Appeals Panel Nixes Christie COAH Plan
Court rules that the governor lacks authority to reorganize an independent agency, saying future of Council on Affordable Housing is up to state Legislature.
A state appeals panel has overturned Gov. Chris Christie's reorganization of New Jersey's affordable housing bureaucracy, saying the governor lacked authority to abolish an independent agency.
Christie issued an executive order in June 2011 that eliminated the state Council on Affordable Housing and transferred its responsibilities to the state Department of Community Affairs.
Christie says he will appeal the decision.
"We are obviously disappointed with the court decision, which only perpetuates the nightmare New Jersey has endured for decades with the COAH bureaucracy," said Christie spokesman Michael Drewniak.
In its ruling, written by Judge Philip S. Charchman, the appellate panel said that the state Reorganization Act "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." The panel found that Christie "exceeded his authority under the Reorganization Act in abolishing COAH."
The authority to "abolish COAH rests exclusively with the Legislature," the panel said.
"The framers (of the state constitution) acknowledged the principle that the power to create and abolish such agencies and to alter such functions resided within the legislative process, involving both the Legislature and the Executive."
COAH had been created in the early 1980s by the state Legislature in response to two lawsuits — known as Mount Laurel I and Mount Laurel II — that ruled that towns had a responsibility to provide affordable housing within their borders. The rulings banned so-called exclusionary zoning — which the court defined as zoning designed to limit housing available to low-income residents.
The Legislature created COAH to create and oversee new affordable housing rules, which mandated that towns provide housing. Many suburban communities opposed COAH and it has been a point of political contention for nearly 25 years.
The Fair Share Housing Center, an advocacy group that brought the suit, lauded the appellate panel's ruling.
“The Appellate Division properly found, based on a careful reading of the original intent of New Jersey’s statutes and constitution, that Gov. Christie simply does not have the power to unilaterally abolish independent agencies he doesn’t like," said Associate Director Kevin D. Walsh.
"In doing so, the Court properly protected the independence of agencies such as the Election Law Enforcement Commission, State Ethics Commission, Public Defender, and dozens of other agencies that would have been subject to gubernatorial abolition if the plan for COAH had been upheld. The Court required the diverse interests represented in independent agencies to have a voice, as the Legislature intended.”
Bill Dressel, executive director of the state League of Municipalities, said the ruling does not alter the need for housing reform in New Jersey.
"When legislative efforts reached an impasse, the governor reasonably sought to use his powers under the Reorganization Act," he said. "The reversal by the court does not obscure the need for reform. The only issue is what shape the reform will take.”
State Sen. Ray Lesniak, (D-Union), who was the prime sponsor of the housing legislation vetoed by Christie, backed the court decision and added that any reform plan must meet court muster.
"In order to develop a plan which will stand the test of court scrutiny, we have to work together to create an alternative to COAH that actually works," he said. "We cannot simply throw COAH out the window without first developing a mechanism which seriously addresses the shortage of affordable housing opportunities in New Jersey communities."
What do you think? Does the governor have the power to abolish agencies? Should COAH be abolished? Add your voice in the comments.
JJ
11:22 am on Friday, March 9, 2012
The funny thing is there is no shortage of affordable housing in NJ so its just a way to waste taxpayers money. Get rid of COAH!
Air
11:31 am on Friday, March 9, 2012
We love what Christie is doing, trying to help NJ, not destroy it! Glad he is going to appeal.
Leniak is wrong on the point of "shortage of housing " .
Go anywhere in the state including north jersey there are numerous existing "housing opportunities" that are nearly empty. If the housing fund was placed to rehab those existing units rather than building new ones we would
cover most of the "housing opportunity" issues.
Stop wasting the taxpayers money , it is a spending problem!
Schu
12:12 pm on Friday, March 9, 2012
COAH is another waste of government resources, government should not be in the business of housing.
Patrick
12:29 pm on Friday, March 9, 2012
I'm sorry.. what?
Patrick
12:20 pm on Friday, March 9, 2012
I think there is a misunderstand about what COAH does... They don't build or fund homes. They are a safeguard agency that is helps municipalities meet Fair Housing Federal mandates. This helps local gov't from lawsuits... so it has nothing to do with how many homes are or are not on the market, it has to do with zoning and the like.
What Christie is doing is taking away a legal safety net from the local gov't. Putting even more pressure on the municipalities to come up with cash to protect themselves. In other words Christie is up to the same sort of rearrange the deck chairs BS that has been going on in NJ for too long.
Paul J. DiBartolo
9:19 am on Saturday, March 10, 2012
Wait a minute, the governement is there to "help municiplaities meet Fair Housing mandates" (an official or authoritative command, order, or authorization from a superior official to a subordinate)? No, that's not right, the power of the government rests almost solely in its ability to coerce (force) its subjects to obey under the threat of force. In fact, the whole idea of mandating 'fair housing' originates in somebody's idea of what fair is and then using the power of the government to force it on everybody else. Thanks, but no thanks.
ymbdfa
9:05 am on Friday, May 18, 2012
Patrick, that went so far over Schu's head he couldn’t get it with a fire truck ladder.
First you have to explain to Schu what Government is supposed to do before you can expect him to understand why it should not avoid its responsibility. What Schu and the like fail to grasp is its comments made by Governor Christie and others with his elitist mentality from the past who said comment like Christies ever famous "If you can't afford to live in New Jersey then Leave,” is exactly why COAH exists in the first place. I just wonder who is going to work for all these multi-millionaires when the middle class exiles the state.
Don
1:56 pm on Friday, March 9, 2012
COAH is nothing more than a social engineering regime. I sincerely hope Christie appeals the court decision and moves forward to dismantle this regime.
Patrick
2:11 pm on Friday, March 9, 2012
Don, nothing could be further than the truth. If you have an issue its not with COAH, but federal Fair Housing laws. COAH is a resource to help local gov't protect themselves from lawsuits. How is that social engineering? No one is forced to utilize COAH. If your local gov't isn interested they don't have to buy in.
BN
10:20 am on Saturday, March 10, 2012
It IS social engineering. Liberals push for development of undeveloped, protected, or farmland in politically conservative areas in a thinly-veiled attempt to impact redistricting. Keep the low income housing (call it what it is) near mass-transit in urban areas.
Air
2:09 pm on Friday, March 9, 2012
Whoa paddy! Easy on your criticism of our great Governor! How about the state mandates? The state supreme court back in 85 put this burden on the municipalities. As stated, there are so many available buildings right now across nj ESP north jersey that could be rehabbed and produce numerous low/moderate income families with homes.
The RCA's were a great tool for those who got the credits and those municipalities who received the money to rehab those existing . RCA's A win-win under that coah plan.
The idea that municipalities are forceful build new units rather than rehab their own or give to others is pathetic!
homes.
Patrick
3:45 pm on Friday, March 9, 2012
Air, yes the Fair Housing Act put pressure on the municipalities, and thus COAH was founded to shield them from lawsuits. This isn't about building out old buildings, although that can be part of it. Its about zoning and new construction. So if Toll Bros comes in can builds 500 units, there must be a proportional amount of affordable house to offset it. Otherwise, a township, town or city can be sued.
Paul J. DiBartolo
9:29 am on Saturday, March 10, 2012
COAH shields the municipalities from lawsuits? No, COAH provides information on all the government 'gobblygook' that municipalities need to do in order to avoid being sued for what the state governement is trying to force the municiplaities to do.
BTW, Patrick, what's your affiliation with COAH? You seem inordinately defensive of the orginization.
Mark Wendell
3:44 pm on Friday, March 9, 2012
To bad Chris, you cant have everything you personally want.
Air
4:08 pm on Friday, March 9, 2012
That's the point, hold off on new construction and rehab existing ones. Those laws encourage sprawl and in a state like ours we should do everything to rehab and
If it means using rca's at a reasonable cost then both municipalities win. It should be focused on rehab first over any new construction, and if a municipality needs resources than others should use the RCA sonthey can rehab. Perhaps that will diminish "builders remedy"
Mark Wendell
10:11 am on Saturday, March 10, 2012
@ Air, you make a good point. I live in a mostly 3 bedroom house type of neighborhood that has some $400,000 rage house's and more than a few very old 1950 and 1960 era trilers left in it. Habitat for Humanity has removed one of the worst trailers and replaced it with a 3 bedroom house. While not a rehab of the building, it was way beyond that, it was a rehab of the propeerty and a rehab of the block. Many forclosure's are around me lets occupy those properties to save the community from eyesores. The banks do not take care of them at all and the teens have moved into them while the buildings rot and are stripped of the plumbing.
Jackie Knoff
4:31 pm on Friday, March 9, 2012
Chris Christie can do whatever he damn well pleases..End of discussion
Mark Wendell
10:15 am on Saturday, March 10, 2012
A perfect comment on how Christie "thinks" and acts. To hell with we the people. To hell with the fact that more people than just Christie may want something different. It's all about his bloted ego. He is just a corporate puppet.
Pogue Mahonelibs
4:32 pm on Friday, March 9, 2012
So when the Legislature establishes rules over the elections the process the Courts say it is OK to ignore them - allowing democrats to swap the corrupt Torricelli for Lautenberg.
But when it comes to eliminating one of the greatest property rights abuses - COAH - we can't override the Legislature.
The judges and liberals have ruined this state. I'm on short time here. Good luck paying for all this - and you guys can keep working until your 70 so the government workers can retire at 55.
N/A
10:23 pm on Friday, March 9, 2012
The only state workers that can retire at 55 and collect full pensions and full benefits are the governors appointments, staff and himself go figure?? Thank you for pointing that out that the rest of the state employees now have to work till their 70...I’m sure they will all thank Governor Christie for that next November.
Funny thing just like everything else he has done in his life he is making Romney do all the work going state to state to primary then he will pretend he is there to save the day and abandon the state continue to collect his pay while he is hopping from High Class restaurant to High Class restaurant in each state while he runs for vice president...good luck Christie, you joke!
Christina Warren
5:17 pm on Friday, March 9, 2012
Ok could someone clarify for me. I thought that COAH mandated the building. Each year we had to expand housing regardless of availability, to avoid being penalized by the state? Please be patient. I am learning, so anyone who could explain to me like I'm a 10 year old it would be appreciated.
N/A
10:13 pm on Friday, March 9, 2012
COAH does mandate how many homes must be built for low and how many homes for moderate income based on how many homes are in a municipality. It’s called the Mt. Laurel Rule. The problem we have is people like Chris Christie pretend they want to help low income and middle class people when they run for office then like all republicans once they get elected they demonize the middle class and poor as parasites. The worst part is they truly believe the poor are like a disease they try to banish them from the state. If they can’t get them 100% out of the state they at least want to corral them into certain areas far away from their own McMansions. Irony is that Christie walked around Camden with Crystal Evans and made their YouTube moment that they were going to help the poor. They said people should never live like the poor do then when he got elected he shut down tent city but never found them new housing. Instead he illegally stopped funding COAH and made an illegal executive order preventing municipalities from subsidizing housing for low and moderate income. Now the courts just overturned his executive order and municipalities again must provide the housing Christie took from them and do it with budgets he refused to fund for COAH.
To date no Governor in the history of the state has had as many executive Orders found to be illegal then Chris Christie ironic that he was a prosecutor. A prosecutor that would have put politicians like himself behind bars.
Patrick
11:02 pm on Friday, March 9, 2012
Thank you for doing what I couldn't. Putting this into a 360 perspective.
Thank you...
Christina Warren
7:19 am on Saturday, March 10, 2012
Easy N/A, I'm a republican, don't judge a book by it's cover. But this still didn't help me to understand the purpose of COAH and the township and state responsibilities. ANYONE???? Preferably without the personal gripes.
Michele Tidd Pfannenstiel
7:44 am on Saturday, March 10, 2012
All the info about COAH I could find is either "it's evil" or "we desperately need it". Really, no middle ground? Come on.
1) I think part of the problem is that people don't understand the council.
2) The people who do understand the council are pretty obviously partisan
The best I could find is a wikipedia article (oi) explaining the Mt. Laurel decisions. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mount_Laurel_doctrine
It seems that COAH was established to set the regulations that towns would need to comply with the Mt. Laurel decisions, approve town actions on their regulations, and then monitor compliance with the town's action plan.
Hope that's a better answer Christina!
Christina Warren
1:59 pm on Saturday, March 10, 2012
Thank you for the info Michele! I will be doing my research. It is understood from what is said above, that we have a right to opt out of the Mt. Laurel but COAH is our protection of we don't. I know that Tinton Falls faces this each year and that is why we see all the new units being added. Information appreciated!
Nancy
7:58 am on Saturday, March 10, 2012
Can anyone tell me where in Mendem is there low income area? A million dollar price tag home is considered the other side of the tracks.
Mark Wendell
10:02 am on Saturday, March 10, 2012
Nacy, places like Mendem buy there way out of low income housing and put them in other towns.
Mark Wendell
10:03 am on Saturday, March 10, 2012
sorry for the mis spell on your name Nancy.
agent itchy
9:29 am on Saturday, March 10, 2012
$35,000 is the per capita average income in Burlington County. clearly, not everybody can afford a McMansion and apartments have become as costly as many houses. i think the answer is in the many vacant / abandoned houses in our forgotten neighborhoods. why can't developers build on existing infrastructure (sewerage and roads)?
housing should to be near mass transit and land near Pennsauken's 36th street station, Riverside, Beverly, Burlington & Roebling would be ideal for transit villages.
Mark Wendell
10:00 am on Saturday, March 10, 2012
@ Chilly. You are right and have said something I rarely hear, "housing should be near mass transit" as opposed to hidden deep away from the rest of the world.
Rik Magee
12:43 pm on Saturday, March 10, 2012
Support Gov Christie he isdoing a good job for N.J. I do not support his backing of Romney however. N.J. in 1963 was the Second richest State in the Union. What happened since can be blamed on the Democrats who gave the state away! Sorry, Sports Fans, read the facts!
Joe R
1:33 pm on Saturday, March 10, 2012
@Rik Magee
Huh?
NJ is still a very rich state, it's in the top 5, it still has among the highest concentration of millionaires, it's in the top tier of states for wealth. NJ has some of the richest counties in the whole US. Christie is a disaster for NJ education, he is slashing and destroying it. He's horrible. He uses the bully tough guy image to fool a lot of people into thinking that he's doing a good job. In 1963, the governor was Richard J. Hughes (Democrat).
NJ is still an industrial power house, where do you get this garbage that NJ is a poor state on par with Alabama or Mississippi? In 2009, NJ had the most millionaires in the country (by percentage of its population). NJ is amongst the richest states in the country.
Richard Magee
10:50 am on Friday, May 18, 2012
Joe R. In 1963 New Jersey was the Richest state in the Union. I knew and was photographed with Gov. Hughes. His wife was very nice. When he asked me "If I was going to vote for him" I replied "you're a nice guy but I am not voting for you. Gov Christie is doing a good job in restoring N.J. NJ had many bad Governors that led to formation of the NJ Tax Payers Assoc. (if it still exists). Way back Gov Hoffman tried to pass a wage and Income tax and the NJTA forced him to repeal it within two days! They found the second set of Books for NJ. I lived in NJ. NJ had the worst Educational Board. Diploma mill state. The Teachers Union is destroying NJ with falsehoods and powerful Lobbyists in Trenton. I could go on and on. Just do the research. The Mafia presence in NJ is still heavy. ~Rick Magee, FL
WD
2:15 pm on Saturday, March 10, 2012
Boy, do these comments get off topic. The court ruling only indicates that Christie over stepped the bounds of his office. The ruling doesn't state whether COAH is good or bad. It is up to the legislature to do anything about COAH. This was a good ruling and reenforces the checks and balances of our government. While Christie may want to dictate his will on the State, he can't.
Eggs-n-Toast
9:17 am on Monday, March 12, 2012
No Paul, I don't have a "thing for abortion". I have a thing for right to privacy - between women and their doctors. I have a thing for LEGAL medical procedures remaining LEGAL - regardless of irrational and erroneous religious perceptions that forbid choice for women. I have a thing for not allowing insurance companies, and/ or religious NUTS deciding what is or is not to be covered when it comes to prescription drugs, or medical procedures. If you have health insurance of any kind, whether state or private it should cover everything that is recommended and/or prescribed by a doctor. Don't want government to subsidize birth control in any way? Then make it over the counter at about $5 a month. I'm sure women would be glad to pay for it themselves if it was affordable and available without insurance companies or the government monitoring and managing their sex lives.
If you take out the religious nonsense and stick to medical science and rational thinking, early-term abortion is a medical procedure.... one that is no one's business but the woman's. Period.
Joe R
7:16 pm on Sunday, March 11, 2012
This is way, way off topic but a decision about whether to have an abortion or not is a decision that should be between the doctor, the woman and her family. If you don't want an abortion, if abortion is against your beliefs, then don't have one. No one is forced to have an abortion. If abortion is criminalized again, women will be forced into dangerous back alley abortions. The rich will go overseas to get safe abortions.
Christina Warren
8:03 pm on Sunday, March 11, 2012
Still off topic, but i just had to say...If they don't want babies, STOP HAVING SEX! It is not a form of birth control! Fact is, if it's not available, how much do you think those pregnancy statistics would drop???
Paul J. DiBartolo
8:19 pm on Sunday, March 11, 2012
You forget, Joe, that we as taxpayers have been asked to pay for these abortions. Now we're being asked to pay for birth control for everybody as well. The decision to seek an abortion is definitely between a woman and whomever she feels it necessary to bring into the decision. Now, if that's the case, keep the rest of us out of it and stop asking us to subsidize such behavior.
Winston
6:44 am on Wednesday, May 9, 2012
This is off topic....but why do left wing liberals/socialists always change the subject to the imaginary abortion issue that no one really believes is an issue or even cares about....off topic but...just sayin!
Paul J. DiBartolo
8:25 pm on Sunday, March 11, 2012
It's funny how Newspeak has developed in our day. You (generically) can be PRO-choice but I am ANTI-abortion. PRO-choice usually means an end to life while ANTI-abortion is an attempt to save a life. Hmmmmmmmmmmm...
Birth Control...just how is it controlling birth? If it's not an abortifacient it is controlling conception not birth. On the other hand, if it is an abortifacient it has nothing to do with controlling birth other than to make it an impossibility because it is ending a life that will never get a chance at birth. George Orwell would be proud of us.
Joe R
9:25 pm on Sunday, March 11, 2012
The moderator is probably having agida at the course of this discussion. But......who knows what the figures were for abortions before Roe vs. Wade, since everything was done in secret, in the back alley. So the solution to abortion is to control the sex lives of Americans??? Good luck with that. Humans will act like humans. News flash, not all abortions happen as a result of women being sluts or loose sex, whatever that is. Oh yeah, loose sex is what poor people do, according to folks like Limbaugh. Many women who have had abortions are also women who desperately wanted children and were trying to have children. There are a myriad number of reasons why women have abbortions and it does not mean that they are sluts, are loose women or that they were irresponsible in any way. Will criminalizing abortion really reduce abortions? How would anyone know since we have no way to compare before and after figures; illegal abortions were done in secret, below the radar.
Project Bluebeam
10:13 pm on Sunday, March 11, 2012
If you want government out of the bedroom, than don't ask government to fund birth control and/or abortions. Condoms are inexpensive, abstinence is free. If you make a bad decision, then you have to deal with it, not the taxpayers.
Christina Warren
5:59 am on Monday, March 12, 2012
No, not all sex results from women being sluts, some results from BOYS being idiots. I said boys, not men. Categorize yourself as you see fit, The fact is we live in a sick world that does what they please. So what, if you can't beat 'em join 'em??? No, we have leaders like Christie that have to man up and be the guy everyone hates, to try to fix the vase that the kids broke by playing ball in the house, so to say. Not every one like correction, but it needs to be done to maintain some kind of order. Kudos to Him for trying!
Patrick
10:18 pm on Sunday, March 11, 2012
Federal monies do NOT pay for abortions that are of a family planning nature... end of.
just google it if you don't believe me.
and BTW Paul, I have issue with the COAH haters because its just code for NIMBY.
Project Bluebeam
10:30 pm on Sunday, March 11, 2012
Seriously dude, its in Obamacare....“We have to pass the bill so you can find out what is in it”. Remember?
Patrick
10:44 pm on Sunday, March 11, 2012
No, it isn't.
According to the Department of Health and Human Service’s website, "by law, Title X funds may not be used in programs where abortion is a method of family planning." Medicaid funding is restricted by the Hyde Amendment to only abortion cases involving rape, incest or endangerment to the life of the mother.
http://www.factcheck.org/2011/04/planned-parenthood/
can we please move on.
WheresTheBallot
7:16 am on Monday, March 12, 2012
Patrick - Go to the source. Look at page 65 of the actual bill. http://docs.house.gov/energycommerce/ppacacon.pdf
"(ii) ABORTIONS FOR WHICH PUBLIC FUNDING IS AL- LOWED.—The services described in this clause are abortions for which the expenditure of Federal funds appropriated for the Department of Health and Human Services is permitted, based on the law as in effect as of the date that is 6 months before the begin- ning of the plan year involved."
Why would there be a clause like this if funding for abortions was not allowed?
Patrick
7:32 am on Monday, March 12, 2012
@WheresTheBallot, what does this have to do with COAH?
and I'd imagine that this refers to abortions covered under the Hyde amendment. Rape, incest, health of the mother.
please move on. or write a blog post for Patch about abortion.
Boris Kofman
8:14 am on Tuesday, March 13, 2012
Glad to see at least the judicial branch doing its duty in this case.
Sal
12:28 am on Wednesday, May 9, 2012
Forget COACH___The real issue here is a State Governor acting as though he is either a Dictator or a King. So far the courts have ruled that Gov. Christie VIOLATED state law and that is the real issue here. We cannot allow anyone to violate state laws. If our Governor believes he has a right to Violate State laws that he does not like___then why should any citizen follow any law that the citizen does not like? We certainly do not need Dictators inside the USA who believe that they alone are the sole power.
Paul J. DiBartolo
8:02 am on Wednesday, May 9, 2012
Actually, that's exactly what the president seems intent on doing and well before Christie came along, so I'm wondering why that doesn't bother you?
Richard Magee
10:59 am on Friday, May 18, 2012
Sal, mi amici, NJ has had many Bad Governors and I don't feel Christie is one of them. Both parties have contributed to NJ history in that regard. Christie is doing what the People elected him to do. Clean up NJ both Financially and internally. For that he will constantly be maligned by opponents of reformation. Look at the mess the NJ TrnPk has become. Filthy! It used to be a Model for the Country. ~Rick Magee, FL
Stan Walker
5:26 am on Wednesday, May 9, 2012
Where is the affordable housing in these neighborhoods?
http://virtualglobetrotting.com/states/NJ/
Chris Welch
9:51 am on Friday, May 18, 2012
Stan - there is affordable housing in Moorestown.
PS - Terrell Ownes doesn't live here anymore.