Close vote decides U.F. will pay for full-time affordable housing planner R ichard Coppola’s appointment as
Upper Freehold’s Council on Affordable Housing (COAH) representative passed in a 3-2 vote at the Jan. 6 reorganization meeting, and the issue provoked some sharp words among committee members.
Committeemen Robert Frascella and Stan Moslowski Jr. voted against hiring Coppola.
Serving on the governing body since 2008, Frascella has consistently voted against paying any bills submitted by Coppola for COAH-related matters. At the meeting, Frascella said he does not think a special COAH planner is necessary, and that the township has spent $180,000 from its COAH trust fund “with nothing to show for it.” He said that a planner could be hired on an as-needed basis to deal with COAH, and asked that any further expenditures from the COAH trust fund be cleared by the committee first.
Committeeman Steve Alexander objected, saying that the trust fund has more money in it than it did three years ago, and that COAH planning could not be done on an as-needed basis. Alexander said the township has been protected against the socalled builder’s remedy by taking the steps recommended by Coppola.
Mayor Lorisue Horsnall Mount, a member of the township’s COAH task force, said that members of the governing body are obligated by oath to do what is right to protect the town.
“We can’t gamble with that,” she said.
Frascella alleged that the township almost went forward with changing the zoning on the property of an unwilling owner to satisfy COAH. Township Attorney Granville Michael Magee said that unless Frascella spoke to the landowner personally, he had no knowledge of that. Alexander said that Frascella was put on the COAH task force last year but didn’t come to meetings. Frascella said he declined to serve on the task force.
Alexander said that if the township didn’t act on COAH, the state would take the township’s $2.1 million trust fund money away.
“We either move forward and spend $60,000 per year to protect Upper Freehold or subject ourselves to the builder’s remedy,” he said.
He added that courts have ruled against municipalities time after time on COAH is- sues. Moslowski said he didn’t want to see more money spent if the town has been protected from the builder’s remedy.
In a letter written last January to William G. Dressel Jr., executive director of the State League of Municipalities, Coppola addressed the proposed legislation of Senate bill S-1.
“While it may sound good to abolish COAH, the problem is not COAH; the problem is certain of the rules which the COAH staff is compelled to enforce,” Coppola wrote.
He noted that the bill does not address needed rules changes, and eliminates all COAH rules, even those that help municipalities satisfy their affordable housing obligation. These include group homes, accessory apartments, and bonus credits for rental housing units.
Coppola’s letter states, “Bill No. 1 leaves municipalities with one, and only one, alternative to satisfy its affordable housing obligations, and that is inclusionary developments, with the possibility that only 10 percent of the units within such developments will be set aside for occupancy by low- or moderate-income households. Bill No. 1 appears to have been written by developers for their benefit; the legislation does not help the municipalities.”
Alexander later stated, “Obviously, COAH is going to continue to be a big issue for Upper Freehold Township regardless of what happens with the proposed legislation. For an elected official of Upper Freehold to think otherwise is dangerous, shortsighted, lacks understanding of the issue, and places the town in jeopardy for greater development.”