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.

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

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.

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.

[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.

News Management – Again

Source: Rutgers, Office of the State Climatologist

Mistakes can be extremely revealing.

Follow me as we look at the chronology and content to illustrate how a relatively minor factual mistake reveals a serious set of problems, I’ll call them “news management“.

My rant will bounce back and forth between the specific factual mistake and the systemic problems it reveals, so try to follow my bouncing ball, which may not connect all the intermediate dots between the particular and the systemic. I close with perhaps the most significant observation and a prediction, so before you hit the delete button, at least scroll down to read that!

Let’s start with the specific factual mistake (in boldface) made in this May 12 south jersey story: ‘It’s a mutual fight’ to keep mosquitoes from infesting N.J.

A wet spring means that 2013 is already looking to be a boom year for mosquito broods. Coupled with the lingering aftermath of Hurricane Sandy, this summer could be overwrought with the pesky pests.

Whether you look at the Rutgers rainfall data (above) or the DEP stream flow and groundwater data, 2013 was a dry spring, not a “wet spring”. 

That’s why last week I wrote that NJ could be slipping into an early drought.

So, how did this reporter get the completely opposite idea that it was a “wet spring”?

Most likely from her sources, who have a strong bias. The reporter obviously did not independently research the readily accessible and simple data from Rutgers and DEP. [Or the maps on Todd Bates' blog.]

The reporter’s sources were DEP and the County Mosquito Control Commission – sources with strong institutional and professional bias.  [The national weatherman was not quoted on NJ data and was not the source for any "wet spring" claim, and instead offered a wet summer forecast - a projection of future conditions, not current conditions.]

Basic reporting methods should prevent this kind of problem, but they didn’t. Why?

So, lets go back and take a look at exactly how this story developed.

Just days after I wrote that “slipping into drought” May 4 post, which harshly criticized DEP’s failure to update the NJ Water Supply Master Plan, DEP issued a press release on May 7 -

CHRISTIE ADMINISTRATION ENCOURAGES RESIDENTS TO REMOVE STANDING WATER ON PROPERTY TO REDUCE MOSQUITO POPULATION

Gee, I thought it was very odd for DEP to be warning about standing water, at a time when it hadn’t rained in 2 weeks and conditions were dry as a bone.

[The heavy rainfall of the last few days came after DEP issued the press release. Conditions were dry when DEP issued that May 7 press release - and not conducive to mosquito breeding. That rainfall is not included in the Rutgers or DEP data. Regardless, DEP did not mention a forecast for a wet summer.]

Until I realized that this was a typical DEP spin and divert tactic – tactics which have been magnified tremendously by Superstorm Sandy.

Instead of focusing on any potential drought or explaining why we need a Water Supply Master Plan Update,  DEP  warned the public about this: (even the timing is odd, because a mosquito warning even DEP admits is not typically issued until “until late summer”):

Concerns are elevated this year because of Superstorm Sandy has increased potential opportunities for mosquito breeding, which could increase the risk of mosquito-borne diseases, including WNV.

“This season will be especially challenging because Superstorm Sandy has created new places for mosquitoes to breed such as wet debris piles and depressions left by fallen trees,” the [Health] Commissioner explained.

Sandy has become the universal cover story – sucking the oxygen out of virtually every other environmental story, marginalizing critics, and providing DEP plenty of cover.

And sure enough, literally within hours of that DEP press release, the Start Ledger ran the DEP’s story, with the Sandy hook – a  remarkable piece of stenography based exclusively on the DEP press release.  Another outcome of Sandy: More opportunities for mosquitoes to breed

As I Tweeted at the time, this is the responsive spincycle you get when a former Star Ledger reporter, Larry Ragonese, heads the DEP Press Office.

But that’s no biggie, DEP Press Office spin and Star Ledger stenography are routine at this point. In fact, I have documented that the Christie DEP Press Office has broken all records for issuing press releases (see: DEP Press Office Wins Prize)

And in addition to the number of press release, the subject matter of those releases in highly suggestive.

On would presume that DEP press releases should reflect scientific priorities, in terms of subject matter.

One would be wrong.

DEP has failed to warn the public about the highest priority and most pressing problems, which scientists, the public, and DEP’s own science found are the risks of climate change, air pollution (which has now become a matter of individual behavior), water pollution (similarly narrowed to residential fertilizer use), public health and safety threats from toxic chemicals, land use, loss of wildlife habitat, forests, and farms to development, crumbling infrastructure, etc, -

There is a common theme: these are all traditional regulatory governed issues caused by economic development and industrial activities.

But to the Christie DEP, government, nature and individual human behaviors are the cause of problems, not business and industry.

Illustrating these bizarre priorities, we note that while DEP Press Office virtually ignored all the above issues, DEP press releases have warned the public – repeatedly – about the hazards associated with naturally occurring or individual consumer behavioral things like mosquitos, and litter, and hungry bears and lawn fertilizers and recreational boating and wildfires and horny deer and abandoned buildings and boats and killer trees and deadly camping and naturally occuring radon and pheasant killing snowstorms and celebrating weakness in a climate change program and viral deer and “naturally occurring” algae blooms and dams and tree killing bugs and wood stoves and fireplaces and DEP culture and turning industrial pollution prevention into a homeowners program and oyster poachers and scary snakes and “red tape” and even fucking bedbugs!

There are common themes here amongst these warped perceptions and priorities too – nature is scary (not industry, chemicals and technology); government regulation is the problem; volunatary personal behaviors are the solution, and don’t bother business and industry with costly red tape.

But the initial Star Ledger story was accurate factually, while the followup regional south jersey story was not.

Getting an important fact wrong is very different.

So – how did the south jersey story get the “wet spring” fact so wrong?

My theory is that it was intentional – just like the motive behind the original May 7 DEP press release.

That error was fed to the reporter, and it was designed to avoid:

1) asking why DEP was warning of standing water during a dry period and warning of mosquitos and WNV far earlier than typical “later summer”

(of course, a dry period could not be related to climate change!. Despite strong science and observations that demonstrate we are now experiencing climate change,, the “objective” and “professional” media can never “speculate” about that, but speculation – based on false information no less! – about this summer’s mosquito populations and risks from West Nile Virus are legitimate issues to engage in HIGHLY speculative bullshit.)

2) to prevent coverage of the dry spring issue and therby open the can or worms of DEP’s longstanding failure to Update the Water Supply Master Plan.

I’ve seen this happen so many times that this is no conspiracy theory – its news management by the spinmeisters at DEP press office.

(today’s hyped Star Ledger cover story – “A Date with Fate” – on Delaware Bayshore/red knot is another example of news management- and that story is running on the day before an Assembly Committee will consider a major controversial  Coastal Commission bill!

Prediction: that Assembly Committee hearing will be ignored by the Ledger, or at best a very short story will get buried. Tomorrow’s big coastal story will be the Supreme Court hearing on dune leases – another painful irony, for sure.)

How do we do it, how do we do it, how do we do it, how do we do it
We need your business, we’re going out of business
We’ll give you the business
Get on the business end of our going-out-of-business sale
Receive our free brochure, free brochure
Read the easy-to-follow assembly instructions, batteries not included
Send before midnight tomorrow, terms available,
Step right up, step right up, step right up   ~~~ Tom Waits “Step Right Up” (1977) (listen here)

Today, I went to the Assembly Budget Committee in hopes that they might ask some tough questions of DEP Commissioner Martin (see this set up story).

I  had hoped that they would focus on climate change as a priority.

I also hoped they could defend the Legislature’s role against Gov. Christie’s Executive over-reach

Again, just like in the Senate, climate change was not even mentioned, Republicans on the Committee asked no questions, and Democrats made a half assed effort that at times praised DEP for horrible performance and policies.

I plead insanity, in the sense that Albert Einstein said that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.

While I was disappointed – but not surprised- by the Committee’s inability to defend Legislative prerogatives against Gov. Christie’s usurpation (separation of powers), or ask an informed policy question, or otherwise hold the Christie administration accountable for their record, I was shocked – and I mean shocked – by moments when legislators expressed “incredulity” and openly mocked Commissioner Martin.

Thus the headline – Martin delivered Enron testimony. Martin simply was not credible and at times was openly mocked by Legislators.

The last time I recall anything like this was when Gov. Florio’s first DEP Commissioner, Judith Yaskin,resigned in humiliation.

But it seemed like water off a duck’s back to Martin, who plowed on with his super confident, aggressive, and clueless testimony.

And the Enron analogy is not a stretch – those interested or who doubt my take can listen to the hearing themselves.

For those unfamiliar with Enron, here’s the Wiki:

Enron Corporation (former NYSE ticker symbol ENE) was an American energy, commodities, and services company based inHouston, Texas. Before its bankruptcy on December 2, 2001, Enron employed approximately 20,000 staff and was one of the world’s major electricity, natural gas, communications, and pulp and paper companies, with claimed revenues of nearly $101 billion during 2000.^[1]Fortune named Enron “America’s Most Innovative Company” for six consecutive years.

At the end of 2001, it was revealed that its reported financial condition was sustained substantially by an institutionalized, systematic, and creatively planned accounting fraud, known since as the Enron scandal. Enron has since become a well-known example of willful corporate fraud and corruption. The scandal also brought into question the accounting practices and activities of many corporations in the United States and was a factor in the creation of the Sarbanes–Oxley Act of 2002. The scandal also affected the greater business world by causing the dissolution of the Arthur Andersen accounting company.^[2]

The former consultancy and outsourcing arm of the firm, now known as Accenture, which had separated from the accountancy side in 1987 and renamed themselves after splitting from Andersen Worldwide in 2000, continues to operate and has become one of the largest multinational corporations in the world.

Note the role of the consulting firm Accenture.

DEP Commissioner Martin spent his career at Accenture.

I’ll let others connect those dots or suggest that Martin’s testimony today was unique and an unrelated affair, not the misleading and fraudulent tricks of the trade he learned and perfected in the Accenture consulting world.

So, getting back to the memorable moments of DEP’s budget hearing today.

While there was nothing new disclosed, the following surprised even this 30 year skeptical veteran:

1) Assemblyman Burzichelli (D-Oil and Chemicals), who is not even on the Budget Committee, was allowed to sit in and ask questions.

He spent his time asking 3 specific questions, that were obviously fed to him by and based exclusively on criticisms he got from his oil and chemical industry backers.

None of those questions involved ways that DEP can better protect public health and the environment. He didn’t even mention the Toxic Train Wreck that forced evacuations and poisoned people in his district.

Specifically, Burzichelli complained about the allegedly high costs to industry of air and water pollution control permits. He also complained about the increasingly oil/chemical industry payment to the NJ Spill Fund, and the fact that 67% of  of those revenues go not to toxic site cleanup (as originally intend by the Legislature in the Spill Act), but are diverted to the General Fund.

Remarkably, DEP Commissioner Martin – Enron style – claimed that those 67% revenues did in fact go to the Genral Fund, but all came back to DEP.

In response, Burzichelli, to his credit, openly mocked this false claim by Martin – Burzichelli knows that those funds do NOT return to DEP, as Martin falsely claimed.

2) Assemblyman Schaer, Co-Chair of the Committee, asked a series of questions.

He noted that DEP staff and budget had remained roughly flat, but that – according to Martin’ testimony - DEP had done an incredible amount of new work on Sandy response, recovery and debris removal. All this new work, according to Martin’s testimony, was done without any impact or reductions in prior work or any reduction in service or environmental protection.

Schaer said he was “incredulous” about how DEP could do so much more with less, and asked Martin flat out: “How do you do it”? 

At that point, I realized that we were in an Enron situation, and that facts didn’t matter.

That’s all, for now.

[Update: 5/10/13 – as usual, Tom Johnson at NJ Spotlight gets it exactly right:

It is a promise repeated by Martin two years ago, appearing before the same Assembly Budget Committee, when he testified then, saying the administration would unveil a stable source of funding for the effort within the next month or so.

“We must consider new ways of doing things and develop a new mode to make our parks self-sustaining,’’ Martin said in written remarks not delivered orally in his annual appearance before the Assembly budget panel. It has yet to happen. …

In the DEP appearance, lasting just longer than an hour, Martin faced few probing questions, a contrast to past meetings when the agency was frequently criticized by lawmakers over its regulatory oversight of business and industry. …

In other issues, Martin downplayed the diversion of millions of dollars in DEP funding to the general fund, a practice the Christie administration and legislators often employ to plug holes in the state budget. He argued it would have no impact on the quality of the state’s environmental programs.

DEP Budget Up In Assembly Tomorrow

Assembly passed Waiver rule veto. Will they stand by that and rise to the larger occasion?

You may not know it, but Governor Christie has used his executive authority essentially to rewrite and weaken all of NJ’s environmental laws.

So, let’s start with the politically obvious – framed by a recent AP story:

TRENTON, N.J. – New Jersey Democrats have an election-year issue that could make Gov. Chris Christie squirm , but they’ve been too divided so far to use it to their advantage.

Yes, Dems sure do have environmental issues to make the Gov. squirm -

[Q: Commissioner Martin, why did you withdraw and subsequently fail, as promised, to adopt a previously DEP proposed drinking water standard to protect pregnant women and young children from exposure to perchlorate, a chemical found in rocket fuel that scientists warn is harmful to pregnant women and fetuses?]

But  that Inquirer/AP story was about gun control.

And in writing that story, there was no hesitation by the media or political pundits to connect the dots between the Governor’s highly unpopular policy position and the partisan interests of the Democratic party and Gubernatorial candidate Senator Barbara Buono:

Christie’s re-election challenger, the mostly unknown Sen. Barbara Buono, is now trying to make gun laws an issue in the governor’s race, hoping to push the popular Republican into uncomfortable territory as he seeks re-election in his blue-leaning home state while stoking national ambitions to become the 2016 GOP presidential nominee.

Just like gun control, protection of public health and the environment is a very popular issue with NJ voters.

But unlike gun control, few know that Governor Christie has a very bad record on the environment (or that Senator Buono has been a longtime environmental champion).

[Q: Commissioner Martin, we note that you have some background in economics. So, when conducting cost benefit analysis required by Executive Order #2, how does DEP quantify the value of human life and disease and weigh them against industry compliance costs in crafting regulations?]

Worse, on top of his unpopular bad policy, the Gov. has deployed unilateral executive branch power to essentially rewrite NJ’s environmental laws.

[Q: Commissioner Martin, Governor Christie recently said that climate change was an "esoteric issue"  that he had no time to consider in Sandy recovery efforts, and that people "don't give a damn" about anyway.  Do you share those views? If not, please describe how DEP considered climate change in coastal programs before and after Sandy, and describe the specific actions DEP has taken to implement the 2007 Global Warming Response Act.]

His unprecedented series of executive branch moves – via executive orders and DEP regulatory actions – have had the effect of essentially rewriting environmental laws and making new policy, thereby raising fundamental separation of powers issues.

Under our Constitutional scheme, the Legislative Branch writes the laws, makes policy, and backs that up with the power of the purse. The Executive Branch implements and enforces the laws and powers delegated by the Legislature – the Gov. can not make new law.

Examples of Gov. Christie’s abuses abound:

• Do laws enacted by the legislature authorize DEP to issue waivers?
• Do laws enacted by the Legislature require that public health and environmental protection be based on or subordinate to industry compliance costs outlined in a “cost benefit analysis”?
• Did the Legislature authorize a non-governmental private industry dominated body to control the scientific basis of DEP regulations, like safe drinking water standards?
• Did the Legislature delegate important clean water protections to local government?
• Did the Legislature direct DEP to exit the Northeast State’s Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative?
• Did the Legislature establish a policy of providing “regulatory relief” from environmental and public health protections?
• Did the Legislature prohibit the Drinking Water Quality Institute from meeting?
• Did the Legislature define DEP’s Mission to include “promotion of economic development”?
• Did the Legislature pass a law or otherwise establish a policy to rollback or make NJ’s strict standards equivalent to or consistent with their counterpart federal minimums? That alone would reverse 30 years of NJ environmental leadership in passing some of the strictest laws in the nation. A bill to do just that was heard in the Assembly, but has failed to move, demonstrating little legislative support for the Governor’s actual policy expressed in Executive Order #2.

But despite no legislative authorization, Gov. Christie and DEP have done all this and more.

Will the Legislature continue to sit on the sidelines while the Governor abuses executive power and rewrites NJ’s environmental laws?

Thus far, the only Legislative pushback has come from a Concurrent Resolution (ACR 37 and SCR 59 (1R) ) declaring the DEP Waiver Rule inconsistent with legislative intent.

When that Waiver rule was adopted last year, the Philadelphia Inquirer reported:

“It is so vague that it opens the door to all forms of abuse, which will result in protections of the environment and public health taking a backseat to politics and economic development,” said Bill Wolfe, director of New Jersey Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility.

The Assembly version to legislatively veto the waiver rule passed last May by a 47-31 party line vote (R’s backing the Gov.), but the Senate version – co sponsored by Senator Buono HELLO! – is stalled and has not been posted for Floor vote, for many of the same political reasons as the gun control divide.

It is likely that the Legislature’s inaction in vetoing this rule was seen as a green light by the Appellate Division, who upheld the waiver rule in a March 21, 2013 opinion.

Despite finding the origin of the DEP waiver rule explicitly in Gov. Christie’s Executive Order #2, the Court nonetheless looked the other way, relied on a fig leaf highly questionable DEP assertion, and allowed the Gov. to implement his Order through DEP rules. The Court wrote:

Although acting almost immediately after the Governor’s mandate, DEP made clear that the agency was “not draw[ing] its authority to promulgate the waiver rules from Executive Order No. 2, but from its comprehensive legislation.” 44 N.J.R. 1001. Relying on this delegated legislative authority, DEP explained its reasons for proposing the waiver rules. …

We find the promulgation constitutes a valid exercise of the DEP’s implied authority incidental to the extensive powers vested in the agency by the Legislature. We also find the waiver rules establish appropriate and clear standards for the exercise of agency discretion.

“Implied incidental powers”? That’s right up there with “penubras and emanations”.

Or how about this statement by the Court, which has echoes of another infamous judicial standard: “we know it when we see it”:

“There are some concepts which, by their nature, defy precise definition.” In re Revocation of Access of Block No.1901, Lot No. 1, Borough of Paramus, 324 N.J.Super. 322, 332 (App.Div.), certif. denied sub nom. In re Access of Block No.1901 (Parkway 17 Assocs.), 162 N.J. 664 (1999). We consider “net environmental benefit” to be one of those concepts.

Could you imagine DEP imposing a new strict regulation on industry, mandating that all permits include a demonstration that the permittee has created “net environmental benefit“, all based on DEP asserted “implied incidental powers” that implement a concept that “defies precise definition”? Are you kidding me?

The Legislature has not acted to reverse the Appellate Division opinion and the case is now on appeal by environmentalists to the Supreme Court. Will that court concur with concepts that “defy precise definition”?

If the Legislature continues to fail to veto the waiver rule, it is likely that the Supreme Court also will view that as a signal of  concurrence with the court’s finding of “implied legislative authority” for DEP to issue waivers based on “concepts that defy precise definition”.

Getting back to the DEP budget.

The Senate Budget review hearing largely gave DEP a pass. That was expected, given the political leadership of the Senate (the failure to pass the Waiver Rule veto is just one indication).

So, tomorrow’s Assembly Budget Committee hearing on the Christie DEP’s FY’14 budget provides a crucially important opportunity to hold the Governor accountable to his record, while using legislative powers of the purse and oversight.

The Assembly passed the Waiver rule veto. Will they stand by that and rise to the larger occasion?

The Governor’s record provides a target rich environment – see:

• Metrics for Mr. Martin
• DEP Budget Up In Senate Tomorrow – Will Dems Give Gov. Christie And DEP Commissioner Martin A Pass?
• DEP Budget Hearing a Bust

1. Sandy Preparedness - 

DEP is required under the federal Coastal Zone Management Act to submit bi-annnual Reports to NOAA concerning, among other things, coastal hazard assessment (Section 309 Report). This DEP led assessment preceded and is in addition to DEP’s subordinate role in NJ State Emergency Planning via OEM. historically, this work was supervised by DEP’s Office of Coastal Planning, which was housed in the Commissioner’s Office, reflecting its priority and stature. That Office had embarked on a local government Pilot Program, known as the  Coastal Community Vulnerability Assessment Protocol (CCVAP) 

DEP Commissioner Martin dismantled all this, including officially downgrading coastal hazards from “high” priority to “medium”, thereby undermining State preparedness.

It is clear that lack of preparedness led to the AshBritt emergency contract for debris removal. Lack of preparedness also led to NJ Transit loss of over $100 million. There are others, including DEP’s neglect of a Pilot Program on Coastal Community Vulnernability Assessment adn DEP’s failure to monitor and enforce current rules on water infrastructure emergency planning. 

2. Implementation of the Global Warming Response Act  - climate change policy and performance including development of renewable energy (although the latter is an Energy Master Plan question better address to BPU)

The Global Warming Response Act was enacted in 2007. In 2009, DEP submitted a report with over 20 recommendations regarding how NJ could secure deep emissions reductions necessary to meet the goals of the Act.

DEP Commissioner Martin has dismantled all that.

3. Drinking Water – Status of the Drinking Water Qulaity institute and DEP promulgation of “MCL’s” (drinking water standards) recommended by DWQI scientists

The DWQI was created by the Legislature almost 30 years ago, and tasked with the exclusive role to make scientific recommendations on drinking water standards to DEP. The DWQI has not met for almost 3 years now, at the order of Commissioner Martin. He has ignored dozens of their recommendations to strengthen standards. Martin outsourced the DWQI science to the private SAB, a body that includes Dupont and others with severe conflicts of interest and scientific bias. 

4. Fracking

What is the Administration’s position on legislation to prohibit the processing of fracking residuals at NJ facilities?

What is the Administration’s position of the DRBC moratorium and DRBC regulations? Do you support adopting DRBC regulations that would end the current moratorium and open the floodgates to over 18,000 wells in NY and Pennsylvania portions of the Delaware River watershed?

5. Waiver rule

a) lack of enabling authority

b) executive branch usurpation

c) status of litigation

d) status of program

6. Alternate Dispute Resolution

a) is ADR program authorized by Legislation?

b) Is ADR program authorized by DEP regulation? DEP Guidance?

c) cases heard, settlements reached (list)

d) transparency and public involvement lacking

7. Regulatory Policy under Christie Executive Orders #1, #2, #3 and #4.

a) Role of the Executive Branch

b) consistency with Legislative intent 

c) conformance with enabling statutory decisions rules; and 

d) “regulatory relief” policy: balancing compliance costs and adverse public health and environmental impacts .

8. Science Advisory Board (SAB)

a) Role – examples of mission creep into policy and regulation, which is prohibited under the prior DEP Commissioner’s Order that created the SAB

b) Membership

c) conflicts of interest

d) Bias

e) lack of Legislative authorization

f) transparency and public participation

g) scientific integrity and peer review

9. Enforcement policy:

a) staff, budget, inspections (by program area)

b) violations

c) penalties assessed

d) penalties collected

e) referrals to the Attorney General’s Office

f) contested cases pending at OAL

10. Site remediation

a) Status of Licensed Site Remediation Professionals (LSRP) Program

b) # cases

c) # audits

d) # cleanups – permanent unrestricted use versus engineering and institutional controls

e) community involvement and transparency

f) Natural Resource Damages collected and mitigation 

Fundraising To Attend Summer Action Camp

We are in the era of extreme energy – mountaintop  removal, deep sea drilling, fracking, tar sands, et al.

And we all should know about the Global Warming’s Terrifying New Math and the moral imperative of taking direct action based on that math.

While I’ve long been appalled and angered by mountaintop removal, I must embarrassingly admit, I’ve really never been more than a few miles off I-81, I-40, or the Blue Ridge Parkway in Appalachia, and know nothing about the region or its people.

Aside from looking at photos and writing some very superficial posts about EPA regulations and reading about the TVA and the works of Faulkner and the history of the Highlander Center, I really have had little knowledge about the region, or its history, culture, or mountaintop removal mining practices.

I’ve become increasing frustrated by traditional environmental tactics and regulatory bullshit, so I’ve looked for opportunities for direct action.

So, when I learned, via “Bidder70″ Tim DeChristopher’s group Peaceful Uprising and “Rising Tide” about the work of the group “Mountain Justice” and their Summer Action Camp, I thought it would be a great learning opportunity and activist experience for this old man.

I figured I could contribute my photography, writing, and support of their direct action activism – and generate support for their work here in NJ.

So, I signed up for the Summer Action Camp – here’s what that’s all about:

Join Mountain Justice this May 19th – 27th for our 9th Mountain Justice Summer Action Training Camp, near Damascus, VA. Mountain Justice has grown from a fast burning brush fire that helped push Mountaintop Removal to national awareness into a critical support network at the base of a growing, national anti-extractive industry movement for social and environmental justice. This year, it’s time to fan the flames of resistance to dirty energy, and put an end to MTR once and for all, while continuing to support bottom up economic transition for a brighter Appalachia.

Will you join us as we build pressure and momentum to stop strip mining and other destructive extractive industries in Appalachia!

Mountain Justice Summer Camp is a place to learn skills, expand on the ones you already have, strengthen connections in networked social movements for Justice, meet new allies and take action to stop the destruction of Appalachia.

Please join or support Mountain Justice!

Although I already registered to attend, the problem is I need to raise funds to attend and to travel there.

I need at least $200 – $150 minimum for Mountain Justice and $50 gas money. 

So, like last year’s “Tour De Frack“, I’m looking for sponsors!

Please, if you agree that Mountain Juatice is doing important work, please send them a check.

While I won’t be traveling there on my bicycle, if you care to support my travel and participation there this Summer, you can send financial support to me at:

359 Oliver Street

Bordentown, NJ 08505

NJ’s $229 million share of the $60 billion Congressional Sandy bailout appropriated for water infrastructure got a lot of media play and press releases this week (e.g. see:  

• Feds to give N.J. $229 million to strengthen Sandy-damaged water and sewage plants
•  N.J. to get $229M from EPA for post-Sandy water upgrades
•  Lautenberg, Menendez Announce $229 Million in Sandy Aid to Rebuild and Strengthen NJ Water Infrastructure

So I want to take a moment to make a few important points that were ignored in that coverage (readers: please hit the links in this post, there’s a lot of meat there).

First, while Gov. Christie and DEP have issued scores of press releases and done many PR events about  Sandy recovery and NJ’s receipt of federal aid, both were curiously silent about this particular $229 million tranch of federal money.

Where was the Gov.? Where was DEP Commissioner Martin?

They don’t want to talk about clean water?

They don’t want to take credit for getting federal money?

Why is that?

Answer: Because they are highly vulnerable.

EPA’s Region 2 Administrator Judy Enck revealed why, i.e. these are not new problems, they were well known and existed long before Sandy hit, but were ignored:

As of now, a project vying for the money must have been affected by Hurricane Sandy, and it must propose fixes that would allow it to withstand future disasters. That includes upgrades such as submersible pumps, backup power sources and barriers to prevent flooding, [EPA Regional Administrator] Enck said.

“As of now”? What? Is that some variant of Obama’s “look forward, not backward”?

Did the world begin anew after Sandy? Is this all down the memory whole via the dismissive phrase “As of now”?

Even the most cursory probe or investigative journalism would reveal that:

1) NJ DEP ignored multiple warnings and performed miserably in preparing for and preventing the severe water infrastructure problems we experienced during Superstorm Sandy;

2) existing DEP emergency planning regulations and permits are weak and unenforceable;

 NJ DEP NJPDES regulations (@ NJAC 7:14A-6.12) specify limited emergency planning provisions for certain wastewater treatment facilities, including back up power provision. These are not mandatory enforceable permit conditions and DEP has lax oversight of these important functions.

NJ DEP Water Supply Planning regulations (@ NJAC 7:10-2.3 Plan for provision of potable water in emergencies) task NJ DEP with the responsibility to develop emergency plans for public water supply systems across the state.

On January 24, 2013, DEP denied my OPRA request for these emergency plans that are mandated by DEP’s own regulations.

3) there are no new DEP plans, regulations, enforcement initiatives, or funds for preventing the same problems from occurring – in fact, DEP has effectively deregulated Sandy infrastructure rebuilding;

4) aside from Sandy damage and vulnerability, there are HUGE multi-billion dollar infrastructure deficits and a complete lack of asset management that DEP and BPU are sweeping under the rug; and

5) Failures can be directly tied back to Governor Christie’s policies and Executive Orders!

The second major issue ignored by media and environmental critics  is that President Obama CUT the clean water State Revolving Fund by $447 million.

Those cuts are reflected in the Christie FY’14 budget.

As I wrote:

Tom Johnson at NJ Spotlight was the only media to put the story in context (i.e. to mention huge infrastructure deficits) and to include criticism from environmentalists – but even Tom did not mention the Obama cuts or the DEP performance issues (see:  Number of the Day – $229 Million)

When a plane crashes, it’s page one news and we spare no resources to conduct detailed investigations to learn why and take steps to fix the problem and prevent a recurrence of whatever failed.

But water and sewer plants fail and we don’t care?

We can live without a plane for a week – try living without water for that long.

Just Like Sandy, State Unprepared- Water Supply Plan Decades Old

Where is the DEP Water Supply Master Plan Update?

Hit links below for data (Source USGS - h/t Todd Bates

Todd Bates of the Asbury Park Press, posted some interesting data and maps on his “EnviroGuy” blog:

New Jersey’s dry spell has led to below-normal stream flows in most of the state, according to the U.S. Geological Survey.

In part of North Jersey, stream flows are equivalent to what happens during a moderate drought, according to a USGS map.

And it looks like it will remain dry through Monday, at least in Neptune, according to the National Weather Service.

Check out these maps:

[Note: the DEP drought monitoring indices rate stream flow and groundwater as "extremely dry" - but curiously, the declared drought status is "normal"]

The stream flow data reflects an unusual weather pattern, written about by Stephen Stirling the “Weather Guy” at NJ.com – This is the same “blocking pattern” that brought Superstorm Sandy, another example of extreme weather:

see:  Same type of weather pattern that brought N.J. Sandy will produce beautiful conditions across state this week

A blocking weather pattern has set itself up over the continental United States and New Jersey is in the sweet spot. A blocking weather pattern centers around a ridge of high pressure that locks itself in place, slowing and redirecting the typical train of storm systems across the country.

Some scientists  - including at NOAA - suggest that the unusual “blocking pattern” is linked to climate change and related to melting of arctic sea ice and is another driver of “extreme weather”.

If that “blocking pattern” lasts for awhile, NJ could be slipping into an early drought cycle – a spring drought would create deficits going into a potentially dangerous dry summer, more of NJ’s cycle of “lurching from drought to flood”.

If an extended dry period were to occur, NJ is unprepared for drought.

The legally mandated update of the Water Supply Master Plan is many years over-due and nowhere in sight. DEP has been promising to update the plan for years, with no action and no accountability for lack of action.

Curiously, the public members of NJ’s Water Supply Advisory Council are totally silent in calling for DEP to act, a disturbing sign of abdication of their public responsibility .

As we wrote, these are highly significant issues for NJ:

Since the last Plan Update in 1996, there have been major changes on the ground that effect water supply management:

• water demand has soared due to population increase, more McMansion residential lawn watering, swimming pools, and golf course and agricultural irrigation;
• water supply has been reduced due to landscape changes, higher temperatures, less rainfall, less groundwater recharge, and higher pollution levels that eliminate summer river flows in the Passaic, Pompton, Hackensack, and Raritan rivers for water supply purposes;
• An aging infrastructure has gotten older and leakier – a multi-billion dollar infrastructure deficit has gone unfunded;
• over 300,000 acres of forests, wetlands, and farmlands have been lost to development, which significantly modifies the hydrological cycle;
• The ecological effects of diminished stream/river flows; loss of wetlands, riparian buffers, and vernal pools; and declining groundwater levels have become pronounced;
• The Highlands Master Plan process documented significant deficits in many watersheds;
• new science on water quality and unregulated pollutants has documented increasing public health and ecological risks; and
• global warming is increasing temperatures and changing rainfall, snowfall, and spring snowmelt patterns, thus altering fundamental hydrology and creating new demand and stressors.

So, if the dry pattern continues, will that wake DEP and the WSAC members up?

To issue that wake up call, we will repost some of the huge issues involved (don’t bother hitting the links to the outdated 1996 Water Supply Plan, DEP took down those documents to cover their tracks!)

natural dunes on Long Beach Island, NJ

Certainly, what we call things matters. And when we fail to acknowledge the difference between natural and man-made structures, we gloss over the immense influence we currently exert on our environment. ..

Orrin Pilkey calls many extremely hard nourished beaches something like “seaside recreation platforms” because they have few other features in common with real beaches, especially those in Florida in which the dredging has brought ashore a lot of shell and fines that cement the sand into a concrete-like surface.  ~~~ Climatide

My head continues to exlode as I read of all the Governor’s so called passion and commitment to “dunes”.

So, just what is a “dune”?

If it looks like a dune and acts like a dune, is it a dune?

Is what the Governor talking about really a coastal “dune”?

Or some nostalgic notion shaped by a carnival barker, Snooki and Springstein?

Man made engineered dunes are costly, do not protect homes from flooding, create a false sense of security, undermine natural coastal processes, and invite even more over-development in harm’s way. DEP’s own Coastal Hazard Assessment Reports (309 Assessment) used to say all that, but not anymore!

“If I was king, we would restore dunes, but we wouldn’t rebuild destroyed homes close to the beach, and we’d move some buildings back anyhow,” said Orrin H. Pilkey, the James B. Duke Professor Emeritus of Earth and Ocean Sciences at Duke University. “We would also put in regulations prohibiting intensification and development.” ~~~ NY Times

But, more narrowly, for an otherwise excellent discussion of this issue from some wise people from Cape Cod, see:  The difference between dunes, escarpments, and piles of sand 

Similar scientific and values questions are being asked on Long Island - but I’m not aware of that discussion in NJ – an absence of debate that is as troubling as the Governor’s demagoguery (that continues to be uncritically reported by NJ press lapdogs).

[Note: The USGS makes it clear that natural dune processes are not consistent with fixed development - including man made "dunes". USGS  scientists also note - contrary to repeated misleading statements by the Governor Christie  - that dunes are not a panacea in terms of providing protection to development:

"Coastal dunes are our last line of natural defense from the onslaught of storms and rising seas," said USGS Director Marcia McNutt. "They are dynamic features that retreat from the battering of major storms like Sandy and rebuild in the aftermath; their natural cycle is inconsistent with immobile development." ...

"We found that there was widespread dune erosion and overwash," Hapke said. "On average, where the dunes were not completely overwashed, they eroded back 70 feet -- the equivalent of 30 years of change. Our research also showed that dunes lost as much as 15 feet of elevation."

The NJ coast is a highly managed project of engineering.

Accordingly, the NJ DEP CAFRA regulations define a "dune" as follows:

“Dune” means a wind-or wave-deposited or man-made formation of sand that lies generally parallel to and landward of the beach, and between the upland limit of the beach and foot of the most inland slope of the dune. Dune includes the foredune, secondary and tertiary dune ridges, and all landward dune ridges and mounds, as well as man-made dunes where they exist. A small mound of loose, windblown sand found in a street or on part of a structure as a result of storm activity is not considered to be a dune.

Or, more accurately, a "seaside recreation platform" - SRP!

Christie "on the beach" - I like the mat, "royal" blue, fit for a King! (Source: Gov. Christie's Office)

Source: Record, AMY NEWMAN / STAFF PHOTOGRAPHER

a pile of sand in Sea Bright

piles of sand in Cape May

Source: - Thomas P. Costello, Asbury Park (N.J.) Press)

Construction of a beach club pool in Spring Lake as the six month anniversary of Hurricane Sandy approaches. Spring Lake, NJ 4/25/13 (Tony Kurdzuk/The Star-Ledger)

Sea gull takes shelter from dredge in Atlantic Highlands marina

I rarely blow my own horn, but foundation grant money is getting extremely scarce, and curiously, other far less effective groups are getting fat. So below is just the main stream media we drove, submitted as part of this year’s Final Report. And these are not cheap sound bite media or generated by trolling press row, but based on and reflective of the substantive policy expertise, analysis, and advocacy we bring.

(and this list does NOT include: 1) the actual work we conducted across the state, 2) the legislative and regulatory testimony, 3) the PEER press releases, 4) the TV and radio interviews, 5) a major upcoming investigative documentary we worked on (to be broadcast nationally late summer) 6) the hundreds of posts here at Wolfenotes read by thousands of people, and 6) the thousands of emails and phone calls).

So, if there’s a funder out there who’s looking to fund an effective group, give us a call. We’re hungry, and we produce.

EXPANDED ROLE FOR INDUSTRY DOESN’T HOLD WATER WITH ENVIRONMENTALISTS

http://www.peer.org/news/press-clips/2013/01/24/expanded-role-for-industry-doesn%E2%80%99t-hold-water-with-environmentalists/

NJ BILL COULD CHANGE REGULATION OF DRINKING WATER CONTAMINANTS

http://www.peer.org/news/press-clips/2013/01/24/nj-bill-could-change-regulation-of-drinking-water-contaminants/

RUSH TO REBUILD COULD BE COSTLY

http://www.peer.org/news/press-clips/2012/12/20/rush-to-rebuild-could-be-costly/

U.S. EPA COMMITS TO MORE DREDGING AT POMPTON LAKE

http://www.peer.org/news/press-clips/2012/12/20/u.s.-epa-commits-to-more-dredging-at-pompton-lake/

GOVERNMENT WATCHDOG GROUP SEEKS EPA IG SCRUTINY OF RAIL SPILLS

http://www.peer.org/news/press-clips/2013/01/02/government-watchdog-group-seeks-epa-ig-scrutiny-of-rail-spills/

SOME RESPONDERS SAY GLOUCESTER COUNTY WAS UNPREPARED FOR PAULSBORO CHEMICAL EMERGENCY

http://www.peer.org/news/press-clips/2012/12/27/some-responders-say-gloucester-county-was-unprepared-for-paulsboro-chemical-emergency/

SWEENEY: PAULSBORO TRAIN DERAILMENT SITE COMMUNICATION GETS ‘F’ FOR FRUSTRATION

http://www.peer.org/news/press-clips/2012/12/11/sweeney-paulsboro-train-derailment-site-communication-gets-f-for-frustration/

JERSEY SHORE DEVELOPMENT FAILURES EXPOSED BY HURRICANE SANDY

http://www.peer.org/news/press-clips/2012/12/11/jersey-shore-development-failures-exposed-by-hurricane-sandy/

CRITICS: CHRISTIE DEEP-SIXED CLIMATE CHANGE PREP

http://www.peer.org/news/press-clips/2012/12/11/critics-christie-deep-sixed-climate-change-prep/

ADMINISTRATION FAILS TO PUSH REVISED STATE PLAN THROUGH AT CONTENTIOUS HEARING

http://www.peer.org/news/press-clips/2012/11/14/administration-fails-to-push-revised-state-plan-through-at-contentious-hearing/

HURRICANE SANDY DAMAGE AMPLIFIED BY BREAKNECK DEVELOPMENT OF COAST

http://www.peer.org/news/press-clips/2012/11/13/hurricane-sandy-damage-amplified-by-breakneck-development-of-coast/

GOVERNMENT REBUILDS WITH LITTLE REGARD FOR NEXT STORM

http://www.peer.org/news/press-clips/2012/11/13/government-rebuilds-with-little-regard-for-next-storm/

STATE AGENCY WAIVES ENVIRONMENTAL RULES TO SPEED REBUILDING AFTER STORM

http://www.peer.org/news/press-clips/2012/11/07/state-agency-waives-environmental-rules-to-speed-rebuilding-after-storm/

ENVIRONMENTAL GROUP GATHERING SIGNATURES TO FIGHT BULL’S ISLAND TREE REMOVAL

http://www.peer.org/news/press-clips/2012/09/22/environmental-group-gathering-signatures-to-fight-bull%27s-island-tree-removal/

STATE MANAGEMENT PLAN TO DECIDE FATE OF CENTURIES-OLD TREES AT BULL’S ISLAND STATE PARK, WHERE FALLING TREE KILLED CAMPER

http://www.peer.org/news/press-clips/2012/09/19/state-management-plan-to-decide-fate-of-centuries-old-trees-at-bull%27s-island-state-park,-where-falling-tree-killed-camper/

NOVARTIS AND MAYOR SPAR OVER SUPERFUND SITE

http://www.peer.org/news/press-clips/2012/09/14/novartis-and-mayor-spar-over-superfund-site/

DELAWARE AND RARITAN CANAL COMMISSION ASKED TO DENY BULL’S ISLAND PLAN

http://www.peer.org/news/press-clips/2012/08/18/delaware-and-raritan-canal-commission-asked-to-deny-bull%27s-island-plan/

B.L. ENGLAND GENERATING STATION’S PLANS TO SWITCH TO NATURAL GAS WILL TAKE PLENTY OF TIME, EFFORT AND MONEY

http://www.peer.org/news/press-clips/2012/08/20/b.l.-england-generating-station%27s-plans-to-switch-to-natural-gas-will-take-plenty-of-time,-effort-and-money/

EPA MUST FORCE THE DEP’S HAND

http://www.peer.org/news/press-clips/2012/08/17/epa-must-forcethe-dep%27s-hand/

CHRISTIE ADMINISTRATION HAS YET TO DO ENOUGH TO STEM BARNEGAT BAY POLLUTION

http://www.peer.org/news/press-clips/2012/08/15/christie-administration-has-yet-to-do-enough-to-stem-barnegat-bay-pollution/

NEW RESEARCH SHOWS BARNEGAT BAY COULD BE DECLARED LEGALLY ‘IMPAIRED’

http://www.peer.org/news/press-clips/2012/08/14/new-research-shows-barnegat-bay-could-be-declared-legally-%27impaired%27/

MARK IN THE MORNING: N.J. FULL OF NATURAL RESOURCES, HISTORY THAT ARE WORTH PRESERVING

http://www.peer.org/news/press-clips/2012/08/06/mark-in-the-morning:-n.j.-full-of-natural-resources,-history-that-are-worth-preserving/

COMMUNITY GROUPS TO URGE GOV. CHRISTIE TO NOMINATE THE POMPTON LAKES DUPONT SITE AS A FEDERAL SUPERFUND SITE

http://www.peer.org/news/press-clips/2012/08/02/community-groups-to-urge-gov.-christie-to-nominate-the-pompton-lakes-dupont-site-as-a-federal-superfund-site/

FEDS TO OK DUPONT’S CLEANUP PLAN

http://www.peer.org/news/press-clips/2012/08/01/feds-to-ok-dupont%27s-cleanup-plan/

SCIENTISTS RAISE ALARM AS STATE CONSIDERS DROPPING PARTS OF BARNEGAT BAY FROM POLLUTION LIST

http://www.peer.org/news/press-clips/2012/07/28/scientists-raise-alarm-as-state-considers-dropping-parts-of-barnegat-bay-from-pollution-list/

BARNEGAT BAY: NO NEED FOR SPECIAL CLEANUP SAYS STATE

http://www.peer.org/news/press-clips/2012/07/27/barnegat-bay:-no-need-for-special-cleanup-says-state/

DESPAIR OVER ‘IMPAIRED’ LIST

http://www.peer.org/news/press-clips/2012/07/27/despair-over-%27impaired%27-list/

AMBITIOUS PROGRGAM TO REDUCE DIESEL POLLUTION RACKS UP ONE RETROFIT

http://www.peer.org/news/press-clips/2012/07/03/ambitious-progrgam-to-reduce-diesel-pollution-racks-up-one-retrofit/

B.L. ENGLAND POWER PLANT CONVERSION TO DRAMATICALLY REDUCE EMISSIONS OVER FOUR YEARS

http://www.peer.org/news/press-clips/2012/06/21/b.l.-england-power-plant-conversion-to-dramatically-reduce-emissions-over-four-years/

EPA TO LOOK INTO N.J. DEP CHIEF’S CANCELLATION OF $429K FINE FOR PARSIPPANY TREATMENT PLANT

http://www.peer.org/news/press-clips/2012/06/14/epa-to-look-into-n.j.-dep-chief%27s-cancellation-of-$429k-fine-for-parsippany-treatment-plant/

EPA OK WITH N.J. POLLUTION POLICING

http://www.peer.org/news/press-clips/2012/06/14/epa-ok-with-n.j.-pollution-policing/

DEP CUT $430,000 PARSIPPANY FINE TO $0

http://www.peer.org/news/press-clips/2012/06/13/dep-cut-$430,000-parsippany-fine-to-$0/

NJ TOWN IN FEAR OVER 30 YEAR OLD TOXIC MESS

http://www.peer.org/news/press-clips/2012/06/11/nj-town-in-fear-over-30-year-old-toxic-mess/

NEW JERSEY COMMUNITY DEVASTATED BY CONTAMINATED WATER

http://www.peer.org/news/press-clips/2012/05/14/new-jersey-community-devastated-by-contaminated-water/

NJ ENVIRONMENTAL FEDERATION AND CHRISTIE — A RELATIONSHIP ON THE ROCKS

http://www.peer.org/news/press-clips/2012/05/04/nj-environmental-federation-and-christie—-a-relationship-on-the-rocks/

N.J. ENVIRONMENTAL FEDERATION: ‘D’ ON CHRISTIE POLICIES

http://www.peer.org/news/press-clips/2012/05/03/n.j.-environmental-federation:-%E2%80%98d%E2%80%99-on-christie-policies/

[Update: As proof of the EPA lie about why they backed out of this panel discussion, note that EPA spoke in detail about the EAB appeal to a "friendly" audience on April 3, 2013 - see this.]

When I got the invitation to participate in a Ramapo College panel discussion on the Dupont Pompton Lakes toxic nightmare, of course I immediately agreed.

When I was told that my fellow panel members would be Dupont, US EPA, and the Passaic River Coalition (PRC), I knew that panel discussion would never happen –  even though Ramapo told me that all had confirmed their participation.

No way would Dupont and EPA agree to publicly face informed and highly critical scrutiny, like this:

• Dupont: Too Big To Jail
• The Great Dupont Train RCRA
• Dupont Pompton Lakes – Still Dirty After All These Years
• Dupont’s Mercury Problem Is Now EPA’s Problem Too
• Documents Show Dupont, EPA, and DEP Knew Of Pompton Lakes Vapor Problem for Seven Years Before Warning Exposed Residents
• DUPONT POMPTON LAKE POLLUTION MAY BE HEADED DOWNSTREAM - DEP Scientists’ Questions Could Prompt Feds to Expand DuPont Cleanup Scope
• FEDERAL WILDLIFE AGENCY FLAYS JERSEY POMPTON LAKES PLAN - Fish & Wildlife Service Conditions Restructure Cleanup and Spur Damage Payments
• US Fish & Wildlife Service Blasts Dupont Science On Mercury Cleanup Plan - Major Rebuke To DEP Review & Challenge to EPA to Strengthen Cleanup

So, despite my reservations, on Friday (April 26), I trucked up to speak at Ramapo College’s 18th annual Watershed Conference:

This year’s conference will present updates on watershed events, including: the Ford paint sludge remediation in Torne Valley in Ramapo, NY;  news from the Ramapo River headwaters in Orange County, NY; recent studies on Eastern timber rattlesnakes (a threatened species in New York and New Jersey); Cropsey’s Castle, Aladdin: the artist’s summer home near Warwick, NY – based on new research by Cropsey expert, Dr. Kenneth Maddox, we will get a virtual tour of  Cropsey’s design for this legendary mansion, destroyed by fire in 1909 (while he lived at Aladdin, Cropsey frequently traveled to paint in the Ramapo Valley) ; the ongoing pollution from the Mulch Pile Site and the problematic DeMarino Soil Site in Tuxedo, NY; New Jersey Highlands issues; environmental impact assessment of natural gas pipeline expansions in the NJ Highlands Region; DuPont pollution and remediation in Pompton Lakes, NJ.

At last year’s conference, there also was a presentation on the Dupont site:

3:30 – E. Durling Merrill, Environmental Officer Pompton Lakes: 1) The DuPont Acid Brook Cleanup  

I wonder if Mr. Merrill disclosed the fact that his salary was paid by Dupont for many years?

This year, in the wake of the controversial EPA issuance of the long awaited final RCRA permit to require Dupont to cleanup a portion of Pompton Lake, the Ramapo agenda included a 1 hour panel discussion of the cleanup – and with a broader set of panelists:

3:00 pm – Acid Brook – DuPont Pollution and Remediation in Pompton Lake: Mike Reinhart, Environmental Specialist, Passaic River Coalition; Jan Barry, Environmental Journalist, Ramapo College Adjunct Professor; Bill Wolfe, N.J. PEER; Ed Merrill, Pompton Lakes Environmental Officer; and a DuPont Representative. 

Both Dupont US EPA Region 2 had confirmed their participation. So did the Passaic River Coalition.

But, curiously, just as I expected, they all backed out.

Why were those highly unusual move taken by those 3 groups?

We were told that the lame excuse EPA gave was that it was due to pending litigation. We don’t know what the excuses from Dupont and PRC were. But  We assume it was when they saw this:

conference announcement notes PEER, Dupont, EPA and PRC panel

So, the panel was reduced to myself and Jan Barry, former Record reporter and now an adjunct Ramapo professor.

Jan did a nice job presenting the history of the site, the Record’s excellent coverage, and the cleanup. Jan noted the explosive public reaction to recent disclosures of the vapor intrusion problem, the cancer cluster, and the down-river migration of mercury.

With EPA, Dupont, and PRC no shows, that gave me lots – lots – more time to rip the various failures (see above posts for most of that). I had fun and held nothing back! I’ll see if I can locate a video, I think it was taped.

And, before closing, I need to call bullshit on this From Passaic River Coalition’s 2012 Annual Report:

Absurd Proposal to Build Homes on Piers in High Hazard Zones

Legislature Joins Gov. In Ignoring Climate Change Threats

To Bill Wolfe, director of the environmental group NJ PEER, “the Rutgers work shows how the FEMA maps underestimate risks.” He wants to see the new tool formally incorporated by the two agencies. ”Buildings and infrastructure like roads, water and sewer and storm water have useful lives of more than 50 years,” Wolfe said. “What we build today will see the Rutgers elevations.” ~~~ Sea-level map offers disturbing picture of Shore’s future - Philly Inquirer, 3/21/13

Back on March 4, a joint Assembly & Senate Environmental Committee hearing considered “for discussion only” a 9 bill package to guide shore recovery. We testified at that hearing and made specific recommendations, several of which were also made by former DEP Commissioner Mark Mauriello, a coastal expert  (see them here).

As a followup, yesterday the Senate Environment Committee took the next step and heard and released a 6 bill package.

I testified and reiterated some of my prior concerns based on the need to conduct FEMA mandated coastal hazard planning that reforms land use in the coastal zone. I advised the Committee of how California’s State Hazard Mitigation Plan describes the land use issues, which are totally ignored in NJ’s plan:

Land use change data for 2000-2005 indicate that hazard information continues to play a very minor role in land use decisions. In addition, land use controls typically remain an insignificant contributor to hazard mitigation efforts. ….

Simply not developing or limiting development to a certain type within hazard areas reduces the potential effects of a hazard dramatically and possibly eliminates any potential losses. While this is a very strong argument for hazard information to play a much larger role in land use decisions (and land use regulation to play a much larger role in hazard mitigation efforts), this change is unlikely to occur due to the inertia of planning and development decision-making.

Governor Christie has rejected consideration of land use reforms and instead chosen to emphasize rebuilding the development that got wiped out. His ONLY reform is reliance on new FEMA building elevations, with reliance on more costly and unsustainable beach replenishment and discredited engineered structures like sea walls and revetments.

[Clarification: The Gov.'s Plan belatedly supported a "neighborhood" scale buyout program from willing sellers, and the Gov. also supports construction of engineered dunes.]

The Legislature has now joined that ship of fools.

(read Tom Johnson’s story at NJ Spotlight:  Senate Committee Passes Package of Bills to Speed Post-Sandy Recovery)

None of our recommendations to consider climate change, sea level rise, vulnerability assessment, adaptation, “resilience”, or a Coastal Commission to oversee regional planning were considered – while horrible bills were moved, including a bill that would actually block reform efforts.

And I really mean “horrible” bills – irresponsible, reckless abdications of the Legislature’s responsibility to learn lessons from the Sandy disaster and reform coastal policies and get serious about climate change.

I)  Grandfather Existing Development – Rebuild the Same  - Repeat Failed Pattern – Block Reform

One bill (S2598) would exempt rebuilding of existing development to meet FEMA “Base Flood Elevations” from local land use laws. This essentially follows Governor Christie’s deregulatory approach.

The DEP already has waived permit requirements for land use reviews under CAFRA, waterfront development and sewer and water infrastructure. Without a DEP permit review, there is no way to implement any reforms – exemption of rebuilding amounts to putting the same highly vulnerable development in the same hazardous locations, a prescription for repeating the mistakes of the past.

Following the Governor’s approach, the Senate bill similarly would block local governments from implementing reforms under the MLUL planning and zoning powers. So, a forward thinking enlightened town could not conduct hazard planning and decide to revise master plans and zoning ordinances to restrict development in high hazard locations, including lands that will be eroded or inundated by high tides, sea level rise and coastal storms.

It will be impossible to implement reforms if existing vulnerable development is allowed to be rebuild with no DEP permit or local land use reviews.

[Note: USGS "LIDAR" is designed to target the most vulnerable locations, so that better protections can be put in place - the bill would block the ability of local governments to plan for a more resilient shore and accomplish USGS objectives:

"This work can help coastal communities understand where they are most vulnerable to future storms," Stockdon said "and help decision makers at all levels create policies that protect their economic, environmental, and ecological health in the coastal areas most susceptible to extreme storm impacts."

Remarkably, while the bill was eloquently opposed by the League of municipalities, it was supported - unconditionally - by Jeff Tittel of the Sierra Club, who cited a $25,000 cost for a use variance. I was just floored by that. At least Sean Dixon of Clean OCean Action, who also supported the bill, specifically said the exemptions had to be made a part of a more comprehensive reform agenda for coastal resilience.

[Clarification: the exemption from local land use reviews would only apply to rebuilding that met the new FEMA BFE's, so it would not be as vulnerable as the development that was wiped out. Again, like the Gov.'s approach, the legislature would ignore land use and rely heavily on elevating structures, instead of a "strategic retreat" approach and expansion of current protected areas of the barrier islands and back bays.]

II) Promote New Development on Piers in “High hazard Areas”

But it gets even worse – check this out.

Current law prohibits new residential development in mapped “coastal high hazard areas”. Atlantic City managed to secure an insane loophole from that law, allowing development of casino’s and hotels on piers along the oceanfront. But, thankfully, no one has been foolish enough to build there, even though it is allowed.

The new FEMA maps include new “coastal high hazard areas” along, among others, portions of the Hudson River, thus blocking proposed new development in those dangerous locations.

But, another bill (S2680), would reverse this longstanding State policy and allow new development of homes, hotels, and commercial development on piers in “coastal high hazard areas”.

III) Failure to Require Public Access

Last, a third bill (S2600) would require DEP to establish a plan and State priorities for beach replenishment projects funded and developed by the US Army Corps of Engineers

While the bill represents an improvement over the existing ad hoc situation where beach replenishment projects are developed and negotiated behind closed doors, the bill defers to the Christie Administration’s hostile policy regarding public access.

The Christie DEP has basically walked away from the public access issue and deferred to local governments, who are hostile to public access and state DEP mandates to provide access and supporting facilities, like parking, restrooms and access points along the shore.

Tim Dillingham of American Littoral Society provided superb testimony in support of requirements for public access – TJ quote captures the essence:

“Federal tax dollars should not be spent to protect private beaches where there is no access,’’ Dillingham told the committee.

IV) A Finger in the Fed’s Eye

NJ is appealing to Congress and the Obama administration for billions of taxpayer dollars to bailout the shore.

At a time when President Obama is calling for cuts to social security and Congress is slashing social safety net programs, it is simply untenable to continue to expect federal taxpayers to continue to provide billions of dollars to pump sand on NJ beaches and subsidize second homes on highly vulnerable barrier islands in conflict with federal policy and sane land use.

By acting so irresponsibly and failing to learn any lessons or make any reforms at the State level, the Legislature is thumbing their nose at Congress and the Obama Administration’s reform policies.

At some point in time, Congress is going to stop the bailouts and/or FEMA will ratchet down on hazard mitigation and land use planning requirements.

Passage of these kind of bills will accelerate federal reform efforts, and perhaps even jeopardize federal funding for NJ restoration.

]]> http://www.wolfenotes.com/2013/04/legislators-go-all-in-with-gov-christie-on-sandy-rebuild-madness/feed/ 2