Flood Protection or Government-Ordered Shore Retreat? NJ Policy Debate

By Wayne Parry, The Associated Press

TOMS RIVER, N.J. — New Jersey officials are defending proposed building regulations aimed at limiting damage from future storms and rising sea levels in coastal areas, pushing back against criticism that the state aims to force people off the Jersey shore by making it more difficult and expensive to build or rebuild there.

Lawmakers of both parties held a hearing Thursday in Toms River, one of the towns hardest hit by Hurricane Sandy, to discuss the state’s climate protection initiative and respond to criticism of the proposal from business leaders.

Ordered by a 2020 executive order from Democratic Gov. Phil Murphy, the proposed regulations aim to consider sea level rise and a changing climate when making land-use decisions near the ocean, bays and rivers to reduce damage from future storms.

The legislation would extend jurisdiction over flood control measures even further inland, require buildings to be constructed five feet (1.5 meters) higher off the ground than current regulations require, and require roads in flood-prone areas to be raised.

They are expected to be published soon in the New Jersey Register and could be subject to public review before going into effect later this year.

Other states and cities are considering or implementing similar changes to development regulations to address climate change or the acquisition of flood-prone properties, including North Carolina, Massachusetts, Fort Worth, Texas, and Nashville, Tennessee.

Nick Angarone, New Jersey’s director of resilience, said the proposed rules are necessary to “get a clear picture of what’s happening before our eyes.”

He added that New Jersey ranks third in the nation for flood compensation paid out by the federal government, with $5.8 billion since 1978.

Angarone and others cited a Rutgers University study that projects sea levels in New Jersey will rise 2.1 feet (65 centimeters) by 2050 and 5.1 feet (1.5 meters) by the end of the century. By then, he said, there is a 50 percent chance Atlantic City will experience so-called “sun floods” every day.

The New Jersey Business and Industry Association has strongly opposed the rules and the study they are based on, warning that the initiative is the beginning of a much-discussed “managed retreat” from the shoreline that some scientists say is necessary but is anathema to many business groups.

“This will significantly harm the economy of our coastal and river communities, and it is based on the policy that people and businesses should be forced off the coast,” said Ray Cantor, a group official and former adviser to the Department of Environmental Protection under Republican Gov. Chris Christie.

“We believe we need to consider sea level rise in our planning efforts,” he said. “However, this rule is based on flawed science and will force a retreat from the Jersey Shore and coastal communities.”

Rutgers defended its projections, saying they were consistent with 2021 sea level projections for Atlantic City produced by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, “a trusted, highly credible, thoroughly peer-reviewed source of climate change information.”

Cantor argues the new rules will create “no-build zones” on parts of the coast where compliance will simply be too costly and burdensome.

State officials have vehemently denied that claim, saying the rules are only intended to reduce damage from future storms that residents and businesses face. They have created a website aimed at busting “myths” about the new rules, making clear that nothing will stop storm-damaged structures from being rebuilt and that there will be no “no-build zones.”

Tim Dillingham, executive director of the American Littoral Society, said governments should start discouraging new development in areas that regularly flood.

“We need to stop developing high-risk areas,” he said. “We need to take steps to keep these people out of harm’s way.”

Under the Blue Acres buyout program, New Jersey has acquired and demolished hundreds of homes in areas along rivers and bays that regularly flood. But it has yet to buy a single home along the ocean.

Senator Bob Smith, who chaired the hearing, said the measures in the proposed legislation “are not a retreat.” He called the opposition from the Business and Industry Association “foolish.”

The association apparently ignored the criticism; on Thursday it chartered a commercial plane to hang a banner over the oceanfront that urged the governor: “Do not force the shore to retreat.”

Follow Wayne Parry on X at www.twitter.com/WayneParryAC