In re Adoption of 2003 Low Income Housing Tax Credit Qualified Allocation Plan
New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division
369 N.J. Super. 2 (2004)
- Written by Darius Dehghan, JD
Facts
The New Jersey Housing Mortgage Finance Agency (agency) (defendant) administered the Low Income Housing Tax Credit program, which provided tax credits to developers and owners of low-income rental housing. Historically, affordable housing was concentrated in urban areas. Because racial minorities were generally unable to afford the housing available in suburban areas, racial minorities comprised a high percentage of the population in urban areas. Each year, the agency adopted a qualified allocation plan (QAP), which specified the standards used to allocate tax credits. The 2003 QAP did not separate urban and suburban housing into different funding categories. In adopting this plan, the agency intended to make affordable housing available in all areas of New Jersey. Moreover, the 2003 QAP set aside tax credits for mixed-income housing. By incentivizing housing for families and individuals of varying incomes, the agency sought to reduce the concentration of racial minorities in urban areas. Four public-interest organizations (plaintiffs) challenged the 2003 QAP, contending that it violated the Fair Housing Act (FHA). Specifically, the organizations argued that the 2003 QAP perpetuated the segregation of racial minorities in urban areas. The agency denied the organizations’ request for an administrative hearing. Subsequently, the organizations appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Havey, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 812,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.