:

Democrats must be able to transform the statewide mandate of the Council on Affordable Housing or else be ready for Republican criticism that may diminish Democratic support among suburban voters.

Ex-Bogota Mayor Steve Lonegan recently traveled to Freehold to stump for votes in his campaign for the Republican nomination for governor. He likened his campaign to the American Revolution and compared Gov. Jon Corzine and the Democratic majorities in the Legislature to the tyrants of Europe and Asia.

The 21st-century Gen. George Washington continued with a blistering attack on COAH and promised that, when the general election is through, the self-financed Corzine will be living in one of the program's 40,000 units.

November's election not only will determine who occupies the front office in the state Capitol. It will test New Jersey Republicans' ability to make inroads into the Democrats' legislative majority. Unless Democrats present a compelling narrative for affordable housing, COAH and its cumbersome regulations have the potential to unite the feuding factions of the GOP and erase Democratic gains in suburban battlegrounds.

From a policy perspective, the need for affordable housing remains as clear today as it was when the Supreme Court ordered state action on the issue in 1984. According to the U.S. Census, New Jerseyans pay 30 percent or more of their income for housing, the fourth highest percentage in the nation. However, members of both parties recognize that in its current form, COAH often results in continued overdevelopment and an increase in property taxes.

Democrats in the Legislature have indicated their willingness to take on the challenge. As chairman of the Economic Growth Committee, Sen. Ray Lesniak, D-Union, introduced legislation (S2485) that directs the state Housing Commission to consider the impact of its assessments on local property taxes.

Lesniak also wants COAH to provide housing not only to low-income individuals, but to those in the middle class who do not qualify for the program but nonetheless struggle with New Jersey's high cost of living. Called "work-force" housing, the change would allow individuals such as secretaries, firefighters and recent college graduates to qualify for assistance.

In his recent State of the State address, Corzine indicated his willingness to "allow for maximum flexibility and ample time for collaborative review" of affordable housing plans. The governor and Democrats will face the challenge of articulating the need for COAH regulations to a public leery of continued development.

Affordable housing may be an issue that Republicans can use to their advantage, but thus far they have offered no policy alternative other than S2292, a bill re-establishing the regional contribution agreements that circumvented the intent of affordable housing in the first place. Their advocacy of a return to the failed status quo does nothing to address the real problem.

New Jersey is a "blue" state and New Jersey Republicans are a party rife with ideological divisions. Criticism of COAH presents them with an issue they can rally around. However, they will need more than rhetoric and stale policy to convince voters they can solve the problem. Democrats have demonstrated a willingness to ease the burden on municipalities without abandoning a commitment to providing affordable housing. The remaining challenge for lawmakers is to deliver reform.

MiddletownMike "Affordable housing is a necessity for working families"

Be sure to take a look at the Courier online today for my column on affordable housing.  I question who needs and qualifies for affordable housing, while giving a little bit of personal background information.

Click the headline to read the MiddletownMike column in the Courier.