The myth of environment versus growth

The CEO of the New Jersey Builders Association says the state faces a false choice between conservation and development.

Over the last several months, Jeff Tittel has published a series of opinion pieces attacking residential development, criticizing the state’s science-based bald eagle delisting decision, and, more recently, condemning the Sherrill administration’s review of New Jersey’s flood and land-use regulations. While the topics may change, the message remains the same: Growth is the problem, development is the enemy, and any attempt to balance competing public policy priorities is treated as a threat. Whether discussing bald eagles, flood regulations, redevelopment, or housing production, Mr. Tittel consistently presents New Jersey residents with a false choice between environmental protection and economic opportunity. That approach may generate headlines, but it does little to address the complex challenges facing our state.

Take the bald eagle. Few species inspire stronger emotions, and rightly so. The bald eagle is an American symbol and one of New Jersey’s greatest environmental success stories. The New Jersey Builders Association supported the species’ delisting because it was supported by science, decades of monitoring, and clear evidence of successful recovery. The decision itself was initiated by the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection following years of biological data demonstrating that the species had successfully rebounded. That is how environmental policy is supposed to work. The goal of endangered species protections is recovery. When recovery occurs, it should be celebrated as evidence that conservation efforts succeeded, not portrayed as a conspiracy to benefit developers. The bald eagle was removed from the federal endangered species list in 2007 and remains protected today under federal law and other environmental regulations.

The same pattern is evident in Mr. Tittel’s recent attacks regarding the state’s flood and land-use regulations. Any effort to review, refine, or balance environmental regulations is immediately portrayed as an assault on the environment itself. Yet the debate surrounding the REAL regulations was never a choice between protecting residents from flooding and allowing reckless development. It was about whether New Jersey could pursue climate resilience while also addressing housing affordability, redevelopment, economic growth, and the practical realities facing communities across the state. Gov. Sherrill’s administration recognized that these goals need not be mutually exclusive. Reviewing regulations, engaging stakeholders, and seeking balanced solutions is not environmental backsliding. It is responsible governance.

The real challenge facing New Jersey today is not a shortage of bald eagles. It is a shortage of housing. For decades, New Jersey has underproduced housing while adding jobs and population. The result is a severe affordability crisis affecting young families, seniors, essential workers, and middle-income residents across the state. Entire generations increasingly view homeownership as unattainable. Businesses struggle to attract workers. Economic mobility is slowing. Yet voices like Jeff Tittel’s continue to portray nearly all new development as inherently harmful, regardless of the broader human and economic consequences. Every redevelopment project becomes a crisis. Every housing proposal becomes a threat. Every attempt to balance environmental protection with economic reality is caricatured as surrender to special interests.

The reality is far different. Responsible development often improves environmental conditions and strengthens communities. New Jersey’s builders regularly redevelop contaminated and underutilized properties, invest in modern stormwater infrastructure, improve resiliency, and replace outdated development patterns with safer, greener, and more efficient housing and commercial spaces. Modern homes consume less energy, use less water, better manage runoff, and are built to dramatically stronger environmental and flood-resiliency standards than the housing stock of previous generations. The building industry has spent decades advancing energy efficiency, green-building practices, resiliency standards, and environmental performance. Suggesting that all development is inherently destructive ignores the substantial progress made over the last 40 years.

Housing also represents something larger than construction. Homeownership has long been central to the American Dream. It creates stability, supports wealth creation, strengthens communities, and expands opportunity. Housing construction creates jobs, revitalizes neighborhoods, supports local businesses, and provides families with a pathway to upward mobility. There is something deeply ironic about wrapping these debates in patriotism and symbolism while dismissing the very opportunities that allow people to achieve that dream. The Statue of Liberty symbolizes hope, opportunity, and the chance to build a better life. For generations, people have come to this country seeking the opportunity to work hard, own a home, raise a family, build a business, and move up the economic ladder. The homebuilding industry helps make that promise real every day.

Recently confirmed Department of Environmental Protection Commissioner Ed Potosnak stated that New Jersey must “dismantle once and for all this myth that environmental and economic health must somehow be at odds.” That observation gets to the heart of this debate. New Jersey can protect wildlife while also creating housing opportunities. We can improve environmental resilience while also supporting economic growth. We can protect natural resources while also helping families pursue the American Dream. Those goals are not mutually exclusive. Our challenge is not choosing one over the other. It is finding the balance to achieve both.

The Jersey Vindicator welcomes a variety of viewpoints in commentaries. Opinion pieces about New Jersey issues can be emailed to editor AT jerseyvindicator.org. They should include contact information and an author headshot. Email commentary pieces to:
editor@jerseyvindicator.org