According to a news report on "NJ.com", a federal Judge in NJ recently ruled that NJ must change the way it calculates the rent formula for Section 8 housing recipients. According to the article, this new formula will make it easier for people who receive Section 8 housing vouchers to qualify for rents in more affluent areas. The article states, in relevant part: "Low-income families in parts New Jersey will have the opportunity to move to better neighborhoods with better schools starting next year, after a federal judge this week directed the immediate implementation of an Obama-era desegregation rule. ... Advocates said the anti-segregation measure will break the cycle of relegating low-income families to poor neighborhoods. Those who qualify for Section 8 vouchers typically pay 30 percent of their income toward rent, the rest is paid by local housing authorities directly to landlords. ... Using more targeted rental calculations broadens housing choices for families so that those who want to live in more affluent communities can receive higher subsidies to afford to do so, advocates argue. For many low-income families, the opportunity to live in more expensive areas also means access to better-quality schools and lower crime rates. "Federal housing policies are a major cause of the racial segregation that stubbornly persists to this day," said Sherrilyn Ifill, President and Director-Counsel of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund in a statement. "It's long overdue that our federal government remedy the massive disparities in wealth and education its policies continue to produce, and modest rules like this one play an integral role in leveling the playing field for Blacks, Latinos, and low-income Americans." "N.J. is a very diverse state and at the same time, one of the most segregated," said Nina Rainiero, a spokeswoman for the Housing and Community Development Network of New Jersey. "The ruling provides an opportunity for New Jerseyans who are struggling to make ends meet but want to raise their family in a safe, decent home in a great neighborhood with great schools." It is not yet clear whether this ruling will impact the planned low income housing the Council is contemplating for Moorestown. If so, I wonder if in addition to the Moorestown tax payers being forced to financially support a development of 150 very low income rental apartments that will pay $0 taxes to the Town (if developed by a "non-profit" group), the taxpayers will be further paying (through our federal taxes) for the rents of the tenants in the development through the Section 8 program? Moreover, will this new ruling mean that more of the tenants who will move into the low income housing will be recipients of Sec. 8 housing under the new formula? In other words, will the tenants of the proposed low income housing be paying rents well below market rates and will those low rents be subsidized for approx. 70% by the Sec. 8 housing vouchers paid by the federal and local government programs? I suppose that in theory giving lower income households an opportunity for housing in a nice, safe area is a laudable goal. But, there are other ways to provide this type of housing that do not include requiring a Town to develop, build and provide 150 low income households with almost free housing at the cost of the existing taxpayers in that Town. Why should those of us who have worked hard, saved our money, made good life decisions, and pay the property taxes that enable us to live in a nice town with good schools incur the very high additional tax burden of paying even more property taxes so that 150 (or more) new households that will move into a housing project while paying $300-800/monthly rent and paying nothing in taxes toward the Town? And, if low income households are striving for improving their situation for their children/families, does that mean that they are entitled to live in the best towns in NJ? For example, if a family lives in poverty in Camden, isn't it a significant improvement for them to move into an already existing apartment/house in a different town in Camden County that is nicer, safer and with better schools than Camden City, as opposed to building new housing units in upscale suburban townships in Burlington County, which will unnecessarily stress already existing towns and infrastructure? Are low income households entitled to live in Moorestown at the expense of the township's existing families and while being financially supported by the rest of the hard-working tax-paying residents? Wouldn't it make more sense to have "inclusionary" or mixed-use housing developments that include some percentage (usually 15-20%) of "affordable housing" units, where the owners of the units still pay taxes (although at a reduced rate) for their property and contribute toward our Town? If there is no other reasonable option but to build 100% low income housing units in Moorestown, wouldn't it make more sense to build the low income units in smaller numbers so that they are "blended" into the rest of the community, as opposed to placing 150 units all concentrated in one location? If you feel strongly about this issue, please consider contributing to our cause. We are still raising funds to enter into the current Court litigation between the Township and the Fair Share Housing Center, Inc. (and other entities), so that the Court is aware that the residents have significant concerns about the Council's plan to develop a 150 unit low income housing rental project on Hartford Road. We have raised sufficient funds to retain an attorney. We need to raise more funds to retain a professional planner to evaluate (and critique) the Council's planned development. Please make your check payable to "MARIFHO Group, LLC" and mail to me at 146 Oakmont Dr., Moorestown NJ 08057, or our Treasurer at 207 Eagle Ct., Moorestown NJ 08057. Thank You. the link to the NJ.com article is: "http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2017/12/low-income_families_in_these_nj_counties_can_move.html" "http://s.nj.com/oAYbOXD" ** the photo above shows a low income housing building in Princeton NJ. Incidentally, there was a fire at this particular low income housing development last week in which one of the residents tragically passed away.