Lawmakers hear competing views on DEP dopted PACT/REAL coastal rules; debate centers on science, costs and implementation

A joint Senate and Assembly Environment and Energy committee hearing on April 22 heard sharply divided testimony on the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection dopted PACT/"REAL" rules, which update flood and land-use standards to account for future sea-level rise and other climate risks.

The committee chairs opened the session by outlining the rule history and explaining that the transcript and supplemental public submissions will be distributed to all 120 legislators. The hearing drew a mix of supportive expert testimony and forceful objections from development and business groups.

Why it matters: The rules raise building-elevation standards, expand the mapping of future inundation zones and change permit triggers; supporters say they protect lives and reduce long-term taxpayer costs from repetitive disaster recovery, while opponents warn the package will increase construction costs, depress housing investment and exceed DEP uthority without clearer legislative direction.

Supporters, including former DEP staff and environmental groups, emphasized scientific evidence showing accelerating sea-level rise and expanding flood exposure. "My name is Mark Mauriello. As, senator Smith said, I'm here today to speak in favor of the DEP's adopted, real rules," said Mark Mauriello, a coastal geologist and former DEP official, who argued FEMA maps and minimum federal standards do not by themselves prevent risky development and that higher standards reduce recovery costs over time.

Scientists who briefed the committee summarized the New Jersey Science & Technical Advisory Panel'025 staff report, saying local tide-gauge data and model scenarios point to substantial increases in coastal flooding over coming decades. The panel nalysis cited likely ranges for New Jersey of roughly 0.9—1.7 feet by 2050 and 2.2—3.8 feet by 2100 under intermediate emission scenarios, with higher upper-end outcomes if low-confidence, rapid ice-sheet loss is realized.

Opponents — including the New Jersey Builders Association, the New Jersey Business & Industry Association, NIOP and municipal representatives — pressed implementation concerns. Jeff Kulikowski, CEO of the New Jersey Builders Association, said the rulemaking lacked meaningful stakeholder engagement and "represents a significant expansion of regulatory authority without clear legislative authorization," and noted legal challenges already filed.

Mayoral and urban planning testimony focused on the rules' impact in dense cities. Jersey City Mayor James Solomon said the rules must be tailored to urban conditions to avoid jeopardizing financing and delivery of major affordable-housing projects, urging clearer practical exemptions.

Insurance and municipal finance witnesses said stronger standards and mitigation investment can lower long-run losses and help with actuarial pricing, but they could not yet quantify immediate premium impacts tied to this specific rule package. A public-finance expert described evidence that municipal bond markets price coastal exposure, which can raise borrowing costs for affected jurisdictions.

What lawmakers asked for: multiple members pressed for clearer cost estimates, more granular maps, and assurances about hardship exceptions, local zoning conflicts and coordination with FEMA flood insurance mapping. Several speakers urged a phased approach, additional funding for mitigation assistance, and clarification of the rules' legal basis.

What's next: The chairs said the record will remain open for seven days for written submissions, and that the committee will transmit the transcript and supplementary materials to the legislature. The committee did not vote or take formal action at the hearing.