New Jersey Family Farm Faces Seizure for Housing Development

A family farm in New Jersey, established 175 years ago, is at risk of disappearing as the Town Council plans to take over 21 acres for affordable housing development. Andy Henry, representing the family, claims that the Council has pressured them to leave the farm or face legal action, as stated through his lawyer back in April.

Jay Taylor, a former Mayor and current property owner, expressed concerns that this situation might have serious implications for the Township Council. Reflecting on the family’s history, Henry shared, “We’ve weathered so many crises—losing my grandfather in a house fire, for instance—yet we’ve managed to keep this farm running as a tight-knit family operation.”

Henry, along with his brother Christopher, has been maintaining the farm since it was acquired in 1850. They currently operate a hobby farm in New Mexico and run the New Jersey property, raising sheep and cattle. “We have no intention of giving up the farm,” Henry insisted during a conversation with reporters.

In June, Henry filed a complaint with the New Jersey Superior Court aiming to block any attempts to seize their land. He mentioned that discussions around “eminent domain”—a legal principle allowing the government to take private land for public use with compensation—have been a central concern.

The farm’s location, surrounded by warehouses and busy roads, seems less than ideal for housing development, yet it appears that the Township Committee has disregarded Henry’s views. Plans to assess the property were moving forward, despite his attempts to halt the process, with an appraiser scheduled for early September.

Interestingly, the farm had not initially been on the Committee’s list for potential acquisitions. Taylor reported that the decision to pursue the farm came only after other landowners declined to sell. Furthermore, Henry noted he received no prior communication regarding discussions about his property before the April letter arrived.

When he got the letter, it seemed the Committee was already aligned with a for-profit housing developer who had approached them. Henry raised concerns about the transparency of these dealings, particularly regarding why the Township exclusively chose one builder instead of exploring multiple options.

For decades, there’s been a partnership with Cranbury Housing Associates, a non-profit dedicated to affordable housing; yet, this time, the Township leaned toward a profit-oriented development strategy. Since 2005, they’ve constructed over 50 units in collaboration with CHA, but the current project could involve substantial land acquisition fees and costs.

There are questions about how the new plan is being financed, and the mayor has not been forthcoming about specific costs associated with the pending development. Taylor suggested that rather than choosing for-profit developers, the Township could have worked with non-profits that have a long-standing commitment to community-focused housing.

Despite the challenges presented, Henry and Taylor remain hopeful but acknowledge the lengthy legal process they may face. “This isn’t a partisan issue. It’s about what’s right for the farm’s legacy and the future of our community,” Taylor noted. Efforts to support Henry have garnered local attention, with fundraising initiatives to assist with legal fees. The struggle to protect the farm from development continues to unfold.