In a recent decision, the Superior Court of New Jersey outlined the procedures that must be followed when litigation surrounding a planning board decision results in the filing and acceptance of a new application. The Facts of the Case Pawlynsky v. Princeton Planning Board centered on a parcel of
In the past, New Jersey courts have increasingly construed requests under N.J.S.A. 54:4-34 (Chapter 91) very strictly against municipalities. The statute authorizes assessors to seek expense and income information from property owners and allows a municipality to dismiss a tax appeal if the owner fails or refuses to respond within
In Propark America New York, L.L.C. et al v. City of Hoboken, the Tax Court of New Jersey ruled that the operator of public parking garage was not entitled to a refund of overpaid municipal parking taxes paid to the City of Hoboken. The court reasoned that in the absence
The Federal Communication Commission (FCC) recently published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking that may impact how New Jersey municipalities address requests to locate wireless telecommunications equipment. The FCC’s Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPR) specifically includes potential measures to expedite the environmental and historic preservation review of new wireless facilities, as
The U.S. Supreme Court will not hear oral arguments in Mount Holly v. Mount Holly Gardens Citizens in Action, which centers on whether disparate impact claims can be brought under the Fair Housing Act. The parties agreed to settle the suit earlier this month. As previously discussed on this Government
The Appellate Division of the New Jersey Superior Court has denied a challenge raised by a citizens’ action group over the construction of a Jersey Central Power & Light (JCP&L) substation on environmentally sensitive land in Tewksbury Township. The court concluded that the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) had reasonable
In Griepenburg v. Township of Ocean, the Appellate Division of the Superior Court of New Jersey ruled that environmental rezoning ordinances passed by the Township of Ocean were invalid as applied to the plaintiffs’ property because the downzoning was not reasonably required to serve the stated purposes of the ordinances.
The New Jersey Tax Court recently considered a novel question of interest to both municipalities and commercial landowners — whether a taxpayer that receives two Chapter 91 requests for two separate lots governed by a singular lease agreement has “failed or refused to respond” pursuant to N.J.S.A. 54:4-34 by having
