ENCAP DEBACLE LOOMS OVER LATEST NEW JERSEY WATER FUND PLAN — Impending Legislative Approval Fails to Address Root Causes of Smoldering Scandal
NJ has a $16 Billion Unmet Clean Water Infrastructure Need – So Why are Clean Water loans subsidizing new development?
Trenton — Yesterday, a key committee of the New Jersey legislature approved financing for a new round of water projects, but this year’s $500 million spending plan does not remedy the flaws that led to the Encap fiasco, according to testimony delivered by Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER).
At a meeting yesterday, the Senate Environment Committee signed off on a four bill package which implements the Infrastructure Trust financing program, clearing the way for a half-billion dollars of new state clean water loans to be issued this fall. This endorsement for extending unchanged current policies occurs just months after an Inspector General’s report laid out causative factors behind the Encap scandal in which the state Department of Environmental Protection provided a $212 million, largely unsecured loan to a project that went belly-up, leaving taxpayers to pay a multi-million tab.
Despite the bath taxpayers took when Encap declared bankruptcy, the Corzine administration is actually increasing reliance on the very techniques that led to the fiscal follies of Encap. For example, it has adopted rules allowing clean water funds to be used for “conduit financings,” “transit villages,” and “transfer of development rights” projects and other high-finance, high-risk projects. Here’s the DEP’s list of “non-traditional” eligible project categories that receive priority points:
Smart growth projects
Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) Receiving Areas
NJDOT Designated Transit Villages –
State Plan Urban Centers and Urban Complexes
Designated Brownfields Development Areas –
Conduit Borrowers (like ENCAP)
Sustainable Community Planning
$25 million Set aside Landfill Closures and Site Remediation
In testimony before the committee today, New Jersey PEER Director Bill Wolfe argued that fundamental features enabling Encap remain. Under the new plan –
1) Clean water funds could be used to subsidize private “brownfields” projects (for example, multi-million dollar loans to big corporations, such as Hartz Mountain ($31 million) and Michelin Tire ($6.6 million) are on the funding list). In addition, tax-secured loans could still go to new development including projects only tangentially related to clean water purposes – as opposed to upgrading existing deficient infrastructure, despite state Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) estimates of a $16 billion infrastructure backlog;
2) The proposed Trust renewal legislation fails to remedy insider and lobbyist abuses identified by the Inspector General as facilitating the Encap debacle; and
3) The legislation does not address the lax financial oversight of loans found by the Inspector General, such as DEP waiver of loan collateral and security and approval of payments for ineligible uses. Without remedying weak DEP financial controls and insufficient staff to oversee loans, the Legislature leaves the program vulnerable to more financial manipulation and abuse.
“We need to close the cookie jar by prohibiting private use or benefit from Infrastructure Trust loans,” Wolfe commented, “We need to focus state support on priority clean water projects instead of no-collateral development schemes sponsored by Governor Corzine.”
###
Look at development projects subsidized
Download file
Read the 2007 PEER letter to EPA asking for oversight
http://www.peer.org/docs/nj/07_30_1_epa_oversight_req.pdf
See the 2008 U.S. EPA disclaimer
http://www.state.nj.us/dep/dwq/pdf/cwf_epa_disclaimer.pdf
Look at the Inspector General report
http://www.state.nj.us/oig/pdf/Meadowlands%20Remediation%20and%20Redevelopment%20Project.pdf
http://www.state.nj.us/dep/dwq/pdf/cwf_2008prop_toc.pdfView the Wastewater Infrastructure Trust Intended Use Plan
Examine diversion of water infrastructure funds to development schemes
http://www.peer.org/news/news_id.php?row_id=813
Review $16 billion backlog of water infrastructure needs
http://www.peer.org/news/news_id.php?row_id=813
New Jersey PEER is a state chapter of a national alliance of state and federal agency resource professionals working to ensure environmental ethics and government accountability
-
Archives
- December 2024
- November 2024
- October 2024
- September 2024
- August 2024
- July 2024
- June 2024
- May 2024
- April 2024
- March 2024
- February 2024
- January 2024
- December 2023
- November 2023
- October 2023
- September 2023
- August 2023
- July 2023
- June 2023
- May 2023
- April 2023
- March 2023
- February 2023
- January 2023
- December 2022
- November 2022
- October 2022
- September 2022
- August 2022
- July 2022
- June 2022
- May 2022
- April 2022
- March 2022
- February 2022
- January 2022
- December 2021
- November 2021
- October 2021
- September 2021
- August 2021
- July 2021
- June 2021
- May 2021
- April 2021
- March 2021
- February 2021
- January 2021
- December 2020
- November 2020
- October 2020
- September 2020
- August 2020
- July 2020
- June 2020
- May 2020
- April 2020
- March 2020
- February 2020
- January 2020
- December 2019
- November 2019
- October 2019
- September 2019
- August 2019
- July 2019
- June 2019
- May 2019
- April 2019
- March 2019
- February 2019
- January 2019
- December 2018
- November 2018
- October 2018
- September 2018
- August 2018
- July 2018
- June 2018
- May 2018
- April 2018
- March 2018
- February 2018
- January 2018
- November 2017
- October 2017
- September 2017
- August 2017
- July 2017
- June 2017
- May 2017
- April 2017
- March 2017
- February 2017
- January 2017
- December 2016
- November 2016
- October 2016
- September 2016
- August 2016
- July 2016
- June 2016
- May 2016
- April 2016
- March 2016
- February 2016
- January 2016
- December 2015
- November 2015
- October 2015
- September 2015
- August 2015
- July 2015
- June 2015
- May 2015
- April 2015
- March 2015
- February 2015
- January 2015
- December 2014
- November 2014
- October 2014
- September 2014
- August 2014
- July 2014
- June 2014
- May 2014
- April 2014
- March 2014
- February 2014
- January 2014
- December 2013
- November 2013
- October 2013
- September 2013
- August 2013
- July 2013
- June 2013
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
-
Meta
Thanks for putting the whole sordid picture together. I could add other things going on at DEP that add to the giveaways to developers or business: Pressure is easily placed by various “stakeholders” to have Hazardous Discharge Site Remediation Funds (HDSRF) money awarded to various projects by local and state politicians (often one and the same, such as with Bayonne or Jersey City). Then the grant recipient (the municipality or Redevelopment Board) is given the right to select the contracted engineering firm or consultant to do the investigation. Then the invoices for the work being paid by state funds must be approved by the DEP. And when staffers at DEP ask too many questions about line items on the invoices or wonder why the investigation and/or remediation costs so much, political pressure is again placed and they are told to just approve it or be reassigned to the basement (you get the idea). It happens all the time.
Another bright idea (not) is the EPA’s “Triad” approach. Under this retread of an idea (EPA gives out promotions to those who reinvent the wheel), so-called fast-track investigation is performed at contaminated sites. The DEP staff and “stakeholders” such as Redevelopment Boards and their consultants , local politicians and their consultants, and the developer and their consultants (!) meet often to iron out the details without the “hassle” of writing work plans or reports or other requirements of state regulations. However, in the interest of speeding up a project in order to get those condos built, much is often overlooked.
I foresee the time when we have Licensed Site Professionals running DEP (with whistleblower protection) while a skeleton crew of DEP staff try to oversee hundreds of projects each and with no whistleblower protection. As the Sierra Club said in their article the other day, soon NJ will be run totally by developers. And the taxpayers and residents don’t even see it coming. They are being duped by the idea that DEP is the reason the economy is in the dumper! Yea, DEP is so powerful that it managed to cause the loan and credit crisis, the rise in unemployment and the rise in the cost of gasoline! If twe have that kind of power, why can’t we get Corzine to lift his hiring and promotional freeze? I guess we probably caused the savings & loan scandal in the 1990s too. Wait a minute……….was there even a DEP then? I do remember this……….there was a Republican in the White House then just as there is now! Coincidence? I think not.