WolfeNotes.com

A Blizzard Of EPA Press Releases On Federal Grants

In the last year or so, I’ve been hit with a blizzard of EPA Region 2 press releases touting EPA distribution of grant funds from various federal infrastructure laws.

They all follow the same script:

• they all make claims of “historic” and “transformational” change;
• they all tout the leadership of President Biden (which has recently shifted to President Biden – Vice President Harris);
• they all include political quotes, but only from Democratic officials: Congress, Gov.; State legislators and local officials, creating a highly partisan impression;
• they all lack basic background information on the particular environmental issues presented and funded and explain how the grant money will make change or improve the status quo; and
• most all of them generate favorable media coverage (and support from environmental groups), based exclusively on the EPA press release (i.e. they illustrate stenography and cheerleading)

I got another one just now titled:

• EPA $1 Million Brownfields Cleanup Grant to Revitalize Contaminated Sites in Woodbine

It’s not much money, and Cape May County is Trump country, so my curiosity was piqued. So I decided to ask some basic question – lets see how (and if) EPA press contact responds to these basic questions:

Hi Stephen – I’m a retired DEP policy planner and write about NJ and national environmental policy issues. A few questions on this press release:

1) Google maps shows the former Hat Company site at 608 Dehirsh Avenue as adjacent to the local MUA and what looks like a water tower, as well as residential structures. Is there groundwater contamination at this site? If so, where is the source water well field? If GW contamination, has vapor intrusion potential been documented and remediated? What is the status of contamination and remediation at this site?

2) Same questions for the old Woodbine School at 808 Franklin Street. What was the source of contamination at the school? Was contamination present when school was occupied?

3) Does the municipal landfill have a DEP approved closure plan? Is there a methane recovery system and/or groundwater pump/treat system installed?  Has a CERCLA HRS been performed at the site? If so, what was the score? What is the status of contamination and remediation at this site?

It would help if EPA provided a link to site specific background information on contamination and remediation.

4) Can you send a link to the program priority criteria for selecting sites and allocating available funds?

5) Woodbine is 1 of only 3 Cape May County municipalities that voted Democratic Party (Clinton/Biden) in 2016 and 2020 Presidential elections, see:

https://nj.gov/state/elections/assets/pdf/election-results/2016/2016-gen-elect-presidential-results-cape-may.pdf

https://www.nj.gov/state/elections/assets/pdf/election-results/2020/2020-official-general-results-president-capemay.pdf

How do you respond to those who question the role of partisan politics in EPA administration of available funds? Is this a legitimate concern? Frankly, I’ve been troubled by the partisan nature of EPA press releases of late.

Thanks for your prompt reply.

Bill Wolfe

DEP Drinking Water System Rules Allow Water Purveyors To Define And Set Standards

DEP Continues Voluntary Status Quo Despite Mandatory Law

The DEP today proposed new regulations to implement a 2021 law designed to assure that drinking water systems are well maintained and that their physical assets are managed appropriately to assure compliance with regulatory standards and prevent failures and threats to human health. The law also sought to upgrade infrastructure to reduce leaks and waste of water resources.

Long before the current crop of Foundation Funded Frauds, we helped put the infrastructure deficit issue on the policy agenda, way back in 2005 testimony to the Clean Water Council and in this 2006 Report, see:

• HUGE NEW JERSEY WATER INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS NOT BEING MET

We also took leadership in warning of the climate risks a decade ago, see:

• Environmental Infrastructure Funding Bills Continue to Ignore Climate Risks and Adaptation

The 2021 law was passed in order to put teeth in DEP’s voluntary 2014 “Asset Management Guidance” and to mandate that drinking water systems develop Asset Management Plans and finance and actually implement them.

We exposed the flaws of that voluntary “Asset Management” program when it was initially adopted by the Christie DEP, see:

• Christie’s Other Hidden Multi-Billion Dollar Deficit – No Plan to Pay for Huge Water Infrastructure Shortfall Aggravated by Sandy

According to the Murphy DEP proposal:

The [2021] WQAA requires that the specified public community water systems implement asset management plans within 18 months of the Act’s effective date … Asset management programs include the process of ensuring that there is sufficient investment in the system, as well as the planned maintenance, repair, replacement, and upgrade of the physical components of a drinking water system.

Unfortunately, the DEP failed to get the message from the Legislature that their voluntary 2014 Asset Management Guidance Document was the source of the problem because it was voluntary and implementation was not mandatory. 

The DEP proposal delegates essential standards and would allow local water purveyors to define the goals and make the Asset Management Plan effectively voluntary:

Due to the large amount of variability between systems, the Department will not mandate specific goals, nor evaluate specific goals as being adequate or inadequate. These proposed requirements would provide  minimums, such as compliance with drinking water rules and regulations, and being reflective of the service goals and metrics of the system.(@ p.16)

WTF? DEP will not set goals or determine if local goals are adequate? Are you kidding me?

The Department relied on existing regulatory standards – the same standards the new law sought to strengthen:

The 15 percent non-revenue water threshold is consistent with the standard from the existing rules (N.J.A.C. 7:19-6.4(a)).

Even for the most “critical” risks – including climate risks – and engineering and operating features of the drinking water systems, DEP abdicates and continues the current voluntary approach and effective delegation and privatization of setting goals, defining critical conditions, outlining technical elements, and standards:

This rulemaking establishes a process for performing criticality assessments at N.J.A.C. 7:10-6.3(b)4 that is designed to evaluate the risk for each asset in a public community water system. The first step of this process is to use the Business Risk Exposure (BRE) framework. In the BRE framework, the probability of failure (scored between one and five) and the consequence of failure (scored between one and five) are multiplied together to create a criticality rating (scored between one and 25). The BRE framework is a commonly recognized methodology for evaluating risk of assets. It is recommended for use in the Department’s 2014 Asset Management Guidance (https://www.nj.gov/dep/assetmanagement/pdf/asset-management-plan-guidance.pdf), … The Department is not requiring the use of any specific values in criticality assessment. Instead, the Department is emphasizing the comparison of the probabilities and consequences of failure to determine criticality as the essential aspect of this part of the process.

Did you get that? DEP will allow private water purveyors to define critical risks.

Here is another blatant loophole regarding the need to determine and reduce the loss of water – note how DEP did not impose and mandate critical new requirements – that would be too “complicated” (and “expensive”):

To accompany this effort, the Department will work with State drinking water sector training organizations to ensure that systems will receive training that will allow them to complete an audit successfully. Some states have incorporated steps to include the Level 1 validation process. This is a process outlined by the Water Research Foundation and AWWA that would have individuals qualified through a training program, and overseen by the State evaluate data quality of audits prior to submittal to the State. However, due to the complication, expense, and staffing associated with developing a licensing program, which would be necessary to meet the requirements of a robust Level 1 validation program, such a process is not incorporated into this rulemaking.

Coulda, Woulda, Shoulda

The entire proposal is full of discretionary actions the DEP “could take” or “may take” – instead of mandates that the water purveyors “shall take”, again defeating the Legislative intent of the 2021 law, which was to mandate implementation and ratchet down on current discretionary and unenforceable DEP standards.

As the quality of submitted data improves, the Department could, pursuant to the Water Supply Management Act at N.J.S.A. 58:1A-15f and consistent with N.J.A.C. 7:19-6.4, 6.5, and 8.3, require systems that exhibit significant water loss to take actions to reduce such loss. Examples of actions that the Department would take to compel systems to reduce losses include: a denial of increases to water allocation, leak detection surveys, submittal of a water main replacement schedule, or a meter replacement program. Each of these follow-up actions is consistent with existing regulatory requirements

DEP is falsely implying that a lack of data is why standards are not enforced, (“as quality improves”) and signaling that any implementation is many years in the future.

Once again, another example of where DEP injects discretion into what should be a mandatory standard:

The Department is proposing that, where a public community water system is in the bottom 35th percentile of comparable systems per the findings of submitted water loss audits, or reports greater than 15 percent UFW or non-revenue water, the Department may take several actions to compel a public community water system to reduce water losses.

So, under the guise of ratcheting down and imposing mandatory Asset Management Plan implementation requirements, the Murphy DEP has done exactly the opposite and preserved the status quo voluntary program.

Accordingly, our drinking water assets will continue to deteriorate and investment upgrade decisions will continue to be made primarily by private corporate water purveyors in order to maximize profits, not protect public health and the environment.

New Director Reverses 30 Years Of Sierra Club’s Opposition To Coastal Development

“Ignorance is compounded with anarchy and greed to make the raddled face of the Jersey shore.”  ~~~ Ian McHarg, “Design With Nature” (1967)

The New Jersey Shore is already recklessly over-developed, with billions of dollars of housing and infrastructure at extremely high and increasing risk of destruction by coastal storms and sea level rise – and even permanent inundation.

One would have thought that was obvious after Superstorm Sandy devastated the coast – or when toxic algae blooms, stinging jellyfish, and ecological collapse threatened Barnegat Bay.

It should have been even more obvious after Gov. Christie pursued an insane post-Sandy policy I dubbed “Rebuild Madness”.

It should have been obvious when a Rutgers professor aptly called back bay flooding the “Achilles heel” of coastal risk management. We offered constructive solutions:

• Back Bay Flooding – In The Face of Climate Change – Highlights Imperative of Strategic Retreat

The NJ Chapter of the Sierra Club was a long time critic of the lack of a sane State shore land use policy and an advocate of regional planning and strong regulatory restrictions, and not only based on the threats of climate change, but to protect natural resources and the ecological health of Barnegat Bay.

I’m proud to say that I was part of that effort for 7 years (1995 – 2002) and privileged to work with and support retired Director Jeff Tittel in those and other efforts.

So I was sickened to just now read this quote from Tittel’s replacement, Anjuli Ramos-Busot: (NJ.Com story)

“I know we love the Jersey Shore, I know the lifestyle of the Jersey Shore is incredibly important to the entire state and people in other states that come to visit us,” Ramos-Busot said. “We’re not saying don’t build. We’re saying build smarter so that you don’t put people in danger.”

Ramos-Busot is parroting the spin of DEP Commissioner Shawn LaTourette, who has caved completely to the political power of the shore real estate and development lobby. As I noted:

LaTourette’s first remarks included this: “We are not saying: ‘You cannot build in a future flood-risk area.’” …

“We’re not at a point, nor do we think it’s our role, to tell people: ‘Don’t build here, you shouldn’t build there, you can’t do that,’” LaTourette said. …

He said the DEP wants to avoid being the “big, bad government” that imposes heavy-handed regulations.

She has become little more than the Commissioner’s puppet.

The Commissioner’s original spin was repeated in a recent legislative hearing by DEP manager: (NJ Spotlight)

Nick Angarone, chief resiliency officer for the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, took exception to claims that the agency aims to stifle all development within flood-prone areas.

“There is no ‘no-build zone’ that stems from the regulations,” he testified. “If I’m going to vastly oversimplify, you have to build higher and you have to recognize that you’re vulnerable.”

How far Sierra Club has fallen. Like the NJ Shore, doomed.

[End Note: Just 2 days ago I wrote this, which perfectly describes the situation:

I assume that they [“environmental leaders”] mistakenly believe that holding the “friendly” State DEC accountable and criticizing their total failure would undermine public and political support for DEC and the climate law. Maybe their friends at DEC might not invite them to meetings and press events and distribute grant funding.

“Liberal governments cannot plan. Planning requires the authoritative use of authority. Planning requires law, choice, priorities, moralities. Liberalism replaces planning with bargaining. Yet at bottom, power is unacceptable without planning.” ~~~ Theodore Lowi, “The End Of Liberalism”

Ted Lowi is smiling from his grave.

The recent passing of Ingrid Reed perfectly validates Lowi’s work, particularly the thesis of his classic book, “The End Of Liberalism” (see above quote).

And the NJ Spotlight Tribute (obituary) to Ingrid Reed ironically portrayed the failures it illustrates, see (emphases mine):

• The enduring legacy of Ingrid W. Reed

So many words of praise and distinction come to mind when thinking about Ingrid Reed — feminist pioneer, civil rights advocate, public policy expert, supporter of the arts, environmental leader, planning proponent, to name just a few.

That tribute set me to reflect upon how Reed’s work validates Professor Lowi (full disclosure: In graduate school, I studied regional planning and took Lowi’s courses on government at Cornell (’83-’85). I’ll never forget that he once criticized my work as “spewing drivel and parroting lectures”. But he also praised a paper I wrote on the Toxic Substances Control Act and offered to help get it published in an academic journal).

In addition to validating Lowi, Reed’s work also overlaps with my academic work and some of my own most significant professional battles on land use and regional planning in central New Jersey, Reed’s own back yard and career turf.

I want to expand upon the following key career milestones highlighted in the Spotlight tribute (emphases mine):

In 1972, she ran for West Windsor Township Committee on the platform of forming a master plan for the community. Her bid was unsuccessful but her focus on planning led to 18 years on the Mercer County Planning Board as the first woman appointee and where she served as chair for 11 years.

In 1987, Governor Tom Kean established the Capital City Redevelopment Corporation with Reed as chair, a position she held until 2010.

Reed’s commitment to improving the state was her motivation in helping to establish New Jersey Future in 1987, an organization dedicated to advancing policies and practices to curb sprawl and promote redevelopment. […]

In 1992, Reed became vice president for public affairs and corporate secretary at The Rockefeller University in New York City. During this time, she was elected to the National Academy of Public Administration and served on the New Jersey committee of the Regional Plan Association.

At a time when Reed lived in Princeton, she had a major role in a critical period of the possibility of Capital City Trenton’s redevelopment, land use controls, and regional planning in central NJ and Mercer County.

During this time (1987 – 2000), the major land use battles in Mercer County – Reed’s backyard – became the most important opportunity for Trenton’s redevelopment, for government regional planning efforts to curb sprawl, and as a test of the policies of the State Development and Redevelopment Plan to deliver results.

The regional planning debate centered on 3 massive proposed corporate Office park developments in Hopewell Township, the neighboring town of Reed’s Princeton. They were: 1) Merrill Lynch’s proposed 3.5 million square foot office park on a soybean field in Hopewell; 2) Bristol-Myers Squib (BMS) huge expansion off a rural farm road in Hopewell; and 3) major corporate office park expansion by Berwind on a rural road connecting Hopewell and Princeton. In turn, this development and regional growth were supported by and used by Mercer County and the State to justify major transportation infrastructure development, including a new bridge across the Delaware River and Mercer airport expansion

These corporate office park developments included extension of water and sewer infrastructure out of Trenton to rural Hopewell portions of Mercer County to serve those developments plus additional capacity thousands of units of new residential sprawl development. This infrastructure would not only promote sprawl but it would deprive Trenton of a key strategic asset: finite water and sewer capacity.

Mercer County Executive Bobby Prunetti (R) and NJ Governor Christie Whitman (R) strongly supported these developments. So did the Mercer County Planning Board, The State Planning Commission, and the NJ DEP.

Here’s a 2014 retrospective overview of the controversy by the Trenton Times:

• Merrill Lynch: Smart growth vs. sprawl

HOPEWELL TOWNSHIP — A few years ago, the 450-acre expanse of rolling farmland seemed to stretch endlessly as you exited from the bustle of Interstate 95 onto sleepy two-lane Scotch Road.

One could hardly visualize how Merrill Lynch’s planned 3.5 million-square-foot office complex might transform the landscape. […]

Bill Wolfe of New Jersey’s Sierra Club launched the argument in 1998 that eventually helped persuade Whitman to express regret over having aided Merrill Lynch’s Hopewell bid.

The very State Plan for Development and Redevelopment that calls for building along corridors such as I-95, he said, also calls for directing investment back into New Jersey’s cities.

It’s an argument that holds sway with State Planning Commission Chairman Joseph Maraziti Jr. He calls Merrill Lynch a “missed opportunity,” saying the state should only have provided millions in incentives to help revitalize Trenton — even if the corporation fled to Pennsylvania in response.

“The census says New Jersey has the highest (median) income in the nation,” Maraziti says. “I wonder the extent to which we need to sell our souls to maintain or enhance the wonderful economic position we have in this state.”

Keep that quote about “selling our souls” in mind, particularly in light of Lowi’s quote about “bargaining”.

And consider just who did government officials sell their souls to?

These corporate development proposals prompted public outrage, the formation of a large and powerful local activist group in Hopewell (The Coalition to Save Hopewell Valley), and the replacement of an entirely 5 member Republican Township Committee to a completely 5 member Democratic committee and Democratic control of the local planning board.

This Statewide debate included an extraordinary national front page story in The NY Times on the emergence of women leading an anti-sprawl campaign, one of whom (Marylou Ferrara) would become Mayor and another (Peggy Snyder) a planning board member. (see NY Times 12/27/98)

• Suburban Sprawl Becomes a ‘Mom’s Issue,’ Altering Township Politics

Another major political outcome sparked by this battle was the election of Rush Holt to Congress in an historically Republican district. Holt ran on an anti-sprawl, pro-regional planning, pro-environment platform.

Yet, despite the fact that this battle involved all her key career objectives – regional planning, Trenton redevelopment, environmental protection, public policy, feminist pioneers – Ingrid Reed was nowhere to be seen. Nowhere. AWOL.

[I’m being too kind. The reality is actually far worse. If you read this retrospective case study by Reed’s corporate planning group NJ Future, it shows that Reed’s groups all supported the Merrill Lynch development.]

The reasons for that takes us back to the Ted Lowi quote above about why liberals can’t plan.

Ingrid Reed could not stand up and take on corporate interests and powerful politicians. Period. She could not plan. Period. She was the epitome of the Lowi liberal.

And the elite organizations she formed and worked for – including NJ Future and NJ Spotlight – either actively promote corporate interests – as Joe Maraziti says, they “sell their souls” to economic interests – or they fail to challenge corporate interests.

If you need any more evidence to reach these conclusions, just check out how Merrill Lynch reveals the corruption, in their own words, from the mouthpiece for corporate interests, NJBIZ:

• Merrill Lynch Works to Win Over Hopewell

[…]

“Sewer systems apart, the larger issue for groups like the Sierra Club is regional development. “We are not trying to stop Merrill Lynch from constructing its complex, says Bill Wolfe, policy director at Sierra Club’s New Jersey chapter in Princeton. “We”re fighting the whole explosive growth of Hopewell Valley and all the induced growth of housing it”s going to have, including in Hunterdon County, and the effects on the city of Trenton. Trenton is not going to be able to see any private sector location and development if it can all happen eight miles away on the farm fields of Hopewell.”

Amid all this, Merrill Lynch is ardently playing the role of good corporate citizen. Last year it helped Hopewell Township raise $1.2 million for the purchase of a 167-acre tract on the Washington Crossing-Pennington Road, considered significant for environmental and historical reasons. While Mercer County brought in $365,000 and the non-profit Delaware and Raritan Greenway contributed $100,000, Merrill Lynch put up the rest. When we become part of the community as we do everywhere we do business, the community will find we”re excellent neighbors, says Cowan.

This isn”t just a philanthropic calling for Merrill Lynch. It makes sense as part of a corporate human resources strategy, as well. The fact is that a large number of our people live in and around Hopewell today, says Cowan. The community will find that we are an attractive and pleasant neighbor to deal with. Merrill Lynch will also open some of its facilities for the community to use and promises to participate in every aspect of community life, whether it is schools or charitable organizations.”

See how that works?

Spread a little corporate money around to the right places and get results. You’ll find many of the Ingrid Reed types that are willing to “bargain” to provide cover. (BMS did the exactly the same thing from their role as Board member at the Stonybrook Millstone Watershed Assc. And I know that from the horses mouth – George Hawkins, former Director, told me he stood down due to pressure from BMS.)

That my friend is corruption, not regional planning, environmental protection, or expert public policy.

Some of us stood up when it mattered and called that corruption out.

We didn’t mouth the slogans of feminism, we worked with strong smart women who  assumed leadership roles.

We didn’t mouth vague Foundation slogans about “environmental justice” and “sustainable development”, we demanded that Gov. Whitman’s State government cancel the $260 million in corporate subsidies to Merrill Lynch and instead walk the talk by reinvesting that money in Trenton.

We didn’t receive Rockefeller and Dodge Foundation grants and we didn’t get invited to the Foundation sponsored meetings and we weren’t asked to speak at conferences on “Sustainable Development” and “regional planning”. We worked with local activists to make that vision real.

Others, like Ingrid Reed and her elite well fed institutional and Foundation crowd did not.

Instead, they “sold their souls”.

And here we are.

*** I was unable to locate a photo of Bill Neil, Conservation Director at NJ Audubon and Leslie Kramer, at a press event about 2 years prior this same site, which was published by Hopewell Valley News. If anyone has a copy, please shoot me an email

Bill Wolfe (left), then-policy director of the Sierra Club’s New Jersey chapter, and Jeff Tittel, the director of the environmental advocacy group, discuss farmland in Hopewell, Mercer County, that they hoped to preserve in 2000.
(text to the caption and Photo: Courier-News file)

Huge Opportunity To Lead On A Bold Progressive Agenda

But Don’t Expect The Current Crop Of Lame NJ Hacks To Draft That Agenda

[Update – 6/24/24 – Wow. My timing was eerily prescient – the Fulop campaign released this reform plan today. It addresses some of the government reform items I mentioned, but didn’t go so far as to include whistleblower protections, adequate OPRA reforms, or corporate capture and revolving door, see:

• Meaningful Government Reform In New Jersey ~~~ end update]

The algorithm just sent me a Tweet from 2025 NJ Gubernatorial candidate Steve Fulop regarding transportation infrastructure.

I was impressed by Fulop’s call for reallocation of $10 billion slated for NJ Turnpike expansion funds to mass transit. Fulop Tweeted:

Re-Allocation of the $10B NJ Turnpike widening project into mass transit investment instead is the next step towards correcting our mass transit issues.

Our campaign was the first to float the idea of the CBT dedication to NJT last year that will now be law and now we must continue being proactive with the next reasonable decision towards mass transit improvement.

Longer term beyond those we have outlined our detailed transportation plans at http://stevenfulop.com – we are the only campaign putting our policy bc that is what NJ deserves

I was so impressed by a politician actually proposing a sound public policy I support, that the Fulop Tweet sparked somewhat of a Twitter storm in my brain in posting comments on it.

I strongly doubt that the current crop of so called NJ environmental and climate leaders have the vision, competence, and integrity to be reaching out to his campaign with bold demands, so maybe I can shame them into at least something of serious substance:

So, I here cut and paste them into an informal strategic & policy Memo To The Fulop Campaign.

1. I just checked your website for “policies”. You don’t have climate, energy, land use, environmental quality, parks, green cities, environment justice, or public health policies posted. Do NOT rely on the usual suspects to draft these policies. HUGE OPPORTUNITY HERE if done right (in policy substance, not just message and narrative).

2. Don’t expect any of the lame “environmental and climate leaders” to help. They have no vision, no competence, courage, and integrity. You will need your Staff to put the policy plans out, create public review process, and embarrass them into support, like Gov. McGreevey did on Highlands.

3. Land use is back on the agenda. Don’t go for the single issue (e.g. warehouse) incremental crap. Adopt a moratorium on destruction of what’s left of NJ forests and farmlands. Go big on reforestation and urban forestry and urban parks. Put regulatory teeth in the State Plan. Time for bold leadership and big plans.

4. Your next regional and infrastructure policy plan should focus on bicycles, restoring riverfronts, and urban parks. Duck Island is Trenton could be the first example. Tremendous opportunity here with vision and leadership.

5. Climate & energy policy agenda needs to put regulatory teeth and real investment in Murphy administration’s rhetoric, press releases, & unenforceable Executive Orders. Moratorium on new fossil, phase out of existing. Retrofit existing development, residential solar, public power. Terminate NJ role in PJM regional corporate grid. Mandates for accelerated electrification. Guarantee jobs (just transition).

7. There also needs to be a coastal “strategic retreat” plan to address resettlement of displaced residents and businesses and the natural recovery of highly vulnerable coastal lands. Shift beach replenishment funding to that. Built Bike & shuttle/light rail to beaches along coast.

8. No more infrastructure or development in the coastal zone – it will be inundated in 20 years or so. Time to start planning for “strategic retreat”.

8. Expand the Riverline – light rail in the medians of Rt 1. to Newark and Rt. 31 to at least Flemington.

9. The Environmental justice agenda needs to close loopholes in current law; ratchet down on air pollution, particularly on mobile sources and hazardous air pollutants from industry; mandate advanced drinking water treatment; address food deserts; huge public housing program; community gardening, urban forestry, pocket parks, & schools. Green cities. New CCC.

10. Take a fresh look at ways to truly implement NJ’s Hazard Mitigation Plan, particularly on public health/pandemic issues. Repeal liability relief for senior care COVID. Strengthen port infrastructure, rail, river and chemical safety – catastrophic risk management programs, which have been privatized and deregulated by DEP over the years.

11. We’ll need dramatic new forms of revenue generation – wealth tax; high income tax; corporate taxes on Big Pharma and Big Tech; financial transaction fees, et al – to fund these projects. Again, time is ripe to go big & progressive.

12. No more corporate subsidies, even for off shore wind.

13. Claw back the $1 billion in PSE&G nuclear subsidies. Reallocate to a new urban riverfront park that includes PSE&G retired coal power plant property on Duck Island in Trenton.

14. Adopt a Major anti-corruption – transparency – citizen participation – and good government accountability platform.

Include strengthening the OPRA law, repealing the corrupt Murphy rollback. Put teeth in the State Ethics Commission and appoint people with integrity and courage. Open up State government planning and policy development. Enhanced sunshine and whistleblower protections. Take on corporate capture and the revolving door.