Statement from the Mayor

 
On the topic of Affordable Housing, I’m aware that information is being disseminated about the settlement, the zoning ordinances required to implement it and the so called legal missteps the governing body is being accused of making. I am correcting that misinformation now.

 

1.     Settling was not possible for the Borough without the increased density on the White Beeches driving range overlay zone. The overlay zone has existed on that site since 2000 and was increased in Round 3 in 2019. The Borough did not propose this latest increase and it was not included in our first HEFSP in June 2025. It was brought up as part of the mediation process by Fair Share Housing Center, the challenger to that June Plan, originally at 25 units an acre. Not increasing significantly was a dealbreaker for them, putting our immunity at risk. 16 units/acre was the lowest number we could get them to agree to after weeks of closed door meetings with the judge and adjudicator. To be clear, immunity for the Borough was protected only because of this rezoning. Any assertion that the Borough did not explore other ways to meet its obligation beyond this location is false. It is not based in fact nor understanding of the process, and our Planner’s work with us is unimpeachable.

 

2.     Yes the density enabled by the rezoning is out of character for the neighborhood. It’s out of character for the whole town. All Affordable Housing is multi-family not single-family. Like every municipality in the state, we were given a number of units. It is our state constitutional obligation to amend our land development ordinances to allow for state mandated affordable units to be built. So as you can see by driving around the region, county and state, multi-family/high-density developments have been and will continue to be built because of this constitutional obligation. Protecting the character of a municipality is not a legal argument in Mt. Laurel cases and is ignored by judges.

 

3.     Additionally, school impact, traffic impact, infrastructure impact, environmental impact, and utilities impact arguments are not allowed in Mt. Laurel cases. It has been argued and tried in the past over the 50 years of Mt Laurel doctrine, and overruled. It is now not permissible to raise as an objection. These potential impacts are simply not part of settlement cases. They are dealt with when a developer is ready to build and submits a site plan application for approval. That does not mean those are not potentially real impacts in some cases. It just means that it’s been deemed irrelevant time and time again. It’s a municipality’s problem to solve while its providing more housing. Nothing matters to the state but providing realistic opportunities for units to be built.

 

4.     And finally, any claim that this governing body did not notice the public throughout this process from March 2024 through March 2026 is outrageous. We communicate on all relevant Borough matters regularly through our town hall email updates. That includes multiple messages about affordable housing—well beyond what’s required by law. We can not force residents to sign up to receive those emails to stay informed. We do, however, have a clearly labelled section on our website for archived town hall emails for those that wish to find them on their own, rather than in their inboxes. Additionally, we have held 2 Town Hall informational meetings about this topic. The first, within a month of the new legislation being enacted in 2024. The second in January 2026, 3 weeks after we settled with FSHC. Again, not required by law. Rather it was required by the people on this dais who want an informed constituency and welcome public discourse. Both of those meetings were noticed by email, by regular mail to every household in the Borough, and on our website. Both meetings were attended at standing room only capacity. At the January Town Hall, we shared every detail of the settlement (supported by a slide presentation), how it was reached, & took questions from the audience. That meeting was 7 weeks before the Planning Board and Council met to adopt the Plan and ordinances. There is also an Affordable Housing section on our website which has  communications, presentations and documents including the HEFSP. Claiming improper notice and town-wide circulation of information is egregious. We are transparent and frequent communicators. It is up to individuals to be engaged and informed, and any lack of awareness reflects a lack of that engagement with us.                            

  I again thank the Council Affordable Housing committee and our professionals for their dedication and diligence in getting us to settlement. Thank you to the Planning Board members for making time in their schedules to hold a special meeting/public hearing to amend the Master Plan and adopt the Amended HEFSP in time for the Council to adopt the implementing ordinances before the legislated March 15 deadline.

Heather Wasser

Mayor, Borough of Haworth