WolfeNotes.com

Former Governor Codey Asked The $64,000 Question

Top DEP Commissioner’s Aid Lied In Response

Connecting The Dots To Expose The Christie Agenda

What Bob Martin has done that is so insidious and unlawful is that he has incorporated Gov. Christie’s Exectutive Orders – and his own personal management and policy opinions – into enforceable DEP regulations.

At last week’s Senate Environment Committee hearing on a Resolution (SCR 180) that would declare a major set of DEP water regulations “inconsistent with legislative intent“, DEP Commissioner Bob Martin’s “Chief Advisor“ told multiple lies.

He did so to obscure two critical facts: first that the rules were intended and in fact weakened protections; and second, that they implemented Gov. Christie’s policies.

First, Cantor claimed – falsely – that EPA had backed off their opposition to the DEP’s proposal.

NJ Spotlight reporting proved that claim false, based on EPA’s explicit rejection of Cantor’s statements:

At the hearing earlier this week, Raymond Cantor, chief advisor to the commissioner, said after meeting with DEP on the proposal, the state had essentially resolved those concerns.

But a letter from the Region II EPA office yesterday suggested otherwise. “The proposed regulations have not changed,’’ wrote Joan Leary Matthews, director of the Clean Water Division. “EPA continues to have concerns as identified in our previous letter.’’  (see second EPA letter here)

It is simply amazing and unacceptable to have high level DEP officials misleading and lying to legislators like this. Yes, spin and obfuscation are routine, but flat out lies are unprecedented in my experience.

But the EPA issue was not the only lie or deception Cantor told the Committee – he also stated that no standards had been weakened, and that was even a bigger lie, as we’ve amply demonstrated multiple times.

Cantor also stated that the Gov.’s Office provided no direction to the DEP on the proposal; that the proposal was generated by DEP staff and based on Stakeholder input; and that the Stakeholder process was open and robust – all 3 of those claims are lies too.

Let me expose those lies in reverse order:

As Cantor surely knows, the DEP Stakeholder meetings are not open and robust, but are “by invitation only” as stated on DEP’s website. The invitees are overwhelmingly hand picked regulated industries or their consultants. Meetings are closed to the public, even for just monitoring the discussion.

As Cantor also knows, the Category One (C1) buffer rules have long been opposed by the builders, landowners, corporate office park, and entire development community.

And Cantor, a lawyer, surely knows that in 2006, the NJ Builders Association sued DEP to block the rules, which NJ Courts upheld. (wonks can read the Appellate Division’s opinion here)

As Cantor knows but withheld from the Senate Environment Committee, the C1 buffer rules were targeted by the Christie DEP Transition Report.

The C1 buffer rollback strategy is openly presented in the DEP Transition Report (see “Omnibus Rulemaking” on page 13)

• Reexamine buffer requirements in urban/disturbed areas and Planning Areas 1 and 2 designated for growth under the State Development and Redevelopment Plan (hereinafter referred to as the State Plan) as applied to wetlands, C-1 waters and potential Threatened and Endangered species habitat under Flood Hazard, Stormwater, and Wetlands rules.

But there is even a broader policy set by the Governor that is responsible for the DEP’s rollback that Cantor sought to obscure.

The Category One buffer program is not unique – so let’s get to the role of the Governor’s Office that Cantor denied.

Codey Pops the Question – Connecting the Dots to Gov. Christie’s Policy

During the Senate hearing, it was truly incredible to watch and listen to Cantor dissemble.

My favorite moment came when former Governor and current Senator Codey asked Ray Cantor, DEP Commissioner Bob Martin’s “Chief Advisor“ a point blank question about whether the “Front Office” has any role in the DEP’s rule.

After a rambling non-response, which triggered objections by Codey and Chairman Smith that Cantor was not answering the direct question Codey posed, Cantor flat out denied that the Governor’s Office had directed the Department on the rule.

Cantor insisted that exactly the opposite was true: that the rule was developed “bottom up” and a product of DEP professional staff recommendations and a robust stakeholder process.

That’s more nonsense.

The buffer rule rollback originates in the radical regulatory policy rollback set forth in Governor Christie’s Executive Orders #1 – #4.  Let me connect those dots.

Man on a (Rollback) Mission

Gov. Christie DEP Commissioner Bob Martin’s has fundamentally and unilaterally revised DEP’s mission – without legislative authority – and in a way that undermines all protections for public health and the environment and that conflicts with environmental laws.

How did he do this and how can he get away with that?

He did this in two ways:

First, he did so by incorporating the regulatory policies in Governor Christie’s Executive Orders #1 – #4 in DEP’s organizational regulations, NJAC 7:1 – et seq.

Second, Martin incorporated his own “Vision and Priorities” statement into DEP’s organizational regulations.

Here it is in black and white:

7:1-1.1 Mission

(a) The Department’s core mission is and will continue to be the protection of the air, waters, land, and natural and historic resources of the State to ensure continued public benefit. The Department’s mission is advanced through effective and balanced implementation and enforcement of environmental laws to protect these resources and the health and safety of New Jersey’s residents. At the same time, it is crucial to understand how actions of the Department can impact the State’s economic growth, to recognize the interconnection of the health of New Jersey’s environment and its economy, and to appreciate that environmental stewardship and positive economic growth are not mutually exclusive goals: the Department will continue to protect the environment while playing a key role in positively impacting the economic growth of the State.

(b) In order to implement the Mission, at (a) above, the Commissioner has issued a DEP Vision and Priorities statement, which is available at www.nj.gov/dep/about.html. The Vision and Priorities build on the principles set forth in Governor Christie’s Executive Orders 1 through 4 (January 20, 2010), available at www.state.nj.us/infobank/circular/eoindex.htm.

On their own, the Governor’s Executive Orders do not have the force and effect of law. To be enforceable, an executive branch “policy” must be authorized by the Legislature and adopted pursuant to rule making procedures of the NJ Administrative Procedures Act.

That means that even though Executive Order #2 says DEP shall provide “regulatory relief”, should not go beyond minimum federal requirements, must justify all rules by cost benefit analysis, and engage in an industry friendly “Stakeholder process” “to prevent unworkable, overly-proscriptive or ill-advised rules from being adopted”, legally that is really all rhetoric –  the underlying environmental laws and the Administrative Procedures Act legally govern and trump Christie’s EO policies.

But what Bob Martin has done that is so remarkably insidious and unlawful is that he has incorporated Gov. Christie’s Executive Orders – and his own personal management and policy opinions – into enforceable DEP regulation.

Legally, all DEP regulations must be authorized by the Legislature.

Additionally, as SCR 180 illustrates, the Legislature has the Constitutional power to veto any regulation as “inconsistent with legislative intent“.

It is my assessment that Commissioner Martin has no legislative authority to revise DEP’s Mission – or program regulations – based on Governor Christie’s regulatory policies and his own “vision”.

We are now witnessing the logical outcome of that Christie regulatory policy and Martin management “vision” in the various DEP “overhaul” regulations being proposed:

1) stream encroachment, stormwater, coastal zone management; (my analysis complete)

2) water quality management planning (public hearings and my analysis  forthcoming soon)

3) freshwater wetlands (“overhaul” upcoming, according to Bob Martin)

4) Highlands (overhaul upcoming according to Bob Martin)

Don’t say you haven’t been warned – and warned for over 5 years now.

Climate Emergency Justifies Fossil Moratorium

Former Governor Florio spoke at a Trenton press conference on Thursday about some of his perspectives on climate change and energy policy.

He began by noting that longevity has its benefits, in terms of providing perspective and experience in addressing policy challenges.

I was able to ask my second question of a Governor at a press conference – my first didn’t go so well – so I want to reflect on that question today to show how Florio’s leadership on integrating energy  and environmental policy remains a relevant model and some of his policy experience and tools can still be used to address very similar policy problems.

First of all, few seem to recall that way back in 1990, Gov. Florio expanded the Department of Environmental Protection’ (DEP) mission to include energy, forming the Department of Environmental Protection and Energy (DEPE). This integration began an incredibly innovative public policy, planning, and regulatory process.

The initial policy thrust and programmatic focus of that integration was on solid waste and air quality, but a future expansion to the issue of climate change was the logical progression and clearly on the horizon. NASA scientist Jim Hansen had just first put the climate issue on the public radar in his groundbreaking Congressional testimony in 1988, as the NY Times then reported:

Global Warming Has Begun, Expert Tells Senate

WASHINGTON, June 23— The earth has been warmer in the first five months of this year than in any comparable period since measurements began 130 years ago, and the higher temperatures can now be attributed to a long-expected global warming trend linked to pollution, a space agency scientist reported today.

Until now, scientists have been cautious about attributing rising global temperatures of recent years to the predicted global warming caused by pollutants in the atmosphere, known as the ”greenhouse effect.” But today Dr. James E. Hansen of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration told a Congressional committee that it was 99 percent certain that the warming trend was not a natural variation but was caused by a buildup of carbon dioxide and other artificial gases in the atmosphere.

After ignoring and denying this warning, almost 30 years later, today Hansen and virtually all climate scientists warn that we must keep at least 80% of known fossil fuel reserves in the ground if we are to avoid more than 2 degrees (c) of warming and climate chaos.

Governor Florio was on the cutting edge and way ahead of the policy curve by institutionalizing energy and the environment in DEPE and beginning the challenge of integrating planning and regulation.

Obviously, the energy industry saw the writing on the wall and perceived the strategic threat of regulation, because the first thing that the Whitman Administration did in 1994 was to dismantle the Florio effort and – like Ronald Reagan’ removing Jimmy Carter’s solar panels from the White House roof – ripped the letters off the DEPE building, leaving the original DEP logo and a charcoal colored stain where the “E” had stood for 4 years.

But the energy industry went way beyond that –

They killed the inchoate integrated energy and environmental regulatory baby in its crib.

Governor Whitman pushed the industry’s energy deregulation initiative, which was enacted by the Legislature and has proven a huge failure.

But Governor Florio was able to implement incredibly important policy with respect to integrating energy and environment with respect tho solid waste policy that Whitman was unable to dismantle (although she tried hard to do just that).

Few know that the Florio policy is what produced NJ’s huge expansion of recycling and killed more than a dozen proposed garbage incinerators.

That’s the feature I want to focus on today to show the relevance for responding some of the fossil infrastructure controversies now underway in NJ.

The challenges of 1990 are very similar to today’s

Consider these parallels:

1. In 1990, Gov. Florio inherited Governor Tom Kean’s Solid Waste Plan. That plan proposed 21 garbage incinerators, one in each of NJ’s 21 counties.

In 2015, we are saddled with Governor Christie’s Energy Master Plan (EMP) that promotes a huge expansion of gas pipelines and power plants.

2. In 1990, the public and environmental groups were vigorously opposed to building garbage incinerators in their towns. Huge political battles broke out across the state in opposition to various proposed burners.

In 2015,  the same battles are occurring across the state on a score of fossil infrastructure projects, from pipelines (gas and oil), bomb trains, power plants, off shore LNG, fracking, etc.

3. In 1990, the Kean Plan did not consider statewide need in relation to the design capacity of all those 21 garbage incinerators.

As a result, there was HUGE excess capacity that was 2 -3 times the amount needed for NJ’s garbage. As a result of this excess capacity, garbage imports from NY City and Philadelphia would expand and be subsidized by NJ taxpayers, while – adding insult to injury – NJ bore the brunt of the pollution and environmental impacts.

In 2105, the Christie EMP does not consider NJ’s demand for energy or natural gas in promoting pipelines and power plants that will serve NY and the northeast and mid-Atlantic region, and again, NJ bears the environmental impacts and safety risks.

4. In 1990, the Kean Plan failed to consider the total cost of building 21 garbage incinerators, which exceeded $3 billion. Those costs would be borne by ratepayers and taxpayers, not the private investors reaping the huge unregulated profits (BPU had been stripped of its public utility “rate base – rate of return” powers over the incineration industry by the 1985 “McEnroe” legislation, a prelude to Whitman’s 1999 complete deregulation).

In 2015, the Christie EMP fails to consider the total cost of the glut of pipelines and power plants, which also are paid for by ratepayers and taxpayers, while the energy industry reaps windfall profits.

5. Perhaps most importantly, in 1990 the Kean plan failed to consider the far superior economically and environmentally preferable alternatives of source reduction and recycling. The Kean plan failed to consider how garbage incineration technology and over-capacity fundamentally conflicted with those preferable alternatives.

In 2015, the Christie EMP fails to consider the far preferable alternatives of energy efficiency and renewable energy or how the glut and artificially low price of natural gas undermines those far preferable alternatives.

6. In 1990, the DEP and BPU roles were to rubber stamp the private sector’s projects.

Despite having clear statutory authority and planning and regulatory tools to protect the public interest and the environment, and despite enormous public opposition to the incineration industry, State government’s role was to rubber stamp their permits and promote industry profits.

In 2015, Governor Christie has aggressively adopted the same pro-industry, anti-regulatory policy and passive role for State government.

[Even the way capital intensive garbage incinerators were financed by debt backed by mandatory waste flow is analogous to public utility model of control over the grid versus competition from energy efficiency, demand management, distributed renewables and net metering.]

It doesn’t have to be that way – we can learn the lessons of 1990.

Florio Governmental Response in 1990 is Still Relevant Today

To respond to the systemic failures of State government planning and regulation and the demands of the public and environmental groups, in addition to institutionalizing and integrating energy and environment at the new DEPE, on April 6, 1990, Gov. Florio issued Executive Order #8 , which established a moratorium on garbage incinerators.

EO #8 also created an “Emergency Solid Waste Taskforce” with the following mission:

3. Within 120 days of the date of this Order, the Task Force shall submit recommendations to the Governor on the following:

a. A program to minimize the generation of solid waste and maximize reuse, recycling and composting. This program should specifically identify the percentages of waste which can be removed from the solid waste stream by reuse, recycling and composting and propose a schedule for these reductions in the waste stream;

b. Alternatives for the disposal of solid waste that cannot be removed from the waste stream through source reduction and

c. The benefits of and a process for regionalizing solid waste disposal facilities where appropriate;

d. The need for revision of environmental or other standards for resource recovery or other solid waste disposal facilities; and

e. Legislative and regulatory changes which are necessary to achieve the Task Force’s recommendations.

We are now in a climate emergency that is far more profound than the solid waste problems that triggered the Florio “Emergency” Task force.

As noted above, there are tremendous similarities between the nature of the challenges faced by Gov. Florio in 1990 in reversing many years of bad policy and trying to tame a politically and economically powerful $3 billion garbage incineration beast and what we face today.

There is no reason why a similar approach could not be followed today.

That approach would begin with a moratorium on new fossil infrastructure and a radical shift in policy to renewables.

That approach would include immediate DEP efforts to use the Clean Water Act Section 401 certification requirements to deny federally regulated energy projects, like the PennEast pipeline.

Similarly, the Gov. has veto power over off shore projects under federal law, like off shore LNG.

That approach would include a major overhaul of the BPU Energy Laster Plan, much like Florio re-wrote the Kean Solid Waste Plan

But obviously Gov. Christie is not going to do this, but that does not mean that the approach should be rejected by activists and supportive government officials.

Strategically, we can begin to build demand for a moratorium by recognizing that it is feasible, then my organizing around it and demanding it, perhaps at the local level and with the regional planning entities, like the Meadowlands, Highlands and Pinelands.

We have to start somewhere – the tools are out there. History provides a lesson.

Is anyone paying attention?

[*Full disclosure: Back in 1990, after a day’s work at DEP,  I regularly would hole up for a few hours with a guy named Frank Sweeney, Florio’s policy advisor on the environment, in a small office in the State house.

Those work sessions were how the Florio solid waste initiative was crafted.]

Senate Republicans Elevate Partisan Loyalty to Gov. Christie Above Clean Water

Senators Kean and Beck Sellouts Are Acute

[Update in text below]

There’s always a lot of talk about the environment being a non-partisan or bi-partisan issue.

At a Trenton press conference just yesterday, pro-environment Senate Republican “Kip” Bateman emphasized that “environmental issues are not red, or blue, they’re green”

That conventional wisdom is no longer true at the national level and has been demonstrated to be totally false in Washington DC, as corporations and Tea Party anti-government radicals have purchased and hijacked the Republican Party. (not that Dems are not similarly bought)

Here’s a very sad example of that, where Congressman and former NJ State Senator Leonard Lance who used to be strong on the environment as a State Senator now votes for Tea Party attacks: (see this)

Lance supported legislation to make it easier to build this pipeline. He voted for HR3301, which would exempt natural gas pipelines from the National Environmental Policy Act.

How can a Congressman claim to demand the highest standards of environmental review and then vote to exempt pipelines from NEPA?

How can conservation groups opposing the pipeline praise and promote this kind of “bipartisanship”?

Despite this hypocrisy Lance was praised in a NJCF press release for his call for strict environmental reviews of the PennEast pipeline.

Worse, again praised by NJCF, Lance wrote a letter that lauded the Christie DEP for “holding the PennEast pipeline to the highest standards” – Say what?

Yet in fact: 1) the DEP’s environmental review letter to FERC had huge gaps and loopholes; 2) DEP’s Office of Permit Coordination is working hard behind the scenes to issue permits, the same Office that rammed through Pinelands pipeline permits with no public awareness, and 3) DEP just proposed to eliminate the current 12,000 square foot standard for stream buffer disturbance by a pipeline and provide an unlimited by right 30 square feet per linear foot of pipeline, and 4) DEP proposed to repeal the Category One buffer regulation which is DEP’s only legal tool to deny PennEast permits.

[Update: 10/24/15 – In an even more incredible irony and hypocrisy, back in 2001, then State Assemblyman Lance was the prime sponsor of a bill [A3694]  that would direct DEP to designate Category One waters and do so legislatively if DEP failed to act. How far we’ve fallen. h/t to Jeff Tittel for reminding me of this history – I worked with him at Sierra at the time.]

Does NJCF not know all this? Do members of the PennEast coalition know this? HELLO!

“Bipartisanship” in The Age of Christie

And here in NJ, in the age of Christie, it certainly is no longer true too (if it ever was).

The Governor himself bragged about issuing over 400 vetoes “from a crazy liberal democratic legislature” (and don’t forget those 189 Executive Orders. This is an abuse of Executive power we’ve written about for years and called on the legislature to step up to).

The Governor himself bragged about rolling back NJ’s environmental regulations:

“I spent the last 5 years dismantling the overreach that she [NJ DEP Commissioner Lisa Jackson] did in New Jersey and our environmental protection area.  ~~~~ Gov. Chris Christie, Iowa, 3/7/15

Yesterday’s vote on a Senate Resolution to veto the Christie DEP flood rule is a perfect illustration of that dismantling.

There is widespread consensus that the rules in question roll back regulatory protections of water quality, flood risks, and coastal development. There is really no debate about that among experts.

The US EPA, FEMA, the NJ Association of Flood Plain Managers, 25 State and local environmental, conservation and watershed groups, and even the League of Municipalities have all raised strong written objections to the Christie DEP rules.

That degree of consensus is very unusual.

Even the NJ Builders Association was forced to acknowledge that “criteria” for limiting development near exceptional waterbodies were relaxed.

So, yesterday’s Senate vote – on the substantive merits – was really very easy.

But, politically, because it would embarrass the Christie Administration and reject the Gov.’s pro-business environmental and regulatory policy, the vote was politicized.

The vote was 24 – 13.

Only 3 of 15 Republicans voted the right way (Bateman, Singer, and Pinnachio). O’Toole did not vote.

That means that 11 Republicans put partisan political loyalty to Governor Christie above preventing major rollbacks to protections for water quality and flood risks.

Senator Beck, who talks the talk on supporting the environment voted NO. It’s a lot harder being green when you have to buck Governor Christie and party leadership.

Senator Kean, who invokes his father’s pro-environmental accomplishments and portrays himself as a moderate, voted NO. That’s not leadership, its cowardice.

Not surprisingly, Senators Van Drew and Rice (Newark) were the only 2 of 25 Dems who voted the wrong way.

Van Drew is a Cape May Democrat, which is a Republican in drag. He’s the lead on pushing the Pinelands pipeline, has gotten tons of criticism for that, and has an animus towards environmentalists, for sure.

I sense that Rice just resents the hypocrisy of most elite white environmental groups, who talk the talk on urban and environmental justice issues, but do very little for his constituents (while taking his Dem vote for granted).

The test of a politician’s commitment is on the tough votes, when it really matters.

The test of the political party is the policy thrust of the overwhelming majority of its members.

On both individual and party criteria, the Republicans failed the litmus test. Period.

Yet, the environmental lobbyists and the media have an interest in maintaining the myths of bipartisanship on environmental issues.

Check the lead on the NJ Spotlight story – it’s in the headline and the lede paragraph:

Bipartisan vote confirms lawmakers agree proposal clashes with legislative intent of earlier environmental laws

In a bipartisan action yesterday, the Senate voted to override a contentious new rule proposed by the state Department of Environmental Protection that is viewed by critics as impairing New Jersey’s water quality and increasing flooding.

When 21 of 24 YES votes (87.5 %) (with 21 needed to win, making the 3 R votes superfluous) are from Democrats, while 11 of the 13 NO votes (84.6%) were Republicans, how can that possibly be described as “bipartisan”?

No one described a very similar vote on the gun veto over-ride as “bipartisan” – so why is the environmental vote characterized that way?

The 3 Republican Senators who bucked the Governor on guns were lauded as brave heroes in editorials, not as “bipartisan” legislators just doing their job.

Why weren’t Bateman, Pinnachio, and Singer, who bucked the Governor on buffers, similarly described?

So, I call bullshit on the bipartisan myth and on those who continue to propagate it.

Prove me wrong.

DEP professionals need to blow the whistle on these kind of abuses

We are not a tabloid or rumor mill, but I find this revolting and want to get it out into the public light.

I want to report the following information which was provided to me by multiple credible sources over the last several months. I have no way to research, document, or prove this conclusively, but I believe that it is true because I believe my sources, who have first hand knowledge.

I do so to urge media, the legislature, US EPA, and/or government ethics bodies to investigate and find out the extent of this culture of corrupt practice that’s been ongoing in Bob Martin’s Department of Environmental Protection:

1) Case of Nepotism #1

I was told that former DEP Assistant Commissioner Michele Sierkerka, currently the head of the NJ Business and Industry Association, hired her child to work at DEP.

If true, this could violate civil service or ethics rules.

2) Revolving door abuse

I was told that Assistant Commissioner Sierkerka promoted unqualified DEP staffers to middle management positions.

These unqualified middle managers made water pollution permit decisions that over-rode staff recommendations and violated regulations and created significant environmental harm.

Subsequently, when Assistant Commissioner Sierkerka departed DEP to join NJBIA, she brought these same DEP middle managers that she had promoted along with her.

Thus, it appears that DEP regulations were bent or violated to grant favors and flawed permits to corporate member of NJBIA.

It also appears that these same unqualified and corrupt DEP middle mangers were then  rewarded by jobs at NJBIA.

If true, this is the epitome of abuse and corruption and may constitute wrongdoing.

3) Case of Nepotism and Revolving Door Abuse

I was told that Karen Fell, who is a senior manger in DEP’s Water supply regulatory program, hired her child to work at DEP.

A few months later, this child was then hired by a major private water company regulated by DEP and Ms. Fell.

Municipal water purveyors have raised concerns that Ms. Fell is biased towards private water companies.

I really try to stay away from this kind of dirt, but all of this is unprofessional, unethical, and compromises the public interest and the public trust and confidence in DEP.

Christie Suffers Historic Legislative Over-ride on Guns & Veto on Buffers

Good Public Policy Is Good Politics

I was in the Senate gallery today to witness an historic event: the Senate finally mustered the votes to over-ride Gov. Christie’s veto of a minor gun safety bill – and shortly afterward – asserted a rare Constitutional legislative veto power.

The veto override was a political milestone for the Democrats. But it was on a very minor bill.

The debate was heated at times. I was surprised and disappointed by Senator Beck in leading the Republican floor debate opposing the over-ride. She was a cosponsor of the original bill and changed her mind after she said she read the bill. Lame, and obviously driven by partisan motives.

I am sure the NJ press corps will report extensively on the gun issue and ignore the historic Legislative veto of the DEP flood rules.

[Yup: see this and this on the gun over-ride – but nothing so far on Legislative veto (as of 7 pm)]

But, more substantively and more importantly as a matter of public policy, the Senate also passed Senate Resolution SCR 180, to begin the process of legislatively vetoing Gov. Christie’s DEP’s flood hazard, storm water and coastal zone regulatory rollbacks .

The vote on SCR 180 was largely along party lines – 24 in favor – 13 opposed.

That means that 13 Republicans put partisan political loyalty to Governor Christie above preventing major rollbacks to protections for water quality and flood risks.

[Correction – 10/23/15 – the vote tally was just posted on the Legislature’s website. 3 Republicans voted YES, so only 11 Republicans, not 13 sold out (O’Toole didn’t vote). Two Democrats – Van Drew and Rice noted NO with the Republicans.]

There was no Senate floor debate before the vote. So, I really have nothing of substance to report until I review the vote tally to see how the vote went.

The next step is securing an Assembly sponsor and moving a companion Assembly resolution.

My Trenton sources advise that Assemblyman McKeon is willing to be the sponsor and that Assembly Speaker Prieto supports the veto.

I assume that Assembly Environmental Committee Chairwoman Spencer would be a prime co-sponsor and ready to post the Assembly Resolution for hearing very soon.

I spoke with Assemblyman Benson, member of the Environment Committee, at another event today, and he seemed supportive.

Please begin to reach out to Assembly friends to urge their support!

More to follow.