Making the environment a priority – where is the leadership?
More signs of erosion of environmental protection
As the summer winds down and we head into the Labor Day weekend, the recent closure of Delaware Bay shellfisheries, proliferation of jellyfish, and wash-up of medical waste that closed Cape May beaches highlight the critical importance of protecting our environment (see: Avalon’s beaches shut again over waste http://www.pressofatlanticcity.com/186/story/237553.html
State hunts dumpers of medical waste off Avalon
http://www.nj.com/news/ledger/jersey/index.ssf?/base/news-11/1219725396143840.xml&coll=1
Few seem to recall that in the wake of a series of revolting medical waste washups along the shore, in the spring of 1989 Governor Tom Kean signed the Medical Waste Management Act. That law put in place a comprehensive program at DEP to oversee proper disposal of medical waste. (see: http://www.state.nj.us/dep/dshw/hwr/medinfo.htm
Since then, DEP budgets have been slashed, and as a direct result, monitoring and enforcement have been eroded.
Bad things – like medical waste on the beach – tend to happen when DEP budgets are cut and monitoring and enforcement are scaled back. This is no different than when the State Trooper and his radar gun are not there: people tend to speed.
Back in the 1990’s former Governor Whitman was slashing DEP budgets and rolling back regulations and enforcement. Whitman cuts to the Shellfish Sanitation Program – which assures the safety of our seafood – caused the federal government to threaten to ban NJ’s ability to ship shellfish in interstate markets. Prompted by mobilized public concern – a group of NJ Senate Republicans stood up and literally drew a line in the sand (see extraordinary letter below).
To put a halt to this shortsighted attack on the environment, seven republican Senators representing shore districts very publicly and clearly said:
DEAR GOVERNOR WHITMAN:
Among all the responsibilities of government, there are few of greater importance, or of more concern to the public than the protection of New Jersey’s environment and the quality of public health….
We are greatly concerned that your proposed budget for fiscal year 1997 does not adequately provide the necessary resources to State government to meet the environmental challenges facing the State.”
Those Senators acted on that demand by restoring $19 million to DEP that had been slashed by Whitman. But Whitman impounded these funds and refused to spend them as appropriated by the Legislature for restoring DEP budget cuts. In response, these same Senators bypassed the Governor and led the charge to amend the Constitution to dedicate 4% of corporate business taxes to environmental programs ($90-$100 million per year).
Fast forward to our current situation.
Current Governor Corzine has cut DEP budgets 3 years in a row and driven many career professionals into early retirement. A maximum of 10% of lost staff positions can be refilled and through retirement DEP and the public lose irreplaceable experienced professionals that are DEP’s institutional memory. At the same time, critical new challenges – like global warming and chemical plant safety – demand additional resources.
Where is the mobilized public outrage at the erosion of the agency that protects public health and the environment? Where is the leadership?
EXHIBIT 1
NEW JERSEY SENATE
Trenton, NJ, May 16, 1996.
The HONORABLE CHRISTINE TODD WHITMAN, Governor,
State of New Jersey
State House CN-001
Trenton, NJ 08625-0001
DEAR GOVERNOR WHITMAN:
Among all the responsibilities of government, there are few of greater importance, or of more concern to the public than the protection of New Jersey’s environment and the quality of public health. We know that protecting these important concerns, and carrying out these responsibilities through appropriate State actions and support is a priority you share with the Legislature and the general public. It is in recognition of that shared commitment to protecting New Jersey’s environment and public health that we write to you today.
We are greatly concerned that your proposed budget for fiscal year 1997 does not adequately provide the necessary resources to State government to meet the environmental challenges facing the State. This is especially true in the proposed funding for the Department of Environmental Protection.
The proposed budget would require dramatic reductions in scientific, technical and human resources critical to the mission of the Department. In a State facing the environmental issues New Jersey does, we need to respond aggressively to the challenges of insuring that our air is safe to breath, the water safe to drink or the empty lot next door safe to play in. It is highly questionable as to whether the Department will maintain the requisite expertise and resources under the fiscal year 1997 budget proposal to answer these questions and respond in a way protective of public health and the environment.
We are also concerned that the proposed reduction in resources will not fulfill the new approaches to environmental protection. The successful implementation of the initiatives under discussion will require additional resources above and beyond those currently available to the DEP. Many of the ”reengineering” initiatives being undertaken by the Department will be fundamentally handicapped by the proposed reductions in resources contained in the current budget proposal.
Due to these concerns we feel that it is important that you be aware we may not be able to support this budget proposal, should it come before the Senate in its current form The historical erosion of staffing at the Department experienced over past important that you be aware we may not be able to support this budget proposal, should it come before the Senate in its current form The historical erosion of staffing at the Department experienced over past budget cycles cannot be continued because the environmental goals we have outlined above will not be attainable.
We feel strongly that the proposed layoffs of DEP personnel will negatively impact the Department’s ability to effectively safeguard the environment and protect public health. Therefore, we cannot support a final DEP budget which contains employee
layoffs.
We are, of course, committed to working with you to restore the resources we feel are necessary to carry out the critical functions of the Department of Environmental Protection We feel that it is very possible to identity appropriate resources, sources of funding and approaches to achieve this, and we ask for the opportunity to explore these with you and your staff.
Respectfully yours,
JOHN O. BENNETT,
Senate Majority Leader.
ANDREW R. CIESIA,
Senator.
JOSEPH M. KYRILLOS,
Senator.
HENRY P. MCNAMARA,
Senator.
JOSEPH A. PALAIA,
President Pro Tempore.
JACK G. SINAGRA,
Senator.
ROBERT W. SINGER,
Senator.
Link to full transcript of US Senate Confirmation Hearing of Christine Todd Whitman as US EPA Administrator: (this letter @ page 123-124) http://bulk.resource.org/gpo.gov/hearings/107s/69822.pdf
This is an example of inspirational leadership:
Woman paddled to D.C., urging support of ocean-friendly bill
Messenger returns
By TERRY GAUTHIER MUESSIG
STAFF WRITER
For 16 days, Margo Pellegrino paddled her way from New Jersey to Washington, D.C.
Her mission in July was to bring a message in a bottle — the message for Congress to pass a bill known as Oceans 21, designed to encourage healthy seas by promoting environmental awareness in the classroom.
“The message was in a milk bottle I found in the Rancocas (Creek) near Camden,” Pellegrino said.
Last year, Pellegrino paddled from Miami to Maine.
During that trip and this one, she said, she has seen huge clumps of algae.
For link to full article: see today’s Asbury Park Press at app.com
(this site seems to prohibit posting of links in comments)
Statements like:
“Bad things – like medical waste on the beach – tend to happen when DEP budgets are cut and monitoring and enforcement are scaled back. This is no different than when the State Trooper and his radar gun are not there: people tend to speed.”
are a little lame. What does this mean? – Money will solve the problem? Ann Millgram was caught speeding the other day. With people in charge having no regard for the laws they are suppose to be enforcing – how can you expect enforcement – no matter how much money they have at their disposal? The same is true for DEP they have a thousand bureaucrats in cubes in Trenton with lots of funding for expensive computers in front of them but the lack a management that cares enough or is capable enough to enforce the laws effectively. As the representiative of the NJ Public employees for Environmental Responsibility – i wish that you would focus on the amazing failures of the DEP to meet legal mandates, their growing proclivity to support pay to play deals, and their current effort to systematically water down regulatiory requirements in support of pay to play deal making.
jerseyswamp2 – Lame?
I specifically said “monitoring and enfrorcement are scaled back”. So I am not just advocating funding for more DEP bureaucrats to sit in cubes in trenton and twiddle theri thumbs.
ENFORCE THE LAW. Is that clear enough?
To cite Millgram speading as an example of lack of respect for the alw is silly. Have you never broken a speed limit?
I have focused EXTENSIVELY on DEP failures to enforce laws effectively. See my website at http://www.peer.org
In fact, I have done FAR more in holding DEP accountable for their failures than all other state envrionmental groups combined.
Suggest you focus your criticism elsewhere. You’re calling the most aggressive advocate in the state lame. WTF are you thinking?