WolfeNotes.com

NJ Gov. Murphy’s DEP Commissioner McCabe Plays EJ “Stakeholders”

Smoking Gun Trump EPA Briefing Document On Rahway “Research” Reveals DEP Lies

Today, we go into the weeds of a Trump EPA briefing document on the controversial Rahway incinerator PFAS “research” project (provided by an EPA whistleblower, and made available upon request) to show how the Murphy DEP is flat out lying and manipulating environmental justice advocates.

See what DEP and Commissioner McCabe knew about the Rahway “research” way back in April 2020, but kept secret: (Source: US EPA Briefing):

Unfortunately, the NJ media has completely missed this story (e.g. regarding the EPA’s deregulatory objectives; by falsely claiming that States requested it when EPA initiated it through the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA); and DEP’s supporting role) despite being provided with the EPA briefing document that documents the real story. Follow.

The photo above is from a DEP January 17, 2019 press release: (my emphasis)

PUBLIC COMMENT SESSIONS SET ON MURPHY ADMINISTRATION PLAN FOR
IMPLEMENTING ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE IN STATE ACTIONS

(19/P005) TRENTON – Following through on Governor Phil Murphy’s pledge that New Jersey take steps to ensure all residents live in a clean and healthy environment, the Department of Environmental Protection today released a plan on how that goal will be achieved across state agencies, Commissioner Catherine R. McCabe announced.

The DEP will hold a 60-day public comment period to receive input on the proposal. Three listening sessions are scheduled in the northern, central and southern regions of the state for the public to comment on the plan.

“Environmental justice is a critical concern for all state agencies when making decisions that will impact communities long overburdened by sources of pollution and the resultant health impacts,” Commissioner McCabe said. “Every New Jersey resident, particularly those in our most vulnerable populations, deserves to live in a clean and healthy environment. Our quality of life depends on it.”

Governor Murphy signed Executive Order No. 23 on April 20, 2018, directing the DEP to take the lead in developing a plan for how all executive branch departments and agencies should consider environmental justice in implementing statutory and regulatory responsibilities.

“New Jersey’s urban communities are disproportionally impacted and overburdened by harmful effects from pollution,” said Zachary Lewis, chairman of the DEP’s Environmental Justice Advisory Council. “A greater emphasis must be made to provide clean and healthy environments and ensure that sound environmental policies are at the forefront in the decision-making process.”

This is public relations, news management, and blatant cynical co-optation of environmental justice advocates.

Commissioner McCabe apparently was “listening” so closely to the EJ Advisory Council’s concerns that she was shocked that the Rahway community would feel betrayed and outraged when they learned that McCabe’s DEP was working behind their backs and had secretly approved a Trump EPA plan to conduct “research” on the burning of toxic  perflourinated chemicals at the Rahway garbage incinerator that is poisoning their already over-burdened community.

After DEP blamed the community for being misinformed, then even after the intense public outrage, DEP doubled down and still supported the fiasco.

 “He [DEP’s LaTourette] said New Jersey is still interested in helping the EPA understand the science of disposing of PFAS chemicals,

This has very little to do with “science” and Mr. LaTourette and DEP Commissioner McCabe clearly know that (see below).

Going even further into the Orwellian night, here’s how McCabe’s spokesperson responded, with a boatload of even more lies and spin: (emphasis mine, NJ.com story)

“As important as the science is to us, our relationship with, our connectivity to and our investment in serving our vulnerable communities is just as strong,” LaTourette said.

Covanta had taken the lead on local outreach, according to the EPA, which added that the company had contacted “local officials, representatives of the Rahway City government and residents.”

LaTourette said the controversy has been instructive for DEP, and the state plans to try harder to maintain community engagement on sensitive issues moving forward.

“Even when we do not own the issue, whether it is a piece of research or a permit, at the federal or local level, nevertheless, we own and are invested in the relationships with the advocates and the community members,” LaTourette said.

Each of the boldfaced text is either a false or misleading claim.

I)  Some inconvenient facts:

1. There was no “meaningful involvement” by the community, no “relationship”,  and no DEP “investment” in the DEP’s decision to approve the Trump EPA “research”.

2. “Environmental justice” was not “at the forefront in DEP’s decision-making process”.

3. There was no consideration by DEP of impacts on an already “overburden” EJ community.

4. In fact, the EPA “research” had very little to do with “science” and was driven by a policy to rollback strict hazardous waste management regulations (which are costly to comply with) to allow the burning of highly toxic PFAS chemicals in local garbage incinerators.

5. Make no mistake: the Rahway fiasco is directly the result of DEP Commissioner McCabe’s failures. McCabe clearly owns the problem. Mr. LaTourette is lying.

6. DEP had no “investment” in or relationships with the community. Just the opposite.

DEP allowed a private corporate polluter- Covanta, the operator of the Rahway incinerator – to control the “public process” and “community involvement” (referred to as “local outreach”).

Get that? Covanta in control of informing the public!

7. DEP conducted their reviews of and approved the Trump EPA “research” in secret.

8. At the time this “research” was being considered by the DEP, the DEP also was reviewing the renewal of the Covanta air pollution permit, which was scheduled to expire on June 30, 2020. 

The “research” was not incorporated in the Covanta air permit and the community knew virtually nothing about DEP’s pending renewal of that permit.

II) Let me document the inconvenient facts not already documented by the media.

The Trump EPA’s objectives for conducting the “research” and the DEP role have been misrepresented my the media so badly as to suggest – absurdly –  that DEP was proactive and did the right thing by urging EPA to cancel the “research”.

When the story broke and the community was outraged, the DEP misrepresented the objectives of the EPA “research” and DEP’s support for it:

If the [EPA/Covanta] study shows that municipal incinerators are not effective at destroying PFAS, LaTourette said there would be new urgency to find new solutions to the trash problem. “If that is happening, we must know it and we must design the technology and the regulatory structure and the processes to stop it,” he said

Neither DEP or EPA were seeking to strictly regulate PFAS emissions from garbage incinerators or “stop it” (what scientifically precise language!). Just the opposite.

NJ DEP (and US EPA) have detailed technical regulatory requirements about waste incineration, including: characterizing the chemical composition of waste burned in garbage incinerators; monitoring the conditions and chemistry of combustion; and monitoring emissions from the stack. NJ DEP has expert experience and a rich history in this scientific and regulatory work, e.g. NJ DEP was one of the first, if not the first, to regulate mercury emissions from garbage incinerators.

But DEP did not conduct research and set those mercury emission standards in secret, behind the community’s back. The DEP Commissioner Scott Weiner created a Mercury Task Force (with public and ENGO members) and held numerous public hearings. Technically, DEP characterized the mercury content of municipal waste and analyzed stack emissions. They did not seek to inject mercury surrogates into the garbage incinerator.

If the EPA “research” was designed as Mr. Latourette describes (e.g. to improve public health protections and strictly regulate PFAS emissions), then the research design would have been very different and in accordance with NJ DEP requirements.

Mr. LaTourette surely knows this – as well as the EPA’s own briefing document which reveals the “research” objectives – which show that he its lying (or incompetent).

1. McCabe owns the Rahway/EPA/Covanta project. Period.

McCabe spent many years at EPA, including a stint as Acting EPA Administrator, so she knows exactly how EPA operates (DEP website bio):

She served at EPA from 2005 to 2017 as the Principal Deputy Assistant Administrator for the Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance (2005-2011); as a judge on EPA’s Environmental Appeals Board (2011-2014); and as Deputy Regional Administrator of EPA’s Region 2 office in New York City (2014-2018). In 2017, she served as the Acting Administrator of EPA (January and February) and as Acting Regional Administrator of EPA Region 2.

McCabe surely knows – after over 100 regulatory rollbacks and a systematic massive attack on and denial of science – that the Trump EPA has a pro-corporate anti-regulatory agenda that completely ignores or denies science.

If McCabe is not aware of this reality then she is incompetent. If she is aware of it, her incompetence rises to malfeasance. Either way, she must resign.

Additionally – and very relevant – is the fact that McCabe is a longtime leader in a group called “ECOS”, for Environmental Council of The States. McCabe is EPA Region 2 representative (representing the states of NY & NJ and territory of Puerto Rico).

The reason that ECOS is key is because the EPA PFAS “research” was coordinated with States via the “Environmental Council of States” (ECOS).

According to EPA ECOS briefing documents (provided upon request), the EPA held a PFAS Bimonthly conference call with ECOS on April 27, 2020, titled: 

USEPA PFAS THERMAL TREATMENT & METHODS RESEARCH – OPPORTUNITIES FOR COLLABORATIVE INCINERATION FIELD TESTING

EPA’s objectives in this “research” was targeted at allowing local garbage incinerators to burn PFAS. EPA wrote:

Hazardous Waste Incinerators and cement kilns may well be effective, but what about Municipal Waste Combustors and Sewage Sludge Incinerators (lower temperatures)?

That EPA objective is scientifically absurd from the get go, because EPA knows that “lower temperatures” lead to “incomplete combustion” and the formation of highly toxic “products of incomplete combustion” (PICs).

EPA”s own PFAS Action Plan (Feb. 2020 Update) focuses on “high temperature incineration“, not the much lower temperatures present in garbage incinerators:

Treatment and Disposal Research

The agency also has numerous PFAS treatment and disposal research projects underway, including on high temperature incineration and other methods. The agency is collaborating with other federal partners, including the Department of Defense, on efforts to increase the agency’s understanding and availability of treatment technologies for PFAS, including analytical methods. Under the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2020, EPA will work to publish interim guidance on the destruction and disposal of PFAS within one year and publish revisions every three years after that.

The EPA’s real “problem” is driven by the facts that:

a) “Hazardous Waste Incinerators and cement kilns” are far more effective in PFAS “destruction and removal efficiency” (DRE), but they cost significantly more than garbage incinerators; and

b) PFAS are required to be managed as hazardous waste under current EPA regulations.

Trump EPA “friends” in the Pentagon and corporate polluters like Dupont have tons of PFAS wastes to dispose of and face billions of dollars in disposal costs if they are required to manage PFAS as hazardous waste under current EPA regulations. At the same time, other Trump EPA corporate friends that burn garbage, like Covanta, would profit from a huge new market in burning millions of tons of PFAS as their dinosaur garbage incinerators.

EPA’s ECOS call briefing reveals that the “research” is intended to “support” EPA regulatory programs (i.e.EPA’s Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards (OAQPS) and Office of Land and Emergency Management (OLEM) and was paid for by and targeted at the Pentagon:

EPA ORD is supporting OAQPS and OLEM to provide incineration guidance as part of the National Defense Authorization Act.

Rollback of EPA’s hazardous waste management regulations to allow burning PFAS at garbage incinerators would be a twofer: it would provide billions in profits to corporate polluters like Covanta, while reducing billions of dollars in corporate polluter and Pentagon disposal costs.

The EPA regulatory objectives are made clear in there conference call to ECOS:

PFAS emission measurement methods are needed to inform regulatory decisions

EPA makes clear and states the regulatory objective multiple times in their ECOS briefing:

field characterization would help inform this process and provide a fundamental opportunity to better understand PFAS thermal treatment behavior in sources of regulatory interest.

Specifically, these tests would seek to:

• • Investigate how well thermal disposal processes such as hazardous waste and solid waste incinerators work for PFAS waste.
• Investigate whether surrogate Principal Organic Hazardous Constituents (e.g. CF4, C2F6) be used in emission tests to ensure PFAS compounds would be adequately destroyed. If so, what demonstrated Destruction and Removal Efficiency would be required?

The EPA ECOS PFAS initiative is led and coordinated by EPA. But it is NOT a science driven exercise, as demonstrated by EPA’s own briefing document and the fact that the EPA Office of Research and Development is coordinating the project with EPA’s regulatory programs.

DEP Commissioner McCabe knows all this – and more.

She owns it.

And for her betrayal, denial of responsibility, co-optation and manipulation of the EJ community, and outright lies, McCabe must resign.

Context Belies Gov. Murphy and DEP Claims

EJ Advocates Are Making A Huge Strategic Mistake

(Part I)

We need to establish the context, before the Murphy propaganda machine frames the issues.

A seriously flawed bill purported to promote “environmental justice” has passed both houses of the NJ Legislature and is now on Gov. Murphy’s desk.

The Assembly resolved some of the flaws I previously noted by passing the Senate version (S232 [2R]) on August 27, 2020. But the bill remains seriously flawed. (see also:

• Gov. Murphy’s “Environmental Justice” Legislation Would Do Nothing To Reduce Current Pollution or Unjust Disproportionate Burdens In Minority Communities
• Now Is the Time To Make Real Demands On Environmental Justice Legislation
• 18 Years After Scathing Criticism By Federal Judge For Ignoring “Environmental InJustice”, NOTHING HAS CHANGED AT NJ DEP

All of this, of course, was ignored by NJ Spotlight coverage and the deeply compromised NJ based EJ cheerleaders who supported the bill.

Even worse, NJ Spotlight’s story affirmatively misleads readers about all the problems with the bill. Reporter Tom Johnson did that by posting a link to the introduced version of S232, not the 2R version that the Assembly passed.

For those that don’t follow the legislative process, a “2R version” means that the bill was substantively amended TWICE. Those amendments weakened an already gutted bill, as I’ve previously written.

And in an Orwellian twist, NJ Spotlight – who had ignored the legislative history until I made that history clear – now reports favorably on a 10 year long process of gutting the original version of the bill (emphasis mine):

The legislation, sought for by the environmental-justice community for more than a decade, is viewed by advocates as one of the strongest measures in the country to give local communities the ability to fight new power plants, incinerators, and manufacturing facilities within their borders.

Let me provide an historical analogy and a thought experiment to illustrate the problem with this “decade”.

The 1965 Voting Rights Act was introduced just days after the nation witnessed viscious police attacks on civil rights protesters. The bill was a direct response to those attacks and a result of the work of the Civil Rights Movement:

On February 18 in Marion, Alabama, state troopers violently broke up a nighttime voting-rights march during which officer James Bonard Fowler shot and killed young African-American protester Jimmie Lee Jackson, who was unarmed and protecting his mother.^[21]:265[24] Spurred by this event, and at the initiation of Bevel,^{[21]:267[22][23][25]:81–86} on March 7 SCLC and SNCC began the Selma to Montgomery marches in which Selma residents proceeded to march to Alabama’s capital, Montgomery, to highlight voting rights issues and present Governor George Wallace with their grievances. On the first march, demonstrators were stopped by state and county police on horseback at the Edmund Pettus Bridge near Selma. The police shot tear gas into the crowd and trampled protesters. Televised footage of the scene, which became known as “Bloody Sunday”, generated outrage across the country. […]

[Senate sponsor] Dirksen did not originally intend to support voting rights legislation so soon after supporting the Civil Rights Act of 1964, but he expressed willingness to accept “revolutionary” legislation after learning about the police violence against marchers in Selma on Bloody Sunday.

For our purposes of analogy, given this history, could you imagine if at the time some so called “civil rights leaders” praised and supported a weak version of a Voting Rights Act bill that was drafted and negotiated 10 years prior to Bloody Sunday?

A bill that was drafted before the Civil Rights Movement gained enormous public support?

Well, that’s exactly what NJ’s so called “environmental justice” leaders have done.

They are applauding and supporting a weak bill that was negotiated and drafted 10 years before the Black Lives Matter movement emerged, and then weakened over this 10 year period.

A bill drafted ten years before the police murder of George Floyd sparked a nationwide rebellion and created political space to advance real progress, not compromised ineffective bullshit.

Why are NJ EJ “advocates” supporting this compromise bill?

Why don’t they demand far more?

They are not only missing the moment, they are betraying their alleged cause.

(Part II tomorrow – we’ll call it “Tuskegee II”):

• DEP secretly OK’s chemical experiment in Rahway, then feigns surprise by community outrage, then blames the community.
• Orwellian “News Management” – to divert from the Rahway disaster, DEP and AG announce token EJ lawsuits.
• How will Gov.Murphy spin all this when he signs the bill?
• How and why will EJ advocates respond?

 

Gov. Murphy’s DEP Commissioner McCabe and her political hatchet man Sean LaTourette must resign and apologize to the people of New Jersey.

First, they secretly worked with and approved a Trump EPA “research” project at the Rahway NJ garbage incinerator. Rahway is a heavily poor and minority “environmental justice” community already overburdened with pollution.

The Trump EPA project was designed to understand the combustion of a family of toxic chemicals knows as PFAS.

Because Dupont and the Pentagon have huge quantities of these toxic chemicals that must be disposed of, the overall objective of this EPA research was almost certainly to promote the burning of PFAS waste in municipal garbage incinerators – a totally unacceptable and low cost and highly polluting disposal alternative.

Regardless of the scientific merits or policy objectives of this research, it is grossly unprofessional, likely illegal, and a totally unforgivable breach of trust for a regulatory agency to operate like that in secret.

Just as bad, it shows bad faith and extremely poor political judgement – at a time when US cities are literally on fire with BLM protests – for DEP to secretly work with EPA and the Rahway incinerator company Covanta and approve a chemical research project with public health implications in an EJ community.

DEP’s behavior was morally repugnant.

When former EPA Region 2 Administrator Judith Enck blew the whistle on this research, of course, the public, the Rahway community, and EJ advocates were outraged. Of course, the media wrote extremely negative stories and – because the project had been kept a total secret and was designed behind the community’s back – of course social media exploded.

Second, in response to public outrage, DEP Commissioner McCabe and Mr. Latourette blamed the public. (NJ Spotlight)

LaTourette said protesters, particularly in New Jersey’s environmental justice communities, had “misperceptions” about what the incineration would consist of, and misplaced fears that the experiment posed a risk to public health.

“Bad information can sow mistrust, and it can sow a misunderstanding of the facts that can lead folks to think that they are in danger of being harmed, and that’s the last thing we want,” he told reporters.

HOW THE HELL IS THE PUBLIC SUPPOSED TO KNOW ANYTHING WHEN DEP DOES THINGS IN SECRET?

McCabe and LaTourette must resign and apologize, NOW. They have lost credibility and the trust necessary to lead a public agency.

For the record, on August 22, 2020, I first learned of this scandal and immediately wrote DEP Commissioner McCabe this email, demanding that it be terminated and the Covanta garbage incinerator permits be revoked.

According to DEP records, the Covanta permit expired on June 30, 2020, so it looks like this whole scheme was developed when their air permit was being reviewed by DEP, which, from a regulatory perspective, is another huge example of misconduct.

On 08/22/2020 7:05 PM Bill WOLFE <bill_wolfe@comcast.net>  wrote:

Dear Commissioner McCabe:

Today I became aware of EPA sponsored and NJ DEP approved “research” regarding combustion of PFAS surrogates at the Covanta garbage incinerator in Union, NJ, see:

https://www.nj.com/news/2020/08/proposed-rahway-incinerator-study-could-help-us-deal-with-toxic-chemicals-activists-wonder-if-its-safe.html

Before I can intelligently make informed objections to the substantive merits of this proposal, I must raise serious procedural defects with this proposal that must be remedied before further consideration or implementation of this proposed “research”.

1. The proposed research is not incorporated and certified by NJ DEP, as required, in the Union County Solid Waste Management Plan. See the DEP’s documents:

UNION COUNTY DISTRICT SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN ADMENDMENTS (SIC), CERTIFICATION AND ADMINISTRATIVE ACTIONS

https://www.nj.gov/dep/dshw/recycling/admentme/20county.htm

2. The proposed research is not included in the NJ DEP and US EPA approved air control permits for the Covanta facility.

There are no parameter specific air pollution monitoring and control or emission limits.

There was no air quality modeling or quantitative risk assessment conducted, as required by NJ DEP regulations.

There was no public notice, public hearing or opportunity for public comment on the proposed “research” as required by applicable NJ DEP regulations.

3. The proposed research may trigger NJ DEP “hazardous waste facility” and hazardous waste incinerator air pollution control and HW treatment and disposal facility permit requirements under EPA delegated federal RCRA and the HSWA of 1984, as well as NJ’s State hazardous waste management regulations.

The DEP apparently conducted no review or consideration of these regulatory requirements and no public participation process prior to “approval”.

4. In addition to these gross regulatory failures, the entire concept of conducting “research” on combustion and air emissions of hazardous substances at a commercial solid waste facility located in and polluting an environmental justice community is morally repugnant.

I make the following demands:

1. Please reverse and over-rule the DEP’s prior “approval” of this “research”.

2. Then please publicly apologize for secretly reviewing and approving this “research”.

3. Then revoke the NJ DEP air permits for the Covanta garbage incinerator, which I understand expired on June 30, 2020.

4. Please provide a public notice and link to the underlying technical documents and full administrative record on this proposed “research.

I look forward to your timely and favorable reply.

Respectfully,

Bill Wolfe

Corporate and Finance Interests Have Hijacked The “Green Energy” Agenda

“Planet of the Humans” Validated

The NJ Senate Environment Committee yesterday approved a bill [S2605] that would promote and subsidize large “utility scale” solar systems on farms and forested land, see today’s NJ Spotlight story:

• Solar Grids Built on NJ Farmland Get Senate Backing

The siting and farmland issues are getting the major focus, but the much larger issues relate to the vision for a renewable energy future and the structure and control of the power system.

I) The Bill Would Destroy A Democratic Decentralized Public Energy System And Dictate Corporate Monopoly Profits

The bill is profoundly misguided, as it would transform a vision of what should be a small scale, decentralized, democratic, and publicly owned and/or controlled renewable energy future into the same corporate, private profit driven, centralized grid we suffer from today.

The “competitive solicitation” process and “power purchase agreement” provisions in the bill have strong echoes to a failed 1985 law (“McEnroe”, NJSA 13:1D-136 et seq)) that established a similar “competitive bidding” (then called “negotiated procurement”) process to promote and subsidize private investment in the garbage incineration technology (Orwellianly dubbed “resource recovery”), while providing above market rate energy contract subsidies for the power produced by burning garbage (those McEnroe subsidies are akin to the subsidies to solar developers by the “reasonable value for capacity” provided by the current bill). The Legislature also passed a $138 million bond act and the McEnroe law also included a suite of landfill taxes to provide millions of dollars in additional subsidies to incineration.

That 1985 “McEnroe” law – named for Democratic legislator Harry McEnroe from Essex County –  not only provided huge public subsidies to corporations, it deregulated the prior BPU “rate base – rate of return” public utility regulation of the industry. [It is important to note that the McEnroe legislation was the first step towards broader deregulation of the energy industry in 1999 under the Whitman administration.]

As a result, the McEnroe law produced the billion dollar boondoggle and environmental nightmare of garbage incineration, which benefitted only Wall Street finance, NJ Bond Counsel law firms and a handful of corporate grifters who built the projects, while the environment was polluted and ratepayers were ripped off.

And once again, we have a Democratic legislator, beholden to and serving the interests of Wall Street and corporate monopolist PSE&G, sponsoring terrible legislation under a “green” pretext. NJ Spotlight reports: (emphasis mine)

Grid-scale projects — ones that produce at least 10 megawatts of electricity — are viewed as “absolutely essential’’ to reach the goal of having New Jersey residents get 34% of their power from solar by mid-century, according to Sen. Bob Smith (D-Middlesex), the chairman of the committee and primary bill sponsor.

“Grid-scale” and “utility sale” are euphemisms for guaranteed corporate monopoly profits and corporate control of what should be public power.

So, we’ve gone down this road before – with McEnroe privatization, deregulation, and subsidies followed by Whitman deregulation – and know full well what it will produce.

That’s why the bill reads like it was written by lobbyists for PSE&G and Exelon – and it literally may well have been.

II)  No Need to Destroy Farms & Forests – There Are Many Other Siting Locations

In addition to the aforementioned vision, scale, and industry structure issues, the siting issues are also deeply troubling.

There are hundreds of millions of square feet of commercial and warehouse rooftops and parking lots that could provide space to locate large scale solar power generation.

Legislation should mandate that the most suitable of these locations is used for solar power production.

So, even if one agree with the deeply problematic “economies of scale” and “cost effectiveness” and “least cost” and centralized grid premises and policies of the legislation, there are plenty of other places to locate “grid-scale” solar projects.

Not 1 acre of forest or farmland should be converted to solar farms unless & until every square foot of that space has been utilized for solar.

III) End It Don’t Mend It

NJ Spotlight reports that the Murphy BPU says the Gov. supports the bill and quotes prime sponsor Senate Environment Committee Chairman Bob Smith as suggesting that the bill is not “perfect” and will be amended prior to passage.

The bill is fundamentally flawed and can not be “perfected” by amendments.

The bill should be rejected and legislators should embrace an entirely different vision for renewable energy, not that of corporate and Wall Street interests.

If not, I have to agree that the recent controversial Michael Moore film “Planet of the Humans” – flawed as it is on several technical issues – was basically right – corporate interests really have hijacked the green agenda.

Neglect and Disinvestment In Urban Areas

Investment and Priority On Wealthy Suburban Areas

[Update below]

I wrote yesterday about how the William Penn Foundation has hijacked the public advocacy program for the Clean Water Act and DRBC planning and regulation of the Delaware River.

The Yale Environment 360 story I reacted to sought to manufacture a myth that the restoration of the Delaware River constituted a “new era in the cleanup of an urban river”.

My focus was on how Penn Foundation money was invested in Neoliberal initiatives that stressed voluntary individual actions and market based solutions, while undermining collective action, political advocacy, and governmental planning and regulation (while taking credit for the progress that was the result of many years of government investment and regulation).

I listed briefly 20 general examples of how this abuse operated. But today I was provided a concrete example.

Word:Even within the voluntary Neoliberal framework, the role of elite Foundations is destructive.

Case in point, from a remarkably timed email I just received today: the “3rd annual Delaware River Cleanup” sponsored by the DEP (I assume with funding from the State Clean Communities Program).

That initiative targets and invests State resources in stretches of the Delaware River that flow through wealthy Hunterdon County towns and the D&R Canal State Park and Bulls Island State Park.

While those stretches do receive many visitors, compared to downriver stretches of the river in Trenton, they are far less impacted by litter.

If the litter program were based on rational criteria and objectives to maximize the reduction of litter, no way would Hunterdon be allocated resources over Trenton.

Obviously, there are urban and environmental justice issues involved as well that compelling argue for investments in Trenton over Hunterdon river stretches.

Targeting and investing resources in the Hunterdon stretches of the River translates into protecting the green backyards of the wealthy while neglecting the riverfront in the poor and minority city of Trenton.

In contrast to wealthy Hunterdon towns, Duck Island in Trenton has been neglected for years (see above photo, and hit this links for more).

Duck Island is a magnificent place on the river that should be a Urban State Park, not a neglected wasteland.

This is an example of reverse Robin Hood: DEP is essentially waging class warfare.  And it is facilitated, legitimized and provided cover by the dominance of William Penn Foundation money (which is allocated to elite groups that work in places like Hunterdon County and not Trenton).

I wrote this note to the Stephanie Fox, the DEP staff contact on the Cleanup Day:

Hi – I got your contact information from Delaware Greenway folks.

I notice that the 3rd annual cleanup is targeted along stretched of the river in Hunterdon County near Bulls Island.

I have 2 questions and concerns about the selection of these sites:

1) Why not target Duck Island? That stretch is far more impacted by litter than the targeted Hunterdon stretches, and it would allocate cleanup resources in a far more equitable fashion than providing resources to the wealthy towns in Hunterdon County (i.e. Environmental Justice).

Take a look at the neglect and mess I’ve documented on Duck Island – a spectacular place that should be an urban State Park:

http://www.wolfenotes.com/2016/04/gov-christie-bob-martin-celebrate-earth-day/

2) Has the northern section of Bulls Island been re-opened yet?

Again, the neglect of that State Park is unacceptable, see:

http://www.wolfenotes.com/2015/09/neglect-of-bulls-island-state-park-is-a-scandal/

I appreciate your timely and favorable consideration and response

(and yes, I know how clean community funds are allocated. All’s it takes is a little leadership by DEP to make my proposals a reality).

Bill Wolfe

[Update – 9/4/20 – the D&R Park responded. While they agree with our concerns, I see no real commitment:

Mr. Wolfe,

Thank you for your inquiry regarding your concerns on some of the planned cleanup efforts along the Delaware River on lands that are part of D&R Canal State Park. The 3rd Annual Delaware River Cleanup, scheduled for September 19 th, is focused on the non-tidal sections of the river in Hunterdon County. Presently there is a partnership established between the Park, the Clean Communities program, and local municipalities within Hunterdon County along the Delaware River. The Park Service wholeheartedly agrees that the Park as it runs through Mercer County, including Duck Island (part of the Abbott Marshlands), is a spectacular place that also needs some cleanup attention. In fact, the Park Service worked diligently this past year with the NJ Watershed Ambassador Program to conduct cleanups within the Trenton sections that you are highlighting.

The second annual South Jersey Scrub, scheduled for April 1st, had been in its final stages of preparation but was unfortunately cancelled due to the coronavirus situation. That particular cleanup would have included areas within Abbott Marshlands and Duck Island. We are confident that the Park will be able to move forward with 2021 Watershed Ambassador cleanups (within WMA11) and the DEP-sponsored South Jersey Scrub. The COVID pandemic has made such organized efforts extremely challenging, but we remain committed to the efforts of keeping these precious areas protected.

Additionally, to bring attention to these lesser-known park areas, Delaware and Raritan Canal State Park staff have been working with the Friends for the Abbott Marshlands on the creation and joint implementation of Marsh-related educational programs. Additionally, we continue to pursue organizing future cleanup initiatives in conjunction with the various user groups and agencies. We concur that a large-scale cleanup event to help the Marshlands and Duck Island is a beneficial way to introduce people to the many outdoor recreational activities available there and highlight the importance of the marsh as a natural and historic treasure.

Finally, the DEP is working on a revised plan to reopen the northern tip of Bulls Island Recreation Area. We will present this reopening plan to the D&R Canal Commission and look forward to public participation at this future meeting. No date for the presentation has been confirmed yet, but it will be in the coming months. Thank you for your continued interest in

D&R Canal State Park.

Respectfully,

Patricia Kallesser, Superintendent

Delaware and Raritan Canal State Park

CC:

Jenny Felton

Stephanie Fox

 Here is my response to DEP:

Thanks Pat –

Do you think the Department, the Murphy Administration, and various allies could put together a plan to make Duck Island a magnificent urban riverfront State Park?

That would be something people could put on their tombstones.

Is a legacy even a meaningful concept anymore?

Respectfully, from 9,350 feet in San Isabel National Forest, Colorado.

PS – FYI, I updated my post on these issues to reflect your response, see:

http://www.wolfenotes.com/2020/08/when-elite-foundations-hijack-the-agenda-there-are-consequences/

Wolfe