New Jersey Assembly Bill A884

New Jersey 2022-2023 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/11/22
• Refer: 1/11/22

Caption

Provides additional home ownership assistance for certain military service members.

Impact

A884 intends to ease the financial burden on military personnel who are looking to purchase homes, thereby facilitating home ownership among veterans. The eligibility criteria focus on service members who have completed at least 90 days of active duty since September 11, 2001, or during the designated Persian Gulf Conflict periods. Notably, the provisions support surviving spouses, enabling them to access these benefits even if they do not meet the military service requirement themselves, which broadens the scope of support to families affected by military service.

Summary

Assembly Bill A884 aims to provide additional financial assistance for home ownership to military service members and their surviving spouses. The bill introduces a provision allowing the New Jersey Housing and Mortgage Finance Agency (NJHMFA) to offer up to $5,000 to eligible service members for down payment and closing cost assistance on their primary residences. This assistance is supplementary to existing programs like the 'First-Time Homebuyer Mortgage Program' and the 'Down Payment Assistance Program.'

Conclusion

Overall, A884 represents a significant effort to bolster home ownership opportunities for those who have served the country, highlighting the state's commitment to supporting military families. As discussions around the bill progress, attention will likely center on its implementation and effectiveness in addressing the needs of these individuals and their families.

Contention

There may be points of contention regarding the funding and sustainability of such assistance programs. Critics could raise concerns about the long-term fiscal implications of extending such incentives and whether this additional funding could detract from other essential programs. Additionally, the requirement of 90 days of service may be a point of debate, particularly around how inclusive or exclusive this criterion is for service members who may have faced injuries preventing them from meeting the minimum service time.