WolfeNotes.com

Bills Would Strip Local Land Use Power – No Public Access Required 

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.

[Update – just read this and it must be included in this list – the Obama budget sets in motion a plan to PRIVATIZE TVA, see:  Obama Honors Thatcher with TVA “Privitization” Plan, Kicks Ordinary People in the Stomach Again – end update]

I will be very brief here, because I’m really just too disgusted to write in detail about any of this:

1. Social Security Cuts

Obama’s budget proposed to cut Social Security cost of living adjustment – all while raising taxes on the poor and middle class.

Obama becomes the first Democratic President ever to propose Social Security cuts. No revenue increases for the wealthy or raise in the $110,000 income cap accompanied or “balanced” these proposed cuts. Social Security plays NO ROLE in the deficit, and therefore can not be justified on “fiscal” auserity or budget deficit grounds.

Despicable.

2. Climate Collapse – Concession to Big Coal 

Obama just caved to Big Coal and killed EPA’s proposed rule on NEW power plants – read the NY Times story.

The move is being spun as merely a delay due to litigation risk, and not a concession. While EPA did make a legal error, make no mistake, it is a total political cave.

We will never see this rule reproposed in a way that would BAN NEW COAL. 

[Note: After listening to the Obama Energy and EPA confirmation hearings – both candidates praised coal and supported the “all of the above” Obama energy strategy, while EPA signaled retreat from even recommending that GHG emissions be considered in coal export policy or NEPA review –  my sense is that EPA will propose a new rule that establishes new coal power plant BACT as CCS – wasting billions more R&D on fossil subsidies and keeping coal alive another generation. “Cost effective” CCS “retrofit” might also be the approach to existing plants, allowing them to remain operating while CCS R&D tries to develop a cost effective or feasible technology –

And lets not forget this groveling: Obama campaign adds ‘clean coal’ to website after GOP complaints. At least Jeff Biggers sure as hell didn’t]

This is a devastating blow for any regulatory strategy to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

And the collapse is not just political – it illustrates a monumental strategic and legal error by Lisa Jackson and her supporters in the ENGO community.

EPA’s proposed rule for new power plants reversed the previous 40 years of EPA’s “best available control technology” (BACT) approach under the Clean Air Act, which was base on fuel and facility type. This resulted in different BACTs for coal, gas, and oil fueled power plants.

Instead, EPA set BACT for a single category on power plants (based on the carbon emissions from natural gas – 1,000 lbs per MMBTU).

This is not legally defensible under the Clean Air Act. What was Jackson and her ENGO cheerleaders thinking?

Ironically, EPA would have been better off doing nothing, because no one is building NEW coal power plants due to the glut and cheap price of natural gas.

Worse, as we warned, this Obama collapse for NEW coal means there is no way he has the balls to get significant emissions reductions from EXISTING coal plants.

We are truly fucked.

3.  Clean Water Cuts

At a time when the best evidence from the ASCE Report card concludes that we need to invest $298 billion over the next 20 years for water infrastructure, Obama’s budget proposes to  cut $474 million from the State Revolving Fund (SRF) that pays for those investments (this is in addition to prior cuts due to sequestration)

Much more investment is required if adaptation to climate change is considered and infrastructure asset management is changed from a voluntary to a mandatory program.

4. Endless War – Endless lies

The Obama lies about his “kill list”, drone program, and expanding war on whistleblowers continue to be exposed – see this.

Really, how much worse can it get? Read Chris Floyd on rethinking.

• “I don’t want to abolish government. I simply want to reduce it to the size where I can drag it into the bathroom and drown it in the bathtub.” Grover Norquist, Republican Guru (5/25/01)

• “This governor [Christie] has said no new taxes and no unfunded mandates” – DEP, 4/9/13

For over a decade, the Republican Party has been driven by Grover Norquist’s desire to shrink government, and zealously have pursued a slash and burn agenda of tax cuts, deregulation, downsizing, and privatization to achieve that objective.

But now, not satisfied with simply drowning government in the bathtub, they are coming after the infrastructures that literally make your life – and your family’s future – possible.

Schools, libraries, roads, trains, buses, water, sewer, parks, hospitals, energy systems – the infrastructure that makes you life possible – are being run into the ground. Just at DEP:

New Jersey needs to spend $45 billion over the next two decades to repair its drinking water infrastructure and sewage treatment plants, according to Michele Siekerka, an assistant commissioner for the DEP in water resource management. That means investing $8 billion in its drinking water infrastructure and another $37 billion in wastewater treatment.

My goodness, in Hillsborough (Somerset County), one of the wealthiest towns in the State, the Star Ledger reports today that they are fighting over library fee revenues! How low can it go?

The necessary funding to maintain and upgrade them is being blocked by political ideology.

We are engaged in a race to the bottom.

Since the day NJ Governor Chris Christie was sworn into Office, we’ve been writing about the implications of his radical and ideological views of government and the public policies that flow from them (all of which were fleshed out in his DEP Transition Report).

In the first hour of his first day in Office, the Governor’s first official act was to issue a series of sweeping Executive Orders (#1 – 4) expressing and operationalizing those radical views.

Those radical policies have consequences – examples:

• because DEP was blocked under Executive Order #4 from imposing “unfunded mandates”, highly vulnerable shore towns and water and sewer infrastructure were left unprepared for the power outages and flooding we experienced under Sandy;
• as a result of the “cost benefit” requirements of Executive Order #2, we are killing the renewable energy industry;
• “No new taxes” means that the Transportation Trust and the Green Acres Garden State Preservation Trust can not be renewed

Now, almost 4 years later, we are finally seeing the effects and the media is beginning to wake up and connect the dots between government policy and on the ground conditions.

In many ways, Superstorm Sandy  has forced that awakening, but more mundane matters, like the recent multiple water main breaks across the state – in Hoboken, six in one week! – certainly reinforce the message.

When these critical infrastructure investments are not made, we kill jobs; forego economic development opportunities; allow erosion of public health, ecological integrity and quality of life; and put your family’s future further at risk.

Is this the future you want?

Christie DEP Stands Environmental Justice Policy on Its Head

Christie Policy and Performance Demand Legislative Oversight

Great Depression - could be Shiloh, NJ today (see below)

We recently wrote about one of NJ’s “sacrifice zones”, Paulsboro NJ, a community in the belly of the toxic spewing petro-chemical beast.

But, as we noted, Paulsboro is NOT alone – there are scores of “sacrifice zones” all across NJ, and they are expanding.

Gov. Christie Whitman - a big smile on her face - frisks black man in Camden, NJ

They are expanding as disasters like Superstorm Sandy, lack of investment, home foreclosures, abandonment, austerity social safety net policies, crumbling infrastructure, decrepit and segregated schools, and unemployment devastate low income communities.

The DEP – historically – at least recognized their responsibility for addressing the environmental and public health aspects of these problems and struggled to provide relief. Those efforts fell far short and were often more PR spin than substantive reform, but, at least the problems were openly acknowledged and discussed, leadership cared, and DEP resources were committed.

In December 2009, it seemed that DEP had finally turned the corner and could no longer deny the magnitude of the cumulative impact, disproportionate burden, public health, and environmental justice problems. DEP researchers released a report that documented the problem – see: DEP Discovers Discrimination – Dumps Environmental Justice Issue in Christie’s Lap.

So, what did the Christie DEP do with that challenge the Corzine DEP belatedly dumped in their lap?

They ran for the hills and spun a lot of bullshit –like this

The Next Generation of Environmental Management
“Working with Communities to Address their Greatest Environmental Concerns” 

0. Goal 3 – Restoration and Enhanced Protection in Environmentally Overburdened Communities

• Develop a new paradigm for the protection of communities overburdened by environmental stresses through a multimedia approach focusing on human health and the environmental impacts; ensure that we work in concert to address issues related to air, water, preservation, acquisition, and affordable access to parks.
• Continued development and utilization of the Cumulative Impact Method.
• Ensure cross program coordination to achieve the greatest net-environmental gain or the least possible negative effect impacting the public’s quality of life.
• Expand the number of DEP staff dedicated to working in and with communities to ensure a thorough understanding of issues and potential solutions.

Paulsboro, and Pompton Lakes, and Camden, and Passaic City, and Garfield and Kearny and Trenton and Gloucester City and Salem and Carney’s Point and Neptune and Clifton and West Orange and  Linden, and Paterson, and Carteret and Middlesex and Elizabeth and Newark  and Doremus Ave. – the list goes on – they all make a mockery of DEP’s “overburdened” community rhetoric (see DEP’s Office of Environmental Justice).

The people of Paulsboro are literally a laboratory for an “over-burdened community” and a case study in what is known as “cumulative impacts”.

But DEP has virtually abandoned the science and the development of regulatory standards to address cumulative impacts and cumulative risks – they default to US EPA. The DEP’s website cites EPA studies that are more than 10 years old!

Towards Cumulative Risk Assessment

EPA Cumulative Assessment Information
This website offers presentations made during the EPA “Mid-Atlantic Cumulative Risk Workshop” held on May 28-29, 2003. The workshop’s theme was “How Can Cumulative Risk Assessment be Used to Achieve Environmental Justice?” Attendees included Public Health Experts, Scientists, Environmental Justice Advocates, and Government Officials. Discussion focused on: defining cumulative Risk and the intersections between cumulative risk and public health.

Risk World
A listing of databases regarding risk assessment, analysis, and management

A List of Risk Assessment Values References (Scorecard)

As we’ve written, DEP Commissioner Martin has established a de facto moratorium on development of new regulatory standards.

DEP science has been outsourced, suppressed, ignored, spun, or defunded.

Let’s hope that these issues get some legislative oversight in DEP’s upcoming budget hearing before the Senate on April 15.

down and out in Shiloh, NJ (3/23/13)

Shiloh, NJ (3/23/13) This Property Is Condemned, but where is Natalie Wood?

Delaware Bayshore, Cumberland County, NJ (3/23/13)

Bivalve, NJ (3/23/13)

great Depression - I couldn't find anyone on porches in Shiloh or Cumberland County

Christie tells Manasquan meeting that FEMA will ease new height rules

• There will be pressure to rollback existing standards, to rebuild quickly and not to incorporate higher standards to create safer communities … Significant pressure will be brought forth politically to relax reconstruction standards, leaving the rebuilt structures as much or more hazard prone than prior to the disaster. The bigger the event the more likely we are to see backsliding in those policies that would make our coasts, cities, and citizens safer in the next event.   ~~~ Association of State Floodplain Managers,  12/31/12 Statement

• “Larry Hajna, a spokesman for the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, said the tool “provides a stunning way to visualize the impacts of sea-level rise and to understand why it is so important to build to the highest possible elevation.” ~~~  Sea-level map offers disturbing picture of Shore’s future – Philly Inquirer, 3/21/13

• 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

According to the Star Ledger,

MANASQUAN — Facing a crowd of hundreds still reeling from the devastation left by Hurricane Sandy, Gov. Chris Christie said today the Federal Emergency Management Agency is expected to release new flood elevation maps in a few months that will ease height requirements for many homes and businesses.

That is a highly irresponsible statement by the Governor and exactly the wrong signal to send to people contemplating whether or how to rebuild.

The Governor is asserting exactly the political pressure that professional floodplain managers correctly view as undermining critically important protections for public safety.

The Governor is recklessly misinforming the public, distorting expectations, and must be called out on this.

[Note: Christie’s statement seems to conflict with the US Senate testimony, just 2 days ago, of FEMA Administrator Fugate (read testimony here).]

For example, just weeks ago, a new set of flood zone maps were released by Rutgers that showed the effects of sea level rise.

Those Rutgers elevations are higher than the FEMA maps, which don’t consider sea level rise or climate change.

As I’ve written several times, when FEMA considers these effects – as they are legally required to do – the final elevations are going to get  HIGHER and the flood zones are going to get LARGER. 

Yes, there may be some minor site specific technical modifications to the mapped “V” zones, but this will be nothing like the kind of relief the Gov. is suggesting.

Let me close with a quote by the flooplain management professionals –  I urge you to read the statement, which outlines specific needed actions – in its entirely:

Right now is the best window of opportunity to incorporate actions to make those communities impacted by Hurricane Sandy more resilient from future flood events. In the devastating aftermath of a significant event like Sandy, there also exists a window of opportunity for communities to make wise redevelopment choices that will help support the economic and social vitality for generations to come. While such choices can be politically unpopular in the short term when the focus is to get back to normal, choosing a better path now can lead to reduced costs, misery, suffering, and hardship for families and businesses alike. It is much harder during a “sunny day”, or after the event has been forgotten, to make needed changes than it is right now when people are faced with the consequences of the storm and are more receptive to significant – although sometimes disruptive actions – that can result in effective mitigation. There are admirable examples of communities in the nation that chose a more resilient future in their darkest hours after a devastating event.

Here is an outline of the document (there are detailed recommendations):

NEEDED ACTIONS

• Rebuilding in Damaged Areas—Do It Smarter and Safer!
• Mitigate Wherever Possible
• Provide Resources and New Authority/Flexibility for Mitigation Programs
• Protect and Restore Natural Floodplain and Coastal Systems

SUMMARY

We cannot afford, as a nation, to rebuild the same way. This event could push the total debt of the NFIP alone to 30 billion dollars. Recovery from Sandy must include mitigation in every single decision. The frequency and severity of coastal storms and rainfall events are changing in the US. We must evaluate how we plan, mitigate, and respond to natural hazards. We must ensure that the nation is not ignoring the ever increasing threat of natural hazards. We must rebuild in a way that will reduce vulnerability to flooding, hurricanes, and other large storms in the future in order to avoid the human suffering and economic disruption that always follows. Reconstruction must balance the critical nature of coastal wetlands, barrier islands, and other natural shoreline processes with the economic uses unique to the Northeast, for if we do not account for the delicate balance, we will simply be reconstructing a coast that will be even more vulnerable to the destruction caused by natural disasters. We must learn from the past to avoid repeating these problems so we have safer, more disaster resistant communities, homes, businesses, and infrastructure. And we must start now.