Dear Highlands Mayor:

I write to provide you an update on the status of the Highlands legislation and outline an issue of concern for municipalities.

Last Monday, May 17, the Assembly Environment and Solid Waste Committee approved an amended version of A-2635. The bill has been "second referenced" and is now assigned to the Assembly Appropriations Committee.

On Thursday, May 20, the Senate Environment Committee met for the third time in an effort to move the bill from committee. The motion to move the bill failed to be seconded and the bill remains in committee. Committee Chair and primary sponsor, Senator Bob Smith, promised to continue to keep the bill on the agenda for every committee meeting for the rest of this legislative term. The committee again meets on June 14.

The Governor's Office has also stated that it will consider, if the Legislature does not act, issuing a building moratorium via Executive Order. For that reason alone, it is wise to continue to work on this legislation and assume that it might be law by July 1.

In the amendments passed by the Assembly committee and considered by the Senate committee, language was added that requires the Highlands Council, as part of its regional plan, to designate recommended TDR zones in every municipality in the planning area, or to provide an analysis why higher density growth in that municipality is not appropriate.

We believe this language exceeds the spirit and intent of the Governor's Task Force report. We believe this language will result in a bureaucratic exercise that will delay the implementation of the regional plan. And we believe that this provision provides the Local Council too much influence into land use matters in the planning areas. Since the regional plan will be forwarded to the State Planning Commission for "plan endorsement", the Highlands regional plan will become part of the State Plan. Any Highlands-planning area municipality that subsequently seeks plan endorsement could be denied such endorsement or compelled to accept higher-density growth as part of the plan endorsement process.

• Section 8 of the amended A-2635 reads, in part, "The council shall not adopt the regional master plan unless it includes one recommended receiving zone and the recommended capacity therefore each municipality in the planning area pursuant to the transfer of development rights program authorized in section 13 of this act, or, for any municipality for which a recommended receiving zone is not included, an analysis of the reasons why the council determined that the municipality has no receiving zone capacity.
  b. Within 60 days after adopting the regional master plan, the council shall submit the plan to the State Planning Commission for endorsement pursuant to the rules and regulations adopted by the State Planning Commission. The State Planning Commission review shall be limited to the planning area only."
  
  
• Section 13 of the bill, which authorizes the transfer of development rights program (TDR) reads in part, "b. In consultation with municipal, county, and State entities, the council shall, within 18 months after the date of enactment of this act, and from time to time thereafter as may be appropriate, identify areas within the preservation area that are appropriate as sending zones…
  c. In consultation with municipal, county, and State entities, the council shall, within 18 months after the date of enactment of this act, and from time to time thereafter as may be appropriate, identify areas within the planning area that are appropriate for development as voluntary receiving zones…"

As we interpret these provisions, the Highlands Council, among it many other requirements, will now be required to identify areas within every planning area municipality that may serve as a voluntary TDR receiving zone, or an analysis as to why no area in that municipality is appropriate for higher density growth.

We find these provisions objectionable for a number of reasons.

One, it is bureaucratic. The regional plan is to be prepared within 18 months. The bill goes into details as to the responsibilities and duties of the Highlands Council. The scientific analysis required to determine the ability of each municipality within the Highlands to accept the higher density of development required in a receiving district would (and should if done properly) take years to complete. We believe that this additional requirement will only serve to slow down the process and delay implementation of the regional plan.

Two, we believe this is unfair to the planning area municipalities. Exactly what "consultation" will occur is unclear. Exactly how much say the planning area municipalities will have is also unclear.

Since the regional plan will be forwarded to the State Planning Commission for plan endorsement, these designations could very well become part of the State Plan. Any planning area municipality that subsequently seeks plan endorsement could legitimately claim that they face higher requirements in seeking plan endorsement because another layer of government. We believe this is inconsistent the Governor's Task Force report and the concepts of sound planning.

We have notified the sponsors and the Governor's Office of these concerns. In the past, we have been able to negotiate amendments with both the sponsors and the Governor's office on this legislation. We hope to do the same now. We will advise you of developments.

In the meanwhile, we are finishing an analysis and commentary of the legislation, based on the most recent amendments. Unfortunately, it has been difficult to provide you with updated analysis on the amendments because of the fast-paced nature of this legislation. This slight pause in the proceedings allows us the luxury of time to more carefully review and analyze the implications of the legislation.

We will send to you, under separate cover, a copy of our analysis and commentary later this week.

We ask that you articulate your concerns and opinions, whether positive or negative, to your State Senator and Assembly representatives. Furthermore, we ask that you copy any correspondence on this to the attention of Mike Cerra here at the League. Questions and comments can be directed to Mike at mcerra@njslom.com or (609) 695-3481 x20

Thank you.