WolfeNotes.com

Czar Oversees Sandy Recovery and Use of Billions of Taxpayer Dollars

Decisions Without A Plan, Policy, Transparency, or Public Involvement

Subpoena To Compel Testimony Now Warranted

Christie's Sandy Rebuild Czar Marc Ferzan (R) (press conference at Union Beach, 2/5/13)

In another example of the Christie Administration’s arrogance and abuse of Executive power, Gov. Christie’ Rebuild Czar refused a request to testify before a special joint hearing by the Senate and Assembly Environment Committees today in Atlantic City.

The joint Committee’s stated purpose for the hearing was “to hear testimony on the progress of Hurricane Sandy recovery efforts.”

In his introductory remarks, Senate Environment Committee Chair Bob Smith stated that the Committees requested testimony from Ferzan, but that he “not indicated a willingness to come” (sic).

Ferzan oversees the entire NJ  Sandy Recovery effort – including NJ’s plans to use the billions in dollars appropriated by Congress. The priorities for and use of those funds involve critical policy decisions that impact thousands of people’s lives, their housing, roads, schools, parks, libraries, and natural environment.

Ferzan’s decisions effect the land use and economic future of the NJ shore.

Ferzan wields huge power because, in addition to controlling the money, he operates as a super Cabinet Official, interjecting in major regulatory, infrastructure and budget decisions made by  all State Agencies, including Departments of Community Affairs, Transportation and Environmental Protection. He also acts as liaison to the legislature, local governments, and the private sector.

Ferzan is accountable solely to Governor Christie – meaning that all this power has been consolidated in the Governor.

Ferzan’s “Czar”  position, his Office, his role, his responsibilities, and the critical decisions he makes – involving billions of taxpayer dollars and the future of the people and the landscape of the entire NJ shore –  have not been authorized by the Legislature.

His deliberations – who he meets with, what he discusses, and the policy and factual bases for his decisions – are exempt from the NJ Open Public Records Act (OPRA) – under the “executive” and “deliberative” privilege exemptions.

He is quite literally a one man government operation with a huge budget and effective legislative, executive and judicial powers.

He operates in an accountability free zone.

This is not democracy or the republican form of representative government established under our State and federal Constitutions.

Emotionally powerful public testimony revealed the implications of this non-transparent, accountability free abuse of power.

Many people, whose lives have been impacted and in some cases destroyed by Sandy, are completely shut out of and have no access to information upon which State government decisions are made or any effective ability to influence those decisions.

Now, with Ferzan’s refusal to testify before the Legislature, our democratically elected Legislators have no effective oversight role either.

This is simply wrong and scandalous.

The Legislature has to assert it’s power – not rely on press stunts and constituent letters as suggested by legislators in response to testimony today about massive policy flaws and government neglect.

Those legislative powers include passing laws that set policy for the Governor to enforce; the power of the purse to provide funds to implement the policy; and the power of oversight to assure that the Governor is implementing the will and intent of the legislature.

Given the intransigence, lack of transparency, consolidation of power by the Administration, and Ferzan’s refusal to testify, a first step in flexing those legislative muscles is use of the subpoena power to compel testimony so that the Legislature can effectively conduct oversight.

Mr. Ferzan – as well as DCA, DOT, and DEP Commissioners – should be subpoenaed to testify.

The Legislature should enact legislation that governs the operations of Mr. Ferzan’s entire Sandy recovery efforts.

Because, quite clearly, current law is not adequate to address the major and continuing challenges of recovery and ensuring that we do not repeat the mistakes of the past and recreate the same patterns of land use that created the vulnerability that led to the devastation Sandy wreaked.

Of course, the Legislature could just bypass Mr. Ferzan and the Governor entirely by creating a Coastal Commission to comprehensively and rationally plan for and address the multitude of challenges Sandy created.

Christie Sandy Team - subpoena them all! (Source: AP) Don'y you love the X's on the ground? These sham events are choreographed, including invitations to supporters and staging faux events. A real "Triumph of the Will". Leni Riefenstahl would be jealous.

[Update below]

The Senate and Assembly Environment Committees are hearing some powerful testimony right now.

The Committees are hearing from the people who are not “stronger than the storm” – who have been abused by banks and insurance companies, ignored by the Governor and media, and abandoned by government.

Details to follow in a post tomorrow.

Back to the hearing now.

[Update 8/18/13: looks like we struck a chord – news coverage echoes:

8/17/13: Philadelphia Inquirer story:  Sandy victims: Not ‘stronger than the storm’

8/16/13 NJ Spotlight story:  EXPERT TESTIMONY CONCLUDES STATE IS DECIDEDLY NOT STRONGER THAN SANDY

DEP Report says NJ Shore “Highly Vulnerable” To Storms 

NJ Is Not “Stronger Than The Storm”

There’s been a lot of controversy and press coverage about Gov. Christie’s $25 million taxpayer funded shore ad campaign, especialy the “Stronger than the storm” video (see:  Christie stands by ad contract, rejects criticism of cost).

Some correctly attack the governor as a hypocrite for spending $2.2 million of taxpayer money to promote himself.

Others, also quite correctly, criticize the Gov.’s ego and express anger watching his self promotion while they continue to suffer and live in trailers or shelters or temporary housing (see: Christie’s ego may send him into a pretty strong storm)

Remarkably, while correct, all that criticism misses the most essential and basic point: the core claim is factually false.

Worse, it’s a deadly lie.

DEP’s federally approved  2011 – 2015 Coastal Assessment Report states the science quite clearly:

Many parts of New Jersey’s densely populated coast are highly vulnerable to the effects of flooding, storm surge, episodic erosion, chronic erosion, sea level rise, extra-tropical, tropical storms, and hurricanes.  

But the Macho Man in the Front Office denies that science and insists NJ is NOT “highly vulnerable” to coastal storms but is “stronger than the storm“.

Why is the Governor lying to millions of people every day in those ads?

Why is no one calling him out on that lie?

But the damage from this lie is not just a false slogan in an ad campaign – the Governor’s warped views are having direct impacts on policy, (lack of) DEP regulation, and the promotion of Sandy rebuilding.

As Chris Satulo at Newsworks reports ( to his credit, he is the only reporter I’ve read thus far to even mention this critical point):

To still others, the idea that the state has proven itself “stronger” than the power of sea level rise and hurricanes is not just silly; it’s dangerous.

Such bravado, they believe, gets in the way of a needed rethinking of how we build and live at the Shore.

That is exactly what we should be focusing on. Policy needs to be based on science, not ad campaign slogans.

The Gov. is recklessly promoting rebuilding in hazardous locations. Professor Pilkey, Professor Emeritus of Earth and Ocean Sciences, Nicholas School of the Environment, at Duke University has called this “madness”.

The DEP deregulated the rebuilding of public infrastructure wiped out by Sandy.[in the same vulnerable locations].

DEP has ignored and failed to implement numerous warnings on shore vulnerability (also see: The Deafness Before the Storm).

According to Georgetown University Climate Center, NJ is the only northeastern state without a climate change adaptation plan – a serious deficiency noted in a recent federal Report.

The Gov. has dismissed climate change, sea level rise and more frequent and intense storms as an “esoteric issue” he has no time to consider and that people “don’t give a damn about”.

Well, we have news for you Gov. Christie – science trumps politics – and ad campaign slogans – every time.

NJ is highly vulnerable to coastal storms – climate change is greatly magnifying those risks. Prudent public policy calls for “strategic adjustment”, not “rebuild madness”.

It’s time the Governor start telling that truth to the people of NJ and taking steps to reduce those vulnerabilities NOW.

Reality is Far Worse – Climate Science Not Only Ignored, but Suppressed

The “flapping of the butterfly wing” creates “storm” of media controversy

One off story, or set up for Legislative Oversight?

[Clarification below]

Ironically, based on a Sierra Club press release, the media is latching onto an obscure update of a DEP environmental “trends report” quietly posted on DEP’s website back on June 21, 2013 to finally write the story that the Christie Administration is ignoring scientific warnings about climate change in their Sandy rebuild plans, see: STATE DEP ISSUES WARNING ABOUT HAZARDS OF GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE

First of all, the headline is flat out wrong – DEP did NOT issue a warning – and that’s the problem.

There was no press release warning the public and the DEP document in question does not contain any warnings at all.

And I say the media coverage right now is ironic, because far stronger evidence of Gov. Christie’s outrageous failure to consider climate change is available and has been hidden in plain sight and posted here extensively for years (see:  Why Is It So Hard For NJ Media to Call Out Gov. Christie on Climate Change?).

Actual DEP warnings about coastal risks were eliminated from DEP documents. These warnings included specific findings that the coastal engineering projects that Gov. Christie is supporting provide a false sense of security and attract even more development to hazardous locations.

Those inconvenient findings sent “down the memory hole” include other specific policy recommendations that would embarrass Gov. Christie and totally discredit his rebuild plans – including a recommendation for “strategic retreat” from hazardous shorelines vulnerable to sea level rise, storm surge, and flooding.

These were all DELETED from DEP documents – while at the same time, the risk rating of coastal storms was LOWERED from “High” to “Moderate” (worse, this was done after the devastation from tropical storm Irene, which should have been a wakeup call about NJ’s vulnerability).

[Clarification – Technically, DEP did not reduce the coastal hazard risk from High to Moderate. Rather, it was the priorities for funding, enhancement, and coastal program planning strategy. Regardless, the more important issue is the deletion of prior findings and a lowering of priority. – end clarification]

Now, there’s a fucking scandal for the media to write about and hold Legislative oversight hearings on.

So, of course, I write with extreme frustration – just disgusted that the flapping of the butterfly wing has triggered this so called “political storm” (see: Climate change at center of political storm).

But who knows, maybe there is some method in the madness of this flapping of the butterfly wing.

It could be a set up piece for the Democrats to hold a real Legislative oversight hearing when they meet this Thursday in Atlantic City at the joint annual summer hearing of the environmental committees (see: Democrats Blow Another Golden Opportunity to Hold Gov. Christie Accountable).

If that’s the case, then this is no butterfly wing, but a well played hand.

But I strongly doubt that Democratic Legislators will bite, which will make this entire controversy about as meaningful as the flapping of a butterfly wing.

In another ironic twist, actually, Larry Hajna from the spin prone DEP prose office  is correct in noting that this is NOT a “DEP study” – it’s merely a rehash of other work, all of which I’ve been writing about from the wilderness of WolfeNotes for months now.

So, if you want a “smoking gun” that actually does prove Tittel’s claim, look at the sources in footnote #17.

Previously, DEP documents were cited as the source of those findings – plus far more – in a regulatory document required under the federal Coastal Zone Management Act known as the Section 309 “Coastal Assessment”.

But those prior DEP findings were DELETED by Christie/Martin regime, which shows that warnings are not only being IGNORED, warnings and science are being actively SUPPRESED.

This kind of scientific fraud was a major scandal during the Bush Administration, when it was revealed that the White House was editing US EPA Climate change science documents.

Where is the outrage when Christie/Martin do even worse in NJ?

BTW, in yet another strong irony, the prime DEP author of the document in question, Mike Aucott, has retired.

DEP is hemoraging experienced professionals to retirement and is not replacing them – in a few years, they can just turn off the lights at 401 East State Street.

Actually, there’s nobody home there now.

Which is just what the banks, builders, realtors, Chamber of Commerce, NJBIA, Chemistry Council, PSEG and Big Pharma ordered.

Extremely Complex and Significant ALEC Privatization Give-Away Moving Quickly Though Legislature With Little Public Awareness or Debate

Bill Provides For Secret Contract Negotiations

At this point, virtually anyone still breathing knows about ALEC – the American Legislative Exchange Council – and the corporate interests they serve and the role they play in drafting pro-corporate stealth “model” state legislation.

So, any ALEC “model” bill must be presumed to be a stealth effort and fraud against the public interest and get extra scrutiny.

So, why are NJ Democrats supporting (another) ALEC model bill, premised on austerity and small weak government, to attack environmental protections and the public interest in ideological pursuit of privatization?

Why is none of this a scandal or discussed in the NJ media?

Even the recent NJ Spotlight quick analysis says nothing about the bill being an ALEC model and downplays the implications of the bill.

I’m getting way ahead off myself, but even without the ALEC model bill link, this alone should send up red flags, because the bill is premised upon:

The need to upgrade the State’s energy infrastructure come (sic) at a time of fiscal austerity and budgetary restraint.

In addition to the ALEC corporate model bill and austerity ideology, the bill shares aspects of what Naomi Klein has called “The Shock Doctrine” – corporate interests use a crisis to privatize public resources and push a controversial corporate agenda through below the radar.

I thought that was Governor Christie’s and the Republican agenda.

I am referring this time to the model bill from ALEC titled the “Environmental Services Public-Private Partnership Act“, a bill that:

Provides an arrangement through which government utilizes the private sector to produce goods and services that would otherwise be provided or funded completely by government.

Sounds like privatization, no?

(hit this link for a complete list of all ALEC attacks on State environmental laws and protections -be sure to scroll down to find the full list).

The NJ version of this ALEC model bill is A4082 Aca [1R]  the “Government Energy Reliability and Savings Public-Private Partnership Act.” 

The bill is sponsored by Assemblyman Chivikula (D-Middlesex.Somerset), Chairman of the Assembly Telecommunications and Utilities Committee , the Committee of jurisdiction, and co-sponsored by fellow Democrats Caride (Bergen/Passaic) and Eustace (Bergen/Passaic).

The bill is moving quickly and below the radar .

Austerity, privatization, energy reliability, Shock Doctrine, and ALEC. That is some combination of warped thinking and ideology that is backing this bill.

The government and taxpayer bear all the financial risk and the profits are privatized, all while promotion a fossil fuel energy industry agenda.

The bill already was approved by the full Assembly on June 24, 2013 by a mostly party line vote of  51-20.

According to the sponsors, the bill is designed to:

The bill is really about “creating a market” for private profiteers and giving away public assets and opportunities.

Under the Trojan Horse guise of creating “public private partnerships”, the bill would ensconce within State government a “P3 Unit” to promote private interests and thereby institutionalize private sector interests within State government.

This is the fox designing the hen house – it makes the traditional concept of “government capture” by special interests seem like child’s play.

That installation of private interests inside government would have significant implications.

A vague and broad definition means a whole hodgepodge of “energy projects” would qualify, making the bill effectively policy neutral – dirty fossil partnerships (fossil co-gen, CHP, garbage incineration, eta l) and renewable energy project are eligible.

Failure to restrict “partnership” negotiations – which ostensibly provide a profit premium to the private sector –  to renewable energy undermines sound energy policy and virtually assures that money will drive energy policy decisions under these “partnerships”, with little public benefit to balance the subsides out.

At the same time, other provisions of the bill would undermine what’s left of the fabric of effective environmental, economic, and consumer protection/public utility regulation of the energy industry.

These so called “partnerships” pose strong potential for abuse and are rifle with corruption, insider dealings, crony capitalism, pay to play, and other ripoffs.

The concept of “energy reliability” has been used to scare people of NJ into approving and paying for boondoggle projects, e.g. threats like: “the lights will go out if we don’t do this”.

So called necessary “energy reliability” projects include billion dollar boondoggle inter-state electric power distribution lines  like the Susquehanna-Roseland project through the Delaware Watergap; construction of new in-state gas power plants; dangerous and destructive gas pipelines through NJ’s most sensitive forests, under the Wanaque reservoir, through the Pinelands, and in NJ’s densely populated urban areas.

The bill would set up a confidential, secret, and non-transparent contract negotiation process – with exemptions under NJ Open Public Records Act for “proprietary” and critical economic info- for “partnership agreements” between government and the energy industry.

That process is rife with potential for abuse – revenue sharing agreements and all sorts of kickbacks and corrupt financial games are encouraged.

The bill would expand current deregulation, privatization, and subsidies to the energy industry, and without effective safeguards and controls, adequate government oversight, public involvement, transparency, or countervailing public interest benefits.

The bill amounts to a giveaway to private interests at the expense of the taxpayer, the environment, and sane energy policy.

Tellingly, the professional, independent and non-partisan Office of Legislative Services was unable to prepare an estimate of the costs of the bill.

That alone should send up a huge red flag – ripoff!.

But none of these issues have been discussed, except within Trenton circles.

Deregulation and privatization of the energy industry have been disasters. So has so called “negotiated procurement” led to widespread abuse (e.g. see the “McEnroe” 1985 law that involved negotiated contract process to build garbage incineration, while deregulating the profits made at those facilities.)

So why are Democrats pushing this ALEC model bill that would promote all this?