Bill
ACR 46
New Jersey ACR 46 would amend the state constitution to ban exclusionary zoning and require municipalities to permit and facilitate affordable housing construction.
Note on source documents
- The materials you supplied appear to describe two different measures both labeled “ACR 46.” One is a New Jersey measure (title/synopsis about prohibiting exclusionary zoning). The other is a California Assembly Concurrent Resolution (author Soria) honoring U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Below I summarize each separately and note available status information.
Purpose and intent
- Proposes an amendment to the New Jersey Constitution to prohibit exclusionary zoning and to clarify municipal obligations regarding affordable housing construction.
Key provisions (based on available synopsis)
- Constitutional amendment language (specific text not provided) intended to:
- Prohibit municipal zoning practices that are “exclusionary” — i.e., zoning that effectively prevents certain housing types or price ranges from being built.
- Clarify or strengthen municipal obligations to permit and facilitate construction of affordable housing.
Who would be affected
- Municipal governments in New Jersey (local land‑use and zoning authorities).
- Developers and builders of housing (particularly affordable and multi‑family housing).
- Residents: low‑ and moderate‑income households seeking affordable housing; municipalities that currently use exclusionary zoning practices.
Status / timeline (from provided metadata)
- Introduced in the Assembly and referred to the Assembly Housing Committee (introduced January 9, 2024, per the header). No full constitutional amendment text supplied in the documents you provided.
- Companion: SCR 80 (listed as related).
Notes / caveats
- The summary above is based only on the brief synopsis in your materials. The actual constitutional amendment text, implementation mechanisms (e.g., enforcement, deadlines, funding, exemptions), and fiscal impacts were not included — those details are essential to assess precise effects and legal mechanics.
Purpose and intent
- A ceremonial/commemorative concurrent resolution honoring the life and legacy of U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and proclaiming March 15, 2025 as “Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg Day” — a day for remembrance and education.
Key provisions / content
- Recites Justice Ginsburg’s biography, legal career, landmark opinions and dissents, advocacy for gender equality and other civil rights, and national contributions.
- Proclaims March 15, 2025 as Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg Day in California.
- Directs the Chief Clerk of the Assembly to transmit copies of the resolution to the author for distribution.
Who is affected
- Largely symbolic; intended for public recognition, education, and commemoration across California (no legal or regulatory changes).
Status / timeline (from floor documents / actions you provided)
- Introduced: March 4, 2025 (author: Assemblymember Soria).
- Committee and floor actions show adoption and concurrence by Assembly and Senate.
- Enrolled and filed with the Secretary of State on April 8, 2025; Chaptered by Secretary of State — Res. Chapter 32, Statutes of 2025.
- Fiscal committee: No fiscal impact indicated.
If you want: I can
- Locate and summarize the full text of the New Jersey constitutional amendment proposal (if you want a detailed analysis of likely legal effects, enforcement mechanisms, or sample amendment language), or
- Provide a concise one‑page brief focused only on the New Jersey measure’s likely impacts and municipal compliance issues.
Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.
Sign in to ask a question.
