Land Use Reform

1. Do you support statewide zoning reform to allow multi-family housing in areas currently zoned exclusively for single-family homes?

• Strongly Support

Please explain your position:

I strongly support statewide zoning reform to allow multi-family housing in areas currently zoned for single-family homes. These exclusionary zoning practices have contributed to a housing shortage that hits working families the hardest. Reforming these laws is a necessary step toward building a more inclusive, affordable New Jersey – where seniors, young families, and the working class can afford to live in the communities they grew up in.

2. Would you vote to legalize Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) statewide, overriding local bans or restrictions?

• Yes

Please explain your position:

Yes, I support legalizing ADUs statewide. They offer a flexible and low-impact way to increase housing supply while giving homeowners the ability to care for aging family members or generate rental income. ADUs are especially helpful in high-cost areas like Hudson County, where affordable options are scarce.

3. Would you vote to legalize single-stair buildings statewide, overriding local bans or restrictions? If yes, do you support four-stories or some higher number? If no, why not?

• Yes

Please explain your position:

Yes, I would support the legalization of single-stair buildings statewide, particularly for buildings up to four stories. This design approach allows for more affordable, family-sized units and reduces construction costs, helping us meet our housing goals. These buildings are used safely around the world and can be built to modern fire and safety standards here in New Jersey.

Transit-Oriented Development (“TOD”)

4. Should the state preempt local zoning laws near major transit stations to allow “by-right” development of multi-family or mixed-income housing?

• Yes

Please explain your position:

Housing and transit must go hand-in-hand if we want to address affordability and climate change. I support allowing by-right development near transit stations to encourage more housing, reduce commute times, and encourage the use of our public transit systems to address growing traffic and pollution. Congestion in Jersey City and Hoboken is out of control, and by building more housing near transportation hubs, we can make it easier for folks to choose public transportation and help get more cars off the road. Of course, this planning and development must be done in tandem with infrastructure updates to NJ Transit and Port Authority and coming up with a dedicated funding source for NJ Transit. 

5. A developer has proposed a 1,000 unit (150 designated income-restricted affordable units and 100 workforce units for artists) apartment building at 150 Bay Street in downtown Jersey City. This development would also include a new public school for Kindergarten through Sixth Grade, a public plaza, and no parking spots. Do you support this project? If yes, would you support more projects like this within half a mile of PATH or NJ Transit HBLR stations in (or near) your legislative district?

• Yes

Please explain your position:

Yes, I support the 150 Bay Street project and would welcome more like it. This development integrates affordable housing, education, public space, and zero parking to support transit use and reduce congestion. It represents exactly the kind of forward-thinking, community-benefit-driven project we need more of near transit hubs.

6. Would you back legislation that removes minimum parking requirements near transit (within half a mile) to reduce housing production costs and promote TOD?

• Yes

Please explain your position:

Yes, I support eliminating minimum parking requirements near transit to bring down the cost of housing and encourage sustainable transportation choices. These minimum requirements may work for other, more suburban parts of the state. However, Jersey City and Hoboken are unique, and our laws should reflect the needs of our district. Parking mandates add tens of thousands of dollars to the cost of each unit, making housing less affordable for everyone. Near transit, we should prioritize people over parking spaces.

7. Should the state provide funding or tax credits for municipalities that adopt pro-housing zoning reforms near transit?

• Yes

Please explain your position:

Yes, we must be incentivizing municipalities to take proactive steps to address the housing crisis. Tax credits and grants can incentivize the kind of zoning changes that lead to more affordable, mixed-income housing near transit. I have a bill right now, A5453, that incentivizes development of moderate-income housing, as right now, our middle class makes too much for public housing but not enough for the new luxury buildings popping up across the district. We need every level of government working together to solve this crisis – this means more housing designed for our middle and working class, and housing that encourages the use of public transportation.

Housing Affordability and Public Land Use

8. Do you support ending the 30-year exemption on rent control for new rental buildings?

• Yes

Please explain your position:

Yes, I support ending the 30-year exemption, which allows developers to avoid rent control and has made it harder for cities to manage affordability long-term. This exemption has allowed some landlords to drastically raise rents after a short window, and it also means that our cities are being left out of crucial tax dollars – leaving our residents to foot the bill. We need consistent, fair rules that protect tenants, keep housing stable, and make our communities affordable for the people that have lived here for generations.

9. Do you support defining what “unconscionable” means with respect to rent increases? 

If yes, how – or at what rate – would you define the term “unconscionable” and if no, why not?

• Yes

Please explain your position:

Yes, I support clearly defining “unconscionable” rent increases to protect tenants from predatory practices. Without a clear standard, too many renters are left vulnerable to sudden and extreme rent hikes. It is for this reason that I voted “yes” on A5432 which would establish standards for determining an unconscionable rent increase. Additionally, renting in a post-COVID environment has brought hikes to tenants and HOA residents that are not considered “base rent” when evaluating an unconscionable rent increase. I introduced A5747 and A5744 to cap HOA fees and other ancillary fees to prevent landlords from hiking costs in areas other than base rent, because no matter what these fees are going towards, the money is still coming out of your pocket. It should count towards what we consider an increase. 

10. Do you support using surplus state or local land (such as government-owned parking lots, disused buildings, etc.) to build affordable or mixed-income housing?

• Strongly Support

Please explain your position:

Absolutely. Public land should be used for public good, and right now the greatest need we face is affordable housing. We can’t address our housing shortage without building more housing. Turning surplus lots and government-owned properties into homes helps maximize taxpayer value and address our housing shortage at the same time.

11. Do you support banning institutional ownership of single-family homes or multi-family homes under four units? 

• Strongly Support

Please explain your position:

Yes, and as a matter of fact, I wrote A5451 which would do exactly that. Our working families cannot win a bidding war against large corporate hedge funds. These institutions are buying much of the single family homes in New Jersey to either flip for a higher price or rent out for profit, turning homes into assets instead of places to live. Our residents deserve a fighting chance at the American Dream of homeownership, and I strongly support banning institutional investors from buying up our housing stock. We must keep housing accessible to residents, not Wall Street.

12. Would you support funding a state-led expansion of the housing choice voucher program to give low-income residents more housing choice?

• Strongly Support

Please explain your position:

Yes, I strongly support expanding housing vouchers so that low-income families can access safe, stable housing in all communities. Vouchers provide flexibility and choice to residents, especially in a tight rental market. In addition, my bill A5452 would create a preference for New Jersey residents for affordable housing. The folks who grew up here, pay taxes here, and have history here deserve to be the ones who are first in line to be able to afford to live here. 

13. Would you vote for legislation requiring municipalities to meet minimum housing production targets, including affordable housing, as a condition of receiving certain state funds?

• Yes

Please explain your position:

Yes, municipalities must be held accountable for their role in solving the housing crisis. The “not in my backyard” mentality must be overcome. Affordable housing has a stigma, but in reality, it means that seniors and working families have a place to live. If municipalities want state aid, they must meet their fair share of housing obligations. This ensures equity and stops wealthier towns from opting out of providing affordable housing.

14. If you had to choose between an expansion of state-led housing choice voucher program and funding the production of affordable housing units, which would you choose?

• Affordable housing production

Please explain your position:

While vouchers are critical, they are only effective when there are enough homes available. We are in a supply crisis and need to build, especially affordable and family-sized units. Long-term affordability and community stability come from more physical housing. In addition, with costs rising and wages remaining stagnant, much of our middle and working class is being priced out. They make too much to qualify for public housing, but nowhere near enough to afford newer buildings. That is why we must address both affordable housing and moderate-income housing development. 

15. Would you vote for legislation that bans junk fees in rental agreements like broker fees statewide?

• Yes

Please explain your position:

Yes, we must eliminate unnecessary fees that drive up the cost of moving. Broker fees are a hidden cost that disproportionately affect low- and moderate-income renters. Banning them will make housing more accessible and affordable, and reduce barriers to entry.

16. Would you vote for legislation that bans applications like RealPage from aggregating rental price data?

• Yes

Please explain your position:

Yes, RealPage and similar apps manipulate markets by encouraging rent-setting based on algorithmic collusion rather than local conditions. This is price-fixing in disguise. We need to ban these practices to keep housing markets fair and transparent, and that is why I have requested to co-sponsor A4872 which would prevent these practices.

Green Space, Resilience, and Smart Growth

17. Should new development projects be allowed to build more densely if they fund or provide nearby public green space or parks?

• Yes

Please explain your position:

Yes, we can achieve both housing and green space goals through smart development. One of the main concerns I hear from my constituents is that there is not enough green space, and that we must preserve the spaces we do have. If a building project contributes to public parks or open space, that’s a win-win – more housing, and more resources and spaces for our community. 

18. Do you support the Caven Point Protection Act for Liberty State Park?

• Yes

Please explain your position:

Yes, I strongly support the Caven Point Protection Act. Caven Point is one of the last wild urban shorelines in our state and must be preserved for future generations. It should never be privatized for elite use while working families lose access to nature.

19. Would you support legislation that prohibits the use of any state park as a venue for professional sports and protects all state parkland from commercial development and stadium construction?

• Yes

Please explain your position:

Yes, protecting Liberty State Park and ensuring it stays open and accessible to residents is crucial. Our state parks exist to serve the public, not private interests. Commercializing these spaces undermines environmental goals and limits community access. Stadiums belong in urban cores, not in protected green areas.

Street Safety and Highway Policies

20. If elected, will you champion or co-sponsor legislation that advances Vision Zero statewide?

• Yes

Please explain your position:

Yes, and I am a champion for Vision Zero. I have cosponsored A1476 to establish the New Jersey Target Zero Commission which will study and implement a plan for New Jersey to reduce traffic injuries and fatalities. Too many people, especially children and seniors, are hurt or killed on our roads. I have had meetings with various local leaders on this issue, and am consistently fighting for policies that prioritize public transit, bikers, and pedestrians.

21. How would you describe your position to the New Jersey Turnpike Extension highway widening and replacement program?

• Oppose

Please explain your position:

I want to be clear – we need to ensure that our roads and our bridges are safe, and much of our infrastructure must be updated and repaired. Our cities are growing – that means more cars on the road, aside from the added weight of electric vehicles. However, I strongly oppose adding lanes onto the Turnpike. Adding lanes which will lead into the bottleneck of the Holland Tunnel, which is not expanding, will only lead to more congestion and air pollution – which hits our seniors, children, and overwhelmingly our working class. In addition to the negative outcomes for Jersey City and Hoboken, putting money towards this project will drain resources from urgently needed public transit infrastructure repairs and updates. We should be investing in the future and encouraging the use of frequent and reliable public transportation—not doubling down on a failed model of highway expansion.

22. Would you introduce or sponsor legislation that allows the New Jersey Department of Transportation and the New Jersey Turnpike Authority to implement dynamic, demand-based variable tolling (commonly referred to as “HOT Lanes”) for express lanes on I-78, Garden State Parkway, and the New Jersey Turnpike? 

• Yes

• No

Please explain your position:

23. Do you support New York’s Congestion Pricing?

• Yes

Please explain your position:

Yes, congestion pricing is an important tool to reduce traffic and emissions while generating revenue for public transit. However, it must be implemented fairly, with input from New Jersey commuters. I will advocate for NJ residents to get appropriate transit investments in return.

24. If any group, organization, or continuing political committee that supports or benefits from the Turnpike Extension were to support your campaign directly or indirectly, would you return the money and disavow the support?

• No

Please explain your position:

The United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America (UBC) is supporting my campaign, and they are in support of the Turnpike Extension Project. However, their support of me has not – and will not – stop me and my office from speaking out against the project, as we have done publicly at press conferences, in response to the Turnpike Authority’s vote to move the project forward, and during the May Turnpike Authority board meeting. 

I am proud to have the support of organized labor, as much of my career has been spent representing injured workers and fighting for victims of corporate greed. We have shared interests that span far beyond the Turnpike Expansion, and I believe that finding common ground and coalition is the way to move forward rather than disavowing a group’s support over this project.

Public Transportation Access & Affordability

25. Would you support reallocating funds from highway expansion projects to enhance public transportation infrastructure and services?

• Yes

Please explain your position:

Yes, we must shift resources from car-centric infrastructure to sustainable transit. Public transit benefits everyone and helps reduce our carbon footprint. With New Jersey’s proximity to New York City and Philadelphia, we should be a national leader in public transportation. However, there are regular delays and cancellations, and last summer’s transit disaster due to aging infrastructure and climate change must not be repeated. We must prioritize our transit systems – this is the way of the 21^st century, and we must be proactive. 

26. Would you support incentivizing Hudson County and local municipalities with state funding to implement bus rapid transit lanes for NJTransit on select county or local roads like John F. Kennedy Blvd?

• Yes

Please explain your position:

Yes, bus rapid transit on JFK Blvd and other key corridors would be transformative. Dedicated lanes would reduce delays and make commuting more reliable for thousands of working residents. I support state funding to help municipalities implement this smart transit strategy.

27. Do you support the implementation of the Corporate Transit Fee—a 2.5% tax on corporations with net incomes over $10 million—as a dedicated funding source for NJ Transit?

• Yes

Please explain your position:

Yes, and that is why I voted “Yes” to pass A4704 to establish the corporate transit fee in NJ. While finding a dedicated funding source for NJ Transit is the end goal, we must do what we can now to ensure that New Jerseyans can get to work, see their doctors, and take care for their families with reliable transit options. large corporations benefit from public transit and should help fund it. A 2.5% fee on companies making over $10 million is reasonable and fair. This would create a sustainable funding source for NJ Transit without burdening working families.

28. If you had to choose between transferring funding from 1) the New Jersey Turnpike Authority / NJDOT highway fund, 2) implementing a corporate transit fee, or 3) raising the sales tax to fund transit, which policy would you implement? You may only choose one.

• Option 2

Please explain your position:

Raising the sales tax is a nonstarter. I have no interest in worsening the affordability crisis for New Jerseyans, especially through a tax which will hit our working class the hardest. Of the other two options, the Corporate Transit Fee is the most progressive and targeted. It doesn’t take from essential services or raise regressive taxes. It asks the most successful companies to contribute to the systems their workers rely on every day. I do believe that finding a dedicated funding source is the ultimate way to go, but the DOT highway fund 

Commitment to Urban Vitality Issues

29. Will you meet with Better Blocks New Jersey to shape legislation and priorities in Trenton?

• Yes!

30. Is there anything else we should know about your policies regarding housing, transit, street safety, or public parks?

As a legislator, I have worked tirelessly to advance housing affordability, tenant protections, and public transit access. I have introduced a comprehensive housing package – much of which was discussed in the answers above, but I also want to highlight A5453 which would strengthen protections for tenants and require more transparency for landlords. Regarding transit, I am in constant communication with both the Port Authority of NY/NJ and NJ Transit to make sure our voices are being heard. I have canvassed with Hudson County Safe Streets at PATH stations to advocate for more frequent and reliable transit alongside my constituents. Additionally, I have brought local leaders to the conversation with NJ Transit so that everyone can have a seat at the table and address these concerns directly. I look forward to partnering with Better Blocks NJ to build a more just, livable New Jersey.

Candidate Information

Candidate Name: Jessica Ramirez

Campaign Name: Jessica Ramirez for Assembly