WolfeNotes.com

Where’s the Governor? Why is he in Washington DC instead of  here listening to our problems?

Have you guys ever heard of the First Amendment? Take down those signs!

I wish the Governor were here so I could tell him exactly how I feel!

Dozens of people spoke passionately last night in Monmouth County at the final public hearing on Gov. Christie’s $1.4 billion second round HUD CDBG funding plan.

Virtually all blasted the Governor and his administration for gross mismanagement of the $1.8 billion first round in funding – many of the speakers were still homeless, living in trailers, or on the second floor of severely damaged homes.

I)  Victims Tell Their Stories – Victimized Again By Christie Administration Mismanagement

Women spoke of living with children in homes with the first floor gutted, no insulation in freezing winter weather, and mold and other health hazards present.

In perhaps the most outrageous story I’ve heard so far, a disabled woman, calling herself a “jersey girl” who will not stop fighting, was denied funds (wait listed), while wealthy neighbors had received tens of thousands of HUD and FEMA dollars. So the federal aid is not only being delayed, but is not targeted to those most in need.

Not one of the Christie Cabinet members jumped up to respond to and help this woman, like they did to several others.

Again, it was shocking to hear the stories of victims, all the more disgraceful because 16 months have passed and 75% of first round $1.8 billion in federal aid has not be distributed to the people most in need.

I’ve been listening to these stories for over a year at 6 Legislative oversight hearings – all boycotted by the Christie Administration – and at the third and final public hearing on the Gov.’s $1.4 billion second round funding “Action Plan”.

II)  Poorly Run Hearing – Disrespects the Public, Suppresses Dissent, and Limits Testimony

Amazingly, the format of last night’s hearing was the same as the ineffective hearing in Stockton last week.

The Christie Cabinet members – all of whom have mismanaged the process – again spoke for one hour of the 3 hour hearing.

In addition to having to listen to incomprehensible bureaucratic program summaries for a full hour, the public’s time was limited, some people could not speak, and those that did were limited to just 3 minutes.

Public testimony was again very poorly managed, as minions walked the floor with microphones as speakers’ names were called.

Don’t these people have a podium? Podiums with microphones could have been set up in front of the panel, allowing speakers to directly address Christie Cabinet officials and look them in the eye. And force the Cabinet bureaucrats to look them in the eye as well.

Instead, people were disrespected, forced to speak across the chasm of another large auditorium, and lots of time was wasted, greatly reducing the number of people who could speak – which probably was the purpose of such poorly run public hearings.

And in addition to all that, signs were posted that prohibited signs! It was obvious that the Gov. didn’t want to see any more “Christie Resign” signs in newspaper photos.

 

III) Subject Matter Experts Ignored – Virtually Beg to Be Included

A representative of the  State Association of Flood Plain Managers spoke. He highlighted their expertise and value in participating in the Sandy recovery process. He noted that the group has been shut out of the Christie Adminsitration’s policy and planning efforts and asked to be included in future efforts.

Bob Kull, a longtime NJ professional planner,  spoke of the values and benefits of planning in guiding positive change. Kull offered the support professional planners in working with various local, county, and state planning efforts and he asked that planners be brought into the process.

Like the subject matter experts in flood plain management, the professional planning community has been cut out of the Adminsitration’s “planning” efforts. As I’ve written, that is because this administration is actively hostile to planning.

IV) Fatal Failures to Prepare and to Plan

I got my 3 minute chance to speak a little over 2 hours into the hearing.

I was again interrupted by Mark Ferzan, Christie’s Sandy Czar and the guy running the hearing, and just at the moment I was making an important point. I now think that this interruption was no accident, but an intentional tactic to divert and derail my testimony.

I made 2 main points: failure to prepare for the storm and failure to plan a recovery.

I explained how NJ Transit was once at the forefront and part of a national pilot program to develop climate change vulnerability assessment and adaptation plans for transportation infrastructure.

But, because Gov. Christie was virtually a climate change denier  – ignoring the NJ Global Warming Response Act, slashing a host of climate change related programs, rolling back renewable energy programs, and diverting $1 billion of clean energy money –  NJ Transit Director Weinstein could not present the climate adaptation pilot study to the Gov. and request funds to begin tackling the necessary planning and investment work.

As a result of Gov. Christie’s policy of denial, Weinstein ignored  multiple warnings and NJ Transit had no plan. Thus NJT was unprepared, and suffered a completely avoidable $120 million loss of almost a third of their rolling stock.

As I’ve written, responding to the same policy direction from the Gov.’s Office, similar failures occurred at DEP, where climate change, vulnerability assessment, and coastal management programs were eliminated, scaled back, or defunded. Experienced DEP program managers were sent to DEP’s Bureaucratic Siberia or purged and forced out of the DEP.

For those interested in the substance of all that, see:.

• Leadership Matters – How DEP Buried Report on Coastal Storm Risks
• The Deafness Before the Storm

The Huffington Post did a great investigative report of what went wrong, see:  Jersey Shore Development Failures Exposed By Hurricane Sandy

V)  Failure to Consider Climate Change and Sea Level rise

As I’ve written here multiple times, the Christie Administration’s “Action plan” does not consider climate change and the single paragraph that does mention sea level rise provides no mechanisms to implement the science in federally funded state programs and funded projects, as required by new HUD regulations.

This failure to base funding decisions on science extends to the failure to provide transparent, objective and enforceable criteria and standards for the residential buyout program or the purchase of highly vulnerable or environmentally sensitive areas. This invites political intervention and abuse.

Technical flaws also include failure to update DEP’s flood hazard maps – there are thousands of NJ homes and businesses in flood plains that do not know it and people dare rebuilding below known future flood elevations. Therefore have not purchased flood insurance. These people will be wiped out emotionally and financially when the next storm hits.

VI) Failure to make sufficiently detailed and binding commitments

With one exception  (i.e the DEP emergency rules that prematurely adopted the FEMA Advisory Base Flood Elevations), the Christie “Action Plan” makes a bunch of vague and prospective promises.

The plan lacks detailed initiatives and enforceable commitments.

For example, NJ has a host of plans, programs, and regulations that could form the foundation, technical basis, and planning process to guide Sandy recovery, including

• the NJ State Development and Redevelopment Plan
• a federally approved Coastal Zone Management Program
• a coastal land use planning law (CAFRA) and implementing regulations
• wastewater infrastructure planning program
• water supply infrastructure planning program
• flood hazard regulations

ALL THESE NJ STATE PROGRAMS WERE IGNORED IN GOVERNOR CHRISTIE’s PLAN.

HUD must either reject Gov. Christie’s funding plan as deficient and not in compliance with HUD rules and President Obama’s Executive Order, or condition its approval of requirements that NJ and DEP strengthen and deploy the above State tools to manage Sandy recovery and federal funding.

New York’s Plan Dwarfs Gov. Christie’s Lame Effort

Gov. Christie’s New Jersey is a State of Denial

Will HUD Accept NJ’s Deficient Plan?

In preparing for Friday’s final public hearing on Gov. Christie $1.46 Billion second round Sandy Recovery spending plan, I thought I’d compare NJ’s efforts to our neighbors across the Hudson in New York.

Oh my, what a difference a State makes – NJ has nothing like it!

New York’s plan is based upon NY City’s Plan: A Stronger, More Resilient New York.

Comparisons of the NY and NJ plans are quite revealing – and frankly, should make NJ residents ashamed and mad as hell that their Governor is either grossly incompetent or in denial about developing a real plan to address NJ’s high vulnerability to climate change, extreme weather, and sea level rise.

There is no vulnerability assessment in NJ’s “plan”; there is no acknowledgment of deficiencies in current efforts; climate change is not even mentioned at all; and there are perhaps 200 words to describe future efforts to address sea level rise. The Christie plan was developed behind closed doors and with the involvement of hand picked “by invitation only” “Stakeholders” (critics need not apply and are subject to State Police escort out of the DEP building).

In contrast, New York’s plan goes into great detail, is very honest on admitting vulnerabilities and deficiencies in current State and local programs, lays out and makes binding commitments to a host of significant initiatives, and was developed by a robust public education and participation effort.

Of course, New York produced a quality document while NJ’s efforts are vastly inferior in comparison.

Check out this NY admission – could you imagine Gov. Christie or DEP saying this to the real estate interests and residents on the Jersey shore?? No way! It might limit new development and increase their insurance bills! New York admits:

Overall, the story told by the PWMs [updated FEMA maps] is unsurprising but nonetheless troubling. The new 100-year floodplain, roughly corresponding to the areas flooded during Sandy, is larger than indicated on the 1983 maps by about 15 square miles, or 45 percent. The new floodplain includes larger portions of all five boroughs with significant expansion in Brooklyn and Queens. Citywide, there are now 67,700 buildings in the floodplain (an increase of 90 percent over the 1983 FIRMs) encompassing over 534 million square feet of floor area (up 42 percent). The number of residential units in the floodplain has increased to 196,700 (a jump of over 61 percent), with the majority of those residences in Brooklyn, Manhattan, and Queens. Almost 400,000 New Yorkers now live in the floodplain (up 83 percent)—more living in the floodplain than in any other American city.

I strongly suggest you read the entire New York Plan, but will provide just a taste in this excerpt on current and future vulnerabilities and the urgency to address risks from climate change: (* apologies for breaks in the excerpt below – it is verbatim and a result of column format of the  NY Plan).

Although New York clearly is at risk today, long-term changes in climate will make many extreme events and chronic conditions worse. These changes have, in fact, been underway for some time. As noted earlier, over the last century, sea levels around New York City have risen by more than a foot. Temperatures, too, are climbing. In fact, the National Weather Service and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) labeled 2012 the warmest year on record in New York City and in the contiguous United States, with average temperatures in the US 3.2 degrees Fahrenheit above normal and a full degree higher than the previous warmest year ever recorded.

HUD Mandated “Science Based Risk Analysis” Absent From Christie Plan and Media Coverage

Christie’s reconstruction plans repeat land use mistakes of the past

Will HUD Enforce New Federal Policy?

There is virtually no public awareness of the fact that President Obama issued an Executive Order and HUD adopted new regulations that impact NJ’s Sandy Recovery effort and funding plan. There has been virtually no media coverage of either.

There is similarly little public awareness that at the same time that the Christie Administration’s $1.4 billion HUD Sandy Recovery Round 2 spending plan is out for public review, the Ocean County Hazard Mitigation Plan is under State review and due to be submitted for FEMA approval in March 2014.

The Ocean County Hazard Mitigation Plan is directly relevant to the Christie HUD Recovery Plan. The two plans have important overlaps.

The overlaps are created by President Obama’s Executive Order and new HUD rules.

What it all boils down to is:

Will HUD allow billions of federal taxpayer dollars to be used to subsidize reconstruction of public infrastructure and homes in hazardous locations – places current science projects will be permanently inundated or subject to storm surge and flooding elevations that are higher than current FEMA and NJ building elevations?

Here’s the story:

Back in August of last year, when President Obama’s Sandy Rebuilding Task Force release their Report, which stressed a policy of “resilience”, I noted basic contradictions between that approach and Gov. Christie’s policy, see:

• OBAMA – CHRISTIE EMBRACE ENDS OVER SANDY REBUILDING – Feds Resilient Strategy Runs Counter to New Jersey Armor Plating Vulnerable Coast

Shortly thereafter, on November 1, 2013, Obama reinforced that Sandy Task Force Report by issuing an Executive Order:  Preparing the United States for the Impacts of Climate Change.

The Order set out comprehensive new federal policies – including mandates for federal agencies, like HUD and FEMA (set forth in Section 5):

Section 1. Policy. The impacts of climate change — including an increase in prolonged periods of excessively high temperatures, more heavy downpours, an increase in wildfires, more severe droughts, permafrost thawing, ocean acidification, and sea-level rise — are already affecting communities, natural resources, ecosystems, economies, and public health across the Nation. These impacts are often most significant for communities that already face economic or health-related challenges, and for species and habitats that are already facing other pressures. Managing these risks requires deliberate preparation, close cooperation, and coordinated planning by the Federal Government, as well as by stakeholders, to facilitate Federal, State, local, tribal, private-sector, and nonprofit-sector efforts to improve climate preparedness and resilience; help safeguard our economy, infrastructure, environment, and natural resources; and provide for the continuity of executive department and agency (agency) operations, services, and programs.

To implement the Obama Executive Order and policies of the Sandy Task Force recommendations, HUD issued new rules.

Here is what new HUD rules require:

Each grantee must describe the science-based risk analysis it has or will employ to select, prioritize, implement, and maintain infrastructure projects or activities. At a minimum, the grantee’s analysis must consider a broad range of information and best available data, including forward-looking analyses of risks to infrastructure sectors from climate change and other hazards, such as the Northeast United States Regional Climate Trends and Scenarios from the U.S. National Climate Assessment, the Sea Level Rise Tool for Sandy Recovery, or comparable peer-reviewed information, as well as the regional analysis developed in Phase 2 of the Rebuild by Design competition.

When those rules were announced back in November, I was skeptical:

The conflicts between the new HUD rules and the Christie Administration policy set up a showdown: I doubt Christie will make the substantial changes required to comply with the HUD rules.

For example, how can DEP deregulation of rebuild of public infrastructure possibly comply with HUD’s new science based risk approach, in consideration of climate change?

Gov. Christie repeatedly has said that climate change is an “esoteric” issue that he has no time to consider in Sandy recovery.

Will Christie eat crow on climate and bow to HUD regulators? Doubt it.

Will HUD withold $1.4 billion from NJ when Christie fails to submit a plan that complies?

The Christie HUD Round 2 funding plan will be reviewed by HUD for compliance with the new Obama policies and HUD rules.

The Christie plan itself connects the dots between hazard mitigation planning and HUD CDBG funding in Section 3  – This is the section that NJ relies on to comply with new HUD requirements to conduct  a “science-based risk analysis”  and forward-looking analyses of risks to infrastructure sectors from climate change and other hazards”

Here is that Christie Plan language, see: “Utilize the Sea Level Rise Tool for Sandy Recovery to Inform Individual Project Selection.”

the State is consistently applying these tools to inform the development of the State of New Jersey’s 2014 Hazard Mitigation Plan. In addition, as part of the State’s comprehensive effort to assess the potential long-term efficacy and fiscal sustainability of specific risk-reduction measures and improvements using CDBG-DR funding, the State intends to utilize the federal government’s available tools to consider the impact of potential sea-level rise and consider whether project designs should be enhanced to address potential sea level rise scenarios, where such enhancements are cost-effective and reasonably practical given the inherent uncertainty in sea-level rise modeling.

This is the only section of the Christie  HUD Plan that addresses climate change and sea level rise. Note that the language of the plan specifically allows “cost effectiveness” and “inherent uncertainty” to derail any efforts to actual implement the science.

Note that the language fails to even consider incorporation of the science in State land use, infrastructure, and coastal management programs (i.e. CAFRA et al) or local land use Master Plans, zoning ordinances, or building codes.

Note that the Plan makes no specific and binding commitments about when and how the sea level rise projects will be used or implemented with respect to federally funded projects.

For example, other portions of the Christie HUD plan do make specific and enforcement commitments with respect to sea level rise, i.e.:

• The State established by emergency rule the best available data from FEMA’s new flood maps, plus one foot of freeboard, as the general rebuilding standard to adapt to changing flood hazard risks.

Contrary to this DEP Emergency Rule that mandated the use of FEMA’s new flood maps – which are inadequate because they do not consider climate change and sea level rise – there  are no regulatory commitments to or standards to address the sea level rise projections that the Plan promises WILL BE conducted at some undefined future time.

HUD can have absolutely no assurance that NJ will actually implement sea level rise science – and there aren’t even any aspirational promises regarding climate change in the Christie plan.

These deficiencies do not meet new HUD requirements.

Worse,  the Christie HUD plan ignores the Ocean County Hazard Mitigation Plan that’s already been prepared.

The Ocean County Hazard Mitigation Plan projects and maps significant land areas in Ocean County that will be permanently (i.e. year round) inundated (i.e. under water) as a result of sea level rise, see:

• Ocean County Hazard Mitigation Plan Shows Major Portions Of County Underwater Due to Sea Level Rise

The OCHM plan shows that much larger areas of the County are projected to be hit by higher storm surge elevations, as sea level rise and climate change combine to increase the extent of highly vulnerable and high hazardous locations.

Those stark findings beg basic questions like:

• Are billions of taxpayer dollars funding infrastructure projects in those high hazard locations?

• Are homes being rebuilt in those high hazard locations?

• Are the DEP’s rebuilding elevations high enough to prevent flooding, based on the Ocean County Plan’s projections?

• Are the DEP’s federal HUD funds “to bolster ongoing efforts to purchase properties in targeted repetitive flood loss areas and convert the land to open space” targeted on high hazard locations?

Before HUD awards another $1.4 billion to the State of NJ, one would think there would be clear answers to those questions.

One would think that there would be enforceable state commitments to assure that federal funds were not misspent on such projects, which are the antithesis of Obama’s “resilience” policy.

One would be wrong.

The Christie Administration’s proposed round 2 HUD spending plan does not answer any of those basic questions.

Instead, the Plan proposes to consider those issues at some point in the future.

The point in the future is not defined – would you sign a contract and pay a roofer $40,000 who promised to replace your roof, but didn’t tell you when he would or make a legal commitment to do so?

The Christie proposed plan does not make enforceable, binding commitments.

Will HUD reject it for failure to comply with new HUD rules? Or cave to political pressure?

 

[Update: 2/13/14– Haha! Got a soundbite on the Tee Vee (along with the ass kicking south jersey folks – watch NBC News coverage: Sandy victims speak out at state hearing – end update].

It was tragedy, comedy, and farce all rolled into one big show, as the Christie Administration literally appeared on stage at Stockton College’s Performing Arts Center last night.

What was supposed to have been a public hearing for the Administration to listen to public comments on Governor Christie’s proposed plan for $1.46 billion in round 2 federal Sandy recovery money, turned into a poorly scripted 1 hour long “performance” – in 9 acts, one for each member of Christie’s Team.

The performance was led by Gov. Christie’s Sandy Czar, Marc Ferzan – remarkably just his third public appearance.

Ferzan led a Cabinet that has refused to appear – multiple times – before Legislative oversight hearings, prompting Senate leaders to threaten a subpoena to compel their appearance.

The arrogance was stunning. And I called Ferzan and Friends on that during the hearing.

In contrast, the dozens of people among the 125 or so who turned out for the public hearing and signed up to speak were limited to just 3 minutes to tell their tales of woe with the remarkable and unconscionable mismanagement of the recovery program thus far.

I’m getting ahead of myself, so let me start from the beginning.

I arrived 30 minutes early, expecting hassles on signing up to testify. Sure enough, my prior electronic registration was somehow lost. I was not the only one whose pre-registration didn’t register. If they can’t get something simple like an online registration process right, how can they get something complex like Sandy recovery right?

After manually registering to speak (#9 on the list), I also signed in as press corps because I wanted to get some photos. Surprisingly, there was no hassle about getting press credentials. As press, I not only got a close up spot to take photos, I got the 2 inch think press packet in the pretty yellow folder! Nice touch.

But, right off the bat, I noticed something was really wrong.

The VIP reserved section was empty – where were the shore Mayors, County Freeholders, and State legislators?

Why were they no shows? Why didn’t they appear to listen to the problems their constituents are experiencing? To find out how badly state programs they oversee are working?

As the event began, an administrator from Stockton welcomed the public – but he might as well have shouted:

Hello out there to you spectators sitting in the dark! Can you see me? Because I sure as hell can’t see you!

It was all down hill from there.

The Christie team stuck to the talking points. They stressed huge multi-billion unmet needs (but they’ve actually distributed less than 25% of the $1.86 billion money HUD granted in round 1, so its not a shortage of money that is causing problems).

They implied that HUD under-funded NJ compared to NY, and blamed almost all the numerous problems on bureaucratic red tape and the need to comply with federal regulations. But a state consultant designed the NJ Sandy recovery programs and State agencies bid the contracts, failed to require adequate staff and training, and oversaw the poor performance of the contractors.

The DEP remarks were canned – I’d heard them delivered several times already – no new info.

But curiously, Mike Winka of BPU went out of his way to explain, at length, why the Administration distributed Hazard Mitigation Grant funds in a way that doesn’t appear to make much sense (see this post:  Documents Show That Gov. Christie’s Office Was Involved in Distribution of Sandy Hazard Mitigation Grants to Towns).

After sitting patiently listening – for an hour – to one Christie Cabinet member after the other speak from prepared text, people who had pre-registered to speak were allowed to speak for 3 minutes.

The Christie stage team made damn sure each speaker was aware of the dwindling seconds, as a huge screen clock counted down the short 3 minute interval – a brief and strange interlude indeed.

People spoke of being treated like criminals. Treated with no compassion at all, as if they were trying to get something for nothing. Of getting bureaucratic runarounds for weeks and months on end, as their applications were shunted from private consultant to consultant. About phone calls not returned. Or applications denied for no reason or the wrong reason.

People spoke about being asked foolish and absurd questions – e.g. senior citizens who had lived in their homes for decades were required to prove they were homeowners.

People who had their homes washed away were required to get asbestos inspections and demonstrate that their homes were not located in environmentally sensitive areas, despite the fact that the homes were gone!

One man made mention of the fact that while he was required to file lots of paperwork, reconstruction of major infrastructure like the $250 million Rt. 35 reconstruction project were granted a categorical exclusion from federal NEPA regarding environmental impact reviews.

Advocate for low and moderate income homeowners and renters blasted the fact that they had to sue the administration to get basic data. They noted that even the complex regulations that governed the various funding programs were kept secret.

One woman spoke of how she diligently paid her flood insurance for many years. But, after her house was swept away by Sandy storm surge, her private flood insurance company denied her claim – get this – on the basis that it was not floodwaters that destroyed her house, but “subsurface migration”!! The ground was literally washed away.

She said the company (forgot name!) should be ashamed – but so should Christie administration regulators who fail to enforce consumer protection and insurance laws.

On top of all that, the control freaks in Christie central had some minion stand next to you and hold the microphone – there was no place to stand and testify. No podium. No central focus where people could look and listen to you. Minions worked the audience like a Phil Donahue show.

That minion holding the mike contributed to the big clock to intimidate people and make for a very undignified public hearing setting.

The voices from the dark audience, their faces unseen but their testimony virtually screaming out about bureaucratic abuse and incompetence, was like a Kafkaesque theater of the absurd.

All in all, not a good night for Sandy victims and victims of future storms that are certain to strike NJ’s highly vulnerable and over-developed coast.

Let’s hope they do better tonight in Newark.

 

Gov. Christie’s Billion Dollar Sandy Recovery Booondoggle

The Gov.’s “Political Slush Fund” & “Piggy Bank” Puts Billions of Dollars and Thousands of People At Risk

Climate Denial at the Jersey Shore

 

“This is too important a place in the fabric of New Jersey’s culture to not rebuild it. I’ve never had any doubt in my mind that we’re going to rebuild it,” Christie said. “I do not intend to be the governor who presides over the idea that this is going to be gone. I refuse to accept that.” (Asbury Park Press 11/10/12)

[Update below]

Today begins the first in a series of 3 public hearings on Gov. Christie’s proposed plan to spend the next round of $1.46 billion in federal Sandy recovery aid, which got me to thinking about historically infamous NJ disasters

(see this for locations and times of those hearings and how to submit comments).

The one that comes to mind today is the Hindenberg, a German airship that crashed and burned while landing at Lakehurst NJ on May 6, 1937 –  Thirty five people were killed (by comparison, thirty eighty NJ people were killed by Sandy) (read the Hindenberg story at Wiki).

“The Hindenburg disaster marked the beginning of the end for airship travel. Yet what is often forgotten today is that, until the 1930s, airships were a popular and luxurious way to travel.“ (link) It was an abrupt end of the era of the Zeppelin

Now, let’s do a little thought experiment to illustrate our current situation.

Let’s suppose that, just days after the Hindenberg disaster, while the smoke had not yet cleared, then NJ Governor Harold Hoffman held a series of press events and said something nostalgic like this:

No doubt that the Hindenberg tragedy was a major blow. But the Zeppelin is too much a part of NJ’s culture to abandon. I do not intend to be the governor who presides over the idea that the Zeppelin is going to be gone. I refuse to accept that.

I fondly recall trips as a boy with parents up and down the shore on the Jersey Zeppelin. I met my wife on the Zeppelin.

We need to keep Zeppelin jobs in NJ – that’s why I am calling for not only reconstruction of the Hindenberg, but a billion dollar program of construction of 10 more so that Zeppelin’s remain an essential part of NJ’s future.

The people of NJ would have tar and feathered the man, right? Or at least had good sense to reject his Zeppelin plan.

But that is exactly what current NJ Gov. Chris Christie is doing in rebuilding the NJ shore in almost exactly the same way in response to Superstorm Sandy.

Just days after Sandy struck, the Mantoloking cut (see above) was filled and work began on reconstructing the bridge and Rt. 35.

“We’re stronger than the storm” Gov. Christie assured us in his famous blue fleece.

Here’s what Gov. Christie’s plan says about Rt. 35 and the Mantoloking cut depicted in photos above:

In reconstructing the State’s transportation infrastructure, the State aims to build back a more resilient infrastructure. For example, State Route 35’s reconstruction will incorporate best practices in mitigation, including an improved drainage system, pump stations, and 24-inch thick pavement and sub-base materials. In addition, the State has undertaken the installation of more than four miles of steel sheeting to further protect Route 35.  (@ page 2-24)

The cost of this folly is over $250 million taxpayer dollars.

But reconstruction of a highly vulnerable road and bridge on a barrier island is just the beginning for the Christie Crew.

One highly vulnerable bridge is not enough – They want to build another bridge!

Other long-term projects are also underway, including the construction of a new bridge, among other improvements, to be built parallel to the State Route 72 Manahawkin Bay Causeway. The new bridge will provide the safety of a redundant route on or off Long Beach Island in the event a span needs to be closed. 

But even that insanity just begins to scratch the surface.

For example, Ocean County planners recently held public hearings on the County’s Hazard Mitigation Plan (for an analysis of that, see:

Ocean County Hazard Mitigation Plan Shows Major Portions Of County Underwater Due to Sea Level Rise – Dunes Offer No Protection – Back Bay Flooding NJ’s “Achilles Heel”:

The Plan is just more evidence that shows how extremely reckless and irresponsible Gov. Christie’s push to rebuild the shore is, without considering future risks due to climate change and sea level rise.

The State is spending billions of taxpayer dollars on infrastructure and allowing people to rebuild in areas that the know will be under water permanently, even without a storm.

The County found that:

The Ocean County Plan shows the major portions of the county will be permanently inundated – underwater – due to projected sea level rise. Sea level rise make storm surge far worse. (see table showing the percentages of each town in the county that will be permanently inundated as a result of sea level rise, not considering coastal storms and storm surge).

In deciding how to use federal Sandy aid, Governor Christie’s plan does not even consider sea level rise, storm surge, and more intense coastal storms that are certain to result from climate change  (see:  NEW CHRISTIE SANDY SPENDING PLAN HAS GAPING HOLES.

The Governor proposes to spend billions of federal taxpayer dollars rebuilding in highly vulnerable areas – and even more private sector dollars.

The Governor’s proposed plans for beach replenishment and dune construction will not fully protect the coastal areas and will make back bay flooding worse. Those plans have not be funded by Congress or designed by the  US Army Corps of Engineers.

Rutgers professor Michael Kennish has called back bay flooding NJ’s “Achilles heel”: (Kirk Moore, APP)

Back-bay areas will be New Jersey’s “Achilles’ heel,” said research professor Michael Kennish. “They have no really good way to protect against back-bay flooding.”

And Rutgers Professor Psuty has warned that dunes are not a panacea: (Sarah Watson, AC Press)

While New Jersey and other states have put a major focus on building extensive dune systems following Sandy, those dunes will only protect the immediate oceanfront area, Psuty said. Communities on the bay side of barrier islands will see no protection from the dunes, he said.

“I’m afraid when I hear our local politicians talk about the dunes, they think the dunes solve everything and that is just not the case.”

And Professor Miller warned:

It is estimated sea levels will rise between 2.5 and 6 feet by the end of the century. If those forecasts prove accurate, New Jersey’s effort to require those rebuilding to elevate at least one foot above the current base flood mark is not enough, said Ken Miller, a geologist and sea level rise expert.

“If New Jersey wants to be moving forward to incorporate sea level rise, there needs to be a minimum of two feet above base flood elevation in the current maps,” he said.

Sea level rise was responsible for an additional 38,000 homes to flood during Sandy, Miller said.

The Governor’s reliance on FEMA “Base Flood Elevations” – which do not consider sea level rise and climate change impacts – plus just 1 foot of “freeboard” elevation above the FEMA BFE’s, will not even address permanent inundation nor will they adequate protect structures from the next Sandy, which is certain to come and certain to increase in destructive force.

The Governor s plan completely ignores the issue of coastal land use – it is not even there. Almost all other  coastal states State’s address land use as a key strategy for Hazard Mitigation and resilience.

The Governor’s plan completely ignores  the suite of NJ State laws and regulations and programs that deal with Coastal Zone Management (CAFRA); water and sewer infrastructure planning; water quality, and natural resource protection.

Not only does the Gov. fail to take advantage of these State laws to improve the status quo, there is not even a linkage in the Governor’s plans to assure that implementation of  the projects that receive federal Sandy funds will be done in compliance with these state laws, regulations, and programs.

All of these key State  government land use and infrastructure planning and regulatory issues are deferred – virtually everything in the Christie plan is prospective – the word “will” is used hundreds of times!

It is difficult for me to imagine that the Obama Administration – who recognizes climate change and sea level rise and serious problems hat must be dealt with – will sit back and rubber stamp this plan, given these fundamental defects.

And it is even harder to believe that the NJ Legislature and media – given the current scandalous situation where some say the Gov. used Sandy funds as a “political slush fund” and others have observed that the Gov. used the Port Authority as a “political piggy bank” – will repeat lax oversight and give the Governor another pass on another billion dollar boondoggle.

[Update – NJ Spotlight is spinning some “good news” about a so called energy resilience fund, see:  STATE PROPOSES SPECIAL FUND TO BANKROLL ENERGY RESILIENCY PROJECTS

Here’s my reply to that:

The Christie plan also calls for using $225 million of federal funds to satisfy the State match requirements.That takes a rather large pair given the current situation, no?And it is almost the she amount of money as the Energy Bank – so when feds reject State match proposal, that will be the first to go.

And when New York State officials and Gov. Cuomo find out that Gov. Christie cut another deal with Chairman Samson at the Port Authority to have the Port pay for NJ’s share of the Port’s $2 billion infrastructure damaged by Sandy, you can be sure that additional federal funds anticipated and “programmed” by Gov. Chrisite will be lost.Of course, HUD is now looking closely and is likely to enforce their new rules on science based sea level rise and climate change risk analysis, which the Christie plan does not even attempt to do (they say the “will” consider that at some undefined future time), so there may be lots more federal money that is jeopardized.We released a letter from HUD”s Inspector General backing this up.Why aren’t critical facets like this reported?

Given the context and the new HUD rules, NJ must demonstrate that federal funds will be programmed via enforceable state commitments.

The Christie plan intentionally ignores NJ’s suite of Coastal land use, infrastructure, water quality, and natural resource protection programs and makes vague prospective promises about what the State “will do”.

That will cut no ice at HUD anymore.