WolfeNotes.com

New Director Reverses 30 Years Of Sierra Club’s Opposition To Coastal Development

“Ignorance is compounded with anarchy and greed to make the raddled face of the Jersey shore.”  ~~~ Ian McHarg, “Design With Nature” (1967)

The New Jersey Shore is already recklessly over-developed, with billions of dollars of housing and infrastructure at extremely high and increasing risk of destruction by coastal storms and sea level rise – and even permanent inundation.

One would have thought that was obvious after Superstorm Sandy devastated the coast – or when toxic algae blooms, stinging jellyfish, and ecological collapse threatened Barnegat Bay.

It should have been even more obvious after Gov. Christie pursued an insane post-Sandy policy I dubbed “Rebuild Madness”.

It should have been obvious when a Rutgers professor aptly called back bay flooding the “Achilles heel” of coastal risk management. We offered constructive solutions:

• Back Bay Flooding – In The Face of Climate Change – Highlights Imperative of Strategic Retreat

The NJ Chapter of the Sierra Club was a long time critic of the lack of a sane State shore land use policy and an advocate of regional planning and strong regulatory restrictions, and not only based on the threats of climate change, but to protect natural resources and the ecological health of Barnegat Bay.

I’m proud to say that I was part of that effort for 7 years (1995 – 2002) and privileged to work with and support retired Director Jeff Tittel in those and other efforts.

So I was sickened to just now read this quote from Tittel’s replacement, Anjuli Ramos-Busot: (NJ.Com story)

“I know we love the Jersey Shore, I know the lifestyle of the Jersey Shore is incredibly important to the entire state and people in other states that come to visit us,” Ramos-Busot said. “We’re not saying don’t build. We’re saying build smarter so that you don’t put people in danger.”

Ramos-Busot is parroting the spin of DEP Commissioner Shawn LaTourette, who has caved completely to the political power of the shore real estate and development lobby. As I noted:

LaTourette’s first remarks included this: “We are not saying: ‘You cannot build in a future flood-risk area.’” …

“We’re not at a point, nor do we think it’s our role, to tell people: ‘Don’t build here, you shouldn’t build there, you can’t do that,’” LaTourette said. …

He said the DEP wants to avoid being the “big, bad government” that imposes heavy-handed regulations.

She has become little more than the Commissioner’s puppet.

The Commissioner’s original spin was repeated in a recent legislative hearing by DEP manager: (NJ Spotlight)

Nick Angarone, chief resiliency officer for the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, took exception to claims that the agency aims to stifle all development within flood-prone areas.

“There is no ‘no-build zone’ that stems from the regulations,” he testified. “If I’m going to vastly oversimplify, you have to build higher and you have to recognize that you’re vulnerable.”

How far Sierra Club has fallen. Like the NJ Shore, doomed.

[End Note: Just 2 days ago I wrote this, which perfectly describes the situation:

I assume that they [“environmental leaders”] mistakenly believe that holding the “friendly” State DEC accountable and criticizing their total failure would undermine public and political support for DEC and the climate law. Maybe their friends at DEC might not invite them to meetings and press events and distribute grant funding.

Just Like In NJ, Activists Give Department of Environmental Conservation A Pass

Just Like In NJ, The State Climate Law Is Effectively Toothless

(Caption: Fracktivists converge on the NY DEC Building in Albany, 8/27/12 – Bill Wolfe)

I’ve long written to compare NJ’s toothless aspirational Global Warming Response Act with what I thought was a far stronger New York State law, which had regulatory mandates and enforceable goals (e.g. see

• What A Difference A State (Law) Makes

Apparently I was very wrong.

In a damning Report: “FLOUTING THE LAW – Major State Agencies Are Ignoring New York’s Climate Mandates”, NY climate activists document the fact that NY State agencies are ignoring NY’s “historic” climate law.

The Report focuses on systemic failures by State agencies to comply with the climate law’s mandates:

… the state’s largest and most powerful agencies have entirely failed to comply with the Climate Act and have not yet issued policies or guidance on implementation of the law.

For example:

• The New York State Department of Transportation (“NYSDOT”) has pushed
forward at least 40 highway expansion projects without properly assessing
their impacts on DACs and the climate;

• Empire State Development (“ESD”) has awarded at least $780 million in
clean energy funding without ensuring that 40% of the benefits go
to DACs;

• The New York Education Department (“NYSED”) has approved at least
25,971 construction projects at public schools across the state without
properly assessing their climate and DAC impacts; and

• The New York State Department of Health (“NYSDOH”) has approved at
least 223 construction projects for new and renovated healthcare facilities
without assessing or mitigating their climate impacts.

These findings show a troubling lack of coordination, or at least a lack of
transparency, that hinders the effective implementation of an all-of-government
approach necessary to transforming our economy and environment. As global
temperatures, sea levels, and extreme weather events continue to track
worst-case scenarios for climate change,6 New York’s state government must
urgently prioritize Climate Act implementation, including conducting required
screens for all relevant regulatory and investment decisions and adhering to
rigorous internal guidance to ensure compliance with the law.

Wow.

But there are some major flaws with this Report.

The NY State DEC is the most important State agency with the clearest climate related organizational mission, legal powers, and regulatory tools to implement the climate law. The DEC has the most qualified professional scientific staff, institutional legitimacy, and public support to implement the climate law.

The DEC should be at the forefront, with a high profile public role in taking a leadership role across state government to implement the climate law.

Yet the Report fails to note that the NY State Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) issued permits to all those State agency projects that failed to comply with the law!

The Report fails to note that the NY DEC failed to enforce non-compliance with the climate law.

Even worse, the Report does not even review DEC’s efforts to implement the law – it gives DEC a total pass:

The state of these traditional environmental agencies’ compliance with the Climate Act is beyond the scope of this report. … We plan to analyze the nascent efforts of environmental regulators like the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (“DEC”), PSC, and NYSERDA in a future report.

Nascent efforts? Are you kidding me?

Once again, regulatory mandates are given short shrift and the State environmental agency is given a pass.

I assume that NY climate activists, like their cowardly colleagues in NJ, are politically timid and unwilling to defend regulatory mandates. They are more qualified and much more comfortable serving as political cheerleaders that spout slogans, instead of supporting regulatory mandates and doing the hard work of regulatory analysts.

I assume that they mistakenly believe that holding the “friendly” State DEC accountable and criticizing their total failure would undermine public and political support for DEC and the climate law. Maybe their friends at DEC might not invite them to meetings and press events and distribute grant funding.

And, again like their NJ colleagues, they not only fail to hold the environmental agency accountable, but they do nothing to challenge corporate power, and instead prefer to focus on the public sector.

And all of this is a formula for failure.

Political timidity is not how they got the law passed – street heat won the day.

I readily admit that I’m a sucker for political rhetoric, but I just listened to Kamala’s speech in Philadelphia and intro of Minnesota Gov. Walz as VP and portions of his remarks.

I think I almost heard – based on the Nebraska upbringing of Gov. Walz  – ghosts of Jefferson’s yeoman farmer.

Walz is a High School football coach and teacher raised on a Nebraska Farm. He celebrates and can talk to his neighbors.

Was I hallucinating?

“Liberal governments cannot plan. Planning requires the authoritative use of authority. Planning requires law, choice, priorities, moralities. Liberalism replaces planning with bargaining. Yet at bottom, power is unacceptable without planning.” ~~~ Theodore Lowi, “The End Of Liberalism”

Ted Lowi is smiling from his grave.

The recent passing of Ingrid Reed perfectly validates Lowi’s work, particularly the thesis of his classic book, “The End Of Liberalism” (see above quote).

And the NJ Spotlight Tribute (obituary) to Ingrid Reed ironically portrayed the failures it illustrates, see (emphases mine):

• The enduring legacy of Ingrid W. Reed

So many words of praise and distinction come to mind when thinking about Ingrid Reed — feminist pioneer, civil rights advocate, public policy expert, supporter of the arts, environmental leader, planning proponent, to name just a few.

That tribute set me to reflect upon how Reed’s work validates Professor Lowi (full disclosure: In graduate school, I studied regional planning and took Lowi’s courses on government at Cornell (’83-’85). I’ll never forget that he once criticized my work as “spewing drivel and parroting lectures”. But he also praised a paper I wrote on the Toxic Substances Control Act and offered to help get it published in an academic journal).

In addition to validating Lowi, Reed’s work also overlaps with my academic work and some of my own most significant professional battles on land use and regional planning in central New Jersey, Reed’s own back yard and career turf.

I want to expand upon the following key career milestones highlighted in the Spotlight tribute (emphases mine):

In 1972, she ran for West Windsor Township Committee on the platform of forming a master plan for the community. Her bid was unsuccessful but her focus on planning led to 18 years on the Mercer County Planning Board as the first woman appointee and where she served as chair for 11 years.

In 1987, Governor Tom Kean established the Capital City Redevelopment Corporation with Reed as chair, a position she held until 2010.

Reed’s commitment to improving the state was her motivation in helping to establish New Jersey Future in 1987, an organization dedicated to advancing policies and practices to curb sprawl and promote redevelopment. […]

In 1992, Reed became vice president for public affairs and corporate secretary at The Rockefeller University in New York City. During this time, she was elected to the National Academy of Public Administration and served on the New Jersey committee of the Regional Plan Association.

At a time when Reed lived in Princeton, she had a major role in a critical period of the possibility of Capital City Trenton’s redevelopment, land use controls, and regional planning in central NJ and Mercer County.

During this time (1987 – 2000), the major land use battles in Mercer County – Reed’s backyard – became the most important opportunity for Trenton’s redevelopment, for government regional planning efforts to curb sprawl, and as a test of the policies of the State Development and Redevelopment Plan to deliver results.

The regional planning debate centered on 3 massive proposed corporate Office park developments in Hopewell Township, the neighboring town of Reed’s Princeton. They were: 1) Merrill Lynch’s proposed 3.5 million square foot office park on a soybean field in Hopewell; 2) Bristol-Myers Squib (BMS) huge expansion off a rural farm road in Hopewell; and 3) major corporate office park expansion by Berwind on a rural road connecting Hopewell and Princeton. In turn, this development and regional growth were supported by and used by Mercer County and the State to justify major transportation infrastructure development, including a new bridge across the Delaware River and Mercer airport expansion

These corporate office park developments included extension of water and sewer infrastructure out of Trenton to rural Hopewell portions of Mercer County to serve those developments plus additional capacity thousands of units of new residential sprawl development. This infrastructure would not only promote sprawl but it would deprive Trenton of a key strategic asset: finite water and sewer capacity.

Mercer County Executive Bobby Prunetti (R) and NJ Governor Christie Whitman (R) strongly supported these developments. So did the Mercer County Planning Board, The State Planning Commission, and the NJ DEP.

Here’s a 2014 retrospective overview of the controversy by the Trenton Times:

• Merrill Lynch: Smart growth vs. sprawl

HOPEWELL TOWNSHIP — A few years ago, the 450-acre expanse of rolling farmland seemed to stretch endlessly as you exited from the bustle of Interstate 95 onto sleepy two-lane Scotch Road.

One could hardly visualize how Merrill Lynch’s planned 3.5 million-square-foot office complex might transform the landscape. […]

Bill Wolfe of New Jersey’s Sierra Club launched the argument in 1998 that eventually helped persuade Whitman to express regret over having aided Merrill Lynch’s Hopewell bid.

The very State Plan for Development and Redevelopment that calls for building along corridors such as I-95, he said, also calls for directing investment back into New Jersey’s cities.

It’s an argument that holds sway with State Planning Commission Chairman Joseph Maraziti Jr. He calls Merrill Lynch a “missed opportunity,” saying the state should only have provided millions in incentives to help revitalize Trenton — even if the corporation fled to Pennsylvania in response.

“The census says New Jersey has the highest (median) income in the nation,” Maraziti says. “I wonder the extent to which we need to sell our souls to maintain or enhance the wonderful economic position we have in this state.”

Keep that quote about “selling our souls” in mind, particularly in light of Lowi’s quote about “bargaining”.

And consider just who did government officials sell their souls to?

These corporate development proposals prompted public outrage, the formation of a large and powerful local activist group in Hopewell (The Coalition to Save Hopewell Valley), and the replacement of an entirely 5 member Republican Township Committee to a completely 5 member Democratic committee and Democratic control of the local planning board.

This Statewide debate included an extraordinary national front page story in The NY Times on the emergence of women leading an anti-sprawl campaign, one of whom (Marylou Ferrara) would become Mayor and another (Peggy Snyder) a planning board member. (see NY Times 12/27/98)

• Suburban Sprawl Becomes a ‘Mom’s Issue,’ Altering Township Politics

Another major political outcome sparked by this battle was the election of Rush Holt to Congress in an historically Republican district. Holt ran on an anti-sprawl, pro-regional planning, pro-environment platform.

Yet, despite the fact that this battle involved all her key career objectives – regional planning, Trenton redevelopment, environmental protection, public policy, feminist pioneers – Ingrid Reed was nowhere to be seen. Nowhere. AWOL.

[I’m being too kind. The reality is actually far worse. If you read this retrospective case study by Reed’s corporate planning group NJ Future, it shows that Reed’s groups all supported the Merrill Lynch development.]

The reasons for that takes us back to the Ted Lowi quote above about why liberals can’t plan.

Ingrid Reed could not stand up and take on corporate interests and powerful politicians. Period. She could not plan. Period. She was the epitome of the Lowi liberal.

And the elite organizations she formed and worked for – including NJ Future and NJ Spotlight – either actively promote corporate interests – as Joe Maraziti says, they “sell their souls” to economic interests – or they fail to challenge corporate interests.

If you need any more evidence to reach these conclusions, just check out how Merrill Lynch reveals the corruption, in their own words, from the mouthpiece for corporate interests, NJBIZ:

• Merrill Lynch Works to Win Over Hopewell

[…]

“Sewer systems apart, the larger issue for groups like the Sierra Club is regional development. “We are not trying to stop Merrill Lynch from constructing its complex, says Bill Wolfe, policy director at Sierra Club’s New Jersey chapter in Princeton. “We”re fighting the whole explosive growth of Hopewell Valley and all the induced growth of housing it”s going to have, including in Hunterdon County, and the effects on the city of Trenton. Trenton is not going to be able to see any private sector location and development if it can all happen eight miles away on the farm fields of Hopewell.”

Amid all this, Merrill Lynch is ardently playing the role of good corporate citizen. Last year it helped Hopewell Township raise $1.2 million for the purchase of a 167-acre tract on the Washington Crossing-Pennington Road, considered significant for environmental and historical reasons. While Mercer County brought in $365,000 and the non-profit Delaware and Raritan Greenway contributed $100,000, Merrill Lynch put up the rest. When we become part of the community as we do everywhere we do business, the community will find we”re excellent neighbors, says Cowan.

This isn”t just a philanthropic calling for Merrill Lynch. It makes sense as part of a corporate human resources strategy, as well. The fact is that a large number of our people live in and around Hopewell today, says Cowan. The community will find that we are an attractive and pleasant neighbor to deal with. Merrill Lynch will also open some of its facilities for the community to use and promises to participate in every aspect of community life, whether it is schools or charitable organizations.”

See how that works?

Spread a little corporate money around to the right places and get results. You’ll find many of the Ingrid Reed types that are willing to “bargain” to provide cover. (BMS did the exactly the same thing from their role as Board member at the Stonybrook Millstone Watershed Assc. And I know that from the horses mouth – George Hawkins, former Director, told me he stood down due to pressure from BMS.)

That my friend is corruption, not regional planning, environmental protection, or expert public policy.

Some of us stood up when it mattered and called that corruption out.

We didn’t mouth the slogans of feminism, we worked with strong smart women who  assumed leadership roles.

We didn’t mouth vague Foundation slogans about “environmental justice” and “sustainable development”, we demanded that Gov. Whitman’s State government cancel the $260 million in corporate subsidies to Merrill Lynch and instead walk the talk by reinvesting that money in Trenton.

We didn’t receive Rockefeller and Dodge Foundation grants and we didn’t get invited to the Foundation sponsored meetings and we weren’t asked to speak at conferences on “Sustainable Development” and “regional planning”. We worked with local activists to make that vision real.

Others, like Ingrid Reed and her elite well fed institutional and Foundation crowd did not.

Instead, they “sold their souls”.

And here we are.

*** I was unable to locate a photo of Bill Neil, Conservation Director at NJ Audubon and Leslie Kramer, at a press event about 2 years prior this same site, which was published by Hopewell Valley News. If anyone has a copy, please shoot me an email

Bill Wolfe (left), then-policy director of the Sierra Club’s New Jersey chapter, and Jeff Tittel, the director of the environmental advocacy group, discuss farmland in Hopewell, Mercer County, that they hoped to preserve in 2000.
(text to the caption and Photo: Courier-News file)