[Update 2 : 1/27/11 - efforts are being made to stop DEP from burying the site, see today's Trenton Times coverage: Historical society calls city dig site 'endangered]

Update 1: 12/1/10 -  NJ Newsroom coverage:  Commission votes to fill in Petty’s Run archeological site on Statehouse grounds]

Trenton Times story: Plan to bury Trenton archaeological site is blasted]

In an appalling and senseless move to destroy a unique and valuable historical asset, an obscure body called the State Capitol Joint Management Commission voted this morning to kill the Petty’s Run Project.

The 5-2 vote allegedly was based on a recommendation by DEP Commissioner Bob Martin.

But, amazingly, on May 25, 2010, the same DEP Commissioner Bob Martin issued an historic preservation award to the Petty’s Run project, honoring it as an example of “NJ’s best and brightest”:

Petty’s Run Site archaeological explorations public outreach, Trenton, Mercer County

The Petty’s Run archaeological explorations were undertaken as part of the design of the proposed Capital State Park.  Phase 1B of the park, just east of the State House, calls for a series of conserved foundations, restoration of flow to Petty’s Run, and the installation of an operational waterwheel in a 19th century paper-mill wheel pit to educate visitors about water-powered industry around the time of the American Revolution. The park design team realized the work, because of its location, would generate considerable attention. The team used the excavation itself to inform the public about the history of the site. Outreach included a web journal, an on-site interpreter, and periodic site tours and presentations.

The political decision to reverse course and kill the project was not based on any well considered rational plan, alternatives or as a cost savings move. Funding is available and dedicated by the voters, and the costs to close the project exceed those to finish it.

Similar to Christie’s termination of the tunnel to NYC known as “ARC”,  “The state has money for the project that under law cannot be used elsewhere.”

The Capitol Joint Management Commission is Chaired by Governor Christie’s Chief Of Staff, Rich Bagger. News sources indicated that Lt. Governor Guadagno wanted the project killed because she didn’t like the view of it out her State House office window. (see Tom Hester, NJ Newsroom: Lt. Gov. Guadagno wants archeological dig on Statehouse lawn buried

So, while there was virtually zero public awareness or debate on costs or alternatives, the involvement of Bagger and Guadagno and the reversal of DEP’s prior support mean that the decision to kill the project was a political one made by Governor Christie.

Christie’ decision is an affront to NJ’s history and an attack on Trenton and the idea of urban parks in NJ. If defies strong public support for parks for people.

Petty’s Run is an ongoing archaelogical excavation and restoration of a mill that dates to pre-Revolutionary War Trenton of the 1730′s.  

History buffs should visit Pettysrun.org for a description of the archaeological dig and restoration project, with excellent photos.

The Petty’s Run project is an essential element of Trenton’s Capital State Park (click here for Master Plan), which showcases Trenton’s rich history: 

Capital State Park

The State of New Jersey is creating a new urban park in downtown Trenton. Named the Capital State Park and following a master plan created by WRT Design, the initial phase of the park focuses on the area between the State House and the War Memorial and on the strip of land extending up behind the Old Barracks Museum and Thomas Edison State College to West State Street. Ultimately Capital State Park seeks to reconnect the city to the Delaware River and the water resources that have underpinned its growth and prosperity.

 Trenton’s rich history is one of the main themes that will be incorporated into the park design. The area behind the Barracks contains the buried remains of several 18th- and 19th-century industrial sites along Petty’s Run. The goal of the archaeological excavations currently in progress is to inform the park design and devise a means of exposing, stabilizing and displaying the buried ruins as an addition to the complex of historic sites that is anchored by the State House and the Old Barracks .

Read the Park Master Plan’s vision and design options for Petty’s Run (click here @ page 76) 

NJ has just one urban State park, Liberty State Park in Jersey City. The new Capital State park would enrich the State park system, capitalize on Trenton’s tremendous historic assets, and serve as a magnet for tourist and historic preservation based economic development.

Funding for the Park was dedicated via the 2003 voter approved constitutional amendment to dedicate $50 million of corporate business tax proceeds to State Park maintenance and restoration. So budget shortfalls can not be the reason for killling this project.  

This is politics at its worst – our sources told me that this battle is not over.

We’ll keep you posted. Below are photo’s I shot after the hearing this morning. They give a sense of the linkage to the Old Barracks and the State House. 

[Update - photo reply to comment. Read the sign at Historic Barracks: "Our funds cut 100%, Please donate". Shot at May 22, 2010 protest

 

 

I awoke today and found the frost perched on the town
It hovered in a frozen sky, then it gobbled summer down
When the sun turns traitor cold
and all the trees are shivering in a naked row
I get the urge for going but I never seem to go

I get the urge for going
When the meadow grass is turning brown
Summertime is falling down and winter is closing in

I had me a girl in summertime
She had summer-colored skin
And not another man in town
My darling’s heart could win
But when the leaves fell on the ground, and
Bully winds came around, pushed them face down in the snow
She got the urge for going
And I had to let her go

She got the urge for going
When the meadow grass was turning brown
Summertime was falling down and winter was closing in

Now the warriors of winter they gave a cold triumphant shout
And all that stays is dying, all that lives is getting out
See the geese in chevron flight flapping and a-racing on before the snow
They’ve got the urge for going, and they’ve got the wings so they can go

They get the urge for going
When the meadow grass is turning brown
Summertime is falling down and winter is closing in

I’ll ply the fire with kindling now, I’ll pull the blankets up to my chin
I’ll lock the vagrant winter out and bolt my wandering in
I’d like to call back summertime and have her stay for just another month or so
But she’s got the urge for going and I guess she’ll have to go

And she gets the urge for going when the meadow grass is turning brown
And all her empire’s falling down
                        ~~~ Urge for Going – by Joni Mitchell (gender adjusted pronouns!)

(I prefer the Tom Rush version)

Tiny Boro Balks at Recycling - Are Republicans Ginning Up Faux Controversies?

Or After Denying Global Warming, is Recycling Next on the Hit List?

File this under “A” for Absurd.

First it was the “Rats in Raritan” - where Town officials refused to adopt a DEP required ordinance to assure that garbage dumpsters have lids so that rats, vermin, and leachate don’t become local public health and water quality problems. They called it an unfunded state mandate.

Shortly after this controversy emerged, Governor Christie appeared for a Town Hall meeting in Raritan, which prompted us to write about the larger political and policy context of the Raritan Revolt in  Gov. Christie Joins Rats in Raritan (No Joke) 

Did the people of upscale suburban Raritan Township really oppose efforts to control rats? Or was this a political stunt?

Now, the tiny Borough of Bloomsbury, less than 1 square mile and population of 881 - which surely must make it a prime target for consolidation reform –  won’t adopt a DEP recycling ordinance, also using the same bogus rhetoric of “state mandate“. (see Hunterdon County Democrat story:  Bloomsbury mayor calls mandatory recycling rules ‘absurd’ and ‘unreasonable’ as officials criticize Hunterdon County, state)

BLOOMSBURY — Borough Council members postponed a vote on the state-mandated recycling ordinance at their Tuesday meeting after expressing objections to the garbage inspections and fines that the ordinance would authorize.

“Obviously, this is not a popular ordinance. The state has come out with its recycling goals, and they’re hard goals,” said Mayor Mark Peck. “The state is threatening us with $3,000 fines a day if we don’t adopt an ordinance that meets their goals

Recycling has been mandatory at the municipal level in New Jersey for 23 years - the law was passed in 1987. Recycling enjoys widespread public support, which helps NJ lead the nation in recycling goals and rates achieved. Recycling is as close to political motherhood and apple pie as it gets.

The passage of New Jersey’s mandatory recycling legislation in April, 1987 was a major milestone in our state’s solid waste management history and helped establish New Jersey as a leader in this field. The “New Jersey Statewide Mandatory Source Separation and Recycling Act” (Recycling Act), N.J.S.A. 13:1E-99.11 et seq., set forth an ambitious program that reshaped at least one aspect of the everyday lives of state residents, businesses and institutions. Among other things, the Recycling Act required New Jersey’s twenty-one counties to develop recycling plans that mandated the recycling of at least three designated recyclable materials, in addition to leaves. County recycling plans were also required to designate the strategy to be utilized for the collection, marketing and disposition of designated recyclable materials. Other provisions of the Recycling Act required municipalities to adopt an ordinance based upon their county’s recycling plan.

So, I smell a rat – this appears to be a manufactured controversy.

Is this a TSA “porno-scanner” like set up to generate astro-turf political support for further attacks on government, especially DEP and environmental programs?

Are Town officials looking out for the best interests of their residents or playing state level politics?  (like Ocean County Republicans)

Both Raritan and Bloomsbury just happen to be located in the 23rd legislative District, home of fellow Gov. Christie global warming denier, Republican Senator Michael Doherty.

Is right wing Republican leadership ginning up these kind of bogus local disputes? 

The press and residents of Bloomsbury should be asking local officials these hard questions.

(ps - yes, the title of this post is a riff on Thomas Frank’s wonderful book ”What’s the mattter with Kansas?”) 

I just listened to a fascinating interview on Democracy Now! with economist Manfred Max-Neef. 

I was not familiar with his work, but knew I was in for a treat after hearing Amy Goodman’s introduction:

He won the Right Livelihood Award in 1983, two years after the publication of his book Outside Looking In: Experiences in Barefoot Economics. “Economists study and analyze poverty in their nice offices, have all the statistics, make all the models, and are convinced that they know everything that you can know about poverty. But they don’t understand poverty,” Max-Neef says.

As Mr.Max-Neef spoke, it became apparent that “Barefooot economics” sounded a lot like the “Buddhist economics” I first read of almost 40 years ago in E.F. Schumacher’s classic 1973 work “Small is Beautiful“.

I hadn’t heard the issues and problems articulated so beautifully, simply, and clearly, so I wanted to share his wisdom and restate the five postulates and one over-arching fundamental value principle he outlined (verbatim):

“1. The economy is to serve the people, and not the people to serve the economy.

2. Development is about people, not about objects.

3. Growth is not the same as development, and development does not necessarily require growth.

4. No economy is possible in the absence of ecosystem services.

5. The economy is a subsystem of a larger finite system, the biosphere, hence permanent growth is impossible.

The fundamantal value to sustain a new economy should be that economic interest, under no circumstances, can be above the reverence for life. Nothing can be more important than life – and not just human life – but life in all its manifestations. ”

These principles reflect the conclusions of another pathbreaking 1972 book that also has guided my thinking and shaped my values: “Limits to Growth”

I urge all to listen to the entire interview - click here.

Back in 1975, when NY City was in financial crisis, then President Ford threatened to veto a Congressional bailout. The move triggered widespread outrage, and this famous headline on the cover of the NY Daily News: Ford to City: Drop Dead.

Governor Christie has taken a page out of history and prompted this far tamer Asbury Park Press story headline (prompting a critical editorial: “Stop Stalling on Bay bill“):

Gov. Christie: No money for tackling Barnegat Bay pollution

 

In addition to failing to support financial investments, Christie and Republican party politics have killed a package of bills designed to reduce nutrient pollution from fertilizers on a  statewide basis, (S1411), require the repair of stormwater basins in Barnegat Bay, and require that DEP adopt a cleanup plan (called a “TMDL”) for Barnegat Bay.

Ocean County Republican Freeholders flat out opposed such efforts during August legislative hearings. Today, the Asbury Park Press reported that the Governor said he spoke with Ocean Freeholders about the Bay, so the issue appears to be a partisan one.  

And the Republicans in the legislature have joined this partisan political game by linking the bills to the Christie municipal spending cap “tool kit” package. Per the APP:

Tool kit protest stalls movement of Barnegat Bay bill

That makes DEP Commissioner Bob Martin’s long delayed “comprehensive plan” to restore the Bay an unfunded, toothless, bad joke – DOA and a political football.

DEP’s Chief Nuclear Engineer removed and “put in a broom closet” for disclosing safety risks at the oldest US nuclear power plant.

NJ State officials blocked the open testimony of nuclear whistleblower Dennis Zannoni at a Friday State House hearing.

After more than 3 years of retaliation and delay by the State, Zannoni was finally scheduled to testify under oath about his criticism of serious safety problems at the Oyster Creek nuclear power plant, and a pattern of DEP retaliation that ensued for those public disclosures. 

DEP retaliation even included trumped up charges – redolent of Soviet Gulag strategy – of state vehicle abuse to support a 6 month suspension.

Zannoni had criticized the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) relicensing process. He claimed that important safety issues were ignored, poorly addressed, and/or covered up during an industry biased relicensing process.

Since he made those disclosures more than 3 years ago, some of Zannoni’s claims have been vindicated by the recent discovery of radioactive tritium leaks at the Oyster Creek plant. 

Oyster Creek is the nation’s oldest nulclear power plant, part of a generation of 1960′s designed facilities dubbed “Zombie Nukes” by safety advocates (see “NJ’s Oyster Creek a Poster Child for “Zombie Nuke Plants”

Shockingly, the Attorney General’s Office and Department of Environmental Protection threatened to have Zannoni’s family members and invited observers physically ejected from the State House hearing by State  Police.

After the Zannoni observers questioned and declined to comply with that threat, State officials reconsidered the wisdom and likely embarrrassing repercussions of that repressive move, and did not call State Police to clear the State House hearing room. 

Instead, after a legal debate about whether the State legally had the authority to close the hearing to public observers, state officials abruptly left the room in protest.

The State move ended the hearing and prevented Zannoni from providing testimony on his side of the story.   

The State claimed that this hearing - which was to provide a forum for sworn whistleblower testimony on the State’s retaliation for disclosures of Oyster Creek safety risks – was a private labor contract dispute that was closed to invited public observers and the press.

This claim is absurd on its face, because the case involves DEP retaliation for criticism of NRC and public disclosures of safety risks.

In retaliation for his public disclosures,  Zannoni was removed as DEP’s Chief Nuclear Engineer and “put in a broom closet”.

Obviously, the Zannoni case is a significant public matter, not a private contract dispute. His case involves both the exercise of constitutionally protected free speech rights and retaliation for classic whistleblower law “protected activity” .

We wrote briefly about the Zannoni case in this broader post on the politicization of DEP science.

National Public Radio’s (NPR) “Living on Earth” program covered the Zannoni story in a piece on former DEP Commissioner Lisa Jackson’s EPA confirmation.

The Corzine Administration’s DEP head Lisa Jackson retaliated against Zannoni (click on to read/listen to “Jackson’s Job in Jersey” by NPR reporter Jeff Young). Here’s an excerpt from the NPR transcript:

Jackson also faces criticism from some who worked for her in New Jersey. One scientist resigned because she felt Jackson had ignored science about the carcinogen chromium. Jeff Ruch directs PEER, Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, which compiled a list of worker complaints about Jackson. Ruch says they’re similar to complaints he hears from federal employees at the Bush EPA.

RUCH: Retaliation against whistleblowers, marginalization of science, a penchant for secrecy. If that’s the management style she brings to EPA it will not be the change we need.

YOUNG: Ruch points to the case of whistleblower Dennis Zannoni. Zannoni was the agency’s top nuclear energy official. When he raised concerns about the safety of the Oyster Creek facility—the oldest nuclear power plant in the country—he soon found himself off the nuclear beat.

ZANNONI: One day, January 30, 2007, I was removed without reason from my position as chief nuclear engineer and pretty much put in a broom closet in the department. And it’s been like that for two years.

Here’s how the most recent episode of the remarkable Zannoni saga went down on Friday, November 19, 2010.

We became aware of the 10 am Friday State House hearing and chose to attend to support Zannoni, bear witness, and hold state officials publicly accountable.

I entered the empty hearing room in the State House at 9:40 am. Shortly after my arrival, the hearing officer arrived (clarification: the room was “empty”, except for the stenographer).

Before the hearing started and was on the record, Deputy Attorney General Hamner entered the room and immediately protested my presence and taking photos.

DAG Hamner then asked me to leave the room.

I questioned his authority to order my removal and declined to leave.

I then introduced myself, advised DAG Hamner and the hearing officer of who I was and outlined my objectives and public interest reasons for being there. I then said that Mr. Zannoni’s lawyers needed to be involved in this discusion and that it should occur on the hearing record.

Other observers then entered, including members of Mr. Zannoni’s family and ocean county antinuclear activists. These folks had attended prior hearings without objection by the State.

The hearing began.

The DAG stated his objections to public observers and said the hearing was limited to direct participants in the case. The State took the position that this was a private contract dispute.

Zannoni’s lawyer objected and outlined the free speech and whistleblower issues in the case. He emphasized that this made the case inherently of significant public interest. He expressed his “shock” by the State’s arguments and attempts to suppress his clients testimony and to remove public observers.

He indicated his intent to file a motion in Superior Court to litigate the question of whether the State could close the hearing to public observers and the press. 

After a round of debate, and private caucuses among the various parties, the hearing officer entered the room and strangley announced that the hearing was “adjourned”.

In other in a pattern of unusual bad faith moves in this case, DAG Hamner requested an “adjournment” in an off the record, private discussion with the hearing officer. Without even consulting Zannoni’s attorney or going on the record,  the DAAG’s request was granted and the hearing was adjourned.

I was told by one fellow observer that the hearing officer indicated to her that the State only had a problem with one specific observer: me.

Immediately after the hearing ended, Zannoni supporters walked to Governor Christie’s office in a protest gesture in support of Mr. Zannoni and as a demand to open the hearing and stop the DEP coverup and retaliation which has effectively destroyed Mr. Zannoni’s promising career as DEP’s 15+ year Chief Nuclear Engineer.

[Update: 11/23/10 - I just re-read this an neeed to make a few clarifications: PEER does not represent Zannoni. I was not invited to the hearing by Zannoni, a colleague forwarded an email by Zannoni inviting the public. The threat to use the State Police was made by the representative of the Office of Employee Relations. I assumed that this was a DEP Office, but it may be Department of Personnel. The "hearing officer" is a mediator. I have not been involved in this case or the prior hearings and have read only a portion of the second hearing transcript. My understanding is that the disciplinary charges agaisnt Zannoni were initiaited after his whistleblowing episode, and therefore asume that are pretextual, but have not reviewed any documents or supporting evidence. The only knowledge I have is from media reports, I have not spoken with Zannoni and met him for the first time at the hearing.]

We will keep you posted as events develop.

I am travelling today and will be off the grid for the weekend at a retreat at the Blue Mountain Center in the Adirondacks, so will be unable to write and post.

But, I just learned that a late Friday afternoon delicately phrased DEP press release announced that Dupont withdrew the “permit by rule” application – the one that drew vehement protest by Pompton Lakes residents.

Organized, informed, and passionate residents kicked Dupont’s ass.

They shamed DEP.

Let this case be a model on how to win battles with powerful corporations and government.

I opened my testimony at Monday night’s hearing and closed my last post with this statement:

If they [Dupont] had any integrity or social responsibility, Dupont would have already agreed to withdraw this application.

But, that’s not likely so folks should contact DEP Commissioner Bob Martin and EPA Regional Administrator Judy Enck and demand that they enforce the cleanup laws, fulfill their commitments to restore transparency and accountability, and deny Dupont’s request.

Lets get Dupont moving with cleanup, not coverup. 

On Wednesday, Dupont withdrew their application – obviously they realized that not only was it a public relations nightmare, but it blatently violated state and federal laws and would have been killed by either DEP or US EPA.

When people are watching and actively engaged, no way corporations and government get away with this kind of BS.  

This is just the beginning of the battles on enforcement of RCRA and other cleanup violations by Dupont.

This victory in preventing further harm and corporate control by Dupont can become the foundation to build upon larger victories that lead to real cleanup of Pompton Lakes and compensation for suffering residents.