Why is was this happening?

The (defeated) redevelopment of 100 Fidelity Plaza was just one of hundreds of cases in which industrial developers are allowed to pursue cheap land and lay waste to local regulations at the expense of New Jersey communities.

These sorts of projects are given ironclad protection under N.J.S.A. 40A:12A, also called the Local Redevelopment and Housing Law (LRHL).

In North Brunswick and many other New Jersey cities and towns, we are granted certain petition powers under N.J.S.A. 40:69A, also called the Optional Municipal Charter Law or the Faulkner Act. Those powers include:

These are the tools that we, as residents, have for accountability.

But the LRHL, as written, contains provisions that allow for local zoning laws to be overridden once a redevelopment plan is adopted by the municipality thanks to the legal concept of preemption.

The LRHL says the following:

"No ordinance, amendment or revision of an ordinance, or resolution under this act shall be submitted to or adopted by initiative or referendum, notwithstanding any other law to the contrary."

Local Redevelopment and Housing Law N.J.S.A. 40A:12A-28

This provision specifically protects ordinances and resolutions for redevelopment plans from referendum, a power and a right for which our town government structure was chosen. Even if a referendum petition against Ordinance 26-13-A gathered the signatures and the filing was completed within the required timeframe, it would be invalid and thrown out under the LRHL.

The LRHL only mandates that notice is given to owners of property within the redevelopment area. For 100 Fidelity Plaza, no one actually lives on the property, so no one was required by law to be notified. The only other notification requirement was to publish a notice in a local newspaper for two weeks; it's not controversial to say that this standard is woefully insufficient. Even the online version of the Home News Tribune is paywalled.

On top of all this, industrial developers are rewarded with tax exemption and abatement opportunities under N.J.S.A. 40A:20, called the Long Term Tax Exemption Law (LTTEL). They can negotiate their way out of paying taxes by entering into a financial agreement with the Council, the same Council that will have control over those revenues and the only people with a say in the matter. All 30-year payment-in-lieu-of-taxes (PILOT) schemes are enabled by the LTTEL. Developers get to enjoy our roads, our electricity, our water, but will not contribute a single red dime to the upkeep of our community.

This means that the only people that have any true binding power in LRHL proceedings are the Council, specifically because the LRHL strips everyone else's ordinary powers away. And because no one lives on 100 Fidelity Plaza, no one was required to be notified. And if the developers have their way, they won't even pay taxes like the rest of us.

It's not just North Brunswick

So many other New Jersey communities face the same struggles against unwelcome warehouses, datacenters, and other industrial developments. These are some of the organizations and coalitions who have fought and continue to fight these proceedings all over the state:

In May 2026, more than 60 such organizations jointly urged Governor Mikie Sherrill to enact a statewide datacenter moratorium.

In 2015, a committee of petitioners in West Orange attempted to bring a referendum against a redevelopment plan ordinance authorizing a bond, but was struck down by the New Jersey Supreme Court affirming the LRHL preemption clause. Later analysis in the New Jersey Law Journal remarked that there would be no latitude for the Court to ignore the plaintext of the law: LRHL ordinances are immune to referendum.

In Millennium Towers Urban Renewal Ltd. Liability Co. v. Municipal Council of City of Jersey City (2001), it was ruled that even PILOT-authorizing ordinances under the Long Term Tax Exemption Law are immune to referendum as well.

This isn't an isolated problem. It's happening all over New Jersey.

The law needs to change

The original spirit of the Local Redevelopment and Housing Law was to encourage deteriorating, underused properties to be redeveloped for the public good, yet there is no requirement under the LRHL for developers to prove that their plans will actually benefit the public. The mere existence of blight conditions is sufficient for a redevelopment area designation and the protections of the LRHL, even if new negative impacts would be created by a proposed redevelopment plan, the kind that are especially true of industrial projects.

Public comment alone is not an adequate tool for holding industrial developers accountable. It's the reason New Jersey is dealing with unchecked warehouse sprawl, and why datacenters are cropping up across the state without sufficient oversight. This issue has been noticed by our lawmakers.

In January 2026, Representatives Dawn Fantasia and Erik Peterson introduced Assembly Bill 177 with companion bipartisan Senate Bill 1857 introduced by Senators Latham Tiver, Troy Singleton, Parker Space, and Vin Gopal which would remove farmland from the definitions of redevelopment areas and rehabilitations areas under the LRHL.

That same month, State Senators Troy Singleton, Benjie Wimberly, and Linda Greenstein introduced Senate Bill 1807 to address PILOT programs depriving school districts of funding.

In February 2026, State Senator Shirley Turner introduced Senate Bill 3228 to enhance transparency standards for municipal governments in redevelopment proceedings, specifically that:

The bill is a carry-over from the 2024-2025 legislative session; there's sustained momentum to keep it moving forward.

In November 2023, Representative Nancy Muñoz introduced Assembly Bill 5692. Though it died in committee, it would've:

In March 2023, Representative Alex Sauickie introduced Assembly Bill 5296, which would've also strengthened notice requirements under the LRHL for warehouses and other high-density redevelopment plans. This also died in committee.

Our lawmakers have noticed and are acting, in many cases with bipartisan support, but tightening oversight still doesn't reach the heart of the accountability problem at the center of the LRHL. If industrial redevelopment projects like 100 Fidelity Plaza were so beneficial to New Jersey communities, if they were such a win-win for corporations and residents alike, then lawmakers and redevelopers would welcome public scrutiny and improved disclosure requirements.

It may be time to consider creating separate provisions for industrial redevelopment plans within the LRHL.

The welfare of our communities must come before economic interests. New Jersey deserves better.

READ THE OPEN LETTER TO THE STATE LEGISLATURE →