Search Site
The New Jersey Beach Access Saga Continues

In a much anticipated decision that came down on Tuesday, December 22, 2015, the Appellate Division of the Superior Court of New Jersey found that the 2012 beach access rules constructed by the Christie Administrative were invalid. The three-judge panel declared the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (“DEP”) was not authorized to promulgate the rules, siding with two nonprofit environmental groups arguing for public access rights to the State’s beaches. Hackensack Riverkeeper, Inc. and NY/NJ Baykeeper v. New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, Docket No. A-1752-12T3 (App. Div. Dec. 22, 2015) (hereinafter, “Riverkeeper”).

After Borough of Avalon v. New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection. 403 N.J. Super. 590, 595 (App. Div. 2008), certif. denied, 199 N.J. 133 (2009) (hereinafter, “Avalon”), a case in which the Appellate Division held the prior version of the DEP’s beach access rules invalid, the DEP adopted the new Public Access Rules. 44 N.J.R. 2559(a) (Nov. 5, 2012) (the “2012 Rules”).

In Avalon, the court considered a municipality’s challenge to the 2007 version of the public access rules that required public access to municipal beaches at all times, and that conditioned eligibility on certain appropriations upon a municipality’s agreement to provide additional parking and restrooms along the coastline. 403 N.J. Super. at 595. The court found these rules to be in contrast with the specifically stated authority granted to the municipalities by the legislature, and rejected the argument that the public trust doctrine supported DEP’s authority to regulate municipally-owned beaches. Id. at 600.

In Hackensack, the DEP asserted the argument that the 2012 Rules do not mandate any action by a municipality, but rather encourages cooperation in planning for access. However, the court reasserts its position as provided in Avalon that the public trust doctrine cannot serve as the “fount” of the agency’s regulatory power in the face of a want for statutory authorization.

In doing so, the court specifically rejected the DEP’s claim that Raleigh Ave. Beach Ass’n v. Atlantis Beach Club, Inc., 185 N.J. 40, 51 (2005) “recognized the agency’s independent regulatory authority pursuant to the public trust doctrine.” Instead, in Raleigh Ave. Beach Ass’n, the private property owner’s development of a boardwalk pathway triggered the DEP’s jurisdiction pursuant to the Coastal Area Facility Review Act, N.J.S.A. 13:19-1 to -21 (“CAFRA”). The court also concluded that the DEP could not support the 2012 Rules pursuant to CAFRA, the MLUL or any other statutory authority the DEP attempted to rely upon.

There is dispute regarding the impacts of the court’s holding. For example, while some celebrate this decision as a victory for the common beachgoer in New Jersey, others question whether the decision creates a void in beach access rules for the State.

Lieberman Blecher & Sinkevich’s attorneys have extensive experience in handling beach access cases.  Stuart Lieberman successfully argued one of New Jersey’s seminal beach access cases, Raleigh Avenue Beach Association v. Atlantis Beach Club, Inc., 185 N.J. 40 (2005), before the New Jersey Supreme Court. 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Our Attorneys

Recent Twitter Posts

  • Contaminant May Have Leaked into Aquifer at Site of Planned LNG Terminal in Gibbstown.
    6 days ago
  • Lawmakers move to extend permits for projects derailed by COVID-19.
    2 weeks ago
  • Governor Murphy signs executive order relaxing deadlines for issuing environmental permits during the COVID-19 pand…
    3 weeks ago
  • New Jersey and coalition of states file lawsuit to block EPA's "Navigable Waters Protection Rule."
    3 weeks ago

Recent Blog Posts


This past January, the federal government rolled back its protections of wetlands authorized under the United States Clean Water Act. The “Navigable Waters Protection Rule,” effective on June 22, 2020,
Read More

Our Drinking Water and Water Bodies Prevailed in The Maui decision

When most of us think of Maui, we envision great weather, lush vegetation, tiki bars and beaches. The very last thing that comes to mind are sewer plants and the
Read More
Our Drinking Water and Water Bodies Prevailed in The Maui decision

Published Reports Claims EPA is Hiding True Lead Levels in Drinking Water

APM Reports (from American Public Media) has just released a report on May 4, 2020 that raises some critical questions not only about the quality of the water we are
Read More
Published Reports Claims EPA is Hiding True Lead Levels in Drinking Water

Toxic Mercury in Gym Flooring Used by Our Children

We have a giant mercury exposure problem in our New Jersey schools. Rubberized flooring found in school gyms cracks over time. And some, not all of the flooring products have
Read More
Toxic Mercury in Gym Flooring Used by Our Children

In the media

  • Gulf Coast Town Center facing foreclosure

    Naples Daily News, September 16, 2015

    Wells Fargo filed a lawsuit Sept. 8 against an affiliate of CBL & Associates, the owners of the decadeold, 1.2 million-square-foot mall in south Fort Myers for a $190.9 million unpaid loan. The center has 94 stores on 204 acres, with such anchors as Super Target, Belk, Best Buy, Dick’s Sporting Goods, Marshalls and Costco...

    Read More
  • Town liable for private company's leaking underground tanks, court rules Jul 26, 2017

    CRANFORD -- A couple that owned a businesses in town and became sick from leaking underground tanks owned by an adjacent business can sue the township for damages because the tanks were partially ...

    Read More
  • Dark Waters: How a Class Action Catapulted NJ to Forefront of 'Forever Chemicals' Battle

    NJ Law Journal Jan 09, 2020

    As property owners become increasingly aware of PFAS contamination, and as individuals exposed to PFAS learn of the health risks associated with exposure, liability will likely affect entire supply chains.

    Read More
  1. 1
  2. 2
  3. 3
  4. 4
  5. 5
Contact Our Firm

Quick Contact Form