Finkel v. Township Committee of the Township of Hopewell
434 N.J. Super. 303
| N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. | 2013Background
- Hopewell Township submitted a nonbinding referendum (Resolution #13-248) to the Mercer County Clerk 70 days before the Nov. 5, 2013 general election, seeking voter input on acquiring a county-owned road segment to lower a school-zone speed limit.
- N.J.S.A. 19:37-1 requires a governing body request to be filed with the county clerk not later than 81 days before the election; the Township missed that deadline.
- N.J.S.A. 19:37-2 requires a certified copy of the resolution to be delivered to the county clerk not less than 65 days before the election; the Township met this 65-day deadline.
- Plaintiffs sued seeking to invalidate the referendum as untimely and challenged the interpretive statement; the trial court denied injunctive relief, concluding compliance with the 65-day rule cured the 81-day lapse.
- This Court allowed the election and count to proceed but retained plenary review; after the election the Township Committee voted against the acquisition; plaintiffs continued the appeal seeking a declaration the referendum was invalid.
- The Appellate Division held the 81-day deadline in N.J.S.A. 19:37-1 is mandatory and cannot be bypassed by compliance with N.J.S.A. 19:37-2, declared the referendum invalid, and declined further equitable relief.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether compliance with N.J.S.A. 19:37-2’s 65-day certified-submission deadline cures noncompliance with N.J.S.A. 19:37-1’s separate 81-day request deadline | The 81-day deadline in 19:37-1 is mandatory; allowing 19:37-2 compliance to cure it would render 19:37-1 meaningless | Compliance with the 65-day certified-delivery requirement in 19:37-2 makes the 81-day request deadline in 19:37-1 inconsequential; liberal construction favors allowing the referendum | Court held both deadlines must be met; failure to meet 81-day deadline rendered the referendum untimely and invalid |
| Whether the 81-day deadline undermines citizens’ opportunity to respond (N.J.S.A. 19:37-1.1) | The 81-day deadline gives notice and preserves the window for citizen petitions under 19:37-1.1 | Defendants minimized the notice function, suggesting differing actors for each statute or that strict enforcement is unnecessary | Court found the 81-day deadline serves an important notice function tied to 19:37-1.1 and must be enforced to protect citizen response time |
| Whether courts should dismiss the appeal as moot because election occurred and the governing body acted | Plaintiffs: issue is capable of repetition yet evading review and implicates significant statewide election-law questions; declaratory relief appropriate | Defendants & AG: election over, Township decided the issue, appeal moot — no relief necessary | Court kept the appeal, finding the question significant and capable of repetition yet evading review and issued a declaratory ruling invalidating the referendum |
| Appropriate remedy given post-election posture | Plaintiffs sought invalidation and possible re-presentation of the question and fees | Defendants urged no relief and dismissal as moot; suggested leaving decision to Legislature or nonjudicial actors | Court limited relief to declaratory judgment of invalidity; declined injunctive or fee awards because election concluded and no bad faith shown |
Key Cases Cited
- Crowe v. De Gioia, 447 A.2d 173 (N.J. 1982) (preliminary-injunction standard referenced)
- N.J. Democratic Party v. Samson, 814 A.2d 1028 (N.J. 2002) (election laws construed liberally to allow voting rights)
- Camden Cnty. Bd. of Chosen Freeholders v. Camden Cnty. Clerk, 472 A.2d 178 (App. Div. 1983) (trial and appellate treatment declaring untimely referenda invalid under filing deadline)
- Borough of Eatontown v. Danskin, 296 A.2d 81 (Law Div. 1972) (strict enforcement of referendum filing deadlines)
- Gormley v. Lan, 438 A.2d 519 (N.J. 1981) (standards for interpretive statements)