New Jersey Assembly Bill A774

New Jersey 2024-2025 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/9/24
• Refer: 1/9/24

Caption

Authorizes payment of just compensation to businesses for losses due to public health emergency closures.

Impact

The implications of A774 are substantial for New Jersey businesses facing future public health emergencies. The legislation stipulates that if a business owner can prove that their loss is directly due to the closure mandated by a public health emergency, they may file for compensation within one year following the termination of that emergency order. This establishes a clearer path for claims against the state, potentially impacting the state's financial obligations during crises. However, it also places the burden of proof on business owners to demonstrate the direct connection between their losses and the imposed health orders, which may lead to challenges in litigation.

Summary

Assembly Bill A774 proposes a legal framework that authorizes just compensation for businesses that are required to close in response to public health emergencies declared in accordance with the Emergency Health Powers Act. The bill aims to address the financial hardships imposed on business owners as a result of mandatory shutdowns during such emergencies, acknowledging that these closures can significantly impact a business's operational viability and income generation. By allowing business owners to seek compensation, the bill intends to provide a safety net for those who might suffer losses under such circumstances.

Contention

The bill's introduction is likely to evoke discussions about the state's role and responsibilities during public health emergencies, particularly regarding economic support for affected businesses. Notable points of contention may arise around the sufficiency of the proposed compensation measures, the potential administrative burden on state resources, and the feasibility of the required proof of loss from business owners. Opponents could argue about the fairness of placing the burden of proof solely on business owners, while supporters may assert the necessity of the bill to safeguard the economic environment in the face of health crises.