Abandoned properties pilot creates land bank

Summary#

A-5710, titled “Provides for establishment of pilot program for acquiring abandoned properties in certain municipalities and develop land bank agreement,” would add a temporary property-acquisition pilot and amend New Jersey’s Municipal Stabilization and Recovery Act and Casino Reinvestment Development Authority Act. Its stated goal is to acquire abandoned properties in a municipality designated as needing stabilization and recovery; the pilot would end on December 1, 2031. The bill was introduced and is not law.

  • The Department of Community Affairs (DCA) director must establish and maintain a list of abandoned properties in the designated municipality, using tax rolls, ground surveys, and municipal lists. The director must formally designate qualifying properties not already designated by the municipality.
  • DCA or, for properties in the Atlantic City Tourism District, the Casino Reinvestment Development Authority (CRDA), may acquire properties by purchase or gift, or through processes under the Abandoned Properties Rehabilitation Act. The CRDA has sole responsibility for administering the pilot within that district.
  • The director may arrange rehabilitation or demolition of properties for which DCA has title. A redevelopment consultant must expedite permits for rehabilitation or demolition of vacant properties.
  • Properties deemed habitable must be subject to a tax sale, sheriff sale, or other auction within set deadlines. Properties needing rehabilitation or demolition must be auctioned after the work is done or within three years of DCA taking title, whichever comes first.
  • The director must develop a land bank agreement within six months. The director chooses whether the land bank entity will be DCA, a qualifying nonprofit, or the municipality; the agreement and local collaboration will set its start date. The redevelopment consultant must serve as its executive director.
  • The bill also requires the director to appoint a redevelopment consultant who lives in the municipality within 30 days of enactment. The bill amends the 2016 Act, but the current Act was not supplied, so the full extent of changes to existing powers cannot be verified.

What it means for you#

  • Owners of properties designated as abandoned: The state or CRDA may acquire a property through the listed routes. This bill does not, by itself, say that every listed property will be acquired. The bill does not spell out notice, review, or appeal procedures; the referenced laws may address some of these, but they were not supplied.
  • People and businesses interested in buying a property: Properties must be put up for a specified type of sale or auction by the deadlines. The bill does not guarantee a sale or say what happens if no buyer bids.
  • Municipalities: A designated municipality’s property records and lists will help form the state-maintained list. The municipality will collaborate with the director and CRDA on the land bank’s start date.
  • Atlantic City Tourism District: The CRDA, not DCA, would administer the pilot for properties in the district.
  • Taxpayers: The bill creates duties for state agencies and a required consultant appointment, but does not state how those duties will be funded.

Money#

No cost estimate is available in the supplied material.

  • The bill requires agency work, a redevelopment consultant, and biennial reporting, but gives no staffing or cost estimate.
  • The director may conduct or contract for rehabilitation or demolition. The bill gives no budget, funding source, or estimate for that work or for a land bank.
  • No new tax, fee, fine, or payment to property owners is specified in the supplied text.

What is unclear#

  • The bill leaves the director to decide which municipality needs stabilization and recovery. The current law’s criteria could not be checked because it was not supplied.
  • The bill does not explain how the director decides whether a property is “habitable” or needs rehabilitation or demolition.
  • It does not set out the full property-acquisition, auction, or land bank operating procedures, including oversight and appeals.
  • The land bank agreement must be developed, but the bill does not require the land bank to begin operating by a specific date.
  • The supplied text does not show how the pilot will interact with existing property programs or what funds will pay for its work.

Case for#

  • The bill appears intended to help a municipality address abandoned properties through a coordinated state-led effort.
  • A single property list, with authority to acquire property and arrange repairs or demolition, could make it easier to identify and address properties that otherwise remain vacant.
  • Requiring properties to be offered at auction by set deadlines could create a route for them to return to private ownership.
  • Reports to the Governor and Legislature would provide counts of properties, actions taken, and sales during the pilot.

Case against#

  • The bill gives the director important choices over property designation, rehabilitation or demolition, and the land bank’s structure, while leaving many decision rules and safeguards unstated.
  • The bill requires auctions but does not explain what happens if a property does not sell or how the public can assess the outcome.
  • Rehabilitation, demolition, staffing, and land bank costs could fall on public agencies, but the bill supplies no funding plan or cost estimate.
  • The pilot may end in 2031 without a stated requirement to assess whether it met its goals; the required reports count actions and properties but do not require outcome measures.