Tag: environment

This report — criticized by Republicans — is wholly consistent with the history of the Bush administration on matters of science and the environment.

The administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency initially supported giving California full or partial permission to limit tailpipe emissions, but reversed himself after hearing from the White House, a Congressional report says.

The report, by the Democratic staff of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, cites sworn depositions by high-level officials of the agency and amounts to the first solid evidence of the political interference alleged by Democrats and environmentalists since the administrator, Stephen L. Johnson, denied California’s request in December.

The Corzine administration is at war with itself over the environment, with the latest skirmish involving a resolution that

would give the Planning Commission the power to oversee and coordinate any laws that impact the environment and planning, oversee capital improvements of more than $1 million, including state Green Acres acquisitions, and evaluate any public expenditures based on how they meet the goals of the state master plan.

The key issue, according to environmentalists, is a recommendation

to give the Planning Commission the power to override DEP rules and local laws involving such issues at where development may occur, including near water
resources, and where sewer lines may be placed.

“The governor said they were only drafts,” Tittel said. “But here is the State Planning Commission trying to implement them without meeting with environmental groups or the public. The planning commission is saying if it is not consistent with what we say, you should not be allowed to do these things.”

The governor has tabled the resolution — which, hopefully, means he’s planning to hold the line on this and protect the environment. Efficiency is great, but environmental protection is key.

South Brunswick Post, The Cranbury Press
The Blog of South Brunswick

E-mail me by clicking here.

The Asbury Park Press calls on the new DEP task force, which is being asked to review environmental rules, to focus on clarifying the rules and process and not on relaxing them. But the language used in the editorial is the same language used by the building community to privilege economic interests over the environment.

Builders have had to clear many hurdles to move ahead with their projects over the years. Too many businesses have looked to locate elsewhere after confronting the state’s slow and cumbersome approval process.

The business community wants environmental policies relaxed to ease the way. So does the state Department of Community Affairs in calling for more affordable housing. But the 19 members on the DEP’s Permit Efficiency Task Force, which has been given four months to complete its work, should resist any temptation to loosen environmental standards.

The builders complain about inconsistent demands to pass the tests for environmental permits. The state must streamline that process. Delays and red tape cost builders money, and those costs are passed on to consumers. Builders need clear, precise expectations and consistent deadlines from the DEP so they can meet their obligations and manage their resources efficiently. Before deciding to proceed, they need to know what environmental remedies will be necessary so they can plan accordingly.

Hmmm. Let’s catalogue the language: “clear many hurdles,” “slow and cumbersome approval process,” “inconsistent demands,” “delays and red tape.” This is not neutral language. Rather, it is language designed to back the business community while seeming to endorse strong environmental regulation.

I am all for making the regulations work better. But balance should not be the goal. The state needs to decide what its primary goal is: boosting the business community or protecting the environment. There are times when both can be done simultaneously but, more often than not, we have to choose.

Consider the local industrial zones in Cranbury, Monroe and South Brunswick. They generally allow only light uses — meaning distributon centers, warehouses and only light manufacturing. Nothing dirty or toxic.

So, yes, clarity is a good thing. But clarity should not be used as a buzzword to gut tough rules.

As I wrote in this week’s Dipsatches, quoting Bill Wolfe of Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility,

“Permit efficiency is not consistent with environmental protection. The task force should not emphasize streamlining. It should promote environmental protection.”

South Brunswick Post, The Cranbury Press
The Blog of South Brunswick

E-mail me by clicking here.