MERITS OF NJ-REAL RULES DEBATED
23 Apr 2026, Posted by in News, Regulations, Science and Environmental Issues, State NewsThe following are notes taken by NJFB Policy Consultant Glen Van Olden from the April 22 Joint Legislative listening session on NJ-REAL. A full audio recording of the of the hearing can be found here.
New Jersey Farm Bureau’s policy on NJ-REAL can be found here.
The joint legislative hearing on Wednesday heard lengthy testimony from ten knowledgeable supporters and opponents of very controversial land use rules that are slated to take effect on July 19, 2026.
Joint Senate Environment & Energy Committee along with Assembly Environment & Solid Waste Committees.
Audio hearing only – attending: Sen. Bob Smith, Assemblyman Paul Kanitra, Senator C.Amato, Assemblyman A.McClellan, Asm. James Kennedy, Sen. L. Greenstein, others…….Mayors
Ten (10) in-depth testimonials voiced and questioned by committee members. Smith stated that 173 requested to speak.
logged on at 11:00 am – full session commenced 11:23 am.
Senator Bob Smith (D-17), (moderator) Chair of the Senate committee, commenced the hearing with his words about climate change and statistics regarding recent storm damage.
Bob Smith fully stated that he believes the Rules are inconsistent with the intent, extremely and negatively impactful on the business economy of NJ.
additional comments (individuals or industry leaders) can still be submitted in writing to OLSaideSEN@njleg.org.
History – all started about January 2020 – until adoption on January 20, 2026. 500,000 NJ acres vulnerable to coastal climate changes.
The overarching themes of 10 testimonials and discussion –
inconsistent with legislative intent. The legislative bodies were completely eliminated from this process leading to a failure of public input. So much was wrongly done in “secrecy”.
While many public hearings were accomplished, little to no responses were offered by the Governor’s office nor DEP. DEP appeared to be annoyed that the public had any say at all.
No one refuted the fact that sea levels have risen and continue to rise and that there are climate caused weather intensity changes
Dismissing past records yet extrapolating data and promulgating rules 75 years into the future is bad and damaging policy.
No economic impact research, nor statements were produced. No impact on property values was studied.
Current DEP workload is overwhelming and much delayed – they are not ready for any of this.
No jobs Impact, Smart Growth, Environmental Justice, Agriculture Industry, Housing Affordability statements were included.
REAL rules are counter to the NJ Development Redevelopment plan as redevelopment in or near urban centers are often near water bodies.
The 11th hour secret adoption of NJ REAL by Governor Murphy and DEP Commissioner LaTourette then both depart is a slap in the face to NJ citizens.
The response to public comments was non-existent
The DEP dismissed the realities of urban centers
180 days to commence construction once permitted is unattainable. DEP knows nothing of the construction business.
Witness Testimony –
1. Mark Mauriello – former NJ assistant DEP commissioner and DEP Commissioner (2008-2010). Currently, environmental specialist of a land use/development firm.
REAL rules are not inconsistent with legislative intent. follows CAFRA responsibility. Mitigating future hazards. documenting 1′ sea level rise over the past 150 years.
Taxpayers are now often footing the bill (through Federal tax funds) for rescue and recovery of storm events. Clearly stated that NJ has a no-retreat policy from shorelines.
Mauriello added that some staff shifting and contract reviewing services can be outsourced to accomplish the desired approval timelines. There will be some legacy protection
for those who clearly can’t comply with REAL for various reasons.
Assemblyman Paul Kanitra, whose district includes coastal Monmouth and Ocean communities, sternly took issue with Mauriello’s “no-retreat” statement. Kanitra quoted DEP’s
120-page 2021 Climate Strategy Report which lists “managed retreat as a resilience strategy” against NJ sea level rise. Advancing retreat “will happen”.
NJ will need to seek financial assistance for new compliance costs. Will need to unify local zoning procedures and construction codes to avoid a fractured development
business model. Costs to raise structures is considerable and lower value homes can easily exceed 50% cost to renovate, improve, update leading to compliance with REAL.
Kanitra added that DEP is so backlogged with reviews and permitting they have completely failed the regulated public even before NJREAL. What will happen? There are some
120 elected officials in NJ, yet none has any input to the public process, unintended impacts nor economics of the whole set of rules.
2. Jeff Kolakowski (CEO – NJ Builders Asso.) – Residential builders recognize climate change and adapt building standards accordingly. We currently have a shortage of some
200,000 housing units, predominantly in the low and moderate income range. We are struggling to keep up with acceptable redevelopment strategies. Simply put, newer buildings
perform better with weather resiliency, better electric use, lower gas use, insulation, etc. There exists poor communication in all agencies and offices. Do current policies reflect
more affordable housing? REAL doesn’t lead in that direction. The REAL rules simply exceeded the limits DEP Authority and public trust was abandoned. NJ REAL only leads to
more needed engineers, consultants, attorneys, and less units built in affordable ranges. This led to SCR-106 as a challenge to NJ REAL. Nothing ever mandates today for the unknown
75 years out and beyond with only a 17% chance that it achieves or exceeds reality. NJREAL counters urban core growth as cities were born and grew near water as a necessity. Now DEP
discourages it. Despite denials “there will be retreat policies” in the future. DEP has been “tone-deaf” to real and voiced concerns by citizens and industry leaders. This process was totally
void of impact statements despite laws mandating them. Such a myopic approach to “government knows best” authoritarianism. Jeff also had issues with the policy of “dry access” mandates
to new development. Developers have no control over public access to new development and how far off-property needs to be rebuilt and raised? Hoboken, Jersey City and the entire Hudson
County “Gold Coast” is here to stay and have their own strategies combating climate change. The often requested and rarely approved “hardship waivers” are a flawed process which is
painfully slow and unpredictable.
3. Mayor James Solomon ( Jersey City Mayor) – Vehemently against current NJ REAL rules and recent amendments. NJ has a serious housing affordability crisis and the DEP really
has no response to that but added housing costs? NJREAL also has severe implications to city historical preservation statutes and policy. No allowances were made for these.
Mayor answered a question about his thoughts on Single Family Dwellings. We have many historical SFDs but new development leans toward multi-family housing as more practical and
affordable. Additionally they can be more resilient to climate change. Mayor added that black and brown communities are so much more affected by REAL rules as the urban core communities
are most often adjacent to water and nearer to sea level. Such areas are most desirable to reside in as history shows.
4. Dr. Anthony Broccoli (Rutgers climatologist & climate modeler) – He does not direct policy. NJ Science & Technology shows that 1900-2017 sea level rise at 0.7″ per decade.
Recently that has accelerated to about 1.7″ per decade in the past decade. Causes include thermal expansion of warmer water, ice cap melting, glacier collapse and mas discharge melt,
NJ coast sinking along with sea level rise. “Sunny day” flooding has increased (simply due to wind, moon/sun tides, etc.). More & more severe tropical activity, more intense precipitation
events are common.
Questioned – policy makers are trying to find guidance on climate adaptations. Any answers? “Status quo isn’t a good policy” at any level with the acceleration of sea rise. It’s always a balance
of tolerance vs. risk. Is a 17% risk of realization reason to completely discard redevelopment standards? Once again – it’s a balance of tolerance vs. risk.
5. David Snyder (VP, International Policy for Insurance Associations) – Home, auto, business insurance professional. Increased costs are already felt. Reducing costs = reducing premiums.
A combination of standards, compliance costs and mitigation saves everyone. Question asked: What is the percentage of riverine vs. coastal damage assessments? No clear answer offered.
What impact on flood insurance would NJ REAL have on communities and redevelopment (adopting vs. not adopting)? New development would be better protected but costlier per unit.
6. Daniel Garrett (financier of public and municipal bonding advisor, Wharton School Professor) – Over 90 Billion in public bonding is raised in NJ by municipalities, counties, etc. Mostly for
infrastructure upgrades and maintenance. NJ will have to pay more for investments up to3.8 Billion. There are increased risks for investors where there are environmental phenomena are unknown
and untimely. NJ and its municipalities have never defaulted on payments (such as the 1900 Galveston, TX hurricane) did. Often State help is sought. Simply put, more risk = higher premiums.
Most are able to adapt in the long term. More affluent towns are more easily able to adapt and pay. Moody’s considers climate risks in lending policy. NJ has recently made $7B in pension payments
and the risks of default decreased, thus costs decreased. Question – Are you able to evaluate the NJ REAL rules on diminishing returns or are current rules with adaptations adequate and best?
In the housing market itself, home devaluation is a concern. Less value = less borrowing power = less entrepreneurship and investments.
7. Ray Cantor (Deputy Chief Govt. Affairs, NJBIA) – Also former DEP Asst. Commissioner. – Recognizing the exceedance of DEP Authority the NJBIA is a co-plaintiff in the REAL rules suit.
For effect, Ray (with some effort) lifted the 1044+ page Rules from his briefcase. Let me be clear, Our business leaders are neither denying climate change nor sea level rise as history has proven.
We do question the validity of projecting 75 years into the future for something that may ebb or where other adaptations are likely adequate. The DEP is ill-equipped to serve the public’s needs
if REAL rules are adopted and take effect as proposed. It will be an economic catastrophe. No other standard looks 75 years into the future with uncertainty and low confidence projections.
Ray added “What this debate is all about is the question of what regulatory standard should the department adopt on future sea level rise given the enormous uncertainty, even deep uncertainty,
in making such projections?” “Resiliency is the key here, not the abandonment of our shore communities.” We see a 2′ standard rise with periodic recalibration as the right move for now. Real
people and real business harm is what we see as is proposed. Question asked – Does this NJ REAL standard go hand in hand in the new administration? answer – Absolutely not! The new
administration promised less red tape, rapid response to reviews and approvals, cost-benefit analyses. DEP is greatly expanding all parameters as increased permitting time, increased costs,
abandoning permit-by-rule standards, increased consultant costs. There needs to be a balance of all rules. Economy only as a starting point as environmental rules allow. Developments
without extreme hindrance….a holistic approach balance of protections along with economic considerations.
8. Michael Fasano, Environmental & real estate attorney (land use planning) – Claims that there was heavy public participation and comment. It was a robust comment period. The 3%
impervious cover was removed, 5′ to 4′ raising of structures if redeveloped was amended. Escape valves (hardship exemptions) are included where feasible and warranted. NJ has recently
been #3 in flooding insurance disaster claims. Michael asserts that DEP indeed has the authority to promulgate REAL rules as it reduces costs in the long run. Question: There have been
some real exaggeration examples of public input. I attended (think Sen. Smith?) many meetings with educated oral public comment. I received no response, no communication, no feedback, nothing.
THAT – is NOT public participation but a listening session without consideration of reality. Clearly placating the intended regulated public. It was “rules are rules, get used to them” attitude.
9. Daniel Kennedy CEO, NAIOP – Commercial Real Estate, former DEP Ast. Commissioner – Coastal resident of NJ & preservation planner in Burlington County Govt. Dismissed the Murphy
administration as doing a disservice to the public with his cowardice last minute enactment of NJ REAL. Almost ALL NJ Transit infrastructure upgrades and improvements are located in, and will
be affected by NJ REAL restrictions. Smart Growth and underserved areas in NJ would now be severely restricted by fewer homes by REAL. Economic impacts are not even fully realized. Making
investments in growth will be impossible as no one fully understands full impacts. What was clear is that “The DEP and Governor dismissed all comments and concerns from residents and business
leaders in NJ.” Moreover there were 5-6 key throw-ins (added to the rules) that have nothing to do with climate change resilience that must be removed now. The standards should be incrementally
studied and applied (or removed) as time allows and as research proves. By his own admission, Commissioner LaTourette stated that there is already an 18 month backlog of permit and interpretation
requests which is unacceptable! What more would NJ REAL add? NJ certainly needs a delay in this rollout of NJ REAL.
10. Dennis Toft, (Atty. NJ Chamber of Commerce) – DEP allows local agencies to create local stormwater utilities to address aging infrastructure. Not many have done so. Current stream-cleaning
rules need to be revised. New infrastructure can not be raised and DEP made no mention of that in the rules. Runoff doesn’t drain up-hill and elevating structures is impossible. Elevation changes
affects all other receiving structures and adjacent lands as well. DEP permit requests are already at 180 days. More concerning is the fact that REAL rules mandate that once permitted, projects
must commence within 180 days from approval. This shows how lacking they are of reality and the ignorance of permitting, financing, contracting, construction, competition tasks. No consideration
of seasonality, weather, or workforce availability was made. This is a terrible clause and unattainable! A comprehensive review of the executive order and rules and the unintentional and negative
interactions must be considered.
