Pinelands Commission to Begin Reform of MOA Rules At Issue In Pipeline Battle

First Meeting In Wake of Bruising Battle over Bob Barr’s Senate Confirmation

Embarrassing Emails Sure To Reignite Debate

Tomorrow the Pinelands Commission’s Policy and Implementation Committee will meet to discuss, among other things, reforms to the current regulations governing Intergovernmental Memoranda of Agreement (MOA).

Chairman Lohbauer recently called for creation of an Ad Hoc Committee to reform MOA rules in response to disclosure of a series of highly improper emails between pipeline applicant South Jersey Gas, Governor Christie’s Office, and Executive Director Wittenberg and legal Counselor Roth.

The trove of emails were obtained by the Pinelands Preservation Alliance, who had to file a lawsuit after their OPRA request was denied.

Prior to that, I also filed a simialr OPRA request that also was denied, see: What Does the Pinelands Commission Have to Hide?

Those emails reveal, at best, a compromised review process, and have generated embarrassing press and critical editorials, see:

I recently predicted that any MOA reform process needed to be closely monitored:

I suspect that the overall game plan is to not oppose Chairman Lohbauer’s proposal to form an Ad Hoc MOA rule reform Committee, but rather to install Tony on the inside, delay and co-opt the MOA reform process, and divert the focus while SJG pursues an alternate pipeline route outside the Pinelands.

I will attend tomorrow’s meeting and repeat my prior recommendations or MOA reforms:

I spoke and recommended that the Commission strengthen the CMP MOA rules by developing more detailed standards and criteria to beef up the current vague and excessively discretionary CMP regulatory standard for MOA’s (@ NJAC 7:50-4.52(c)2.) that sets the following standard:

afford an equivalent level of protection of the resources of the Pinelands than would be provided through a strict application of the standards of this Plan.  

I suggested that the Commission look to NJ DEP’s Guidance and Technical Manual regarding reductions in the 300 foot C1 stream buffers, which require demonstration of “equivalent ecological function” (see: NJAC 7:8 -5.5(h)1.ii.) which sets this standard:

The encroachment shall only be allowed where applicant demonstrates that the functional value and overall condition of the special water resource protection area will be maintained to the maximum extent practicable.

I also recommended stronger standards and definitions of public projects and public entities, to avoid the abuse of using BPU to cover for the private SJG project.

I also recommended that the Commission impose an administrative moratorium on review of any applications seeking a MOA or Waiver of Strict Compliance until CMP regulations are strengthened, so we don’t repeat the mistakes made during the SJG review process.

The model for a moratorium was the Delaware River Basin Commission’s moratorium on review of fracking applications until new safeguards were developed to address gaps and weaknesses in current DRBC regulations.

We’ll keep you posted on what transpires.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

80 Responses to Pinelands Commission to Begin Reform of MOA Rules At Issue In Pipeline Battle

  1. Pingback: police aviator sunglasses price

  2. Pingback: wow gold

  3. Pingback: Lululemon Outlet Online

  4. Pingback: Cheap Ray Ban Sunglasses

  5. Pingback: http://www.foodandwineexpo.ca/sitepages/pollnews.asp

  6. Pingback: Cheap Christian Louboutin

  7. Pingback: http://www.sportslegalforms.com

  8. Pingback: http://www.croftonline.co.uk/view.asp

  9. Pingback: Lululemon Outlet

  10. Pingback: Christian Louboutin Replica

  11. Pingback: http://www.manthanaward.org/louboutin.asp

  12. Pingback: http://www.saugatuck.com/raybans.asp

  13. Pingback: Lululemon Outlet Factory Online

  14. Pingback: Christian Louboutin Replica

  15. Pingback: louis vuitton outlet

  16. Pingback: Lululemon Outlet

  17. Pingback: http://www.bamboodownunder.com.au/files/

  18. Pingback: cheap ray ban sunglasses

  19. Pingback: Christian Louboutin Outlet

  20. Pingback: http://www.whatsupmuskoka.com/sitepages/pollnews.asp

  21. Pingback: lululemon canada outlet

  22. Pingback: Replica RayBan Wayfarer

  23. Pingback: Lululemon Outlet Online

  24. Pingback: giuseppe zanotti outlet

  25. Pingback: Lululemon Outlet

  26. Pingback: louis vuitton outlet

  27. Pingback: lululemon yoga pants

  28. Pingback: giuseppe zanotti outlet online

  29. Pingback: giuseppe zanotti outlet

  30. Pingback: cheap louis vuitton

  31. Pingback: Lululemon Outlet

  32. Pingback: http://www.corcon.org

  33. Pingback: http://www.corcon.org

  34. Pingback: Lululemon Outlet

  35. Pingback: Christian Louboutin Outlet

  36. Pingback: http://www.whatsupmuskoka.com/sitepages/pollnews.asp

  37. Pingback: Louis Vuitton Outlet

  38. Pingback: giuseppe zanotti outlet

  39. Pingback: Christian Louboutin Outlet

  40. Pingback: http://www.croftonline.co.uk/view.asp

  41. Pingback: Christian Louboutin Replica

  42. Pingback: Cheap Ray Ban Sunglasses

  43. Pingback: Christian Louboutin Outlet

  44. Pingback: ray bans replica

  45. Pingback: http://www.kingstonlife.ca/sitepages/pollnews.asp

  46. Pingback: lululemon outlet online

  47. Pingback: lululemon outlet

  48. Pingback: ray ban sunglasses replica

  49. Pingback: ray ban sunglasses replica

  50. Pingback: Christian Louboutin Replica

Leave a Reply