By Courtenay D. Mercer, PP, AICP

Another four years, another Governor, another set of transition reports. If you have not seen them yet, follow this link to review the Subcommittee Reports With Recommendations to Improve, Shrink State Government released by Governor Christie’s office. Many of the reports have a direct link to land use, and therefore, could have a significant affect on our work as planners.

Brief descriptions of the relevant and most interesting sections of the reports will follow. It is important to note, however, that the reports were created by Subcommittees that seemingly did not discuss their research and recommendations with one another, thus creating a somewhat schizophrenic set of policy recommendations. This is likely attributed to the make-up of the various Subcommittees, each with Chairs of different political inclinations and members representing myriad interests. It also seems that the Subcommittees were instructed to make recommendations in a vacuum, ignoring the reality of legality or process necessary to implement the recommendations. That said, the reports provide great insight into the mindset of those advising the new Governor. The reports can also guide planners as they begin working the new Administration on critical projects around the state.

Perhaps the most promising of the reports was that of the Economic Development and Job Growth Subcommittee, which calls for the Governor to:

“Develop a Balanced State Plan: Reconstitute and elevate the State Planning Commission and appoint a cabinet-level Executive Director with the charge directly from the Governor to support the Lt Governor in working with the Commissioners to update the State Plan in a manner that breaks down the ‘silos’ between their respective (and often contradictory) capital investment priorities and regulatory regimes.”

This is what smart growth advocates, including APA-NJ, have been calling for since the McGreevey administration gave us hope for a more collaborative State government with Executive Order 4. This transition report also calls for the streamlining of the State’s regulatory and financial incentive programs.

Juxtaposed to the Economic Development Subcommittee’s recommendations is the Department of Community Affairs report, which did not even mention the State Plan when discussing the Office of Smart Growth (OSG) and State Planning Commission (SPC). It further suggested that the Governor either “abolish the OSG and SPC”, or “reposition OSG (with or without the SPC) as a “One-Stop” shop (the “Interagency Office”) in the Department of State where both the private and public sectors can utilize the office for purposes of carrying out future development of the State”, i.e. turn it into Christie’s version of Corzine’s ineffective Office of Economic Growth. Neither scenario for the OSG seems particularly enlightened. That is not to say the DCA report did not make some useful recommendations. For example, it calls for a consolidation of the Department’s many housing related functions to one office to streamline processes and possibly enhance financial stability of some programs. The report calls for similar consolidations related to New Jersey Redevelopment Authority, the Urban Enterprise Zone Authority and the Economic Development Authority (EDA). Each of these consolidations should make these programs easier (more logical) to find, and thus more consumer-friendly.

The DCA report included many suggestions related to the Council on Affordable Housing (COAH), the first of which was to put forth a Constitutional amendment to either define a municipality’s constitutional obligation to provide affordable housing, or affirmatively state that a municipality does not have an obligation to provide affordable housing. Either amendment, according to the report, would eliminate the need for COAH. The report did recognize the political difficulty of getting such an amendment through the legislative, and thus called this a “long term” goal. Alternatively, the report recommended legislative changes to the Fair Housing Act (FHA) to eliminate COAH or have its “authority dramatically scaled back”. If the legislature could not produce something “acceptable to the new administration”, the last recommended course of action was the pursuit of regulatory changes that would reduce fair share estimates. Interestingly, Senator Lesniak introduced Senate Bill 1 just before the release of the transition reports, which “Reforms procedures concerning the provision of affordable housing, and abolishes the Council on Affordable Housing”. There is obviously an inclination on both sides of the aisle to do “something” with COAH. Whatever that “something” turns out to be, it will certainly have an effect on planners’ work throughout NJ.

The Transportation transition report is largely a summary of the dire state of NJ’s transportation funds and a litany list of up-grades needed to keep NJ’s transportation system safe and supportive of our economic development desires. It is generally supportive of the large infrastructure projects critical to economic development, including freight and passenger rail up-grades. Similar to the other reports, it calls for measures to streamline services and processes, as well as recommends cost-saving performance measures.

The findings of the report on the Department of Environmental Protection should not come as much of a surprise to most. It lambasted the Department for overstepping its authority, and said it “has driven economic investment out of this state”. The following summary list of major recommendations was compiled by the County Planner’s association (thank you CPA!):

• Builders will no longer be forced to submit “extensive data” for some permits and may only have to go down a checklist for approval on others.
• The required buffer zone between new developments and a C-1 stream or river should be cut in half to 150 feet.
• Cleanup standards for some contaminated sites could be lowered.
• The report suggests that the DEP must do less with less, and do it better.
• The report’s recommendations identify efforts such as establishing definable goals for the staff and creating online permit applications.
• Expand the use of a permit checklist called “permits-by-rule” as well as “general permits” that do not require extensive data supplied by developers.
• Suspend the use of the state “Landscape Project Map Book” to designate habitats for threatened and endangered species. Instead, review development applications of those areas only if the species are documented there.
• Reduce the complexity of permits for large facilities that emit air pollutants.
• Revise cleanup standards to be “achievable and protective of the environment” at contaminated sites by refraining from using “overly conservative” remediation standards.
• Allow private contractors overseeing the cleanup of toxic sites to rely on their “professional judgment” rather than strictly adhering to guidance documents provided by the DEP.
• The transition team was critical of the Highlands Council; the report said the legislation “has been hijacked by overreaching regulations by the DEP and by a Highlands Council.”
• The transition team indicated that if the Council was eliminated, environmental protections would still be in place to protect the region.
• Creation of a Department of Natural Resources.

The Department could certainly benefit from some consolidation and breaking down of silos. It might also be advantageous to look at inflexible regulations that cannot “see the forest through the trees”, but the overall tone of the report is a concern.

Alternatively, the Department of Agriculture report was quite positive in nature. It seems the Subcommittee saw an opportunity for renewed support for the Department’s mission. The report spoke of funding cuts over the years, but also provided reasonable methods to fill the gaps. The report spoke of a need for a stable source of funding for preservation, as well as funds to monitor preserved farms for proper stewardship. The report also spoke of the promise of Transfer of Development Rights and the need for more incentives to make it a workable strategy. Not surprising, the report spoke of DEP regulatory impediments to the agriculture industry. It is interesting to note, though, that the Agriculture report did not call for the repeal of the Highlands Act or dismantling of the Council and its staff. It raised concerns about the effect on agriculture and made relevant and salient requests for continued and enhanced support for agriculture in the Region, but did not go beyond that.

The Authorities report, on the other hand, had stronger views on the Highlands Council, calling it “a disaster on many levels”, and stating that:

“If the Highlands Council had its powers changed or reduced, or even if it was eliminated outright, environmental protections would still be in place, enforced just as they are in every other part of the state. All projects would still be subject to DEP and local rules and regulations, just as they would be in any other region.”

In the immediate future, presumably recognizing the Governor does not have the ability to eliminate the Council outright, the report suggested cutting the budget and changing the Council make-up to include more residents (both would still require Legislative initiative). Beyond the Highlands, the Authorities report also recommended the consolidation of the South Jersey Transportation Authority and Turnpike Authority (as did the Transportation Report). Further, the report called for a complete overhaul of the NJ Sports and Exposition Authority, better leveraging of NY/NJ Port Authority funding, the merger of several economic related entities under the EDA umbrella, immediate attention to NJ Transit budgetary shortfalls in order to maintain service and rethinking Delaware River Port Authority capital projects. It noted that the Transportation Trust Fund is broke, and made a suggestion to add finance experts to the Board.

The Energy & Utilities report included a commendation for Sustainable New Jersey, saying it “has proven to be highly successful and the state should support the program”. It also called for the creation of a new Energy Master Plan and an updated strategic plan aligned with the policies of the incoming Administration. This latter recommendation seems a waste of time and resources, given the extensive process to adopt the last Energy Master Plan.

Finally, there has been a rumor spreading amongst planners that the Board of Professional Planners and the license are to be eliminated. The Law and Public Safety transition report, which included information on licensing boards, made no recommendations to this effect. The APA-NJ did attend the Board of Professional Planners’ last meeting in which they confirmed there was talk of possibly consolidating various professional boards into one “super board”, but not that the license would be eliminated altogether. Regardless, this would require a legislative change, and is not likely to happen any time soon.

I have only provided you a small insight into the relevant issues emerging from the Transition Reports – a full synopsis and interpretation would take many more pages of this newsletter. I recommend that you read the reports to come to your own conclusions about the direction Governor Christie may take with regard to land use. Know that the APA-NJ is following the State’s policy initiatives, and reaching out to the Administration and Legislature when it can.

The Housing Committee recently testified before the Senate Economic Growth Committee on Senate Bill 1 that “Reforms procedures concerning the provision of affordable housing, and abolishes the Council on Affordable Housing”. In addition, President-Elect, Chuck Latini, and I sent a letter to Governor Christie following the release of the Transition Reports in January expressing the APA-NJ’s support for state planning, and our endorsement of the Economic Development Subcommittee’s report to the Transition Team. Both the hearing testimony and the letter can be found on the front page of our website.

We will be expanding our policy initiatives in the coming year, and welcome you to join the Legislative Committee or any of our topical sub-committees by contacting the appropriate Chair.

The President’s Corner reflects the President’s opinion and not necessarily that of the APA-NJ Executive Committee or APA-NJ membership.