NJ Democrats Had A December to Remember

Trio of Terrible Bills Now On Governor Christie’s Desk

No Daylight Between Dems and Gov. Christie 

 

When Senate President Sweeney posted the water privatization bill for a floor vote on December 18 – the bill that would eliminate the current requirement that local voters approve any sale of their public water systems – I tweeted a question: Would Sweeney pay a political price for this?

The bill was an outrageous dual attack on fundamental democratic rights and the public sphere, on behalf of corporate interests.

The bill was vehemently opposed by virtually the entire Democratic base: labor, environmentalists, consumer, good government, and progressives who oppose stripping away of democratic rights to favor more corporate power and profits.

The bill split the Democrats – 9 D’s voted NO – and squeaked through the Senate by a 21-16 vote.

So, did Sweeney pay a political price?

Not from labor –

Sweeney made sure to post – on the same December day – a (failed) over-ride vote on restrictions of Gov. Christie’s privatization deals, and Charlie Wowkanech wrote an Op-Ed to go right along and provide cover – with no criticism from labor on an outrageous privatization scheme. CWA was similarly on the sidelines.

So, labor settles for a symbolic gesture, while privatization of public assets expands. Heckofajob!

Not from environmental groups –

The dust had not yet settled and yet Environment NJ rushed to hold a press conference with Sweeney on wind – a big wet kiss – again, providing political cover and getting absolutely nothing in return.

As I’ve written – the barrier to wind is the cost test in law. If Dems say they are pro-wind, then pass a bill to correct or eliminate the cost test.

And what ever happened to the 80% renewable energy bill?

Why do labor and environmentalists constantly get so easily played?

And not from self proclaimed “progressive” outlets like BlueJersey – they do Dem cheerleading only – or even NJ Spotlight, the only outlet that covers Trenton policy.

So, here’s the quick rundown on the status of the horrible bill’s Sweeney rammed through on December 18 – surely, a December to remember:

• Water Privatization (S2412)

We’ve written extensively about how bad this bill is (see this and this and this) so we’ll just leave you today with a quote from Senator Smith’s floor debate:

“This is such a bad deal for the citizens of NJ. This is crazy… just giving away our water supply.”   ~~~ Water privatization bill removing public vote requirement moves to Christie’s desk

The bill is on Christie’s desk.

• Permit Extension Act (S2551)

I wrote about that here.

Governor Christie already signed the bill, see: Christie signs controversial bill to extend N.J. building permits

• Sweetheart deals for Highlands Landowners while State Parks are starved (S1050)

I wonder how Senator Sweeney felt about this headline?

• N.J. Senate seeks more relief for Highlands landowners

The bill is a sweetheart deal for wealthy individuals and corporate speculators that own large land parcels in the Highlands. They will get an extension of an “incentive” that set the appraised value of their land PRIOR to passage of the Highlands Act’s development restrictions. Land values are based largely on the ability to develop them.

The bill will increase the appraised value of Highlands  land – and therefore public costs of acquisition – by 10 times or more.

This huge giveaway to the Highlands comes at a time when the State Parks capital budget and operating funds have been diverted to the new “Open Space” fund, which is less that 1/3 of its historic level. The scarcity of funds has set off nasty competition between State parks, open space, farmland, historic preservation, and urban advocates.

In this fiscal context, it is literally crazy to extend “incentives” to wealthy Highlands landowners and corporate speculators.

The Highlands is the only place in NJ where landowners are “protected” by law from diminution in their speculative land value resulting from environmental restrictions on development.

The provision was part of the political deal to secure votes for passage of the Highlands Act in 2004. The intent was to encourage willing sellers to offer their property for State acquisition.

Expecting landowners to voluntarily come forward, the Highlands Council refused to invoke their power under the Act to designate lands for “preservation”, where all development was prohibited.

But landowners were only granted this “incentive” for 5 years – a period later extended to 10 years.

But instead of coming forward to sell their land or development rights, landowners fought the act tooth and nail – first in losing lawsuits and then politically, seeking legislative repeal or Governor Christie’s rollback.

Now, those landowners are rewarded for their intransigence and political attacks on the Highlands – and the reward was provided by Democrats.

• Commercialization of Liberty State Park (S2647)

This was a stealth move – see yesterday’s Bergen Record story of the ugly details:

Advocates see hidden threat to Liberty State Park; bill could spark development

A paragraph added at the last minute to a bill awaiting Governor Christie’s signature puts a new state commission in charge of development of Liberty State Park, a move some believe will make it easier for the park’s coveted Hudson River waterfront to be sold or leased to private developers.

I’ve written the setup story and the backstory.

The bill is on the Governor’s desk.

So there it is, a Democratic  December to remember.