WolfeNotes.com

Attack On PDC Program Will Be The Camel’s Nose Under The Tent To Gut CMP

Time For Conservation Community To Rein In Potosnak And Circle The Wagons

“Twenty, 25 years ago, 30 years ago … the towns, many of them did not want to accommodate residential growth,” said Grogan. “That has completely turned around. What we see today are towns begging the commission to allow for more residential growth.” (Asbury Park Press, 1/7/22)

[Update below]

The delicate situation in the ecologically critical NJ Pinelands is spiraling out of control. It could become a death spiral.

Economic and political forces are mounting enormous development pressure on the Pinelands region, and Gov. Murphy – after 4 years of virtually ignoring the Pinelands – just radically upended and weakened an already pro-development Pinelands Commission.

The Gov.’s Pinelands move follows his administration’s support of an economic development plan for the NJ Highlands region, whose authorizing legislation (the Highlands Act) and Regional Master Plan land use plan was based on the Pinelands Act and the Pinelands Comprehensive Management Plan (CMP).

The Governor just appointed a personal political loyalist (Laura Matos, immediately installed as Chair) and a corporate crony (Davon McCurry, with Orsted, the Gov.’s heavily subsidized & Wall Street financed  off shore wind developer) on the Commission.

The Gov. terminated reliable conservation votes by the Chairman Richard Prickett and Commissioner Rohan Greene. Two good people just thrown under the bus in order to install the gov.’s political loyalists and corporate cronies. Disgusting. No good deed goes unpunished (and the conservation community didn’t even fight for them).

That move comes at a time when the Commission is seeking a new Executive Director after the unexpected death of Nancy Wittenberg. The Gov.’s move exacerbated the prior 7 – 4 County appointee pro-development voting block on the Commission to a 9-3 pro-development slant.

At the same time, the conservation community – who are supposed to serve as an advocate for preservation and watchdog on the Commission – just completely collapsed, fragmented, cut a dirty deal, and actually supported the Gov.’s move.

Asbury Park Press reporter Amanda Oglesby recently wrote a good overview piece, that sets the stage and outlines what’s at stake, see:

• Ocean County, South Jersey future at stake as NJ Senate votes Pinelands Commission picks

Oglesby quotes Carleton Montgomery, Director of the Pinelands Preservation Alliance, at length on the ecological and water resource values provided by the Pinelands forests and why the Pinelands Commission is so important.

But, while not really surprised given his political corruption in support of Gov. Murphy, I was shocked by how Olgesby then quoted Ed Potosnak of the NJ League of Conservation Voters (NJ LCV) at length, concurring with the NJ Builders Association:

Though [Acting Executive Director] Grogan says the credit system is a success, New Jersey builders think otherwise. Jeff Kolakowski, CEO of the New Jersey Builders Association, said the credit system has added “unnecessary costs to the production of housing” around the Pinelands and has failed to work as it was originally intended.

“Regardless of whether you are building a 1,000-square-foot apartment or a 10,000-square-foot mansion, the price of PDCs (Pinelands Development Credits) are the same on every unit of housing, which in turn serves as a disincentive to more compact development,” Kolakowski said in an emailed statement. “Further complicating the matter is that PDCs are scarce and in high demand, which resulted in the price of PDCs more than doubling since last year.”

It’s a concern he shares with environmentalists, who also say new nominees to the Pinelands Commission need to address the issue.

“What we want to see is denser development in the growth zones, because it reduces the (suburban) sprawl and has a smaller environmental impact,” said Ed Potosnak, executive director of the New Jersey League of Conservation Voters. “The existing system actually disincentivizes this kind of development so you have things like six-acre zoning. The houses are further apart, which means you need longer roads and longer water systems and sewer pipes, and you are cutting down more trees.”

Potosnak wants Pinelands rules to favor more dense housing surrounded by open space.

“We can provide, through the Pinelands Commission, even more incentive by changing the way the credits work, that folks can get more credit if they do some of these things we think are better for the environment and actually better aligned with what … prospective homeowners are looking for.”

Whoa! WTF? Are you kidding me?

Is Potosnak now a real estate agent? (“aligned with what … prospective homeowners are looking for.”)

The man knows nothing about land use planning or the Pinelands CMP. (And, while I’ve been out of State for several years, I’ve never seen him at a Pinelands Commission meeting and am not aware of anything NJ LCV has ever done in the Pinelands to promote preservation). (a reliable longtime Pinelands advocate just wrote to tell me that Potosnak has never been to a Pinelands Commission meeting. How is he possibly now a spokesman for “environmentalists?”).

Potosnak’s statements are ill-informed, politically dangerous, and flat out false (it will take several posts to explain why).

On top of that, it is abundantly clear that he is a political whore for Gov. Murphy and is committed to supporting Gov. Murphy’s tools the Gov. just installed at the Pinelands Commission and their policy agenda.

And on top of all that, Potosnak is concurring with the NJ Builders Association on flaws with and need to revise the CMP to promote denser development and “reform” the Pinelands Development Credit (PDC) system.

I am no fan of trading schemes like the PDC program, because they are designed to promote growth, are a form of privatization that restricts public involvement, and because the designated growth areas are often poorly planned and allow far too much growth (and climate issues and ecological water limits were never considered).

It is obvious that the NJ Builders Association game plan is to focus on”reforms” to the PDC program and that will serve as the camel’s nose under the tent to gut the CMP. Ed Potosnak is either a dupe or a whore – or both.

Opening the dood to any CMP amendments to promote growth under the current economic and political conditions would be a disaster.

We should not even be talking about more growth.

The conservation agenda for the Pinelands needs to focus on adopting CMP amendments to address the climate emergency, restrict water use to protect ecological functions, restrict destruction by ORV’s, and regulate endocrine disrupting chemicals.

To slow this train down, I sent the following email to Carleton Montgomery, who sits on the NJ LCV Board and has the power to rein him in: Potosnak can not possibly become the voice of the conservation community in the Pinelands (or anywhere else):

Carleton – You are on the Board of NJ LCV.

I was disgusted by the role NJ LCV played in supporting Gov. Murphy’s nominees (he also undermined PPA’s position, which I also did not support)..

Now, I read in the Asbury Park Press that Ed Potosnak is speaking on Pines land use issues and agreeing with the NJ Builders Association? WTF? see:

https://www.app.com/story/news/local/land-environment/2022/01/07/pinelands-commission-future-ocean-county-south-jersey-stake/8793943002/

You must rein Potosnak in. We are in dangerous times. Suggest you folks circle the wagon and do something publicly to slow this train down.

Wolfe

We’ll keep you posted –

I’m highly skeptical of any engagement, and note that the NJ LCV Board is stacked with other lame, well fed fellow Foundation funded, Murphy sycophants, including Tom Gilbert, NJCF and Julia Somers of the Highlands Coalition. They have not only been Murphy cheerleaders, but have not objected to the Gov.’s Highlands economic development initiative.

[Update: 1/18/22 – Carleton Montgomery of PPA writes to tell me that I got it all wrong:

The point that development in the regional growth areas should be higher density than it has been to date is one PPA has advocated for many years.  That means, among other things, changing the incentive structure built into the PDC requirements so they do not dis-incentivize higher density.  The very low density development that has marked almost all residential development in the growth areas just uses the limited growth area land inefficiently, while causing just as much habitat and water loss as would higher densities on the same land areas – something the Commission’s science program found long ago to be the case.

To rebut his ideas about density in the growth areas and the risks of opening the CMP right now, I responded thusly:

So, you would support opening the CMP to amendments regarding managing growth in the growth areas?

Do you think that is a wise stance right now, given the recent changes on the Commission and the development pressures?

I disagree with your characterization of low density land use as “inefficient” – what exactly is your optimization objective to define “efficiency”? Revenue per square foot? Lower per acre site improvement and infrastructure costs to the developer?

I have not reviewed the science program report, so if you could send a link, I’d appreciate it.

Aside from all that, if you are not troubled by the role of NJ LCV in recent events – a concern I raised that you ignore – I would strongly differ.

If you are concerned with habitat and water loss (recharge? consumptive use?), perhaps you might want to shrink the growth area boundaries and allowable growth in them and focus on setting the long overdue ecological based water allocation restrictions.

That might be a far more protective approach than supporting higher densities.

The Only Way Out Is For PVSC To Withdraw The Permit Application

Expect The Long-standing DEP Shuffle: Delay It To Death

I need to explain the reasons and implications of why DEP can’t deny the PVSC Newark power plant permit.

The Governor and DEP are in a box.

They both have made commitments and promises on EJ that they can not deliver on. Those promises have raised public expectations. Yet the Governor’s Executive Orders and the DEP Commissioner’s Administrative Orders are not enforceable and have no more legal weight than a press release. 

The activists in Newark are not going away. And the media has begun to report on the project and is following the issue.

The DEP air permit regulations are fatally flawed and do not provide a legally defensible basis to deny the PVSC permit application. Despite these flaws, the DEP has not revised permit regulations to walk the talk on EJ.

If DEP were to deny the air permit, then PVSC could easily legally appeal and win (that might take years, but they would win). But PVSC is a public sector entity, so they might be reluctant to get into litigation with the State.

One would think that a “free pass” on legal challenge from PVSC might lead DEP to deny the permit and use political pressure to block PVSC from appealing that decision.

But, here’s why that won’t happen.

DEP won’t deny the permit – even if they knew PVSC would not appeal – because to do so would provide a regulatory basis and precedent that could then be used against other permits. 

Corporate industrial polluters would never let DEP get away with that. This corporate power is why the DEP air permit rules are so weak to begin with.

For the same regulatory reasons, this is why the EJ law if fatally flawed: because it didn’t require than DEP fix these existing fatally flawed air permit regulations and review methods (this would include everything from how to define “State of the art”, to air quality and emission standards, to air quality monitoring and modeling, to cumulative impacts, to community based health risk assessment (known as “stressors” in the EJ law).

Instead of that heavy lift – which corporate polluters would vigorously oppose and block in the legislature – the EJ law created a parallel DEP review process with vague narrative standards that can not be enforced by DEP.

This novel parallel EJ process explains why DEP has delayed and been unable to propose EJ rules. 

So, just like the PennEast pipeline, DEP must find some other means to kill this project (assuming they want to, which is a questionable assumption).

My best guess is that DEP will pull their longstanding standard operating procedure when dealing with public controversy and huge regulatory stakes: they will delay any permit decision in hopes that PVSC will just abandon the project or withdraw the permit application.

Just like the PennEast pipeline.

The Gov.’s Press Office Is Gaslighting The People Of Newark

Project Is NOT Subject To Environmental Justice Law Or DEP Climate Rules

[Update below]

Apparently, Gov. Murphy asked the PVSC to postpone vote on the construction contracts. According to the Gov.’s press office: (NJ Spotlight)

The pause will allow the project to undergo a more thorough environmental justice review and robust public engagement process, ensuring that the voices of the community are heard.

I say “apparently”, because there are no government decision or policy documents. I am so tired of this administration governing by press release and press statement. Even the Gov.’s Executive Orders read more like press releases than policy statements.

Don’t be fooled: If the Gov. were serious, then DEP would have denied the permits.

The press office statement is highly misleading.

Here’s why. As I’ve written many times:

1) this project is NOT subject to the environmental justice law for 2 reasons:

a) because DEP has not adopted EJ regulations (they haven’t even proposed them); and

b) because DEP deemed the permit application complete before EJ regulations were adopted;

By law, DEP review of permits is based on the regulations in effect when DEP deems the permit application to be “administratively complete”. DEP did that long ago for the PVSC permit application.

Accordingly, the project can not undergo an enforceable environmental justice review because there are no EJ standards to enforce and no formal procedure for meaningful community input.

Given these legal realities, there can not and will not be “a more thorough environmental justice review and robust public engagement process” as stated by the Gov. Press Office.

Maybe the media can force DEP Commissioner Latourette on the record to clarify this manipulative falsehood.

2) this project is NOT subject to DEP’s recently proposed greenhouse gas (CO2) regulation for 2 reasons:

a) the DEP proposed CO2 rules only apply to fossil fueled power plants that generate and provide electric power to the grid (the PVSC project does not do that) and

b) the DEP deemed the PVSC permit application complete before the CO2 rules were adopted, so even if the DEP CO2 rules applied to this type of PVSC power plant – which they don’t – the rules would not apply.

[Also, as I’ve written, the current DEP air pollution permit rules that do apply to this project are fatally flawed.]

3. The DEP and PVSC may hold additional voluntary meetings with the community, but they are pure window dressing and manipulation and can have no impact on DEP’s regulatory decisions on the permits, which can only be made in accordance with and based on DEP regulations.

DEP Commissioner LaTourette is a former corporate lawyer and knows this. This is not his first time gaslighting on the EJ issue.

Shame on him and Gov. Murphy for such blatant gaslighting.

The Gov. Press Office is gaslighting the public, again. That is totally unacceptable.

[End Note: We saw this coming and predicted exactly this would happen.

On 1/11/22, I  Tweeted:

And on 1/13/22 I wrote: (boldface in original)

we’ll see how today’s PVSC meeting protest gets covered and see if they approve the construction project. I’m predicting they won’t).

 [Update: 1/15/22: I need to explain the implications of why DEP can’t deny this permit.

The Gov. and DEP are in a box.

They both have made commitments and promises on EJ that they can not deliver on. The activists in Newark are not going away. And the media has begun to report on the project and is following the issue.

The DEP air permit regulations are fatally flawed and do not provide a legally defensible basis to deny the PVSC permit application.

If DEP were to deny the air permit, then PVSC could easily legally appeal and win (that might take years, but they would win). But PVSC is a public sector entity, so they might be reluctant to get into litigation with the State. One would think that a “free pass” from PVSC might lead DEP to deny the permit and use political pressure to block PVSC from appealing that decision.

But, here’s why that won’t happen.

DEP won’t deny the permit – even if they knew PVSC would not appeal – because to do so would provide a regulatory basis and precedent that could the used against other permits. 

Corporate industrial polluters would never let DEP get way with that. This corporate power is why the DEP permit rules are so weak to being with.

For the same regulatory reasons, this is why the EJ law if fatally flawed: because it didn’t require than DEP fix these flawed air permit regulations. Instead of that heavy lift – which corporate polluters would vigorously oppose and block in the legislature – the EJ law created a parallel process with vague narrative standards that can not be enforced by DEP. This parallel EJ process is what DEP has delayed and been unable to propose EJ rules. 

So, just like the PennEast pipeline, DEP must find some other means to kill this project (assuming they want to, which is a questionable assumption).

My best guess is that DEP will pull their longstanding standard operating procedure when dealing with public controversy and huge regulatory stakes: they will delay any permit decision inn hopes that PVSC will just abandon the project or withdraw the permit application. Just like the PennEast pipeline. ~~~ end update]

Senator Gopal Is The Epitome Of All That Is Wrong With Trenton Politics

Harshly Attacks Pinelands Supporters For Pushing “Disinformation” and “Propaganda”

Gopal Flat Out Lies About Environmental Group Support

Rarely does a politician – in his own words – reveal what he really thinks and in the process expose his entire corrupt political worldview and flat out ignorance.

In an arrogant and dismissive email to a constituent who had raised concerns with his vote in favor of Gov. Murphy’s controversial Pinelands nominees, NJ Senator Vin Gopal just did exactly that.

He actually attacked his own constituent and accused them of “pushing misinformation and propaganda”.

At a time when misinformation is a very serious problem in our politics and triggers de-platforming, canceling, and can destroy a person’s reputation and career, that is a very serious allegation that should not be used so recklessly and falsely to attack a critic. Shame on Senator Gopal for this cheap stunt.

And the Senator doubled down on it when I called him out on it. His followup reply to me not only revealed his ignorance of the Senate’ advise and consent role, the NJ Pinelands Act, ELEC, and State ethics laws, but also made a false factual claim about alleged support of the Gov.’s nominees.

If I were to try and write a caricature or parody of an out of touch, arrogant, petulant, entitled and dishonest Trenton partisan hack, I could not have done a better job than Senator Gopal did himself and in his own words. Seriously, it was like a High School lunchroom scene – “she’s my best friend!” She went to my wedding! – Gopal actually offered up that crap as the basis of why he supported a Pinelands Commissioner!

[Update – a knowledgeable Trenton source just sent me this note, which makes Gopal’s attack even more corrupt:

Matos’ husband is a Democratic consultant that did his [Gopal’s] campaign- his wife a lobbyists at Princeton Public Affairs. ~~~ end update]

It’s a long exchange, but well worth the read. So, below, in chronological order, a farce in 4 parts: 1) Senator Gopal’s reply to his constituent, 2) my criticism of it (plus addendum); 3) his reply back to me; and 4) my closing back to him.

1) Part 1 – Gopal insults constituent

From: Vin Gopal <vin@vingopal.com>

Date: January 13, 2022 at 1:44:15 AM EST

XXXX – thanks for your e-mail. Laura Matos is one of my best friends and stood with me when I got sworn into the Senate and stood with my family when I married my wife. She will make an outstanding commissioner and is a passionate environmentalist. She is not a registered lobbyist and never has been and I am really disappointed that activists are doing minimal research on who her and Davon are as human beings but are trashing them based on what a propaganda they are reading but not researching. They passed 39-0 because the Senate is very happy with Governor Murphy’s appointments.

I would encourage you and urge you to get to know who she is as well as Davon who worked at DEP and was outstanding and know who they are as human beings instead of pushing inaccurate propaganda. They will do a great job on the Pinelands Commission and also bring much needed diversity to a New Jersey commission that has never had any. Trump will win because our own Democratic activists want to tear people down instead of getting to know who they are and instead spread misinformation on them, when they will be natural allies to us when they are in the office.

Always feel free to reach out

Vin

2) My reply to Gopal:

———- Original Message ———-

From: Bill WOLFE <bill_wolfe@comcast.net>

To: “vin@vingopal.com” <vin@vingopal.com>

Date: 01/13/2022 1:11 PM

Subject: Pinelands Commission confirmation vote

Dear Senator Gopal – My friend XXXXX forwarded your response below.

As I am one of those you apparently namelessly accused of “doing minimal research” and “trashing” and “pushing inaccurate propaganda” and “misinformation”, I feel compelled to reply.

Before I do, as we have not met, please allow me to introduce myself. [educational credentials and NJ professional experience deleted]

Frankly, I am appalled by your reply to XXXXX – both the tone and the content.

You begin by claiming that Ms. Matos is “one of my best friends“. That is irrelevant to the qualifications for a Pinelands Commissioner that you are sworn to review in your Senatorial confirmation capacity.

It is deeply disturbing that a Senator would vote to confirm a person to an important office based on friendship and the fact that you openly use that justification evidences a clueless Trenton “clubbiness” bubble scene composed of self serving and self dealing insiders and partisans.

You then claim, without offering a scintilla of supporting evidence, that Ms. Matos “will make an outstanding commissioner and is a passionate environmentalist“.

This fact free claim is then following by this smear, to which I must respond because I am implicated in it: (i.e. I’ve written strong criticism of the Gov. and both nominees). You wrote:

“She is not a registered lobbyist and never has been and I am really disappointed that activists are doing minimal research on who her and Davon are as human beings but are trashing them based on what a propaganda they are reading but not researching.”

1. Registered lobbyist: You should look up the ELEC definition of “attempts to influence government processes” that triggers registration requirements.

Ms. Matos has spent her career – directly on indirectly – in such activities. Ms. Matos is a political operative. Her entire career reflects that. The fact that she is not a registered lobbyist is irrelevant (and she might have been in noncompliance). I’d welcome a debate with you on that issue.

You also should read the job description  that Orsted posted on Davon McCurry – here’s a link:

https://us.orsted.com/news-archive/2021/07/orsted-names-davon-mccurry-as-deputy-head-of-market-and-government-affairs-new-jersey

“McCurry will help develop and implement strategies to ensure the successful advancement of existing projects, Ocean Wind 1 and 2, inform efforts to secure additional business and shape Ørsted’s position and standing in the state.“

His job function is to promote Orsted’s corporate interests – again see ELEC definition above. See also NJ conflict of interest laws, particularly the statutory “appearance” standard.

2. Minimal research

I do my homework. I reviewed all publicly available information on both nominees, including the Gov.’s press statements.

None of that provided any evidence to support your claims above. None suggested any environmental or Pinelands qualifications or experience. To the contrary, the public record is loaded with prior corporate and political activity.

I worked for 4 years in the DEP Office of Legislation during the Florio administration and am very familiar with its functions. Mr. McCurry was not qualified for his DEP post as Director. Period. Not even close. McCurry’s DEP experience is no evidence of any commitment to the environment, just the opposite, especially given how quickly he used that post as a revolving door to a higher paying corporate job with Orsted.

3. Misinformation and propaganda

I deal in the fact based world. I have opinions and ideology and expertise. I have values and standards. Fact based opinions are not propaganda. Law and fact based criticism is not “trashing” a person.

I really resent that – and coming as a fact free and anonymous smear from a State legislator is deeply disturbing.

You made a serious charge of “inaccurate propaganda” and “misinformation”. Don’t you think you have an obligation and the burden of supporting that allegation with facts?

4. The Gov.’s Office defended the nominations on grounds of promoting “diversity and environmental justice”.

I support those goals. But not at the expense of qualifications and commitment.

Do you assume or think there are no qualified black and Latina Pinelands supporters?

Such an assumption is racist.

And there was no need for Gov. Murphy’s nominees to replace Chairman Prickett and Commissioner Rohan Greene. The political balance on the Commission has gone from a 7-4 county dominated pro-development posture to a lopsided 9-3.

5. In terms of politics, the Democratic Party is losing to a rising Trump Neo-fascist culture and politics because they have betrayed the New Deal coalition, policies, and politics in favor of Bill Clinton’s “Progressive Neoliberalism” that uses cultural politics to disguise corporate economic policies (Google Professor Nancy Fraser’s work on that).

You can and must do better.

Bill Wolfe

Addendum:

Senator – In my haste, I omitted important issues:

1) If you – and/or Matos or McCurry – felt that their names and reputations had been besmirched by false “misinformation” and “propaganda”, then why didn’t any of you appear before the Senate Judiciary Committee and go under oath to correct the public record?

Why did the Senate ram the confirmations through in the last day of a lame duck session?

2) If both nominees were qualified and strong environmentalists, then why did the Gov.’s nominations blind side the conservation groups that had been working cooperatively with the Administration on Pinelands appointments? (i.e. PPA)

3) You seem oblivious to the fact that the Pinelands Commission is by law an independent planning and regulatory body. The Commission is a legacy institution that has become increasingly politicized. It is not a patronage pit for unqualified political loyalists, friends, or corporate cronies.

4) Over an almost 40 year career in Trenton, I’ve seen far too many ambitious, careerist, climbers in NJ politics and government.

If Matos and McCurry want to work on political campaigns or as corporate advocates, that is their prerogative.

But they do not belong in government or on powerful institutions grounded in law and science like the Pinelands Commission.

Bill Wolfe

3) Part 3 – Gopal reply to me

———- Original Message ———-

From: Vin Gopal <vin@vingopal.com>

To: Bill WOLFE <bill_wolfe@comcast.net>

Date: 01/13/2022 8:36 PM

Subject: Re: Addendum – Re: Pinelands Commission confirmation vote

Bill – Thank you for your email.

I am not giving an opinion on the Governor’s process of selecting folks as that is his prerogative, not mine and his legal right to appoint or replace who he wants as the Governor of the State.

Laura is not a lobbyist so by continuing to say she is one is putting out misinformation to push a false agenda to try to make her into someone when you don’t know anything about her.

I don’t judge people i don’t know or characterize them with namecalling when I don’t know them. Laura is one of my best friends, she grew up in the Pinelands and my friendship with her is relevant to me because I personally know her character, integrity and ability. Only by knowing her personally do i know these characteristics and traits.

They were nominated several weeks ago and had the support of the League of Conservation Voters, Clean Water Action who testified on their behalf in judiciary committee. Nothing was rushed through.

I won’t engage in the namecalling that you have no problem engaging in on people that you have never met and don’t know.

I look forward to working with these commissioners to continue to protect the Pinelands and protect our environment

Be well and good luck with your future endeavors.

Vin

4) Part 4 – My closing reply, where I document Gopal’s ignorance and falsehoods:

———- Original Message ———-

From: Bill WOLFE <bill_wolfe@comcast.net>

To: Vin Gopal <vin@vingopal.com>

Cc: senbsmith <SenBSmith@njleg.org>, “tmoran@starledger.com” <tmoran@starledger.com>

Date: 01/14/2022 11:11 AM

Subject: Re: Addendum – Re: Pinelands Commission confirmation vote

Vin – you should talk to your colleague Senator Smith and inquire about my credibility and experience. I’m copying Senator Smith on this email.

You are flat out wrong on the Gov. powers with respect to Pinelands Commissioners. Read the Pinelands Act and the NJ Constitution – Gov. nominees are not his sole prerogative but must be confirmed by the Senate (advice and consent, remember that from 7th grade civics?). Shocking that I need to tell a sitting State Senator that.

I suggested you read ELEC regulations about the definition of activities that constitute “attempts to influence government processes” and NJ State ethics laws on the “appearance” standard.

You ignored that and instead accuse me of name calling. Again, shocking.

Clean Water Action did NOT support the nominations and did NOT “testify on their behalf”. I actually listened to Dave Pringle’s testimony, did you? Why are you factually misrepresenting it? I also have an email from his boss, Amy Goldmith and she did NOT support the nominees. Again, shocking.

Carleton Montgomery, longtime head of the Pinelands Preservation Alliance and a Harvard trained lawyer I believe, wrote this about the nominees. On December 3, 2021, he wrote:

“In a truly shocking move, Governor Murphy today nominated three corporate lobbyists for the Pinelands Commission. They would replace three seasoned environmental leaders with years of service for the Pinelands.

All three of the new nominees appear to have fundamental conflicts of interest due to their employment as lobbyists for industry.  Only one of the three appears to have any prior interest at all in environmental protection.”

Even the the Star Ledger editorial board excoriated the Gov.’s move as “a craven power play”, a “brazen” attempt to “gut the Commission during lame duck”, and a “scheme” that was similar to the “bullying” by Gov. Christie.

Is that name calling? Tell Tom Moran that to his face (copy my friend Moran on this as well).

Ed Potosnak has very little credibility as a Murphy and Democratic Party shill. And I don’t recall ever seeing him (or Matos and McCurry) at a Pinelands Commission meeting.

You rammed through corporate cronies. Own it.

Bill Wolfe

[Update: 1/16/22 – Senator Gopal triples down.

Here’s the conclusion of my “debate” with NJ Senator Gopal. He not only failed to correct his false statement about testimony, or note his misstatement of the Senate’s confirmation role, or apologize for false accusations of “misinformation and “propaganda”, he cluelessly digs in based on the nominees’ “skill sets”. He does this without realizing that this is precisely the problem: the nominees lacked essential qualifying “skill sets” and the “skill sets” they do poses are problematic (political loyalty, appeasement, go along, yes men).

———- Original Message ———-

From: Vin Gopal <vin@vingopal.com>

To: Bill WOLFE <bill_wolfe@comcast.net>

Cc: senbsmith <SenBSmith@njleg.org>, “tmoran@starledger.com” <tmoran@starledger.com>

Date: 01/15/2022 11:46 PM

Subject: Re: Addendum – Re: Pinelands Commission confirmation vote

Bill I appreciate your opinion but obviously disagree. I know the character and skillsets of the two nominees I voted yes for and which passed unanimously by the Senate.

All the best moving forward – I have no interest in fighting with you and I respect your opinion.

Vin

Green Masks Are Off In Murphy’s Second Term

Long Delayed Regulatory Measures To Reduce Emissions Are Weak or Non-Existent

As I am a frequent and harsh critic of NJ Spotlight’s favorable coverage of Gov. Murphy’s climate and environmental record, I feel obligated to praise them when they get it right.

NJ Spotlight Editor John McAlpin got it exactly right in his coverage of Gov. Murphy’s State of the State address:

Perhaps the biggest omission was the looming climate crisis. Murphy barely mentioned one of the more difficult issues he tackled during his initial four-year term — transitioning New Jersey’s economy from one overly reliant on fossil fuels to one powered by clean energy.

Notable omission

Murphy acknowledged the state, like the rest of the nation, is “facing an existential crisis of climate change,’’ and touted those who are finding work in the burgeoning green-energy market and at two ports serving the growing offshore-wind sector.

But he failed to mention whether his administration will step up a phase-out of fossil fuels — one of the few areas of dispute with the environmental community, which largely has been a stalwart backer of Murphy’s policies.

The issue is likely to flare again in Murphy’s second term as the administration faces decisions whether to push forward fossil-fuel projects, like a new liquefied natural gas facility in Gibbstown and a new power plant at the Passaic Valley Sewerage Commission in Newark. If the state continues adding new fossil-fuel projects, environmentalists warn the state will never achieve its goal to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions.

I’m hopeful that the recent series of bad policy moves on climate – including DEP’s denial of Empower NJ rulemaking petition; DEP’s proposal of weak CO2 power sector, diesel, and port equipment emission rules; and delays on building electrification – coupled with other huge policy failures like the Pinelands Commission appointments; promotion of an economic development plan for the Highlands; abandonment of the State land use Plan; failure to respond to rapidly proliferating warehouse sprawl; and failure to enforce DEP’s new drinking water standards for “forever chemicals” – will prompt more critical media coverage and expose the Gov.’s sycophants in the environmental community for the cheerleaders that they are.

I also suspect that Bill Potter’s wonderful Op-Ed on Gov. Murphy’s record opened some eyes at NJ Spotlight and NJ media circles.

Of course, we’ll take some credit here for what looks like turning the tide as well.

It’s a lot easier politically to shovel billions of dollars of public subsidies to corporations and Wall Street to build wind power to serve growing electric demand, than to actually use State regulatory power to compel corporations to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.