WolfeNotes.com

If we had a functioning press corps, I would not have to write this note this morning.

Senator Barbara Buono

In an important speech last night in Atlantic City, Senator Buono harshly criticized Governor Christie’s conservative ideology and personal ambition.

I strongly share those views and think that they should be a major focus of the campaign.

But I know that the newspapers will not frame the issues that way or even cover the content, so, although I am no political reporter or partisan advocate or pundit, here we are.

I’ll try to fill the gap in the crap that passes for journalism. Stuff like this, which not only is superficial, but curiously managed to fill half a story about Senator Buono’s speech with Gov. Christie’s quotes. I guess the “professionals” call that “balance”).

Last night in Atlantic City, Senator Barbara Buono took charge of the Democratic Party and presented a speech that outlined her vision of the campaign challenge against Governor Christie.

Buono began with allusions to FDR’s New Deal, JFK’s New Frontier, and the Civil Rights and Voting Rights Acts.  Buono struck these historical chords to summon what some refer to as the “democratic wing of the democratic party” (the lazy and cynical reporters call this “appealing to the base”).

But,  more significantly, Buono framed the campaign as a clash of ideology – which is something that news reporters and editors seems to not understand and virtually never report.

So here is the key excerpt of the speech -

Let’s hope that Buono continues to hammer away at exactly this set of issues (Christie’s achilles heel) and can manage to provide real life concrete illustrations of how political ideology impacts the daily lives of real people.

Buono recognized this communication and political challenge  by saying “I know we can’t do this on platitudes alone.”

This remark shows realism and maturity and provides a sharp contrast with Gov. Christie’s reliance on slogans and YouTube moment demagoguery, that mask his right wing policy agenda.

I say – keep on bringing it Barbara!

(Full speech text courtesy of BlueJersey)

Today in New Jersey a radical agenda – ruled by conservative ideology and funded by corporate interests – has those values – our values – under assault. And Governor Christie and Republicans in the Legislature are on the front lines.

While he should be thinking about what’s best in our interest here in New Jersey, behind each and every decision Chris Christie makes is the goal of pandering to right-wing conservatives or fulfilling his own national ambitions.

How else can you explain that in New Jersey – a blue state, a progressive state, a state that hasn’t sent a Republican to the U.S. Senate in four decades – teachers, police officers, and fire fighters – our heroes – are vilified?

There’s no other way to explain how working folks fighting for fair representation are portrayed as a drain on our system, how seniors are pitted against public workers and millionaires are put before the middle class.

Our working people, our children, and our seniors – my parents always taught me to stand up and fight for them.

They’re the reason I got involved in politics in the first place.

They’re the reason I embraced the Democratic Party years ago.

But for Chris Christie, they are a mere stepping stone on the road to Washington.

Martin: DEP Programs “temporarily put on hold … in order to staff  two major [Sandy] initiatives”

Last week, during the DEP budget hearing, DEP Commissioner  Martin was asked point blank about how he managed to perform a lot of new Sandy response and recovery work, with a smaller staff and lower budget, without cutbacks in other environmental programs.

“How do you do it?” incredulous legislators asked. What DEP work is not getting done?

But Martin insisted that he had maintained existing DEP programs and was able to do more with less. Martin attributed this alleged huge productivity increase  to his “transformation” initiative and various technology and streamlined permit processing reforms.

Listening to this bullshit led me to question Marin’s honesty  (see “DEP Delivers Enron Testimony on Budget”)

Well, just days after that testimony, Martin wrote the following memo to his DEP staff – which expose the lies in his testimony.

Has it now become acceptable to mislead legislators?

Here’s the smoking gun memo by Martin, laying out his plan to transfer staff (emphasis in boldface are mine).

Legislators should call him back for additional testimony on what programs will suffer from Martin’s staff transfers – how many transfers, from what programs? What will be the environmental impacts? Are staff qualified for the new work?

What legislative authority and budget allocations are being used to justify this “rebuilding” work? 

From:
Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2013
To: DEP Commissioner
Subject: DEP’s Role in Rebuilding New Jersey

As you all know, the number one priority of Governor Christie and this entire Administration is the recovery and rebuilding of New Jersey in the wake of Superstorm Sandy. Many of you have contributed by assisting within your current programs or in different programs that needed more help. Together we have overseen the removal of more than 8 million tons of household and vegetative debris and sand from our streets. Our waterway debris contractors are currently removing everything from pieces of buildings and household debris to boats, docks, boardwalks and trees—working seven days a week to get the job done. We have developed guidelines for the demolition of Sandy-damaged houses to ensure that towns are eligible for FEMA reimbursement. We have worked closely with towns to provide interim shore protection for damaged beaches while we continue to work with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to create a statewide shore protection system. We have expedited our permitting processes so homes and boardwalks could be rebuilt. We have been providing expertise and working hand-in-hand with municipal leaders to help guide their towns to recovery.

Many of you are not aware of the fact that we have two additional recovery activities that are about to begin: the buyout of properties for homeowners that do not wish to rebuild, and performing federally required environmental and historic reviews so that our sister State agencies can release HUD dollars for rebuilding, small business assistance, reconstruction, assistance to blighted communities, resettlement, elevation of homes and flood risk mitigation.  These are two very important projects that are beginning in the next week, and they address some of the pain and personal challenges that have impacted our residents, businesses and vacationers.

In order to ensure we can process the 10,000-plus applications that DEP will be responsible for during the period within which the State is required to spend the $1.8 billion of HUD funding, I will transfer staff to assist Fawn McGee, who will head up the acquisition program; to Donna Mahon, who will head up the environmental assessment program; and to Scott Brubaker, who will head up the hazardous mitigation grant program.

As part of our transformation process, Deputy Commissioner Kropp and the Assistant Commissioners have had multiple discussions about how we can streamline, make more efficient or temporarily put on hold certain operations in certain programs in order to staff these two major initiatives. The Assistant Commissioners will be reaching out to those program managers and staff who will be transferred to help implement these critical programs.

I understand that every person in DEP is dedicated to the job he or she is currently performing. However, we all must focus on the families, individuals and small businesses that need our help during this second phase of New Jersey’s long-term recovery. I am proud of the work that DEP has accomplished already in our response, recovery and rebuilding efforts. We must continue to put all of our time, experience, expertise and resources to use in meeting this priority.

Thank you for your continued efforts.

Bob Martin
Commissioner

 Wild & Scenic

Delaware River “Hot Dog Man” Update

All hell seems to be breaking loose in response to press coverage of the fact that DEP is seeking a $140,000 lease (with $2 per Delaware River tuber) for the D&R Canal State Park Delaware River access lease now used by the “Hot Dog Man”:

Delaware River tubing company must pay at least $140,000 to continue operating

 

While Greg Crance might be known as the “Hot Dog Man,”this wasn’t quite the type of pickle he was looking for.

Crance, owner of Kingwood Township-based Delaware River Tubing Inc., has recently learned that in order to keep running his river tubing business of 11 years, he’ll have to pony up at least $140,000 to the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection to obtain exclusive commercial use of the boat launch he uses along a stretch of D&R Canal State Park.

In past years, Crance said, all that was needed to operate was a $200 special permit use.

Last year, he didn’t pay anything. This year, the DEP is seeking bids of at least $140,000.

Last summer, I learned about this dispute and viewed it as a perfect example of DEP’s failure to enforce environmental laws in order to generate revenues from lease/concessions fees under the new Christie State Parks funding policy. I wrote:

So, why has DEP not taken enforcement action for this egregious violation (which triggered a cease and desist order by the USACE, an organization not known for environmental sensitivity)?

The reason DEP has looked the other way on blatant violations is because DEP has adopted Governor Christie’s vision and pauper policy for the State parks.

Governor Christie’s  “Sustainable Parks Funding Strategy” (see also Governor Christie’ press release) seeks to maximize concession revenues in State parks and to privatize commercial revenue generating operations in State parks.

The head of DEP’s Parks and Natural Resource programs, Assistant Commissioner Rich Boornazian,  is a former real estate hack, with no environmental training or experience.

At the same time, DEP has failed to collect lease revenues from major corporate Parks land users, like oil and gas pipelines and electric power transition lines (see this from our friends at PEER:

FAIR MARKET VALUE LEASES COULD FUND JERSEY PARK SYSTEM — Shale Gas Pipeline Highlights State’s Failure to Collect Full Payments from Utilities

… Over the last several years, a series of audits by the Office of Legislative Services found major flaws in the DEP Office of Leases and Concessions, most notably its failure to charge fair market value or collect overdue lease and concession payments. In response to these audits and PEER advocacy, the Legislature mandated that DEP “conduct a re-appraisal of the rents and fees charged for all residences and other buildings and structures, and for utility easements and right-of-ways, located on State park or forest lands to ensure they reflect current fair market values and will continue to do so” (P.L. 2008, c.31).  DEP was then supposed to integrate this with its plan to fund state parks and forests, a plan due on July 1, 2009.More than two years after this statutory deadline, DEP has done neither mandated task.  Instead the Christie administration has explored a number of small revenue measures to commercialize parks, such as selling corporate naming rights for park facilities and privatizing various park operations.“As this new lease richly demonstrates, charging fair market value for utility easements from the energy industry, as the state is required to do, would be a major funding source for depleted parks and state lands budgets,” Wolfe added.  “If the Christie managers want to run the state more like a business, it should start by collecting the rents truly owed.  Doing this basic job would eliminate the need to panhandle in the parks with chintzy privatization schemes.”

(see also: DEP Parks Funding Plan Can Start By Collecting The Rent)

So, instead of collecting rents owned by their corporate friends, the Christie DEP increases user fees (e.g. new boat ramp launch fees) and promotes illegal and destructive schemes like “The Hot Dog Man”.

This is what happens under DEP Commissioner Martin’s vision of DEP promoting economic development and revenue producing private concessions in state parks.

Looks like my initial take was right on point – DEP is seeking to expand revenue from the operation, and that desire for revenue sure seems to be over-riding the environmental concerns with this operation. (Yes, I read the DEP RFP and noted that it does require compliance with DEP permits, something that did not and does not now exist – there are no DEP stream encroachment or other permits issued to this project, as far as I know).

So, let me lay out my larger take here:

I am not opposed to DEP levying lease/concession and access fees on a commercial operation in a State Park, like the Hot Dog Man operation.

And I do not think that $140,000 is too much to pay for that lease or that $2 per tuber who use that commercial operation is too much to pay.

What I see as the problems here are:

1) The Christie privatization and State lands/Parks fee policy encourages commercial operations in State Parks. This is not right. Parks should not rely on commercial lease and concession fees – or even entrance or user fees – to survive.

Parks are a public obligation that should be funded by the General Fund and free to all users.

Commercial operations are incompatible – in almost all locations – with public Parks and many state lands.

In places where low impact commercial operations are compatible with the Park mission, functions, and environmental setting, then they should pay the full costs their operations impose on the public sector (not just State costs, but local as well) and Parks operations, plus an above market rate premium from the profits of the operation. This is only fair, because the public park/state land itself and its location are the primary creator of the commercial viability of the operation.

2) The Christie policy subsidizes uses of public lands that are environmentally destructive and totally inappropriate and incompatible with the integrity of public lands, like oil & gas pipeline and electric transmission lines.

These uses should be banned (new uses) or existing severely restricted as an option of last resort – while paying huge fees not only for environmental destruction and mitigation, but a significant percentage of the profits derived from the use. This approach will discourage the siting and use of public lands for these kind of inappropriate uses, instead of encouraging it.

3) If General Fund support and huge fees were collected from highly profitable existing commercial operations – like oil, gas, and electric transmission – were dedicated to parks and public lands, then there would be no need to collect fees from park users, river tubers, or Kayak and boat access.

4) DEP needs to strictly enforce all environmental laws on state lands – that is not happening right now.

5) The Delaware River is a Congressionally designated Wild & Scenic River (from Trenton north). This designation and the management plan apply to the entire river corridor, including not just the river and water quality, but scenic, historic transportation, cultural, natural resources, and recreational attributes and issues.

I have not reviewed the management plan in any depth, but my initial impression is that while I support public access and low impact recreational uses of the river, a commercial operation of the scale and type of Hot Dog Man is not compatible with a Wild & Scenic designation.

And I wish they would ban jet ski’s and all motorized boats on the river.

End of sermon.

[Update 5/15/13: it's no longer "zero" media - Tom Johnson at NJ Spotlight wrote a good story:  Bill Would Enforce Environmental Justice, Keep Polluters out of Poor Urban Areas

I testified in support of the bill and promised to provide the Committee relevant documents to rebut misleading and inaccurate testimony by Hal Bozarth from the Chemsistry Council. I will write on that later today.  end update]

Of course I am a longtime supporter of stronger gun safety laws and proponent of GLBT equality and civil rights.

Still, this post is very likely to piss off my friends in those communities and be perceived as resentment of the fact that environmental issues are not on anyone’s radar, but let me be blunt: the current dominant focus by Democrats on guns and gays, while the right thing to do and in some ways politically effective in challenging Gov. Christie, is missing huge opportunities, and raising issues of political strategy, focus, timing, and coordination.

Jobs, living wages, global warming, urban neglect, and Governor Christie’s attacks on public education, the middle class, protections of the environment and public health, and affordable housing should be the central issues focus of Gubernatorial Candidate Senator Barbara Buono’s campaign and the policy agenda of Democrats who control the Legislature.

Governor Christie’s record is terrible on these bread and butter issues that resonate with NJ voters – and he is hugely vulnerable on ALL of them.

I may be missing things, but from my perspective, those issues need to get more focused and substantive attention.

Democrats need to get much, much better, and not just on coordinating message, but on the substance of policy, effective criticism of the Christie Administration – particularly the timing of events.

Let me give just one example of what was and what could have been.

Yesterday, Assemblywoman Spencer, Chair of the Assembly Environment Committee, posted extremely important and long overdue “environmental justice” legislation (see A3836).

For the first time, the bill would put teeth in the empty rhetoric that Governors and DEP have been allowed to get away with for years.

Despite years of studies, activism, and litigation –  including the fact DEP themselves, almost  4 years ago, issued a Report that found statistically significant correlations between race and poverty and 9 indicators of pollution and public health health (see:  DEP Discovers Discrimination – Dumps Environmental Justice Issue in Christie’s Lap), in New Jersey, EJ issues have been ignored in the DEP regulatory arena and little progress made.

The EJ issue is not only morally compelling, but passage of the Spencer EJ bill could have concrete and positive impacts on the daily lives of thousands of predominantly poor and minority residents, who bear disproportionate health burdens from pollution.

Powerful testimony was offered by longtime urban EJ community activists and a religious leader – they have been ignored by Governor Christie and made little progress on their issues before the DEP.

This was their moment!

It could have and should have been leveraged and magnified – and used to contrast progressive Democratic values with the ideological and pro-corporate Christie agenda.

Imagine the response if former EPA Administrator Jackson – who has won awards for her leadership on environmental justice - and Corey Booker – a nationally prominent black urban leader – along with a couple of hundred activists, cameras rolling and press in tow, held a State House press conference prior to Spencer’s hearing and then later testified in support of her bill!

Instead, Senate Dems focused on a gun bill and Buono and Booker did an gun safety event at a Newark Baptist Church, which got great press – all while Chairwoman Spencer – who is from Newark – had zero media coverage of her EJ bill, which didn’t even have the votes to leave a democratically controlled committee.

So, the EJ bill was a blown opportunity. It didn’t have to be that way. Let’s hope Spencer gets more support next time the bill gets heard in her Committee.

And that’s not the only recent example of political malpractice I could cite.

We just passed 400 ppm, a milestone that could been used as a millstone around Christie’s neck, given his climate change policy and clean energy fund diversions. Instead, we’ve got crickets from Dems on the climate change issue.

Dems can and must do better.

Environmental Groups Unified in Support of Barnes’ Regional Planning Legislation

[updated, below in text]

Proposed legislation (A3920) to create a 19 member Coastal Commission to oversee land use planning and zoning, environmental regulation, and reconstruction of the NJ shore was released from the Assembly Environment Committee yesterday by a 4-2 vote. The two Republicans on the Committee (Schepisi and Rudder) followed Governor Christie’s lead and opposed the bill. (listen to the hearing here.)

The participatory and deliberative public planning process envisioned by the bill is a sharp contrast to Governor Christie’s governing approach to Sandy recovery.

Christie has consolidated policy and decision-making power in his Coastal Czar, Mark Ferzan, and virtually dictated unilateral “Action Plans” developed behind closed doors by his Department of Community Affairs for spending billions of dollars appropriated by Congress for Sandy recovery. To expedite rebuilding, Christie and his DEP have deregulated reconstruction of infrastructure (in the same vulnerable locations and at the same elevations, repeating the mistakes of the past and virtually guaranteeing future wipeout), exempted rebuilding from DEP permit reviews, and relied exclusively on elevating rebuilding to the new (and inadequate) FEMA Advisory Base Flood Elevations. Christie also has ignored climate change and sea level rise, rejecting them as “esoteric issues” he has no time for.

Assemblyman Barnes (D-Middlesex), the prime sponsor, emphasized that his legislation originally was the vision of former Republican Governor Tom Kean, a man Barnes praised as an intellectual and thoughtful public policy expert and advocate of good government, regional planning, and environmental protection. Barnes spoke highly of how, in the late 1980′s, Gov. Kean proposed legislation to create a Coastal Commission. But that effort, by an extremely popular and powerful governor, was blocked by powerful special interests and the development lobby who then controlled – and still dominate – the NJ Legislature.

In the wake of Sandy, finally recognizing that NJ can no longer rely on parochial local interests and flawed site specific DEP CAFRA regulation, the bill finds that:

New Jersey’s shore area is a vital component of the economy, welfare, and cultural landscape of the State and the existing land use and environmental regulatory system cannot adequately protect the region

The bill drew praise and strong support from virtually all of NJ’s environmental groups, including the typically more moderate coastal and conservation groups that have been close to Governor Christie, including Clean Ocean Action, American Littoral Society, and NJ Audubon Society. Tim Dillingham of ALS gave particularly articulate and compelling testimony. Going forward, it will be interesting to see if these groups mobilize their members in a serious effort to back the bill, which is a heavy lift and will require a major battle to pass (and overcome a likely veto by Governor Christie, if Democrats can get on the same page before the election).

I also supported the bill, but, because this is the beginning of the legislative process and the bill will be amended significantly, did not get into the policy weeds. There will be plenty of time to work with Assemblyman Barnes, the sponsor, who recognizes that his bill will spur much needed public dialogue with diverse perspectives on these critical issues.

But from a big picture standpoint, as I’ve written here multiple times (see this and this and this and this) the bill needs significant revisions to more effectively and explicitly address climate change, vulnerability assessment and adaptation, and protective regulatory policies on water resources, public access, and coastal natural resources. The bill also needs to be expanded to include the Delaware Bayshore, which is already within the delineated CAFRA regulated and federally designated  ”coastal zone”

Creation of a Coastal Commission also has been supported by professional planning groups like NJ Future and former DEP Commissioner Mauriello, a coastal expert, both of whom did not testify yesterday, but are expected to support the legislation.

[Update: 5/16/13 - NJ Future Op-Ed on Sandy rebuild "resiliency" does not mention a Coastal Commission. NJF previously testified to Senate Budget Committee on February 11, 2013 in support of a Coastal Commission and they did polling on a regional planning approach. So, it looks like pure partisan politics have over-ridden their judgement in support of good planning and compromised their prior support of a Commission.  I suspected that when they did not testify at the hearing.  If in fact that is true, i.e. that they do not support a Coastal Commission now, that would be a major blow to their integrity. Just sayin' - end update]

The position of other key coastal players, like recreational and commercial fishing groups, boaters, outdoor recreational businesses, scientists and research institutions, surfers, Barnegat Bay and watershed groups, good government groups like the League of Women Voters, tourism, and the sea food industry is not known at this time, as none testified on the bill.

The bill was opposed by the League of Municipalities and of course the NJ Builders Association.

The League defended local home rule land use powers that the bill would eliminate and shift to the regional Coastal Commission. The League’s planner used surprising harsh language to denounce the bill as a “radical” initiative that would spawn litigation and gridlock, despite the fact that the concept was proposed by a moderate Republican Governor and the bill itself is based on longstanding and extremely successful regional planning bodies in the Hackensack Meadowlands, Pinelands, and Highlands.

Instead, the League recommended an alternative approach, whereby DEP would develop a non-regulatory Shore Master Plan to guide towns and beef up CAFRA regulation. I assume that they were referring to Senator Van Drew’s bill (S 2575) that would require DEP to update the Shore Protection Master Plan.

The League did have one positive suggestion, and that was to hold public hearings on the bill along the shore to seek the input of coastal communities. I’m sure that that will happen and the sooner the better. Legislators should not wait for their annual summer special joint environment committee shore hearings in Toms River – they should move now to schedule hearings on the bill now and through the summer and into the fall.

I urge folks to read the bill and work with one of the many environmental groups supporting the bill.

First step – get a Senate sponsor and get the bill moving in the Senate – perhaps Senator Kean (R) would like to follow in his father’s footsteps and build a legacy – and show that Republicans still care about the environment, are not merely loyal lapdogs of Governor Christie, and want to protect the future of the shore.

More to come on this.

[Update: press coverage:

Kirk Moore, Asbury Park Press:  Assembly environment committee releases Coastal Commission bill

Sarah Watson, Press of Atlantic City:  New Jersey legislation would create state coastal commission

Tom Johnson, NJ Spotlight: Democrats Want Coastal Commission to Oversee Rebuilding of Jersey Shore - For GOP, bill would just add another layer of bureaucracy, slowing push to restore the Shore

Citing a study by a university planner, Bill Wolfe, executive director of the New Jersey chapter of Public Environmental Employees for Responsibility, warned that the state needs to change its policies. “New Jersey has become the laboratory of how not to develop your coast,’’ he told the committee.

Sorry, the Star Ledger, as predicted, was AWOL and – you can’t make this shit up – too busy writing about the Eagles Cheerleaders shore calendar and Prince Harry and the roller coaster and Angelina Jolie’s breasts. Now, there’s a revealing set of journalistic priorities if I even saw one – it’s called “tabloid”.

In fairness, exactly as I predicted, the Ledger’s shore reporter covered the Supreme Court case and the State House reporter actually wrote TWO stories about bills that moved yesterday, one from the same COmmittee, but curiously did NOT write about the Coastal Commission bill. I don’t think that’s an accident because they are terrible on land use issues and rarely report policy stories, especially those that challenge Governor Christie.