BERKELEY – The Township Council approved an ordinance that would add age restrictions in retirement communities to the township code.
The ordinance will change the definition of “Planned Residential Retirement Community” in town.
Homeowner associations have their own bylaws restricting who can live there. The new ordinance is a town law that would reinforce the existing bylaws.
Mayor Carmen Amato said that this ordinance codifies what the bylaws already state. It will keep these neighborhoods the way seniors want them.
“The ordinance will not change any of the bylaws of the homeowner association in which you live,” township attorney Lauren Staiger had previously said. She also noted that Berkeley is not regulating whether your grandchildren can live with you.
This move was popular with seniors in the area, who filled a clubhouse to hear about it.
Residents talked about how the property is deed restricted for those over a certain age. They said the entire intention of the senior communities was for retirees. They said before they moved in, they read the bylaws and believed that would be the way it is forever. One resident shared a story of a flipper who bought an $80,000 house in a senior development, fixed it up, and sold it for $220,000.
Former Councilwoman Judy Noonan was the first speaker. She has brought up Berkeley’s ordinance to the governing body of Manchester, where she now lives. She used to encounter a lot of problems with underage people living here when she was the president of the Holiday City Silver Ridge Park Coalition of Berkeley Township and Silver Ridge Park East.
“I think this is overdue,” she said, thanking the governing body for passing the ordinance. “I’m really proud of Berkeley for standing up for their seniors.”
The Board of Realtors is misusing the word “discrimination,” she said. That word is used in terms of race or religion, not age.
“There are a lot of good realtors,” she said, but there are some who are trying to open up the senior communities to sell to anyone. They will sell to limited liability companies who will rent the homes to young families, for example.
Legal Specifics
The ordinance states that it is made in accordance with the Federal Fair Housing Act, as amended in 1988, for senior communities. This is significant because in the last few years, local officials have been fighting against state laws that would alter senior bylaws. Federal supersedes state laws.
Although the state legislators making these laws have said they only want to have consistency across New Jersey on how senior developments are governed, locals were concerned about Trenton overreaching their authority. Most importantly, they have worried that this would eventually lead to action to take away the senior communities’ 55+ designation.
The ordinance does say that it may be in accordance with the provisions of N.J.S.A. 45:22A-21 et seq., which is the State Retirement Community Full Disclosure Act.
This is a hot topic in these senior communities, as everyone seems to have a story about an underage person living near them. The residents fear real estate flippers and renters that would lower their quality of life. Also, they fear that if too many younger people move in, they might lose their protected status as a senior community.
Realtors Fight Back
Township Council meetings are usually held in Bayville, but because of the interest people had, they moved it to the Holiday City South clubhouse. Most of the speakers were residents who were in favor of the ordinance. A few were realtors who got booed.
Bruce Shapiro is director of regulatory affairs for the Realtor Political Action Committee. He said that the age restriction is on occupancy, not ownership. In other words, as long as the person actually living there is of the right age, it doesn’t matter who owns the home.
He said there is legal precedence of this, and that the ordinance could violate federal and state laws.
Councilman James Byrnes said “These aren’t commodities. People moved here for a way of life. If you can’t sell over 55 then you don’t belong in the business.”
Deborah Doyle, who lives in a senior community, said that Byrnes comments were uncalled for. She worried that the ordinance would interfere with estate planning and asset allocation.
Staiger, the attorney, reiterated that the only thing the ordinance does is preserve the status quo. If the association allows children to buy homes for their parent, then it still will.
Renee Savage, who lives in a senior community, said there are very few instances where a child is buying for a parent. If the family can prove relation, there’s no problem. The town should check who is living in a home versus who is paying taxes on a home. Or, they could ask the schools to find out where children’s addresses are.
William Huneke, an attorney who lives in a senior community, and Drew Fishman, president of the Realtor Association of New Jersey, both said that the homeowner association bylaws aren’t more powerful than state and federal laws.
“Maybe the state and federal laws are wrong,” Mayor Amato said, expressing his personal opinion.
Amato held up a flier that had been sent to seniors in the area from the realtors that were against the ordinance. He estimated that between printing and postage, it must have cost them more than $20,000. That shows that the realtors want to make money on these homes.
“So as far as I’m concerned, we’re on the right side, and we will go to the U.S. Supreme Court to defend our ordinance,” he said.
