Consider the following question: If the sky had actually fallen down on Chicken Little, would he still be remembered as a paranoid alarmist? Perhaps the answer can be found by examining the politics of land use (and land abuse) in New Jersey. In the waning months of the twentieth century, New Jersey lawmakers at the state, county and local levels wrestled with an overabundance of legislative proposals, schemes, and scams tied to a wide range of hot-button issues, almost of which have been reduced to succinct two-word catch phrases, presumably to ease the burden on our attention spans. Just use Smart Growth, Open Space, Anti-Sprawl, Home Rule, or Wise Use in polite conversation and you might easily be mistaken for a politician or a lobbyist.*  To avoid that embarrassment, we think it's worth looking at a few key issues in greater depth, say six or seven words, especially where the outcome could be vital to the well-being of the Great Swamp watershed.

To see what's been happening at the state level, a review of The New Jersey Builder's Association Legislative Program and Policy Statement as found on the NJBA web site (www.njba.org) is a good place to start. To the bitter disappointment of conspiracy theorists everywhere, the NJBA has come out of the cedar closet wearing its heartwood on its organizational sleeve. The NJBA's goals and objectives are presented in clear, unambiguous and unapologetic black and white prose for all the world to see, and paranoid outside observers must forego the pleasures of posing imaginary environmental doomsday scenarios involving the NJBA, statewide gridlock, black helicopters, and the wanton destruction of grassy knolls. With the NJBA's own words now exposed to public scrutiny, it's apparent that the imagined scenarios are in fact real (except for the helicopters), and it's almost impossible to overstate the worst case. Let's look at a few examples of the NJBA's views on current issues of interest to GSWA:

Builder's Impact Fees – A bill which would allow municipalities to assess off-site "impact fees" to finance the construction of schools and other infrastructure made necessary as a consequence of new development was passed by the NJ Senate in 1999, but failed to move through the Assembly before the end of the last legislative session. (A similar bill (A1712) was introduced at the start of the current session.) According to their policy statement, the NJBA would in fact endorse a "rational" system for financing off-tract infrastructure, but to us there is some question as to what they mean when they say "rational". In commenting on the bill's passage in the Senate, NJBA Executive Vice President and CEO Patrick J. O'Keefe noted that the median price of a new home in New Jersey is already about $230,000, which exceeds the limit of affordability of many buyers to the extent that it constitutes a form of economic discrimination. Mr. O'Keefe estimated that the Senate's bill would increase the cost of a new house by as much as $40,000. (This figure was disputed by the bill's sponsor, Senator William Schluter, who said the fee would be more like $6,500 on a $350,000 home.)

Mr. O'Keefe's opinions on the high cost of housing are very curious in view of the recent experiences of two of NJBA's larger corporate members, Toll Brothers (who promise "Equal Housing Opportunity" on their web site, www.tollbrothers.com) and K. Hovnanian (www.khov.com). Both of these companies posted record profits for FY 1999. Moreover, Mr. O'Keefe has attributed the proliferation of expensive housing in New Jersey to the pursuit of "rational self-interest" on the part of builders, who are naturally more inclined to build large numbers of high-margin homes than any number of low-margin homes as long as market conditions favor the former over the latter. Mr. O'Keefe appears to be embracing the narrow constructionist's view of rationality, in which rational behavior is maximized when maximum profits are realized. We wonder if Mr. O'Keefe chanced to read the recent article in the Economist (December 18, 1999) which reported that the economist's long-held reliance on rational behavior as a fundamental assumption in modern economic theory is being challenged by some who argue that economists should really pay more attention to irrational behavior if they want to get a true picture of the economics of the New Age. Under the new paradigm, irrational behaviors such as "cognitive dissonance" (holding a belief which does not square with the evidence) and "quasi-magical thinking" (believing one's thoughts can influence events, even when one knows they can't) are gaining recognition as legitimate predictors and determinants of economic activities, including even those of home builders, and especially those of watershed advocates.

Residential Site Improvement Standards – According to NJBA, the social benefits of diversity do not extend into the realm of slash and burn development. NJBA continues to defend, with obvious pride of authorship, legal challenges to the RSIS, otherwise known as the NJ Hometown Homgenization Handbook. Bills to exempt the Great Swamp Watershed from RSIS were introduced in 1998, but did not pass either house. GSWA will continue to support this legislation in the new session.

Land Use Regulatory Reform (Act) – Another NJBA initiative, LURRA was originally drafted by them as a comprehensive overhaul of the NJ Municipal Land Use Law for the express purpose of "streamlining the development process." It has appeared in various iterations through the last legislative session, but did not get very far and has not shown up in its usual omnibus format so far this year. Be warned, however, that many of LURRA's components will survive as independent entities, including a Time of Decision rule requiring towns to act one way or the other on zoning permit applications with a specified number of days, and a Regulatory Freeze exemption which would allow developers to ignore zoning changes for up to five years after an initial permit application is filed. More LURRA spin-offs are sure to follow, so, stay tuned.

But, to get back to our original question: The sky may indeed be falling, but, as Chicken Little himself found out, it's not necessarily going to be fatal. He was last seen recuperating at the Sunrise Home for Unemployed Paranoids, reading a novel about high finance entitled "Hovnanians at the Gate", by B.B. Wolf.