By Charley Falkenburg, Staff Writer
MONTGOMERY The Township Committee adopted a resolution to support an Assembly Bill 2717 sponsored by Anthony Bucco that would amend the controversial “Roberts Bill” at its March 5 meeting.
The “Roberts Bill” ruled that municipalities that don’t spend the money in their affordable housing trust funds within four years of the money being collected are required to transfer those funds to the Council on Affordable Housing.
The “Roberts Bill” was adopted in June 2008 and put into law by former Gov. Jon Corzine.
If Assembly Bill 2717 is adopted, it would give municipalities eight years instead of four years to spend the money in its affordable housing trust funds.
The committee agreed the extended time would be beneficial, especially with the current turmoil in Trenton with the Council on Affordable Housing.
”Upheaval is the only word to describe the situation in Trenton between the regulatory in the governor’s office, Council on Affordable Housing, the Department of Community Affairs and the courts for many years now in the say on affordable housing,” said Kristina Hadinger, township attorney. “Affordable housing in New Jersey has been an issue that’s been in flux.”
Ms. Hadinger added that because they don’t have the appropriate guidance and are uncertain of their obligations, the money in the affordable housing trust fund would be spent prudently.
In the same evening, the Township Committee adopted a resolution, urging the Legislature to amend the Open Public Records Act to protect citizens’ personal privacy rights.
The Open Public Records Act states government records must be readily accessible to citizens and that a public agency has an obligation to safeguard a citizens personal information when its divulgence would violate that person’s privacy.
The committee’s recommended amendment to the Open Public Records Act would exempt citizens’ home addresses, phone numbers and e-mails from disclosure.
The resolution was the result of a recent Union County court case that ruled the county must release the names, addresses and phone numbers of senior citizens who subscribed to the Union County’s “Senior Newsletter.”
The committee emphasized that transparency in the government and publics record is a good thing, but this situation was problematic.
When the Open Public Records Act was enacted, a Privacy Commission made many recommendations, which included not disclosing phone numbers and several guidelines in giving out home addresses.
However, the committee said the Union County case was an example of the abuses of the act by legislatures.
Ms. Hadinger said the Open Public Records Act has become a tool many commercial entities use at the taxpayers expense to do their research. She explained many of these companies go to the clerk’s office to get a list of people instead of compiling their own lists.
”Essentially the clerk is working on behalf of many private commercial interests in getting information now, which is not a transparency in government issue,” said Ms. Hadinger. “It’s being used for other reasons; it’s being used to promote private interests.”
