Where We Stand

Defining Need to the Vanishing Point: The Council on Affordable Housing (COAH) Third Round Rules

History:

• Concerned over a growing trend to exclude entire classes of people from home ownership, the Southern Burlington County NAACP and others challenged the zoning practices of Mt. Laurel township which they contended were unfair.

• In a 1975 ruling, the NJ Supreme Court ruled that the Mt. Laurel zoning ordinances were discriminatory, and that “every municipality in a growth area has a constitutional obligation to provide a realistic opportunity for a fair share of its regions needs for housing of low- and moderate-income families.”

• This ruling failed to address enforcement and had no impact on the state’s municipal zoning practices.

• In 1983, NJ Supreme Court ruled to reaffirm the need for a fair-share housing plan and put some teeth into the process of enforcing it.

• In 1985, the NJ Legislature and Governor enact the state Fair Housing Act, which created the 11-member COAH as the administrative alternative to implement the Mt. Laurel decision; instead of going directly to the courts with a lawsuit, one must deal with a governmental agency.

• COAHs principle responsibility is to periodically calculate how much affordable housing is needed in NJ and then come up with a sound way of getting as much of the need built as possible.

• For ’87-‘93, COAH in its first-round rules, defined statewide need at 145,000 units. During this period COAH reviewed and certified 151 first-round municipal housing elements and fair share plans. The unmet obligation of the over 400 municipalities who did not comply with their fair share housing obligation was carried over to the next round.

• For ’94 – ‘99 COAH adopted second-round rules defining statewide need to 118,000 units. During this time COAH reviewed and certified 203 second-round municipal housing elements and fair share plans. According to COAH data, 36,000 homes were built, yet it gave credit for 78,000.

• ’02 NJ Supreme Court unanimously reaffirms Mt Laurel II doctrine.

• ’03 COAH third-round rules released defining statewide need to 75,862 units. A municipality need only send a check for $35,000/unit to COAH to assume up to 50% of the sender’s fair housing requirement. Up to 50% (an increase from 25% in the second round rules) of the affordable housing may be age restricted (55 and over). Provides incentives for building of townhouses that are barrier free/accessible and of low income homes.

Problems with COAHs Third Round Methodology:

From its failure to address the issue of sprawl and concentration of poverty in our cities to its failure to promote sustainable development, the problems with the third round are numerous.

The third round COAH regulations minimize the need for affordable housing that needs government assistance to get built or rehabilitated in NJ (COAH estimates 75,862 vs. Housing and Community Development’s estimate of 641,000-651,000 units for the next ten years) and creates so many loopholes that municipalities could completely avoid building low income housing.

Though the third round regulations give additional credits as incentives to municipalities for the building of townhouses that are accessible and of low income homes, if no homes need be built, than these are but token gestures. Given our cultures long history of discrimination against people with disabilities, it is questionable whether “incentives” will solve the problem and abolish discriminatory housing policies in the suburbs.

MHANJ is particularly concerned that COAH does not truly address the need for accessible housing. Furthermore, because COAH is focused on moderately priced units, few if any low and very low-income units get built. As a result, a whole class of citizens is pretty much excluded from home ownership – the disabled.

What You Can Do:

1. Write to Governor McGreevey and ask him to rewrite the COAH rules so that they reflect the real housing needs in NJ. Be sure to send a copy of your correspondence to your legislators. Mail correspondence to: The Honorable James E. McGreevey, Governor, P.O. Box 001, State House, Trenton 08625-0001

2. Protest COAH’s Proposed Rules at one of the four public hearings:
   4-8 p.m. Monday, November 24
    * Cumberland County Courthouse, Broad & Fayette Streets Bridgeton, NJ
    * Bergen County Administration Building, 1 Bergen County Plaza, 5^th Floor   Hackensack.
   4-8 p.m. Tuesday, November 25
   * New Jersey HMFA Building, 637 S. Clinton Ave., Trenton
   * Monmouth County Library, 125 Symmes Drive, Manalapan, NJ
   
   For more information, call the Housing and Community Development Network at 609-393-3752
   
   To keep updated on what you can do, log onto our website at www.mhanj.org or directly to the Housing and Community Development Network of NJ website at www.hcdnnj.org.

Hot Topics

Conditional Extension Pending Placement (CEPP)

The state of New Jersey is unique in the way that its public mental health system deals with patients in state hospitals who are no longer considered dangerous to self or others, but are not discharged fairly quickly. They may be placed on a status called Conditional Extension Pending Placement, which means that a judge has decided they are no longer dangerous, there is no immediate discharge plan, and one must be developed by hospital staff in preparation for discharge.

Under the Screening/Commitment Law a person must be deemed suffering from a mental illness, and dangerous to self, others or property through a legal process before being committed to a psychiatric unit against their will. This status includes screening by a mental health professional and a psychiatrist. A person may be held up to 72 hours against his/her will in a screening unit. After that time, he/she must be released, admitted voluntarily, or committed temporarily through a judge’s decision. Following this last option, a formal hearing must be held with 20 days. This hearing is carried out in a state psychiatric hospital.

One of the major problems with this system is that people are held in hospitals on CEPP status because the appropriate setting in the community is not available. In most cases there is no housing that is affordable and meets the person’s needs and there are no services available to provide treatment and/or support. This situation exists for approximately 1/3 of state hospital patients. For example, with a total population of about 2000 patients in the four hospitals, there are, at any given time, between 600 and 740 patients on CEPP status. The trends and numbers vary from hospital to hospital for a variety of reasons, but the basic truth remains; a third of the patients being held against their will are no longer legally committable but are still living in the most restrictive setting because their needs cannot be met in the community.

Thumbs Up!

Consumer Advocates of the Month

Consumers Help Empower Consumers:

On September 13th, mental health consumers were trained to be Voter Empowerment Specialists during the months leading up to the General Election on November 4th. William Bradley, James DeAnnuntis, Paula Gallant, Theresa Gaskiol, Steve Jakubowycz, and Irene Smith, were trained on how to get consumers registered, how to keep up with candidates and issues and how to get other consumers to the polls on Election Day. They were trained by pros Kelli Cochran-West, Bill Shulz, Meg Stenson and Milo Turk who were trained last year, and came back to provide “real life” experience and education. In addition, consumers Dennise Babin, Madeline Bell, Karen Burke, Maureen Mayer, Betty Redman, Shalet Richardson, Juliette Saltz and Helen Williams, unable to attend the event, trained “at home” to be Voter Empowerment Specialists. Thanks to all these consumers who volunteer their time, energy, talents and are truly dedicated to helping the consumer voice be heard.

Join MHANJ’s Legislative Network! Contact
C. Chin at 973.571.4100 Ex. 37