Across the United States, proposed industrial projects are pitting elected officials against developers, and now those behind the construction plans are coming up with strategies to deal with political opposition.

NAIOP New Jersey, the state’s main trade group for the commercial real estate industry, held a panel on preempting local opposition to industrial development that was very much about how politics play into the picture. Some elected officials fear consequences of approving warehouse projects — including being ousted from office — in their communities, according to Tony Pizzutillo, a government affairs consultant for NAIOP, and some fellow panelists.

Local planning boards and mayors have told developers seeking approval for warehouses that “we are going to reject your application because of public safety, and default to the judiciary,” even when the proposed development complies with municipal zoning regulations, he said. In those instances, the cases wind up in court. New approaches are needed to get a better outcome, panelists said.

While concerns and opposition to the growth of warehouses that handle increasing online shopping has spanned from California to the U.S. Northeast, New Jersey has one of the nation's most in-demand and growing logistics markets. With it has come opposition from grassroots groups against what they describe as “warehouse sprawl.” Those activists typically voice concerns about the truck traffic, noise, potential pollution, the environment and elimination of green space that they say follows the creation of distribution hubs.

By contrast, developers and some politicians laud the logistics business as a golden goose for New Jersey — generating jobs and revenue for the state — and shouldn’t be thwarted. The Garden State has become ground zero for the national face-off between proponents and opponents of industrial development.

Towns in some parts of the nation have imposed limits, even moratoriums, on warehouse development. In New Jersey, proposed legislation to control their construction on a statewide level has so far failed, though the state’s Planning Commission has issued nonmandatory guidelines for municipalities to look to for guidance on industrial projects.

Anti-warehouse activists are highly vocal and “and tend to bring to state lawmakers misinformation as well as distortions that overlook any net benefit” of industrial projects, according to Pizzutillo. Industrial developers and groups such as NAIOP New Jersey need to make their case to those lawmakers, he said.

And merely arguing that a warehouse will generate tax revenue for a municipality isn’t enough to convince some skeptics and residents, according to Mark Shearer, a senior managing director for Rockefeller Group and president of NAIOP’s Garden State chapter.

“One thing that we’ve learned is that going in and saying you’ll" provide developments that give taxes to local governments "is about worthless,” said Shearer, the panel's moderator.

About a half-dozen bills regarding warehouse development have been introduced in New Jersey, and those proposed pieces of legislation “vary bizarrely in different ways that actually don’t make good public policy,” according to Pizzutillo. He said he doesn’t see those restrictions getting traction, and then he looked into the future.

Using New Jersey as an example, he said state lawmakers are on summer recess and won’t be back until after the Nov. 7 general election. From the election to the middle of January will be the lame-duck session at the governing body, a period of “troubled waters,” according to Pizzutillo. Politicians who won't be remaining in office sometimes feel free to make unpopular decisions during such times, he said.

“That’s where things can be done that typically are not politically feasible during a regular session, especially with a number of legislators retiring this year, a record number,” Pizzutillo said.

He added that he nonetheless felt confident that warehouse restrictions wouldn’t be an issue, with some lawmakers coming around to NAIOP’s position that there should be a regional planning approach in New Jersey to various kinds of development, not just warehouse projects.

The panelists agreed that developers need to be preemptive and get out in front of local opposition to warehouse projects, meeting with residents to get their input and identifying and communicating with area leaders, elected and otherwise.

“Find out who the key players are,” said Richard Levesque, a public relations specialist with MikeWorldWide. He added that “everyone’s looking toward the next election, next November, and that’s really driving a lot of decision-making going on.”

Scot Murdoch, a partner at KSS Architects, said developers “have to control the narrative or it gets control for us, and that’s before we even land in the meetings,” and perhaps even make concessions in their plans in response to what’s important to a town.

“We have to get out there and show this [industrial project] is a place that’s actually contributing to the communities in which they’re serving,” Murdoch said.

In New Jersey, warehouse development has now flowed into the southern, more rural part of the state, upsetting some residents.

“Everyone whose been living in these communities perceives it as farmland — they’re entitled — and suddenly they didn’t realize it was zoned industrial [and] a massive complex goes up,” Murdoch said.

There are ways to address concerns about such projects, like pulling back the proposed building from the edge of the property or installing screening around it, he said. Developers also need to “help communities understand that not everybody is an Amazon, and even if they are, not every Amazon facility is exactly the same as the other,” Murdoch said.