LETTER: O’Scanlon has nothing new to offer voters

The expressed opinions or views of this letter does not necessarily represent the opinion of the MiddletownMike blog. This letter appears online at the Asbury Park Press:


Assemblyman Declan O’Scanlon’s Sept. 7 op-ed piece “Gopal lacks credibility on property taxes” on community consolidation and property tax relief was transparently self-serving. Apparently all it will take to solve the Gordian knot of New Jersey taxes is electing him, Sen. Jennifer Beck, and other like-minded candidates to office. But the record would suggest otherwise.

After nearly a decade in office, we don’t have tax reform because O’Scanlon has nothing new to offer, has presented no innovative ideas and has no record of significant accomplishments or collaboration to extol. Instead he just rolls out the same old public service villains — police, firefighters, teachers and “special interests” — as the root cause of our tax dilemma.

It is no less emblematic of their monolithic worldview that both O’Scanlon and Beck voted against equal pay for women. And it is especially interesting to note that O’Scanlon’s ire and focus of the piece were directed at Vin Gopal, who is not the candidate O’Scanlon is running against. Does he really think so little of Beck and other women that he must “mansplain” complex issues to and for them? Beck should be able to speak for herself to the candidate opposing her, but if she believes women don’t deserve the same pay as men, then perhaps she is better off letting O’Scanlon do the speaking for her.

It is time to stop pointing fingers, blaming others and throwing rocks at other candidates. O’Scanlon has had nine years to solve the tax problem and he hasn’t succeeded yet. Why should he another two years to try? He shouldn’t.

Kevin Akey

Little Silver

Pallone & Grijalva: Trump’s Offshore Drilling May Have Disastrous Consequences

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
May 2, 2017



Washington, D.C. – Today, Congressman Frank Pallone, Jr. (NJ-06), the Ranking Member on the House Energy and Commerce Committee, and Congressman Raúl M. Grijalva (AZ-03), the Ranking Member on the Natural Resources Committee, sent a letter to Department of Interior (DOI) Secretary Ryan Zinke today expressing concerns over President Trump’s executive order instructing DOI to consider new oil and gas leasing for offshore drilling in federal waters in the Atlantic Ocean and the Arctic Ocean. Trump’s executive order, which he signed on Friday, could open areas of the Atlantic and Arctic Oceans where offshore drilling is currently banned.

“This executive order is the latest in a series of ill-advised actions by the Trump Administration that favor corporate interests over the safety of the environment and our communities,” Pallone and Grijalva wrote to Secretary Zinke. “We believe the review of the leasing program lays the groundwork to eventually weaken key safety regulations that help prevent oil spill disasters, while simultaneously introducing drilling to ocean areas currently off-limits. In doing so, this action greatly increases the threat of a devastating oil spill to these critical and irreplaceable marine ecosystems and puts at risk billions of dollars in states’ tourism revenue.”

The two Committee Ranking Members stressed that the executive order overlooks the irrevocable and widespread harm that oil and gas disasters have had on our nation’s rich and productive marine ecosystems. They pointed to the fact that areas currently closed for Atlantic and Arctic drilling serve as habitat to endangered species and major biodiversity hotspots critical to fisheries, tourism and communities that depend on them.

Pallone and Grijalva wrote that before considering opening new areas for develop, DOI should require oil and gas companies to use existing leases and opportunities in areas open to drilling. For example, oil and gas companies hold leases on approximately 16 million acres in the Gulf of Mexico, but have developed only about 26 percent of that acreage.

In their letter to Secretary Zinke the Democrats ask for information, documents, and answers to several questions relating to DOI’s review of the offshore leasing plan, including:

· Please provide all risk assessments and analysis undertaken to determine how lifting the ban on drilling in these areas would not adversely affect fragile ecosystems or damage fishing, restaurant, or tourism interests.
· What additional actions or plans does the Department intend to take to protect coastal communities from the possibility of another catastrophic oil spill?
· How would President Trump’s proposed DOI budget cuts affect the ability of the Department to draft a new 5-year plan, while administering an even greater number of oil and gas leases?

A copy of the letter is available here.

Pallone Calls on New Jersey Board of Public Utilities to Reject Monmouth County Reliability Project

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
March 23, 2017



Long Branch - Today in a letter to Richard Mroz, President of the New Jersey Board of Public Utilities, Congressman Frank Pallone, Jr. (NJ-06) asked the board to accept a motion by Monmouth County local communities to stay consideration of Jersey Central Power and Light’s (JCP&L) application to construct the Monmouth County Reliability Project (MCRP). The plan for JCP&L’s new transmission line would impact Aberdeen, Hazlet and Middletown in Pallone’s district and run along New Jersey Transit’s North Jersey Coast line.

Earlier this year, the state Rate Counsel raised questions about the necessity of the project to increase reliability in Monmouth County. The Rate Counsel described a number of technological alternatives that could increase reliability without requiring the construction of a transmission line like MCRP. Additionally, many residents have argued that the project is unnecessary and potentially harmful to the public health, environment, and economy of their communities. The plan states that poles will be up to 210 feet tall in some places, and many residents are worried that this will negatively affect their home values. Pallone testified at the January 25th public hearing on MCRP in Middletown and expressed his opposition.

Pallone has long voiced concerns with JCP&L’s proposal. In October, Pallone sent a letter to the New Jersey Board of Public Utilities (BPU) voicing his concerns over JCP&L’s proposal for the MCRP. In August, he shared his concerns with BPU regarding JCP&L’s proposal to transfer all of its transmission assets to Mid-Atlantic Interstate Transmission. JCP&L withdrew its transfer proposal in September, a week after Pallone’s statement.

The text of the letter is below.



March 23, 2017



The Honorable Richard Mroz
President
New Jersey Board of Public Utilities
44 S. Clinton Avenue
Trenton, NJ 08625

Re: Docket No. EO16080750

Dear President Mroz:

I write regarding the upcoming March 24, 2017 meeting of the New Jersey Board of Public Utilities (BPU) to consider the motion by Monmouth County local communities to stay consideration of Jersey Central Power and Light’s (JCP&L) application to construct the Monmouth County Reliability Project (MCRP). I strongly encourage you and the other commissioners to grant their motion.

As part of seeking approval for the proposed 10-mile transmission line, which would run through my Congressional district, JCP&L must obtain permission from NJ Transit to use existing rights-of-way along the North Jersey Coast Line. Despite having failed to consider fully other options, JCP&L has made it clear that it believes that this route is the only viable one for this project. NJ Transit has not yet consented to use of its right-of-way.

There is no substantive reason for the BPU to continue consideration of JCP&L’s project application for the MCRP until the company obtains the necessary approval for use of the right-of-way from NJ Transit. Going forward with proceedings is a waste of resources for all parties until JCP&L can produce the required land-use agreement. Recognizing this, in October, communities that would be impacted by the MCRP filed a motion to dismiss or stay the approval process. Unfortunately, Administrative Law Judge Cookson declined to grant that motion. The towns have now appealed to BPU, and the Board should seriously consider their case. Failure to grant this motion ensures that additional time and resources will be devoted to considering this ill-conceived project, despite JCP&L having failed to secure the land and other perquisites necessary for it to build the project.

Additionally, it is important to point out that, when JCP&L proposed a substantially similar transmission project in 1989, Administrative Law Judge Perselay ruled that if the utility had not secured a land-use agreement with NJ Transit prior to the evidentiary hearing’s start date, the approval process could not move forward. BPU should honor that precedent when considering its decision on the towns’ appeal to reconsider their motion.

Thank you for attention to this matter.

Sincerely,


FRANK PALLONE, JR.
Member of Congress

GAO Report Confirms Need for Pallone’s Bill on Flood Insurance Transparency

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
January 10, 2017


Washington, DC – Today, the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) published a report on the compensation paid to Write-Your-Own (WYO) companies that administer the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). The report confirms the need for Congressman Pallone’s Flood Insurance Reimbursement Standards Transparency (FIRST) Cap Profits Act, which he introduced last year and will introduce in the new Congress. The bill would require increased oversight and transparency of the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and cap the profits of private companies providing flood insurance at 10%.

The report states “FEMA continues to lack the information it needs to incorporate actual flood expense data into its compensation methodology as well as determine how much profit WYO companies make and whether its compensation payments are appropriate.” In July 2016, Pallone led a bipartisan letter asking FEMA to fulfill its legal obligation to provide oversight of the WYOs.

“It is shameful that private insurance companies have profited from Sandy while failing to meet their basic obligations under the NFIP. This reports confirms yet again that FEMA has failed to provide proper oversight of those entities - especially when Congress has already empowered and required the agency to do so,” said Pallone. “FEMA has a responsibility to ensure that policy holders are treated fairly and charged a fair market price for the service they purchase, and it better get to work.”

In May, Pallone led a bipartisan letter from members of the New Jersey Congressional delegation to Administrator Fugate of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) requesting that it take swift action on behalf of those who have suffered from documented, widespread fraud perpetrated by private insurance companies in the aftermath of Superstorm Sandy. The lawmakers asked for an explanation of why it is taking FEMA so long to process the insurance claims of these victims and to detail the steps FEMA is taking to swiftly rectify the situation.

After that letter was sent, Pallone and Congressman Bill Pascrell (NJ-09) met with Roy Wright, Deputy Associate Administrator for Insurance and Mitigation at the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), to demand that FEMA take swift action to process claims for victims of Hurricane Sandy.

Reps. Pascrell, Pallone Call for State Action on Mismanagement of Superstorm Sandy Funds

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
October 7, 2016


Congressmen who called for audit showing mismanagement request State action to protect residents

MOONACHIE, N.J. – Today, Congressman Bill Pascrell, Jr. (D-NJ-09) and Congressman Frank Pallone, Jr. (D-NJ-06) hosted a press conference in Moonachie, NJ calling on the State to respond to the findings of improper management, oversight, and disbursement of federal recovery dollars to Hammerman & Gainer Inc. in a U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Office of Inspector General OIG audit. The Congressmen also sent a letter calling on Governor Chris Christie to proactively address the documentation issues the HUD Office of Inspector General notes in its audit; ensure Hammerman & Gainer is held accountable for every dollar it improperly spent; and implement oversight programs to adequately administer future disaster fund contracts.



"We want answers for the folks who were left without homes," said Pallone and Pascrell. "We want answers because this federal funding was spent improperly. We want answers and we want action to ensure this doesn't happen again when the next storm hits New Jersey."

In January 2014, Reps. Pascrell and Pallone wrote a letter to HUD requesting they investigate the State’s contract with Hammerman & Gainer. The HUD Office of Inspector General conducted the audit because the contract involved a significant amount of funds, was critical to the implementation of three of the State’s disaster programs, and was terminated less than one year into the three-year contract. The audit concluded that New Jersey did not use federally accepted controls, overspent on real estate and labor, and dozens of expenditures were submitted without receipts or not authorized by compliance officers.

The HUD Office of Inspector General audit is available here.

Today’s letter can be found below:


Dear Governor Christie,

As you know, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Office of Inspector General (OIG) issued a report this week after investigating the State of New Jersey's contract with Hammerman & Gainer Inc. (HGI) to distribute Community Development Block Grant – Disaster Recovery (CDBG-DR) funds after Hurricane Sandy. In light of the revelations and recommendations included in the report, we are writing to express our strong concerns with the State’s oversight of this contract. Additionally, we urge you to fully account for CDBG-DR funds spent by HGI and ensure that HGI pays back any funds that HUD determines must be returned. New Jersey taxpayers should not be on the hook to repay federal funds because of HGI’s mismanagement or your Administration’s inadequate oversight.

As you know, Hurricane Sandy housing recovery programs are funded with federal CDBG-DR dollars provided through the Disaster Relief Supplemental Appropriations Act, which became law on January 29, 2013. These funds were to be spent on expenses related to disaster relief, long-term recovery, restoration of infrastructure and housing, and economic revitalization in the most impacted and distressed storm-affected areas. However, throughout the Sandy recovery process, there have been numerous complaints of a lack of transparency in the selection criteria and distribution process of certain CDBG-DR funded programs in New Jersey.

In January 2014 we wrote a letter to HUD because we were concerned about this lack of transparency and accountability. More specifically, we requested that HUD investigate the manner in which New Jersey’s contract with HGI, the firm handling the largest Sandy recovery program, was terminated.

The HUD OIG report resulting from this request concluded that New Jersey did not disburse disaster funds to HGI in accordance with HUD and other federal requirements. Specifically, the report notes that your Administration “did not ensure that (1) disbursements met a national objective, (2) expenses were incurred after the contract was executed, (3) other direct costs were fully supported and the prices paid were fair and reasonable, (4) labor costs were fully supported, (5) travel costs were fully supported, and (6) disbursements were for costs that were reasonable and necessary.” The report highlights this happened because New Jersey “did not have adequate controls in place to administer its contract and monitor contract performance and was not fully aware of Federal procurement and cost principle requirements.”

As a result, we urge you to proactively provide HUD with the proper documentation necessary to demonstrate that the federal dollars paid to HGI were eligible, supported, reasonable, and necessary. Further, we urge you to ensure HGI is held accountable for any improper funds it was paid, not New Jersey taxpayers. Finally, we urge you to put in place adequate controls to administer future disaster recovery funds so New Jerseyans can swiftly receive the support they need to put their lives back together after an extreme weather event.

We fought hard to ensure that New Jersey got its fair share of federal disaster recovery dollars after Sandy, which is why it is disappointing that the State did not do all it could have to ensure these funds were spent in compliance with federal requirements. The New Jerseyans who struggled to recover from the devastation of Hurricane Sandy deserved better. Thank you for your attention to this request, and we look forward to your response.

National Park Service to hold Public Engagement Events on Sandy Hook Rate Increases at Pallone’s Request

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
August 11, 2016


Continues to Urge NPS to Withdraw Proposal on Fees and Provide Additional Information

Long Branch, NJ –The National Park Service (NPS) announced that it will be holding public engagement events on August 12 and August 20 for its proposal to increase Sandy Hook’s camping and parking fees. There will also an open house to discuss the proposal on August 31. The announcement comes after Pallone wrote NPS Director Jonathan B. Jarvis requesting that NPS hold a public hearing on the fee increases and provide information on the fee differences between Sandy Hook and other parks. Pallone also requested a meeting with NPS to learn how the revenues from the increased fees will be used, and if these new revenues would be used exclusively to maintain and improve facilities at Sandy Hook. NPS has not yet responded with additional information.

“It is crucial that New Jersey residents and those who pay the fees as Sandy Hook receive the opportunity to comment on these rate increases and this is a positive first step,” said Pallone. “Still, I remain greatly concerned about the rate proposal and am awaiting additional information on NPS’ proposal. We should be looking at ways to encourage more visitors to the parks, helping the surrounding economies. This proposal to yet again increase park fees moves us in the opposite direction.”

The public can offer its opinions at Gunnison Beach’s parking plaza on Friday, August 12 from 11am to 2pm and at Lot D’s parking plaza on Saturday, August 20 from 11am to 2pm. The open house will be held on August 31 from 6pm to 8 pm at the Sandy Hook Chapel.

For most vehicles, beach parking is currently $15 per day or $75 per season. For oversized vehicles (more than 20 feet), the charge is $30 per day or $150 per season. The new proposal would place fees at $20 per day and $100 per season, with $50 per day and $200 a season for oversized cars. This would mark the second fee increase at the park in five years.

In 2012, Pallone successfully fought efforts to increase parking fees per vehicle from $10 to $20, and a season pass increase from $50 to $100. NPS compromised and cut the proposed fees by half, which is what the parking fees are today.

The text of Pallone’s letter to NPS is below:


August 2, 2016

Director Jonathan P. Jarvis
National Park Service
1849 C Street NW
Washington, DC 20240

Dear Director Jarvis:

I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed increases to the parking and camping fees at the Sandy Hook Unit of Gateway National Park. The National Park Service (NPS) should abandon this proposal, which would be the second fee increase in just five years.

Currently, NPS is proposing to increase the parking and camping fees on vehicles accessing Sandy Hook in 2017. This would be a dramatic increase from what fees were in 2011, when it cost $10 a day to park a car at Sandy Hook. This increase would cause additional financial burden to the many individuals and families who visit the park for recreational purposes, and has the potential to negatively impact the local economy. We should be looking at ways to encourage more visitors to the parks, helping the surrounding economies. This proposal to yet again increase park fees moves us in the opposite direction.

Ensuring affordable access for the public to Sandy Hook has been important to me throughout my time in Congress. I have repeatedly called upon NPS to avoid fee increases, and have worked to forgo or reduce these increases in the past. However, I find myself again having to appeal to the NPS to withdraw this latest proposed increase. In order for the NPS to fully understand the impact these fee increases would have on the visitors to Sandy Hook, I call upon the NPS to have a public hearing to hear directly from local residents, officials, and visitors to Sandy Hook. I would also request that the NPS provide to me statistical information related to Sandy Hook – specifically visitor counts and revenue information from prior to the last fee increase through the most recent data available. In addition, I request a meeting with NPS representatives who can provide an explanation of the proposed use of the increased fees, and if the fee money collected at Sandy Hook is dedicated specifically to Sandy Hook, or if any is diverted to other parks within Gateway National Recreation Area, or other NPS parks.

I thank you in advance for your attention to this letter, and I look forward to working with you and your staff on this matter.