Splitsville: Trump and Kushner orgs split ties in NJ deals

Trump Organization and Kushner Companies have dropped a plan that would have allowed the Trumps to manage an oceanside hotel in Long Branch. (MaryAnn Spoto | NJ Advance Media for NJ.com)

Trump Organization and Kushner Companies have dropped a plan that would have allowed the Trumps to manage an oceanside hotel in Long Branch. (MaryAnn Spoto | NJ Advance Media for NJ.com)

Erin Banco reports for NJ.com:

Kushner Companies and the Trump Organization are calling it quits on two hotel business deals in New Jersey, according to a source familiar with the matter and a recently published story by The New York Times.
Earlier this year, the companies had discussed plans for the Trump Organization to manage a hotel in Long Branch. They also jointly managed a hotel in Livingston for at least part of last year. Both deals are now off the table, sources say.
The news comes after ethics watchdogs called out Jared Kushner, the son-in-law of President Donald Trump, for maintaining stakes in the company while simultaneously working in the White House. Charlie Kushner, Jared’s father and the founder of Kushner Companies, recently called those watchdogs “jerks.” 
The watchdogs raised questions about the partnership between the Trump Organization and the Kushner Companies in New Jersey and whether it had influenced Kushner’s role in the White House.
Jared Kushner serves as a senior adviser in the administration. He resigned as CEO of his family’s company in January 2017, but financial disclosure reports show he still owns part of Kushner Companies.
In an opinion piece published in March, Fred Wertheimer, the founder and president of Democracy 21, a nonprofit organization that seeks to promote government accountability, said Jared Kushner violated ethics laws when he took loans for his family real estate business after he held White House meetings with representatives of the lenders.

Splitsville: Trump and Kushner orgs split ties in NJ deals Read More »

Teacher disavows NJEA; sues to deny union ‘representation’ money from her paycheck

NJEA building at 180 W. State St. in Trenton, NJ

Bill Gallo Jr. reports
for NJ.com


A South Jersey teacher who doesn’t want anything to do with the state’s largest teachers’ union has filed suit saying she shouldn’t be forced to “subsidize” the New Jersey Education Association and its activities.

Filed in U.S. District Court in Camden, Ann Smith claims her constitutional rights are being violated by forcing her to pay ‘representation fees’ as a condition of her employment as a public school teacher — “even though Ms. Smith refused to join the teachers’ union and does not wish to subsidize the union’s activities.”
Smith is a special education staff member at the Clearview Middle School in Harrison Township, Gloucester County, according to the district’s website.
The suit asks the court turn this into a class action suit allowing others in Smith’s situation to join.
“She refused to join the NJEA or its affiliates because she disapproves of the union’s political and ideological advocacy, as well as the excessively high salaries that are paid to the union’s leaders,” the suit says.
Along with the NJEA, the suit names as defendants the Clearview Education Association, National Education Association and Clearview Regional Board of Education along with New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy, state Attorney General Gurbir S. Grewal and others from the New Jersey Public Employment Relations Commission and the PERC Appeal Board.
According to the Trenton-based NJEA’s website, full-time teachers pay the union $866 in dues. Information in the lawsuit showed Smith had some $700 taken from her pay for dues, with the bulk, $529, going to the NJEA and smaller amounts going to the national and local education unions.
All of these deductions are mandated by law with no opt-out ability.
Steven Baker, spokesman for the NJEA, called the suit “part of a well-funded national effort to undermine the rights of working people by attacking their unions.”

Teacher disavows NJEA; sues to deny union ‘representation’ money from her paycheck Read More »

Energy and Enviro bills up for NJ Assembly votes Monday


More than 40 bills are scheduled for votes on Monday,
June 25, 2018 in the New Jersey Assembly. Among them are the following pieces of energy and environment legislation:


A1810 (Eustace / Vainieri Huttle / Mukherji) – Permits operation of low-speed electric bicycles.

A2041 (Coughlin / Holley / Pintor Marin) – Establishes “Economic Redevelopment and Growth Grant Bond Financing Act,” authorizing issuance of bonds secured by pledge of Economic Redevelopment and Growth Grant proceeds, municipal liens, and special assessment; expands “Redevelopment Area Bond Financing Law;” extends time to complete certain projects under “Long Term Tax Exemption Law.”

A2426 (Benson / Wimberly / Giblin) – “The Reliability, Preparedness, and Storm Response Act of 2018;” requires public utilities to file certain information concerning emergency preparedness with BPU and increases certain penalties.

A3373 (Conaway / Pinkin / Mukherji) – Requires DEP to adopt Statewide plan to reduce lead exposure from contaminated soils and drinking water.

A4255 (Andrzejczak / Land / Mazzeo) – FY2019 supplemental appropriation of $1.2 million to Shellfish and Marine Fisheries Management for Bureau of Marine Fisheries in DEP.

S879 (Sweeney / Burzichelli / Taliaferro) – Amends definition of “existing major hazardous waste facility” in “Major Hazardous Waste Facilities Siting Act.”

S2662 / A4113 (Sweeney / Bateman / Burzichelli) – Limits liability for persons who deliver heating oil to unregulated tanks for discharges from that tank under certain circumstances.

Like this? Click to receive free updates

Energy and Enviro bills up for NJ Assembly votes Monday Read More »

No signs of longstanding lead issues in Bordentown, NJ

Image result for Bordentown City images


Kyle Bagenstose reports for the Burlington County Times:


Drinking water and blood data reviewed by this news organization show no signs of a longstanding lead issue in the Bordentown area, after the local water system exceeded the EPA’s limits for the toxic metal last year. However, a lack of state blood testing data for Bordentown City makes it difficult to gauge the level of recent exposure in children.
After the Bordentown City Water Department exceeded the federal limits for lead in its drinking water system last year, residents and experts wondered how long the system’s customers may have been exposed to the toxic metal.
But city records newly reviewed by this news organization show no apparent signs of consistently high levels of lead in drinking water in recent years, or elevated blood levels in area children. On the other hand, state data show there were signs of elevated levels of lead in area children in the early 2000s, following a previous lead-in-water issue.
The blood data also show a lack of current testing for the city’s children, making it difficult to determine whether or not there has been any increase of lead in their blood, even though law state requires such testing. The low compliance rate could make it difficult to assess exposure as the area continues to see high lead levels in 2018.
Related content
What happened?
As previously reported, the Bordentown City Water Department exceeded the federal limits for lead in drinking water last year after the state Department of Environmental Protection told officials to change which homes they tested for the metal. The water department, which also serves Bordentown Township and provides water to Fieldsboro, does not have lead in the water coming from its treatment plant, near Crosswicks Creek.
Lead typically leaches from piping along the distribution route; either from lead water mains, service connections to homes, or internal household plumbing. City officials have said the system has no lead water mains, and that they instead suspect lead is leaching out from in-home plumbing at numerous residences.
Still, federal law holds water systems responsible for preventing lead from entering tap water. Water systems are required to sample a designated number of homes, typically 30 or 60 residences, and include “high risk” homes they believe might be susceptible to lead contamination. If 10 percent of the homes tested exceed a 15 parts per billion (pbb) “action level” set by the Environmental Protection Agency, the system is required to make adjustments at its treatment plant to try and stop lead from leaching from pipes.
Last year, about 21 percent of 74 homes tested by Bordentown City exceeded 15 ppb, and the city’s 10th percentile rating was 30 ppb, or double the EPA limit. Bordentown City officials say they are adjusting the water’s pH level in an attempt to make the water less corrosive, which would be expected to curb any lead leaching into water.
But high lead levels have continued to appear in 2018, according to NJDEP data. Of 62 homes tested so far, 11 have tested above 15 ppb as of June 22, with three of them showing more than 100 ppb. Eight of the homes weren’t tested in 2017, meaning they were newly discovered.
The state will determine whether or not the water system has returned to compliance with the lead standard when the testing period closes at the end of June.

No signs of longstanding lead issues in Bordentown, NJ Read More »

NY says Exxon’s sitting on key records subpoenaed in climate fraud investigation

New York’s new attorney general isn’t letting up on the oil giant. Investigators want to know if it misled investors and the public about climate change.

David Hasemyer

 DAVID HASEMYER REPORTS FOR INSIDE CLIMATE NEWS

Credit: Spencer Platt/Getty Images

The attorney general’s office wants to see internal estimates of how future limits on global warming pollution would affect Exxon’s sales. The oil giant hasn’t complied. Credit: Spencer Platt/Getty Images
ExxonMobil has yet to turn over key financial records subpoenaed by state investigators over a year ago in a climate fraud inquiry, New York’s attorney general told a judge in new court filings.
New York Attorney General Barbara Underwood asked Judge Barry Ostrager to order the oil giant to obey the state’s subpoenas, saying that company employees had told investigators that the records are readily accessible.
At issue are records that document the company’s estimates of how future limits on global warming pollution would affect its sales of oil and gas.
Known as “proxy costs,” these estimates are thought to be laid out in the cash flow spreadsheets that Underwood’s office is seeking. They could be crucial to understanding whether the assets that underlie Exxon’s value as a company might be stranded if fossil fuels have to be left in the ground to stave off climate change.

Exxon has steadfastly insisted in public documents and statements, including its filings with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, that none of its oil and gas reserves will become stranded. The Exxon investigation in New York and a similar investigation underway in Massachusetts seek to determine if the company misled investors and the public about risks related to climate change.
“Exxon has repeatedly assured investors that it is taking active steps to protect the company’s value from the risk that climate change regulation poses to its business,” the attorney general says in the 30-page motion filed in the Supreme Court of New York in Manhattan.

Two Sets of Numbers?

State investigators suspect that the company used one set of numbers in describing risks to investors but used a secret set internally to calculate the impact of greenhouse gas regulations. The internal estimates are the ones the investigators want to see.
The evidence lies in records related to 26 of Exxon’s largest projects, the investigators say.
“Cash flow spreadsheets likely provide the most direct evidence of what proxy costs, if any, Exxon used, as well as the financial impact of any failure to abide by the company’s public representations,” the motion, some of which was redacted, states.
Exxon has said that searching through hundreds of thousands of documents for the spreadsheets is too much of a burden to find what investigators are seeking. But the attorney general’s office says that argument has been undermined by the testimony of Exxon’s employees, who have said the company has the spreadsheets stored in an organized and readily accessible manner.

Exxon Says It’s Taking Steps on Climate Risk

Underwood, who inherited the investigation after the abrupt resignation of former Attorney General Eric Schneiderman, asserts that the basis for the state’s investigation has only grown stronger because the company continues to maintain it is taking steps to protect the company’s value from climate change risks.
Exxon claims that it safeguards the company’s assets, and consequently its investors, by considering a proxy cost for greenhouse gas emissions in the company’s long-term projections that form the foundation of it internal planning.
The investigators say they doubt that the same information was presented to investors as required by law.
“The evidence obtained in the course of the OAG’s investigation provides substantial reason to believe Exxon’s representations were false and misleading,” according to the motion.
The attorney general’s office issued its first subpoena in 2015, three months after InsideClimate News published an investigative series of stories disclosing Exxon’s early understanding of the link between burning fossil fuels and global warming in the late 1970s.  The Los Angeles Times later published similar stories.
New York investigators later subpoenaed Exxon records held by company auditor PricewaterhouseCoopers, seeking internal records the company may have provided its accountants.
Exxon has faced a series of legal setbacks in the last few months. The company was rebuffed in New York federal court in its attempt to block investigations by both the New York Attorney General’s office and the Massachusetts Attorney General’s office. The company also failed to halt the Massachusetts investigation in that state’s highest court.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
David Hasemyer

David Hasemyer

InsideClimate News reporter David Hasemyer is co-author of the “Dilbit Disaster: Inside the Biggest Oil Spill You’ve Never Heard Of,” which won the 2013 Pulitzer Prize for National Reporting, and co-authored the 2016 Pulitzer Prize finalist series “Exxon: The Road Not Taken.” Prior to joining ICN, Hasemyer had an award-wining tenure at The San Diego Union-Tribune as an investigative reporter. Hasemyer’s newspaper work has been recognized by the Associated Press, the Society for Professional Journalists, the Society of American Business Editors and Writers. He also has been a finalist for the Gerald Loeb Award and the Robert F. Kennedy Award for Social Justice and Human Rights. He can be reached at david.hasemyer@insideclimatenews.org. PGP key: http://ow.ly/iEHN3089Gqg 

NY says Exxon’s sitting on key records subpoenaed in climate fraud investigation Read More »

5-cent plastic grocery bag bill adds to NJ budget debate


If Murphy signs on, law could reduce clutter in landfills and landscapes, but it won’t deliver money to lead-abatement programs — as originally intended

Plastic bags

Credit: Creative Commons

Tom Johnson reports for NJ Spotlight:


By the slimmest of margins, lawmakers yesterday voted to impose a nickel fee on plastic and paper bags, a strategy intended to reduce the use of single-use carryout bags.
The bill (A-3267) aims to tackle the mounting problem of coping with the millions of bags that end up in garbage dumps and waterways and littering roads and landscape across the state.
The legislation, approved without debate in both houses, now heads to the governor, where the debate over the measure is sure to intensify. Backers say the fee will encourage consumers and stores to switch to reusable bags.
“More stores have made the change and now provide more environmentally friendly bags for customers,’’ said Assemblywoman Valerie Vainieri Huttle, the bill’s sponsor. “This bill encourages more stores to get on board and move away from using the bags that are harmful to the environment.’’
Some environmental groups oppose the bill, preferring to ban plastic bags outright. They also are against a provision that would pre-empt individual towns from adopting bans on single-use plastic bags as some communities are doing.
But the New Jersey Food Council backed the bill, arguing a patchwork of assorted bans and fees on bags would create confusion and increase costs to consumers and retail stores.
Under the bill, the money raised by the fee is targeted to go to lead abatement programs, a recurring problem in New Jersey, where 3,500 children were found to have elevated lead levels in their blood.
Whether that money — projected at about $23 million just from plastic bags — ever is spent on lead abatement programs is another question. The money was meant to remove and replace lead-based fixtures, plumbing, and pipes in schools and communities, as well as stripping lead paint from schools, apartments, and houses.
In the fiscal 2019 state budget approved by the Democratic-controlled Legislature yesterday, there is language in the spending plan that would instead divert the money to the general fund. The budget supersedes other bills enacted by lawmakers.


Read the full story

Like this? Click to receive free updates

5-cent plastic grocery bag bill adds to NJ budget debate Read More »