N.J. Supreme Court allows housing advocates to argue for more affordable units

The state Supreme Court said it will hear an appeal of an Ocean County case

TRENTON -- Housing advocates in New Jersey get a second chance to convince a court that the state should keep in place its requirements that got thrown out earlier this summer for towns to provide for affordable housing for low-to-moderate income residents.

The Appellate Division in July had shut down housing advocates' attempts to keep in place the formula for determining how many lower-to-moderate income units a town must build, but the state Supreme Court said towns shouldn't yet throw out that formula until more arguments are heard.

In an order signed on Wednesday but released on Thursday, the state's highest court said it would allow the Fair Share Housing Center to appeal the July appellate decision and set the case on an expedited case by directing that oral arguments be scheduled for the last week of November.

"We were disappointed in the Appellate Division's decision in July because we thought it misinterpreted the law and the Supreme Court's order today stops that order from being effective," said Kevin Walsh, executive director of the Fair Share Housing Center. "It gives us a chance to argue at the Supreme Court as to why it should be reversed."

N.J. affordable housing council fails to adopt Christie's new rules 

The legal action is the latest round of decades of litigation among towns, developers, housing advocates and state officials. This case grew out of a decision earlier this year by a Superior Court judge in Ocean County who ruled towns are responsible for meeting their previous and future affordable housing obligations as well as their obligations between 1999 and 2015, a span known as the "gap period" when the Council on Affordable Housing couldn't agree on a third round of requirements.

The Supreme Court last year appointed a panel of Superior Court judges to decide on a case-by-case basis how many units would have to be made available to low and moderate income residents.

In July, an appellate panel said towns did not have to meet their obligations in the gap period. Fair Share Housing asked the Supreme Court to take up the case, which it agreed to do.

Fair Share Housing has estimated the state needs about 200,000 affordable units to be built in the coming decade, but that figure could be cut in half if towns don't have to meet their obligations from the gap period as the appellate division had said in July.

The New Jersey State League of Municipalities, which is helping towns to coordinate the fight against Fair Share Housing, said the Supreme Court's decision wasn't unexpected.

Michael Cerra, assistant executive director for the League, said it will, however, mean a continuation of expensive litigation.

"While we are not surprised that the court will consider the issue, it will unfortunately further delay what has been a drawn-out, costly process for taxpayers," Cerra said. "Ultimately, we fully expect the well-reasoned, unanimous appellate ruling to be upheld.   Perhaps once this decision is upheld, we can bring finality to costly litigation and get around to the business of compliance."