Full Service Law Firm in Mt. Laurel Township, NJ | Capehart Scatchard

Legal Alerts

On March 18, 2026, the New Jersey Board of Public Utilities (NJBPU) announced “$5 million in grants to fund more than two dozen projects that will expand cooling infrastructure, reduce energy demand, and improve public health while strengthening climate resilience in the state’s most heat-vulnerable communities.”

The awards, issued through NJBPU’s Urban Heat Island (UHI) Mitigation Program, span 10 municipalities statewide — with major investments concentrated in Newark, Camden, and Trenton, and additional projects in Paterson, Atlantic City, Elizabeth, Roselle, Egg Harbor City, Lakewood Township, and Pennsauken Township. Projects include tree planting along major street corridors, conversion of public buildings into resilience hubs, shade structures, water features, community gardens, cooling corridors and pop-up oasis initiatives, all designed to lower surface temperatures and cooling costs on the hottest days of the year.

NJBPU describes the UHI Mitigation Program  as advancing “Governor Mikie Sherrill’s agenda to pair aggressive climate action with investments that directly improve public health, affordability, and quality of life in overburdened communities.”

NJBPU describes the public health benefits to NJ residences under the UHI Mitigation Program:

“Higher temperatures accelerate ozone formation and intensify air pollution, aggravating asthma, COPD, and cardiovascular disease. Urban trees and greening initiatives help counter these impacts by filtering harmful particulates, lowering temperatures, and improving air quality. Research shows sustained greening efforts, such as tree-planting, can reduce asthma-related emergency room visits, lower medical costs, and decrease missed school days.”

NJBPU reports “Camden will receive a $1 million award to redevelop Farnham Park with shade structures, improved youth recreation spaces, and expanded green areas. Additional community-based funding will support the “Blooming Bus Stops” initiative, adding shade trees, seating, and amenities at up to 20 bus stops in North Camden.”

“Newark will receive a $500,000 award to redevelop Hennessey Street Park into a climate-resilient community space in the Ironbound neighborhood, adding cooling infrastructure, trees, and emergency cooling amenities. Additional community-based projects will install shade structures and hydration stations at community gardens and deliver tree planting in neighborhoods disproportionately affected by extreme heat.”

NJBPU announces the following Full List of Awardees and Projects:

Category 1 – Comprehensive UHI Interventions in Public Spaces (up to $1 million each)

  • City of Trenton – Trenton North and West Wards Tree Arteries Project ($1,000,000)
  • City of Camden – Farnham Park Redevelopment ($1,000,000)

Category 2 – Cooling the Built Environment / Resilience Hubs (up to $500,000 each)

  • City of Trenton – Hermitage Library Resilience Hub ($500,000)
  • Pennsauken Township – Elm Avenue Resilience Hub ($500,000)
  • City of Newark – Firefighters Memorial Park Climate-Resilient Community Space ($500,000)
  • Housing Authority of the City of Elizabeth – Bayway Community Center Cool Roof and Heat Resilience Project ($500,000)

Category 3 – Urban Micro-Climate Interventions (up to $50,000 each)

  • New Jersey Conservation Foundation (Trenton) – Green Streets to Battle Monument Intermediate School ($50,000)
  • Isles, Inc. (Trenton) – H2Grow – Bellevue ($50,000)
  • Trenton Artworks, Inc. (Trenton) – Trenton Heat Resilience Garden ($50,000)
  • Passage Theatre Company (Trenton) – Cool Theatre Passageways ($50,000)
  • Center for Environmental Transformation (Camden) – East Camden Community Heat Preparedness ($50,000)
  • Neighborhood Collaborative / Camden Urban Agriculture Collective (Camden) – Blooming Bus Stops ($50,000)
  • Greater Newark Conservancy (Newark) – Water-Enhanced Newark Community Gardens and Green Spaces ($50,000)
  • Newark Science and Sustainability, Inc. (Newark) – Newark SaS Shade Infrastructure Project ($50,000)
  • Rabbit Hole Farm (Newark) – Newark Cooling Improvements ($50,000)
  • Project for Empty Space (Newark) – Newark Grounds Art Canopies and NIGHT FEST Markets ($100,000)
  • FARD United (Newark) – Urban Heat and Community Safety Initiative ($50,000)
  • City Green (Paterson) – Tree Canopy Expansion in City Green Learning Garden ($50,000)
  • One Ocean County, Inc. (Lakewood Township) – John Patrick Sports Complex Cooling Garden ($50,000)
  • Ducktown Neighborhood CDC (Atlantic City) – Ducktown Cooling Corridor Pop-Up Oasis ($50,000)
  • Key Recreation, Inc. (Egg Harbor City) – Buffalo Avenue Playground Urban Heat Relief Project ($50,000)
  • Groundwork Elizabeth (Elizabeth and Roselle) – Urban Heat Mitigation Through Native Tree Canopy Expansion ($50,000)

Awardees will have two to three years to complete projects and must submit regular financial and performance reports to the NJBPU.

On March 3, 2026, the Appellate Division of the Superior Court of New Jerey held that a prospective cannabis retailer is entitled to an explanation by a municipal governing body for denial of an application for a “resolution of support” (ROS), which is a requirement under the NJ Cannabis law to obtain a Retail Cannabis License.

A City Council is required to provide a discernible basis for denying an ROS application to inform the applicant and the public of its reasons, as well as afford meaningful appellate review. A City Council’s failure to do is a reversable error.

In Higher Breed NJ LLC v. The City of Burlington Common Council, 2026 N.J. Super. LEXIS 33 (App. Div. March 3, 2026)(Approved for Publication), the Appellate Court considered whether the City of Burlington Common Council (City Council) was required to provide a reason for denying Higher Breed NJ LLC’s (Higher Breed) application for a ROS, as required under  N.J.A.C. 17:30-7.10(b)(9). A ROS is a requirement to obtain a Cannabis Retailer License (CRL) from the State of New Jersey Cannabis Regulatory Commission (CRC) under the Cannabis Regulatory, Enforcement Assistance, and Marketplace Modernization Act (CREAMMA), N.J.S.A. 24:6I-31 to – 56. 

Here, after the City Council held three separate public meetings and after hearing testimony from Higher Breed in support of the ROS, and from an objector (a real estate broker alleging Higher Breed failed to pay him a real estate commission for arranging a commercial lease at the subject property to Higher Breed and referring to Higher Breed as “unprofessional” and alleging they exhibited “ethically questionable behavior”), the City Council announced (without any explanation or reasons) it will not grant  Higher Breed’s application for the ROS. The City Council relied on a recent Appellate Division decision in Big Smoke LLC v. Township of West Milford, 478 N.J. Super. 203 (App. Div. 2024) (municipalities have wide discretion in deciding to grant, deny or reconsider requests for an ROS for cannabis businesses).

CREAMMA specifically directs that a business intending to sell cannabis from a retail establishment must obtain “a Class 5 [CRL]” from the CRC to operate a retail premise. N.J.S.A. 24:6I-42. The CRC has issued regulations identifying the proofs a prospective business must submit in its application, including zoning approvals and “[p]roof of local support.” N.J.A.C. 17:30-7.10(b).

The CRC requires “[p]roof of local support, which shall be demonstrated by resolution adopted by the municipality’s governing body, or where the municipality has no governing body, a written letter of support from the municipality’s executive.” N.J.A.C. 17:30-7.10(b)(9). “‘[P]roof of local support’ [is] embodied in a municipal governing body’s resolution.” Big Smoke LLC, 478 N.J. Super. at 219 (citing N.J.A.C. 17:30-7.10(b)(9)).

The Appellate Court in Higher Breed found:

The City Council’s failure to provide a reason for denying Higher Breed’s ROS application prevents the applicant and public from understanding its action, and meaningful appellate review. We have held that a municipality’s discretionary determination shall be “vested with a presumption of validity[] that will be upheld where any state of facts may reasonably be conceived to justify the action.” Vineland Constr. Co. v. Township of Pennsauken, 395 N.J. Super. 230, 255 (App. Div. 2007) (citing Quick Chek Food Stores v. Township of Springfield, 83 N.J. 438, 447 (1980)). Stated another way, for the City Council’s resolution to be accorded deference, there must be a clearly discernible basis provided to support its decision.

Additionally, a governing body has the responsibility to set forth findings of facts in its decision to facilitate meaningful review. Cf. In re Application for Med. Marijuana Alt. Treatment Ctr. for Pangea Health and Wellness, LLC, 465 N.J. Super. 343, 375 (App. Div. 2020) (providing that “an administrative agency acting quasi-judicially must set forth basic findings of fact, supported by the evidence and supporting” its determination “for the salutary purpose of informing the interested parties and . . . any reviewing tribunal of the basis on which the final decision was reached so that it may be readily determined whether the result is sufficiently and soundly grounded” or is arbitrary, capricious, or unreasonable). Despite the lack of statutory directive, “[t]he requirement of findings is far from a technicality and is a matter of substance.

The Appellate Division affirmed in part and vacated in part the trial court’s decision and remanded the case back to the City Council. The Appellate Division held “the City Council was required to provide a discernible basis for denying Higher Breed’s ROS application to inform the applicant and the public of its reasons, as well as afford meaningful appellate review.” “The City Council on remand is directed to give further consideration to Higher Breed’s application and sufficient reasons for its decision regarding Higher Breed’s ROS. We express no opinion on the outcome of this matter.”

The lesson here is a diligent applicant should protect the record before a City Council in the event of an appeal to the Court. When applying to a City Council for an ROS, the applicant should offer and build a record with sufficient and credible admissible evidence in support of the ROS. Here, the trial court correctly noted “[t]he four members who voted against the ROS did not state a reason for their vote that was related to site suitability or not complying with Burlington City’s local ordinances.” The trial judge also reasoned that “another cannabis applicant, Northern Alternatives, LLC” was issued an ROS at the third meeting and the application was similar to Higher Breed’s application. Additionally, the City Council had approved an ROS for “a medical cannabis establishment for LIFE Compassion Center Dispensary, LLC” at the property in 2021. The trial judge went on to explain that the record did not support the City Council’s decision, noting it was not based on “any substantiated evidence.”

I have successfully obtained ROSs for clients applying for Retail Cannabis Licenses before the CRC. If you require legal assistance with an ROS application, please feel free to contact me at afox@capehart.com.

On December 22, 2025, New Jersey lawmakers approved a bill that is expected to significantly limit cell phone use in public schools. The policy promoted by the bill is commonly known as a “bell-to-bell” ban, meaning it would apply for the entire school day. The final step is for the governor to sign the bill, which he has indicated he intends to do.

Under the bill, the New Jersey Department of Education must create guidelines to help local school boards develop rules about students’ use of internet-enabled devices, including cell phones. Each local board of education is required to follow these guidelines when adopting its own policy.

The ban applies to all public school students in kindergarten through 12th grade and covers regular school hours, time spent on school buses, and school-sanctioned events. However, the law allows for certain exceptions, such as when internet-enabled devices are needed for disability accommodations or for translation services.

The goal of the legislation is to keep students focused on learning and reduce distractions caused by internet-enabled devices and social media.

We will continue to keep you informed as further developments occur.

New Jersey led the nation as the first state to pass legislation creating a One Health initiative. P.L. 2021, Chapter 117 (adopted and effective on June 24, 2021), which establishes the “New Jersey One Health Task Force”.

New Jersey Governor Phil Murphy proclaimed November 3, 2025 as “One Health Day” in the State of New Jersey. “One Health Day” is an awareness campaign recognizing the interconnectedness of human, animal, plant, and environmental health, and promotes collaboration to address these interdisciplinary issues.

While “One Heath” is not a new concept, the legislation states, “it has become increasingly important in recent years as many factors have changed interactions between people, animals and the environment, leading to the emergence or reemergence of many diseases”.

This legislation declares that it is “in the public interest of the State of New Jersey to establish a permanent New Jersey One Health Task Force to promote health and wellness of New Jersey residents, animals, including pets, livestock, and wildlife and natural resources by encouraging the collaborative efforts of experts and leveraging knowledge and resources effectively.”

The New Jersey One Health Task Force is charged with the task to “develop a strategic plan to promote inter-disciplinary communication and collaboration between physicians, veterinarians, and other scientific professionals and State agencies, with the goal of promoting the health and well-being of the State’s residents, animals and environment.”

The legislation provides the New Jersey One Health Task Force shall consist of 13 members as follows:

      1. The Secretary of Agriculture, or the secretary’s designee, who shall serve ex officio;

      2. The Commissioner of Environmental Protection, or the commissioner’s designee, who shall serve ex officio;

      3. The Commissioner of Health, or the commissioner’s designee, who shall serve ex officio;

      4. 10 public members to be appointed by the Governor, as follows:

        • one person representing the medical community, who is a medical practitioner licensed to practice in the State;
        • two people who are veterinarians licensed or approved to practice in the State by the State Board of Veterinary Medical Examiners, one of whom shall have expertise, knowledge, and experience with farm animals;
        • one person with expertise, knowledge, and experience in medical research;
        • one person with expertise, knowledge, and experience in zoonotic diseases;
        • two people with expertise, knowledge, and experience in epidemiology or biomedical sciences; and
        • three people representing the State’s academic community with expertise, knowledge, and experience in public health, ecology, natural resources, or environmental and biological sciences.

The New Jersey Department of Agriculture explains the purpose of the One Health initiative as follows:

New Jersey was the first state in the nation to legislate a One Health initiative by establishing the OHTF (P.L. 2021, Chapter 117). “One Health” is a concept that recognizes the strong connections and interdependencies between human, animal, and environmental health, and calls for a collaborative, multi-sector, and transdisciplinary approach. The OHTF is comprised of members representing a variety of disciplines, including human and veterinary medicine, public health, epidemiology, and academic research.

The Strategic Plan sets forth six major goals for the OHTF to accomplish:

      1. Strengthening One Health Coordination and Collaboration,

      2. Stimulating Interdisciplinary Health Research and Innovation,

      3. Developing a One Health Cognizant Workforce,

      4. Increasing Public Awareness of the Importance of One Health,

      5. Improving Data Accessibility Across Sectors and Disciplines, and

      6. Ensuring Sustainability for the One Health Approach in New Jersey.

Each goal is supported by underlying short-term (one-year) or longer-term (3-5 year) objectives. The Task Force’s Strategic Planning Committee will revisit and revise these goals and objectives annually to assess progress.

New Jersey Agriculture Secretary Ed Wengryn states: “From food safety to animal disease to soil and water quality, each challenge we face is deeply interconnected. By addressing them holistically, we can ensure the resilience of our agricultural systems.”

New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection Commissioner Shawn M. LaTourette states: “Through the One Health Task Force, New Jersey is working to advance our scientific understanding of the complex relationships between public health, our environment, and plant and animal health,”. “This first Strategic Plan will help spur a coordinated, multi-disciplined response to growing threats to wildlife and agricultural commodities, ultimately better protecting public health.”

New Jersey Department of Health Acting Commissioner Jeff Brown states: “Protecting the public’s health requires understanding and responding to diseases and other health threats that spread between people and animals. It also requires recognizing how these challenges impact our globally connected environment. This strategic plan puts New Jersey at the vanguard of science and public health, providing a roadmap for building the infrastructure that will undergird this complex and essential work.”

You may find more information about New Jersey’s One Health Task Force on the New Jersey Department of Agriculture (NJDA) website.

The New Jersey Department of Agriculture offers a new tool to facilitate interdisciplinary collaboration in New Jersey, the OneHealthConnect listserv.  You may contact me at afox@capehart.com if you need assistance registering for the listserv, and receive rolling email updates or weekly digests.

One of Governor Murphy’s key electoral platforms during his gubernatorial campaign was his goal to increase New Jersey’s minimum wage.  That electoral promise became a reality just a few short weeks ago. On February 4, 2019, Governor Murphy officially signed into law the New Jersey Minimum Wage Bill. The law will ultimately increase the minimum wage rate in New Jersey from $8.85 (currently) to at least $15.00 by 2024. The wage increase progression will be as follows:

  • At least $10/hour by July 1st, 2019
  • At least $11/hour by January 1st, 2020
  • At least $12/hour by January 1st, 2021
  • At least $13/hour by January 1st, 2022
  • At least $14/hour by January 1st, 2023
  • At least $15/hour by January 1st, 2024

Most notably, the above progression and schedule does not apply to very small businesses, defined as employers with five or fewer employees. Such employers will not have to pay $15.00 an hour to their employees until 2026. Further, the law includes a provision allowing employers to take a “tip credit” against their minimum wage obligations up to a certain level but ultimately the hourly rate earned by the employee must still reach whatever the then mandated minimum wage level is at that time. Obviously, the first compliance date of which employers must be immediately aware is July 1. Prior to that time, employers must take the necessary internal steps of ensuring that all employees are receiving this upgraded minimum wage by that required date.  Thereafter, employers will then need to ready themselves for the next increase happening approximately six (6) months later raising the minimum wage again. With all the graduated changes under the law, employers would be wise to calendar these important dates and proactively ensure that your workplace complies with these new evolving minimum wage requirements.

———–

Ralph R. Smith, 3rd is Co-Chair of the Employment and Labor Practice Group. He practices in employment litigation and preventative employment practices, including counseling employers on the creation of employment policies, non-compete and trade secret agreements, and training employers to avoid employment-related litigation. He represents both companies and individuals in related complex commercial litigation before federal states courts and administrative agencies in labor and employment cases including race, gender, age, national origin, disability and workplace harassment and discrimination matters, wage-and-hour disputes, restrictive covenants, grievances, arbitration, drug testing, and employment related contract issues.

On October 29, 2018 New Jersey’s Earned Sick Leave Act will go into effect.  This new law will impact almost every employer with workers in New Jersey and businesses should begin preparing now to ensure your policies and practices are compliant with the law.

Covered Businesses and Employees

The coverage of the law  is broad.  It applies to any business entity that has employees in the state of New Jersey without regard to the size of the business’ workforce, including temporary services firms. It also applies to most employees working in New Jersey who work for compensation.  However, the law does have limited exceptions including exclusions for public employers that are required by law to provide sick leave to their employees, per diem healthcare employees, public employees with existing sick leave benefits and construction industry employees working under a collective bargaining agreement.

The law goes on to prohibit and preempt New Jersey municipalities from enforcing their own ordinances for earned sick leave, which includes the 13 municipalities who enacted their own earned paid sick leave laws over the past few years: Bloomfield, East Orange, Elizabeth, Irvington, Jersey City, Montclair, Morristown, Newark, New Brunswick, Passaic, Paterson, Plainfield and Trenton.

Accrual of Sick Leave

 Employees will begin accruing sick leave time on the effective date of the law.  An employee then accrues up to forty hours of sick time at a rate of one hour for every thirty hours worked.  Employers can choose to frontload the full 40 hours at the beginning and employers with existing paid time off may utilize those policies to satisfy the Act’s requirements. It is important that employers review their vacation, personal time and sick day policies with a labor and employment counsel to ensure they are compliant with the law.

Following enactment, employers are required to designate a period of 12 consecutive months as its benefit year for purposes of implementing the law and can only change their established benefit year after first notifying the New Jersey Department of Labor and Workforce Development.  Further, for employees hired after the effective date of the law, benefits will begin to accrue immediately and they will be eligible to use the leave after 120 days.  However, employers may agree to an earlier date.

Using Time and Carryover

Employers would be permitted to require employees to provide up to seven days notice of the intended use and the expected duration whenever the need for sick time is “foreseeable” and employees would be required to make a “reasonable effort” to schedule the time off so it does not “unduly disrupt” operations.  However, the law would permit employers to prohibit employees from using foreseeable sick time “on certain dates” and to require specified documentation for unforeseeable sick time used during such dates. When sick leave time is not foreseeable, employers would be permitted to require notice “as soon as practicable,” so long as the employee has been provided notice of this requirement, such as in a legally compliant employee sick leave policy.  Further, employers are permitted to require “reasonable documentation” for sick time lasting three consecutive days or more, establishing that time was used for a permissible purpose.  The law sets forth what reasonable documentation is for the different types of sick time.

The law allows employees to use sick time for the following reasons:

  • Diagnosis, care, treatment, or recovery for an employee’s own health conditions, including preventive care
  • Diagnosis, care, treatment, or recovery for a family member’s health conditions, including preventive care
  • Circumstances resulting from the employee’s or family member’s status as a victim of domestic or sexual violence, including related counseling and court proceedings
  • Time the employee is unable to work because of the closure of an employee’s workplace or of a child’s school or place of care because of a public official’s order relating to a public health concern
  • Time to attend a school-related event as requested or required by school staff, or to attend a meeting related to the care of a child’s health condition or disability

Employers should note that the definition of family member under the Act is broad, including any individual “whose close association with the employee is the equivalent of a family relationship.”

The law provides employers with the discretion in setting the increments in which its employees may use accrued time, but the largest increment chosen may not be greater than the number of hours an employee was scheduled to work in a given shift. The law also requires that accrued, but unused, sick time up to forty hours be carried over from one year to the next, but also permits offering employees the option of selling back unused sick time at the end of the benefit year in lieu of carrying over the time into the next year.  However, employers are not required to “pay out” unused sick time at the time of termination under the new law.

Notice and Record Keeping

The New Jersey Department of Labor and Workforce Development is in the process of developing a notice that employers must post in the workplace and must also provide a copy of to their employees.  This notice must be provided to employees within 30 days of its drafting and new hires must be given a copy of the notice upon hire.  Additionally, employers must give an employee a copy of the notice upon request.  Employers must also retain records of an employee’s hours worked and sick leave taken for a period of five years and allow the Department access to those records upon demand.

Anti-retaliation Provisions

Like many other employee rights and worker protection laws, the law  includes an anti-retaliation prohibition, which establishes a rebuttable presumption of retaliation when an employer takes adverse action against an employee within 90 days after engaging in protected activity surrounding an employee’s rights or use of earned sick leave under the law.  However, the law permits employers to discipline employees that misuse sick time for purposes other than those permitted by the law.

Going Forward

As the law will go into effect on October 29, 2018, it is more important than ever for employers to consult with legal counsel to take proactive steps including  performing a thorough internal audit of HR policies and practices, to ensure they are in complete compliance with New Jersey’s Earned Sick Leave Act and have adapted their business practices when the law takes effect.

Employers– get ready! The deadline as to when the new Form I-9 must be used is quickly approaching.  In case you are not aware, employers are required to use the Form I-9 to verify the identity and employment authorization of people hired for employment in the United States.  In July 2017, the US Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”) published a new version of the Form I-9 and starting on September 18, 2017, employers must only use the new Form I-9 or risk being subject to fines and penalties.

The new Form I-9 is available to employers on the USCIS website at https://www.uscis.gov/i-9.

What’s different about the new form?

  • The USCIS has revised the list of acceptable documents in List C of the Form I-9. This list now includes a new document called the Consular Report of Birth Abroad (Form FS-240).  This form is issued to certain people born overseas to a U.S. citizen.  This Form is now listed as acceptable documentation.
  • The USCIS has combined all the certifications of report of birth issued by the Department of State into one selection.  Therefore, the total number of separate List C categories are now 7 instead of 8.
  • The name of the Office of Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Unfair Employment Practices (“OSC”), the agency focused on preventing discrimination during the hiring process based upon employee’s citizenship, national origin or immigration status, has changed to the Immigrant and Employee Rights Section (“IER”).  Due to this name change, the new Form I-9 refers to IER instead of OSC.
  • In the instructions on the new Form I-9, USCIS has removed the phrase “the end of” from the phrase “the first day of employment.”  This change clarifies that the section 1 of the form must be completed when the employee starts work for pay, rather than by the end of the day.

If you have any questions about filling out this form or any of the changes, please contact your labor and employment lawyer for advice.

Capehart Blogs

Subscribe to Blog Updates

Categories