The 95/5 Deed Restriction: A Community's Fight for Justice and Fairness

In a dramatic display of unity and frustration, around 50 property owners and their supporters gathered outside Jersey City Hall to protest the controversial “95/5 deed restriction,” which has left an estimated 100 to 300 homeowners in financial limbo. This rally, organized by the community group Jersey City Together, aimed to shed light on the struggles faced by those caught in this seemingly unjust situation.

Understanding the 95/5 Deed Restriction

The 95/5 deed restriction was initially introduced as part of an affordable housing program, allowing residents to purchase homes at a reduced price. However, the terms have turned into a nightmare for many. Here’s how it works:

• Homeowners can only recoup their original purchase price plus 5% of any increase in market value.
• The remaining 95% of any appreciated value goes back to the local and state government, primarily to fund affordable housing initiatives.

Homeowners like Rosemary Nwabueze voiced their frustration, stating, “We cannot be paying market rate taxes on homes that cannot be sold at market rate.” Many attendees held signs and shared personal stories, emphasizing their united front against this policy.

Voices from the Rally

Mae Moreland, another property owner, passionately declared, “We’re in the fight, but we’re going to finish the race.” This sentiment resonated throughout the crowd, showcasing their determination to challenge a system they feel has betrayed them.

As the rally continued, it became clear that the impact of the 95/5 rule extends beyond just financial hardship. Luisa Mantilla shared her own experience, revealing how she invested her life savings into her home only to discover that the city would take 95% of any potential sale profit. “This rule was never mentioned at closing or any time after. It was hidden from us,” Mantilla lamented.

The Debate Over Development and Equity

The rally also brought attention to the developers benefiting from tax abatements while homeowners struggle under the weight of the 95/5 rule. Nwabueze questioned, “Why aren’t the rich developers funding the affordable housing trust fund? Why are working-class people funding this?”

Some protesters even raised concerns about racial equity, suggesting that the program disproportionately affects black and brown communities. Mantilla pointed out that many buyers didn’t speak or understand English, leading to a potential exploitation of vulnerable populations.

Calls for Change

During a recent city council meeting, Councilman Frank Gilmore described the program as “heartbreaking” and “mindboggling.” Fellow council member Yousef Saleh argued that homeowners who have maintained their properties for decades deserve the right to sell at market value. “If you maintain the property for 30 something years, you should be allowed to sell it at the market rate,” he asserted.

As the rally concluded, participants expressed their willingness to take their fight to Trenton if necessary. Assistant Corporation Counsel John McKinney acknowledged the complexities of the situation, indicating that any amendments to the policy might require state intervention.

The Road Ahead

The 95/5 rule, while intended to promote affordable housing, is now at the center of a heated debate about fairness and equity in property ownership. As homeowners continue to rally for change, they hope their collective voice will not go unheard.

What do you think?

• Is the 95/5 deed restriction an unfair burden on homeowners?
• Should developers be held accountable for contributing to affordable housing funds?
• Does the program disproportionately impact certain racial communities?
• How can local governments better balance affordable housing initiatives with homeowners' rights?
• Should homeowners have more rights over the appreciation of their properties?