Oil & gas companies, luxury boats/Marina’s subsidized while Park Visitor Fees Increase
Bill WolfeToday’s Asbury Park Press and Morris Daily Record are reporting that the Department of Environmental Protection’s management of leases, easements, and concessions is in disarray, and losing lots of money.
This news comes after Governor Corzine threatened to close state parks and raise parking and entrance fees:
State loses money on leases – DEP’s lease program disorganized — but at what cost?
BY MICHAEL RISPOLI • GANNETT STATE BUREAU • AUGUST 3, 2008
Tenants know how it works: Rent goes up every year, and if it’s not paid they get evicted.
But for years when lessees did not pay New Jersey for using the state’s parklands, they didn’t even get a slap on the wrist. As the value of the land they occupied went up, some kept paying the same rate.…
The DEP has 232 leases currently on file — which include family homes, education centers and utility lines — but no complete list is available. Staffers currently are combing through state park files to find the total number, which they estimate to be upward of 300. A review of records from the State House Commission, the state panel that oversees such agreements, shows at least 10 agreements approved since 2006 that are not included on the list.
…Raising park user fees may wind up plugging the park’s budget hole, but Wolfe says the state is going after the wrong people.
“(Gov.) Corzine’s willing to raise park user fees, but he’s not willing to say the corporations who are using these lands have to pay up,” Wolfe said.
http://www.app.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080803/NEWS/808030434
Look DEP – in case you can’t find it in your files. This is an easement – Texas Eastern Pipeline across D&R Canal State Park
Bill WolfeTexas Eastern Gas Pipeline crosses D&R Canal State Park just north of Lambertville
Bill Wolfe
Bill Wolfe
How many communities have to be poisoned and criminal convictions have to occur before common sense prevails?
Bill WolfeIn a little noticed but what could be a major story, on Friday the Trenton Times reported that:
“A contractor who dumped more than 400 loads of contaminated soil from Trenton at a farm in Moorestown and tried to conceal the disposal with false documents was sentenced yesterday to three years in prison.”
Man gets jail time for dumping tainted soil
Friday, July 25, 2008
BY LINDA STEIN
http://www.nj.com/news/times/regional/index.ssf?/base/news-14/1216958750310050.xml&coll=5
A key fact buried in the story is that neither DEP nor State DOT detected the crime:
“A tip made to the Burlington County Health Department prompted the investigation.”
We have written about significant problems due to lax State oversight of the illegal disposal of toxic contaminated soils, most recently in a Bergen Record Op-Ed:
“Playing with dirty dirt.
Bill WolfeContractors imported thousands of cubic yards of toxic sludge, contaminated soil and highly questionable “recyclable materials” that were used as clean fill or landfill-capping material. This made existing toxic problems at the site far worse. Press reports disclosed that DEP lacked even a basic ability to monitor contaminated materials imported to the site.
A similar lack of DEP oversight at the cleanup of the Ford plant in Edison resulted in PCB-contaminated soils and demolition debris being used as clean fill at 19 housing projects in central New Jersey.
These same practices not only continue across our state; they are encouraged and subsidized by DEP.
We are spending millions of dollars to clean up toxic soils, only to allow scam operators to “launder” and dump them in someone else’s backyard. This is insane. These materials require strict management to ensure they are safely handled.”
Recapping a fiasco
http://www.northjersey.com/opinion/moreviews/Wolfe_Recapping_a_fiasco.html
Bill WolfeLax oversight of contaminated toxic soils has cost taxpayers millions in the Encap fiasco, where the Star Ledger reported that funds from a DEP $212 million loan were used to purchase contaminated soils that may have been part of a mafia kickback scheme. See:
Mob taint suspected in EnCap project
http://www.nj.com/business/index.ssf/2008/07/mob_taint_suspected_in_encap_p.html
Bill WolfeMartin Luther King, Jr. School site in Trenton (this is old school, not new construction that was demolished).Importation of toxic soils forced demolition of the partially built Martin Luther King, Jr. elementary school in Trenton, at a $27 million loss to taxpayers.
Similarly, PCB contaminated soil from a DEP “supervised” cleanup at the Ford plant in Edison was used as “clean fill” at 19 residential construction sites in central NJ. The PCB tainted soil had to be excavated and properly disposed at a cost of millions. This fiasco triggered legislative oversight hearings, where we warned DEP and legislators of the need to “impose cradle-to-grave management requirements for contaminated soils and demolition waste“. (See:
LEGISLATURE TO PROBE TOXIC COLLAPSE IN NEW JERSEY — Series of Cleanup Fiascoes Have Communities Feeling Betrayed and Vulnerable
http://www.peer.org/news/news_id.php?row_id=694
Bill WolfeHackensack River operationYet despite the loss of millions of taxpayer dollars, significant risks to health and the environment, and a widespread ongoing pattern of fraud and abuse that is enabled by lax DEP regulatory oversight, DEP and Legislature have done NOTHING to tighten oversight, monitoring or enforcement to fix the problems that have been exposed.
Worse, the Corzine Administration, backed by democratic legislators, is seeking to privatize toxic site cleanup, which would further weaken already lax DEP oversight and lead to even more serious scandals. See:
NEW JERSEY MODEL FOR PRIVATIZED TOXIC CLEAN-UPS FAILS AUDITS — Serious Violations Found in More than Two-Thirds of Audited Massachusetts Sites
http://www.peer.org/news/news_id.php?row_id=1034
How many communities have to be poisoned and criminal convictions have to occur before common sense prevails?
Bill Wolfe
Bill WolfeJohn Weingart, Chairman, Highlands Council.Response to today’s Op-Ed:
“Wrong to Pick On Highlands Master Plan”
(and just who is the bully and who is being picked on here?)
Last week, the Highlands Council approved a controversial Regional Master Plan (RMP). The vote finally came many months past the deadline established in the Highlands Act. But after more than 3 years of planning, just minutes prior to the final vote on the RMP, a series of major amendments were introduced by 3 Council members to strengthen the Plan and fix significant flaws. These amendments were defeated, with little discussion or staff analysis. As a result, environmentalists are petitioning Governor Corzine to Veto the Council’s actions and direct them to remedy the RMP’s flaws.
Today, in the midst of this highly charged debate, John Weingart – the politically appointed Chairman of the Highlands Council – has written an extraordinary Op-Ed. Weingart, in classic “blame the messenger” fashion, does not focus on defending the Plan he voted for, but instead engages in a fact free attack on environmental critics of the Plan. See:
“Wrong to Pick on Highland Master Plan”
http://www.nj.com/opinion/ledger/perspective/index.ssf?/base/news-1/1217219910231620.xml&coll=1
Of course, Weingart has direct access to the Governor and therefore had no need to take to the editorial pages to get his opinion injected into policy decisions..
From someone with Weingart’s responsibilities and expertise – he not only serves as Chairman of the Council but has an extensive background in land use planning and environmental regulation – one would expect not only leadership and vision, but substantive analysis and opinions based on science and law, not pure politics.
But one’s reasonable expectations would be dashed by reading Weingart’s Op-Ed.
Weingart makes three basic assertions – each a sweeping conclusion with no supporting evidence:
1) environmentalists politicize policy debates, mount political campaigns, and have significant political power and influence, equivalent to that of developers and the business community;
2) “[The] Highlands Council … adopted the most environmentally-protective, comprehensive regional master plan in the state’s history. It is a model for the rest of the nation.”;
3) “the Highlands Plan is already more protective than required by the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection. … municipal officials complained the plan will allow little, if any, additional building; farmers argued the plan will severely limit their ability to sell their farms to housing developers.”
That’s all folks – really. Not a fact, a law, or a policy or planning analysis in any of it. Totally devoid of substance.
But it’s worse – Weingart’s attack knowingly ignores and is designed to divert attention from the debate over the substance of the RMP; the purpose of last minute amendments that were defeated; or the essence of the environmentalists’ criticism.
Obvioulsy, Weingart can not defend the indefensible – like allowing new development to occur where there are existing deficits in water supply; or dense “cluster” developments that destroy the character of surrounding farmland and pollute groundwater; or destruction of forests and sensitive stream buffers.
Mr. Weingart – a self described “environmentalist” – doesn’t want to talk about any of that.
So, for readers interested in the debate on the RMP – here is a link to the letter to Governor Corzine that sets forth the grounds of the environmentalists’ criticism and basis for amendments to the Plan:
Download file
With respect to the amendments, Dave Pringle of the NJ Environmental Federation – a target of Weingart’s attack – has posted a summary of the amendments. According to Dave:
“The 11 votes were:
1 ban on development in water deficit areas (amendment 1)
2 further restrict development in water deficit areas (alternate amendment 1)
3 close all loopholes limiting 300′ buffers for all Highlands waters (amendment 3a)
4 close fewer loopholes to strong stream buffers (amendment 3b)
5 close some loopholes to strong stream buffers when developing farmland (amendment 4)
6 require background level nitrate standard (amendment 5)
7 require a less strict but still strict (2 ppm) nitrate standard (amendment 6)
8 eliminate inclusion of open space in septic density calculation (amendment 8a)
9 require stronger nitrate standards in Existing Community Zones (amendment 8b)
10 limit map adjustments (amendment 11)
11 adopt final plan
The pro-env., pro-public health position prevailed on only the 2nd and 8th votes and even then barely so and in watered down forms.”
I have posted several substantive critiques of the RMP, most recently this – if this DEP standard to protect groundwater from septic is legally overruled by the Courts, the RMP would suffer a fatal blow:
NJ Farmers threaten your water supply
http://blog.nj.com/njv_bill_wolfe/2008/07/nj_farmers_threaten_your_water.html
Back in February, I posted an analysis of the November 2007 draft Plan – however, since then, some revisions of the Plan have ben made that address my specific criticisms, so this analysis is no longer current or accurate. Similarly, since February, additional flaws in th Plan have been identified:
Potemkin Plan – Highlands Plan an empty shell
http://blog.nj.com/njv_bill_wolfe/2008/02/potemkin_plan_highlands_plan_a.html
The bottom line: serious discourse on protecting the Highlands is frustrated when appointed leaders like Weingart abdicate their leadership roles and engage in specious attacks on environmentalists.
And is is outrageous when the little substance that is injected in the debate comes not from well staffed expert government organizations like DEP and the Highlands Council, but from caring citizens and volunteer efforts of watchdogs like myself.
[Update #1 – unfortunately, we have a pattern of Weingart lashing out at critics – on February 12, 2008, I wrote:
“An absolute donnybrook (I’m an old hockey player, and I haven’t heard that word used in ages) erupted after Council Chairman John Weingart opened the hearing. Weingart went on the offensive and took the highly unusual step of reading a press release by the Highlands Council. The press release chastised the public – primarily the environmental critics of the RMP – for 7 “misconceptions” of the controversial plan.”
http://blog.nj.com/njv_bill_wolfe/2008/02/water_wars.html
Weingart was wrong in Feb. because specific changes have been made to the Plan to fix what he misleading claimed were public “misconceptions”. end Update]
