Agenda - 03-21-1990 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

148 LAND USE AND ENVIRONMENT [4] imposed state constitutional mandate in New Jersey.3 The no- tion is derived from a political theory that holds that governmen- tal rezoning of real estate into a more profitable use bestows a benefit on the landowner and, therefore, a portion of that benefit may be allocated by government toward a public purpose, such as the construction by a developer of below-market "afford- able" housing. The specific regulatory technique recently man- dated in New Jersey and first implemented on any scale in Orange County, California, is the inclusionary set-aside. This system requires housing builders to set aside some percentage of their housing development for housing affordable to low- and moderate-income families. The New Jersey and Orange County systems have interesting public policy implications. If New Jersey and Orange County can provide for the housing needs of some substantial portion of their poor by simply making housing developers market every fourth or fifth house below cost, perhaps government largess can be expanded in other areas without new taxes or other costs. Perhaps government should require automobile manufacturers, drug companies, and food distribution outlets to distribute some portion of their products to the needy at "affordable" prices so that everyone can enjoy the benefits of society with lower taxes • and less guilt. The advocates of inclusionary housing delivery systems main- tain that they have stumbled upon a method through which government can contribute toward the resolution of broad social problems without cost to any sector of society. If they are correct, the concept is truly revolutionary. This inclusionary theory would be the equivalent, in the field of political science, of the perpetual-motion machine in the field of engineering, al- chemy in the field of finance,or the fountain of youth in the fields of medicine and geriatrics. In Orange County, county government, acting within the con- text of a California statute passed to encourage the construction of housing for a broad spectrum of people, created a requirement that builder-developers construct "affordable" housing units, with some commensurate benefit, largely within the context of 3 Southern Burlington County NAACP v. Township of Mount laurel, 92 N.J. 158 (1983) (hereinafter cited as Mr. Laurel l/). 4 Cal. Gov't Code §§ 65915-65917 (West 1983). While the Orange County mechanism reflects the statute, it goes substantially beyond it in terms of mechanisms.