I. State Issues
a. Cannabis Legalization Stalls
On Monday the State Legislature did not act on A4497/S2703, which would legalize adult use of recreational cannabis. The measure did not have the needed 21 votes to pass in the State Senate.
Through this long process, the League, while not taking a position on the issue of legalization itself, championed measures to facilitate municipal implementation of legalization, if it were to become a reality. The League pointed out the inadequacy of the initial local tax structure, advocated for strong home rule and planning protections in the Legislation and worked closely with the New Jersey Urban Mayors Association and Conference of Mayors to assure that the bill adequately addressed expungement and restorative justice.
This delay does offer local officials a fresh chance to review the current proposal to assess what their local course of action will be, if legalization becomes a reality. This legislation may return in May, and there are indications that some of the expungement provisions currently in S2703 may be moved to separate legislation. S-3205, instead.
For more, please see the League’s alert from earlier this week or the League’s cannabis legalization page.
For an overview of the Legislation in its current form, please see the League’s Urgent alert from Friday, March 22.
Have updates on this topic delivered directly to you when new information is posted by subscribing to receive email alerts on cannabis legalization. Visit the Cannabis Legalization web page for more resources.
Contact: Michael F. Cerra, Assistant Executive Director, mcerra@njlm.org, 609-695-3481 x120.
b. Municipalities Prevail in NJ Supreme Court Case
Earlier this week the New Jersey Supreme Court issued its decision in, Caraballo v. City of Jersey City Police Department, a case in which the League participated in as amicus, along with the NJ Institute of Local Government Attorneys and the NJ Municipal Excess Liability Join Insurance Fund.
In this case the Court considered the relationship between two statutory schemes; the NJ Law Against Discrimination (LAD) and the NJ Workers’ Compensation Act (ACT). Specifically, the Court was to determine whether a plaintiff who pursues a workers’ compensation claim under the Act but fails to utilize its enforcement mechanisms may make a claim for failure to accommodate under the LAD. Relatedly, the Court also considered whether medical treatment qualifies as a reasonable accommodation under the LAD.
The Court, siding with Jersey City and the amici held that a plaintiff’s failure to utilize the Act’s administrative remedies to obtain medical treatment precludes them from making a failure-to-accommodate claim under the LAD. And, in addition, the court held that medical treatment cannot qualify as a reasonable accommodation under the LAD.
This is an important ruling because, as the Court pointed out in amplifying the argument made by the League and other amici, “[plaintiff’s] position, if accepted, would allow employees to ‘leverage the threat of a LAD suit against an employer’ if a demand for workers’ compensation benefit is denied.”
The League would like to thank Fred Semrau, Susan Sharpe, and Edward Pasternak, of Dorsey & Semrau in Boonton for their work representing the League and other amici in this matter.
Contact: Frank Marshall, Esq., League Staff Attorney, fmarshall@njlm.org, 609-695-3481 x 137.
c. Small Municipality Economic Development Proposal Gains Traction
On Monday, the State Senate unanimously approved S-2256, a bill which establishes the "Main Street Assistance Program" to provide financial and technical assistance to businesses located in the “Main Street area” within a “small municipality” The bill's purpose is to encourage business development in small municipalities having substantially developed commercial areas.
There are two ways to qualify for the assistance as a "small municipality. First, a municipality with a population of less than 20,000, according to the latest decennial census, can qualify, if it is over 70 percent developed, according to the according to the 2012 New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) land use/land cover data set. Second, a county seat can qualify, if its population was less than 11,000, according to the last census.
The bill authorizes the governing body of a small municipality to designate a Main Street area in the municipality. To designate a Main Street area, the governing body must provide a statement of intent to the Economic Development Authority (EDA) setting forth the municipality's findings concerning the economic conditions existing in the Main Street area and the municipality's intentions for addressing them.
For a business to be eligible to receive financial and technical assistance from the EDA under the program, at least 15 percent of the full-time employees of the business are to reside within the small municipality. Under the bill, the EDA is to work cooperatively with other State agencies to explore and implement opportunities to direct resources and create enhanced incentives for Main Street area businesses participating in the program.
The bill provides qualifying Main Street area businesses with corporation business tax credits and gross income tax credits equal to 15 percent of the cost of employee compensation expenses. The bill, further, requires the EDA to establish a "Main Street Assistance Fund," which would be used to provide loans, loan guarantees, and technical assistance to Main Street area businesses.
We support this bill, and expect it to join its companion, A-1183 in the Assembly Commerce and Economic Development Committee.
Contact: Jon Moran, Senior Legislative Analyst, jmoran@njlm.org, 609-695-3481 x121.
d. Bill Expanding Statute of Limitations for Sexual Abuse Victims Heads
to Governor’s Desk
State Legislators on Monday voted to approve A-3648/S-477 which would extend the statute of limitations on civil actions for sexual abuse claims, expand categories of potential defendants in civil actions, and create a two-year window for parties to bring previously time-barred actions based on sexual abuse.
The League is supportive of any measure that would allow survivors of sexual assault the ability to seek justice against the individual perpetrator as well as those who knowingly and willfully enabled them. However, we have concerns with language in the bill that would completely eliminate the application of Title 59 (Tort Claims Act) in such cases against municipal governments. The wholesale exemption to all of Title 59 in these matters would create a host of unintended consequences outside of the scope of the legislation’s purpose and substantially increase municipal expenditures.
The nonpartisan Office of Legislative Services (OLS), which provides research assistance and prepares Fiscal Estimates for legislators, notes in their review of A-3648 that the bill would expose, “local units of government to civil claims that may result in added legal defense expenditure and substantial settlement and judgements…” Estimating further that individual settlements could produce expenditures in the hundreds of thousands, if not millions of dollars. And, as noted in the OLS Fiscal Estimate, even local governments without claims against them would see an increase in expenditures as liability insurance premiums would rise substantially across the board.
It should be made clear, the League is not asking for, nor does Title 59 provide, complete immunity for municipal governments against claims of sexual abuse. What we are seeking is that the unnecessarily broad action to completely eliminate Title 59 consideration for sexual abuse claims be curtailed. With the information provided by OLS in hand, and thanks in part to your calls, efforts were made by legislators to amend A-3648/S-477 to do just this. However, these efforts failed and the bill passed with language completely eliminating Title 59.
With the bill now awaiting Governor Murphy’s action we focus our efforts to improve the bill towards his office. We ask our members to do the same by contacting the Governor’s office.
Contact: Frank Marshall, Esq., League Staff Attorney, fmarshall@njlm.org, 609-695-3481 x 137.
e. Bill Limiting Local Control of Planning Headed to Governor’s Desk
State legislators on Monday voted to approve S-1074/A-4221 which seeks to provide protections for the public’s right to access waterways under the public trust doctrine. While the League is supportive of public beach access we opposed S-1074/A-4221 because it would give the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) a tremendous amount of authority over local planning. If signed by the Governor, the bill would allow the DEP to determine, based on statewide criteria rather than local factors, how much and what kind of beach access is necessary.
Requiring beach access would not simply mean a walkway from a road. It could mean the installation of public restrooms or the building of parking facilities. Under the bill the DEP would be required to withhold certain permits, including, among others, those required before municipalities can undertake beach replenishment projects, and condition their issuance on the permit seeker providing, at their own cost, public beach access.
The League believes that this is a heavy handed approach to beach access that fails to take into consideration unique local characteristics and instead replaces it with an unworkable, one size fits all approach. In addition, the bill does not consider the potential increased expense and liability that would be forced upon municipalities who are responsible for the maintenance and safety of local beaches and waterways.
We are asking our members to reach out to the Governor’s office and urge him not to sign the bill until municipal concerns are addressed.
Contact: Frank Marshall, Esq., League Staff Attorney, fmarshall@njlm.org, 609-695-3481 x 137.
Share on Facebook
Share on Twitter
Share via Email
