New Jersey Senate Bill S4350

New Jersey 2024-2025 Regular Session

• Introduced: 5/12/25
• Refer: 5/12/25
• Report Pass: 6/9/25

Caption

Changes certain allocations and amounts of constitutionally dedicated CBT revenues for Fiscal Year 2026 and thereafter; authorizes Garden State Preservation Trust and local governments to acquire lands in urban areas for agricultural or horticultural purposes.

Impact

The proposed legislation could significantly reshape urban land use policies by enabling local governments and the Garden State Preservation Trust to acquire and preserve lands specifically for agricultural endeavors. This would represent a shift towards proactive measures in utilizing urban spaces for food production and ecological conservation. Additionally, the bill directs a substantial portion of funding towards community-driven projects that bolster soil health and climate resilience, potentially leading to more sustainable urban development practices. However, it also places limitations on the power of eminent domain, requiring a dual legislative approval for its use in these acquisitions, which could add complexity to the process.

Summary

Senate Bill S4350, introduced in May 2025, focuses on the acquisition and stewardship of land for agricultural and horticultural purposes in urban areas of New Jersey. It mandates the establishment of the Preserve New Jersey Urban Agriculture and Horticulture Fund, which will allocate funds from the Corporation Business Tax revenues. Initially, the bill stipulates a $25 million deposit into this fund to support urban farming projects, emphasizing the importance of small parcels of land in urban areas suitable for agricultural purposes. The intention behind this bill is to enhance urban agriculture, thereby increasing local food production, promoting sustainable practices, and contributing to environmental health.

Contention

One of the notable points of contention around S4350 stems from its implications for local governments. While proponents argue that the bill supports local agriculture and environmental conservation, critics may see it as an intrusion on municipal authority concerning land use planning. As towns and cities might lose some control over their land use decisions—now under greater oversight by state-level entities—it could raise concerns about the adequacy of local input in determining the most beneficial land usage. Additionally, the distribution of funds might lead to debates over which areas receive priority and how effectively the funding addresses diverse urban agricultural needs.