MANCHESTER – More than 60 people turned out for a recent Manchester Coordinating Council (MCC) meeting and the turnout was connected to strong concerns and opposition to several pending bills in the State Legislature.
The MCC represents all the senior communities in the township and their meeting at the Crestwood Village V clubhouse featured discussion of pending legislation that could have a major impact on their communities if passed. These bills covered “common interest communities,” which in Ocean County are mostly senior communities, run by homeowner associations.
Those present listened to guest speaker, attorney Ron Catelli of The Catelli Law Firm of Red Bank. He shared his concerns about New Jersey legislators from Bergen, Middlesex, Hudson and Burlington Counties who are actively working to pass laws, such as Assembly Bill A4377 and Assembly Bill A4106-Senate Bill S2537, which gives more authority from the State Department of Community Affairs and would put new regulations on senior communities.
Assembly Bill A4377, proposed by Assemblywoman Carol Murphy (District 7 Burlington), which is applicable to communities with over 100 units, seeks to impose an annual tax on all state condominiums, cooperatives and homes within homeowner associations, at approximately $3 per unit.
The money from this would go into a “Common Interest Community Homeowners’ Association Trust Fund.” This fund would then pay for an ombudsman that would advocate on behalf of homeowners. The ombudsman would also require annual reports from every HOA.
MCC members expressed that this bill will not only discourage qualified individuals from serving their community, it would cause a jump in the cost of living in each New Jersey community association with more than 100 units, and the monies collected will create further bureaucracy within the DCA.
Senate Bill S2537 was proposed by Senator Troy Singleton (District 7 Burlington), and, the companion Assembly Bill A4106, proposed by Assemblywoman Yvonne Lopez (District 19 Middlesex) and Assemblywoman Angelica M. Jiminez (District 32 Bergen and Hudson) applies to age-restricted communities.
This bill would allow corporations, businesses and under-aged people to buy units or homes in such communities to rent them out.
Catelli told the MCC audience he had started attending MCC meetings 23 years ago when he first began practicing law.
“Under the Fair Housing Act, you have the right to regulate based on age. In any other circumstance you are not allowed to do that the same way you wouldn’t with gender or race. It is called the Housing for Older Persons Act and it says you are allowed to discriminate based on age provided that at least 80% of your community is over the age of 55,” Catelli explained.
Catelli warned the MCC to watch for S-2537’s potential implications on age-restricted common interest communities. He said “to the anti-discrimination provisions of the Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988, provided that certain quotas are maintained of age-appropriate persons occupying the premises.” This means that once the percentage of seniors in a senior development falls below a certain percentage, they lose some of their protections.
As to A4377, Catelli said the bill proposes the enlargement of state agency power and regulatory oversight over individual common interest communities. Also of note is that these newly proposed authorities provided to the DCA would only apply to common interest communities with over 100 units.
Catelli said A1698 would require board members of planned real estate development associations to engage in a course of training which the DCA would develop. Also, the DCA commissioner would have the authority to remove a board member who does not complete the training required. A1699 would require licensure of community management entities that contract to conduct management services for the associations of planned real estate developments. This would be developed by the DCA commissioner.
Present at the meeting were Council President Joan Brush and Councilman Sam Fusaro who were representing the governing body. Fusaro provided a synopsis of the meeting during a Township Council meeting held later that same day.
Sen. Singleton spoke with The Manchester Times about Senate Bill 2537 which would require age-restricted communities to allow owners to sell their property without regard to the age of a buyer. The lawmaker said he wanted to “clear up several misconceptions about this bill.”
“This legislation would require age-restricted, common interest communities to permit an owner to sell their home to someone whose age doesn’t comply with applicable age restrictions. The purpose of the bill is to prevent age-restricted community associations from restricting who owners can and cannot sell their homes to. It does not allow anyone under the age of 55 to live in those communities,” he explained.
The senator said the bill was needed because, “currently, several age restricted communities in New Jersey and at least one municipality have either language in their bylaws or municipal ordinance prohibiting those under the age of 55 from purchasing property in a 55+ community, which is in violation of federal and state law.
“This is problematic for several reasons. First, it makes it more difficult for persons in those communities to sell their home by limiting the buyer pool, which can lead to lower home values. Further, it makes it difficult for someone over the age of 55 who wishes to live in these communities but cannot afford to do so on their own. By allowing their family member or someone else who may be under the age of 55 to buy it, they can then rent it and then live in the retirement community,” Sen. Singleton said.
“I want to further clarify that this bill does not allow children and teenagers to live in a 55+ community. Under both federal and state law, it is already prohibited for persons under the age of 55 to occupy a home in an age-restricted community,” the lawmaker said.
He added, “even if the owner of a property in an age-restricted community is under the age of 55, the occupants would still have to be over that age in order to comply with federal and state laws. Nothing in S-2537 changes any laws to allow anyone under the age of 55 to reside in such a community, only that they may be able to purchase a unit, at which time they would still be required to certify the occupant is either over the age of 55 or 62, a requirement on the books as a state law since 2008 in New Jersey.”
Concerning the impact on Homeowners Association Boards, Singleton said he’s received “questions about whether this legislation would permit people under the age of 55 to serve on association boards. Under existing laws, a HOA, including those in an age-restricted community, can regulate who may serve on their Board. Nothing in S-2537 would change that.”
As to concerns about renters, the senator said, “while nothing in S-2537 regulates the activity of potential owners, occupants, or tenants in an age-restricted community, HOAs traditionally can regulate certain activities of anyone who resides in them.”
“Whether it be a renter over the age of 55 or an owner over the age of 55, HOAs have the ability to take action if a resident violates the rules of a community. Additionally, it may benefit a community to have over 55+ renters occupying homes that may otherwise be vacant and become rundown if someone wasn’t living there,” he added.
During the MCC meeting one attendee recommended a visible presence of opposition in Trenton and that a bus ride to the State Capital was in order noting that they needed to be seen as well as heard.
Whiting resident Judy Noonan serves as the legislative liaison to the MCC. She said this week that a petition effort was underway in opposition to each of the proposed bills.
