Home > Uncategorized > Christie State Plan A Power Grab That Subverts Environmental Protections

Christie State Plan A Power Grab That Subverts Environmental Protections

Christie Crony Economic Objectives May Not Over-ride State and Federal Environmental Laws

The Asbury Park Press ran an awful “he said/she said” story on the Christie State Plan today, see: Christie Growth Plan – Most Either Love it or Hate It.

Until I put together a more comprehensive analysis, here’s my quick note to reporter Bob Jordan – I hope Carleton Montgomery at Pinelands Preservation Alliance, who was quoted in the story, gets a chance to read it:

Bob – I don’t hate anybody, but I did study regional planning in Graduate School at Cornell and practice for 13 years at DEP at the interface of planning and regulation, so I can say with confidence that Christie’s so called State Plan makes a mockery of land use planning mandated under the State Planning Act and provides an explicit attack on DEP and environmental regulations.

His Plan and EO 78 to implement it also usurp legislative power under the State Planning Act and numerous environmental laws, and concentrates unaccountable power in the Administration’s Planning and Regulatory Czar, Lt. Gov. Guagagno.

It abolishes maps and makes invisible the natural features that are mapped to be protected.

Maps identify places and features and link policy with place. Planning without a map is impossible – like chemistry without chemicals.

It attacks DEP and regulations as “red tape”. It would destroy the independence of DEP, over-ride science and environmental regulations, and put Guadagno in charge.

It has a singular focus on economic development that contradicts the balancing of multiple objectives mandated under law. It would arbitrarily place economic development objectives above environmental protection policies and standards, and thereby violate environmental laws.

The Plan is inconsistent with legislative intent and would violate federally delegated programs under the Clean Water Act, e.g. DEP water quality management planning rules.

If the NJ Legislature fails to engage, I am certain that EPA will intervene to block attempted rollbacks to federally delegated environmental programs and plans.

For details, see:


[Update: I was just advised that Carleton Montgomery of PPA is a Board member at NJ Future.

Was Carleton commenting as an environmental advocate/lawyer, or as a Board member of NJ Future?

NJ Future is a corporate dominated organization that is politically supporting the Governor and his economic development policies. It is my understanding that the NJ environmental community does NOT consider NJ Future a pro-environmental organization, and has a long history of significant disagreements on the State Plan and important DEP regulations. Readers should know this, as it is relevant to the motivation and credibility of his comments.

[Update #2 – Plan Smart NJ is not a professional planning group.

Plan Smart NJ should not be cited in a news story as a planning group – they are a group of corporate (fill in the blanks – I’d say “whores”)

I realize that NJ is an ethical swamp, but I think we’ve broken new ground here.

It’s weenie Halloween here, so WTF is Pringle?

Categories: Uncategorized Tags:
You must be logged in to post a comment.