Bill > A3435

Introduced Session

This bill, designated the Equitable Disclosure Act of 2010 applies the same rules for objectors and applicants in the land use approval and appeals process. The goal is to make sure land use boards and other boards of jurisdictions receive full disclosure of applicants and objectors. Due process rights are fully maintained under this bill. Disclosure requirements are applied to objectors and applicants on a level playing field. The proposed legislation applies current case law and court rules for the disclosure of all interests before a land use board or court. The legislation addresses coordinated efforts to delay approvals that are oftentimes undertaken by economic competitors and are at times clandestine. The Wall Street Journal reports how these covert operations are proudly referred to as "black arts" by the groups undertaking them. ("Rival Chains Secretly Fund Opposition to Walmart," The Wall Street Journal, June 7, 2010.) The approval and appeal process outline in the "Municipal Land Use Law" (MLUL), P.L.1975, c.291 (C40:55D-1 et seq.) has become a tool for economic competitors of land use applicants. The tactic is to delay final approval of projects at the expense of taxpayers, businesses, and developers. Economic competitors who have no legitimate land use based objections to an application are manipulating the MLUL with a strategy of delay and deception. This bill does not limit anyone's rights, including economic competitors, with legitimate, land-use based objections from appearing and testifying. The bill contains the following components: 1. Clarifies the definition of interested party in the MLUL to exclude economic competition as the sole reason for standing while at the same time protects economic competitors standing as "a party immediately concerned" and gives them an opportunity to make their case as to how the approval would negatively impact their position on land use grounds (language modeled after case law); 2. Adds transparency and fairness by applying disclosure requirements to objectors similar to the ownership disclosure requirements for the applicant. They include providing: name and address, employer, affiliation with an economic competitor, who is paying for professional fees if any, and a statement on how the right to use, acquire, or enjoy property is affected; 3. Empowers court, in its discretion, to award attorney's fees that were paid with public funds should an approval be upheld on appeal; 4. Empowers court, in its discretion, to award applicant's attorney's fees should the case be deemed to be frivolous (language modeled from court rules); 5. Empowers court, at its discretion, to order appellant to post security (modeled after court rules); 6. Provides planning or zoning board with continuing jurisdiction over an application notwithstanding an appeal unless a stay has been issued by the reviewing court; 7. Requires participation in public hearing process in order to have standing to appeal to courts.

AI Summary

Committee Categories

Verlina Reynolds-Jackson (D)*, 

Introduced, Referred to Assembly Housing Committee (on 02/01/2024)

Official Document