Just After Fourth-Round Obligations, Towns Face a New Affordable Housing Curveball and Towns are Unaware

A new proposal in Trenton would allow nonprofits and religious groups to build dense housing with limited municipal oversight, igniting fresh battles

By Jim Lonergan Tapinto.net Published November 21, 2025 at 4:43 PM

TRENTON — New Jersey municipalities barely finished submitting their Fourth Round affordable-housing plans — a massive state-mandated process that will shape zoning and development for the next decade — yet the Legislature is already advancing a new bill that could force even more density, height, and development into local neighborhoods.

Senate Bill S-4736, introduced by Senators Troy Singleton (D) and Benjie Wimberly (D), is the latest proposal raising alarm among municipal officials who say the state is moving the goalposts again. The bill would give religious institutions and nonprofit organizations broad power to convert their properties into mixed-use, inclusionary developments — while limiting how much local planning boards can push back, even when height, density, traffic, or environmental concerns are at stake.

S-4736 would create a new category of “inclusionary developments” on nonprofit-owned land. At least 20 percent of the units would need to be deed-restricted affordable housing, and municipalities would be required to approve such projects if they meet the bill’s criteria. Planning boards would be prohibited from rejecting these developments based on location alone, significantly reducing the discretion that local boards traditionally hold under the Municipal Land Use Law.

What the Bill Proposes: Under S 4736, properties owned by religious or tax-exempt nonprofit organizations may be converted into “inclusionary developments” — meaning some residential units would be reserved for very-low, low- and moderate-income households. Key features of the bill include:

• A minimum 20% of units in such projects must be affordable.

• The municipality’s planning board must approve these developments if they meet zoning rules — effectively limiting the ability of a municipality to reject them based on location.

• The bill sets uniform maximum parameters for height and density: up to 40 units per acre, and up to one story above the maximum height in the zoning district. 

Supporters See It as an Affordable Housing Accelerator: Housing advocates say this type of legislation is needed to address a statewide shortage that has driven both rents and home prices to record highs since 2020. The New Jersey Apartment Association reported a 30 percent rent increase over four years, while the median home price increased more than 45 percent. Supporters say unused church, synagogue, and nonprofit properties represent an opportunity to quickly increase supply without displacing existing neighborhoods.

Senator Singleton’s office describes the bill as “sweeping changes” intended to ensure low- and moderate-income residents are not displaced amid redevelopment and gentrification. 

Municipalities Raise Red Flags Over Local Control and Neighborhood Impacts: Municipal officials across the state argue the opposite. They say the bill overrides local planning, undercuts carefully crafted master plans, and could allow large market-rate developments with only minimal affordable housing included. Several towns have already begun adopting formal resolutions opposing S-4736. For example, Chatham Borough unanimously passed a resolution opposing S 4736, saying it “bypasses the planning process” and strips away local decision-making on height, density and safety. This comes during Gov. Murphy's lame-duck period, which could add “height and density” to projects without the approval of municipalities. 

The Chatham council's resolution {click HERE}, urging the defeat of the bill, is being sent to relevant State Senator's, Assembly members, the Governors office including Governor-Elect Mikie Sherrill, and the New Jersey State League of Municipalities.

Critics also note that the 20% affordable-unit threshold is lower than some municipalities currently require, and worry the bill could lead to large market-rate developments with limited affordable housing proportion. Click HERE

Environmental & Open Space Concerns Surface: Alongside density and height issues, environmental groups warn that the bill may inadvertently allow development on lands currently protected for open space or sensitive ecosystems. For instance, Friends of the Drew Forest argues that S 4736 could permit dense development on lands long considered off-limits, undermining conservation efforts. 

What Happens Next: S 4736 was introduced in the Senate on October 27, 2025, and has been referred to the Senate Community and Urban Affairs Committee but has not yet advanced. For further insight and bill status, click HERE

Because the bill could change zoning rules and reshape housing patterns in municipalities across the state, several towns are already preparing outreach or resolution votes to express support or opposition ahead of legislative hearings.

Why This Matters for Municipalities & Residents: If enacted, S 4736 could create a new path for affordable housing development while reducing some traditional municipal controls over land use, height, density and location. For residents, this means potential changes to neighborhood character, building scale, infrastructure demand and housing mix.

As New Jersey continues to wrestle with how to accommodate growing housing needs without sacrificing community identity, infrastructure capacity and open space preservation, S 4736 stands out as a pivotal piece of legislation that may redraw the map of what’s allowable — and where.

Chatham Council President Jocelyn Mathiasen explained that Madison officials informed her of the legislation and said it would have “a significant impact” on Chatham Borough if it were to be signed into law.. The resolution passed by Chatham Borough points out that the proposed legislation would allow increased density and height, regardless of the municipality's ability ensure safety. Chatham Borough has a train station, making it a target for “new developments near transit” that the legislation mentions.