New Jersey Senate Bill S3651

New Jersey 2026-2027 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/24/26
• Refer: 2/24/26

Caption

"Disaster Victims Protection Act"; requires Governor to allocate federal and State disaster aid to municipalities in proportion to amount of catastrophic physical damage sustained within each municipality.

Summary

S3651, the “Disaster Victims Protection Act,” would require the Governor to give priority consideration to municipalities in proportion to the amount of physical damage they sustained when allocating federal Community Development Block Grant-Disaster Recovery (CDBG-DR) funds or State disaster relief funds. The bill applies when the Governor has discretion in creating a federal action plan or otherwise distributing disaster aid, and it directs that municipal funding priority be based, as far as practicable under federal requirements, on relative catastrophic physical damage. The bill is framed around lessons from Hurricane Sandy and New Jersey’s use of federal recovery dollars. Its findings state that while the state and many counties were affected, some municipalities were far more severely damaged than others, yet aid was sometimes distributed based on county designation rather than the level of damage in each municipality. The bill seeks to ensure that residents, businesses, and local rebuilding efforts in the hardest-hit municipalities receive aid more commensurate with their losses before funds are directed to less-damaged areas or broader redevelopment projects.

Impact

If enacted, the bill would add a statutory requirement governing how the Governor allocates disaster recovery funds, including both federal CDBG-DR money and State disaster aid, when there is discretion in the distribution process. It would not create a new funding program, but would change the priority framework for allocating existing disaster resources by tying municipal funding priority to the degree of physical damage sustained. The practical effect would be to influence state disaster recovery plans, municipal eligibility rankings, and the distribution of aid among affected local governments, residents, and businesses, subject to federal funding rules.

Sentiment

The bill’s stated purpose and framing are strongly supportive of a fairness- and equity-based approach to disaster recovery. The text emphasizes that the most heavily damaged communities should receive the most relief, and it presents the measure as a corrective to prior allocations that allegedly favored less-damaged municipalities. No committee transcripts or recorded votes are provided, so there is no additional evidence of formal support or opposition beyond the bill’s own rationale.

Contention

The main point of contention is the allocation method itself: whether disaster aid should be distributed primarily by municipal damage severity or through broader county-based or programmatic planning that may also support housing, redevelopment, and economic projects in less-damaged areas. Supporters of the bill’s approach would likely argue that aid should track actual physical harm and urgent need, while opponents may argue that rigid proportionality could reduce administrative flexibility, conflict with federal CDBG-DR requirements, or limit the state’s ability to pursue region-wide recovery goals. The bill also implicitly raises concerns about how damage would be measured and how much discretion the Governor would retain under federal constraints.