Government contacts for Baysave

Please contact our government officials to say that it is WRONG for the State of New Jersey to sue Sandy victims like us solely because rebuilding, permitting and financial recovery at the bayshore is moving so slowly.

If you landed on this page because you offered to contact a government official on our behalf, THANK YOU! Most government officials are not aware of the actions on NJDEP here at Money Island New Jersey. Please let them know that it is wrong for the State of New Jersey to sue the individuals and businesses at Money Island New Jersey simply because they are unhappy with the pace of post-Sandy recovery.

The following eight New Jersey state officials control much of the future of Money Island and the bayshore recovery issues. They are directly responsible for the decision of the State to sue Baysave, its officers and affiliates. Our three federal official are also included only to the extent that they have offered statements of support but they are not empowered to take direct action to stop the state’s lawsuit against us.


Governor Phil Murphy

Twitter: @GovMurphy

Web form (although his office has never responded to any of my requests): https://www.nj.gov/governor/contact/all/

Phone: (609) 292-6000

Mail: Office of the Governor
PO Box 001
Trenton, NJ 08625

My message: “Please support me and other Sandy victims here at Money Island being sued by the NJ Attorney General simply because some officials in government are unhappy with the slow pace of post-Sandy financial recovery and permitting. We are working as hard as we can to rebuild our lives after losing our homes and businesses and receiving no help from government in the recovery process. It is WRONG for the state to be using the massive power of the AG against poor rural citizens suffering in a depressed post-Sandy community making it even more difficult to rebuild our lives. Pease put an end to the legal prosecution while we continue to work on our financial recovery and land use permitting issues”.


Lieutenant Governor Sheila Oliver

Twitter: @LtGovOliver

Same other contact information as the Governor

NJ Attorney General Gurbir Grewal

Twitter: @GurbirGrewalNJ

Phone: 609-984-5828

Email/Webform: https://www.nj.gov/lps/formmail.htm

Mail: Office of The Attorney General
RJ Hughes Justice Complex
25 Market Street, Box 080
Trenton, NJ 08625-0080


State Senator Jeff Van Drew

Twitter: @jeffvandrew

Phone: (609) 465-0700

Email: SenVanDrew@njleg.org

Mail: School House Office Park

211 S. Main St. Suite 104.

Cape May Court House, NJ 08210


NJ Assemblyman  Bob  Andrzejczak

Twitter: @BobAndrzejczak

Same mail address and phone as Van Drew


NJ Assemblyman Bruce Land

Same mail address and phone as Van Drew


NJDEP Commissioner Catherine McCabe

Twitter: @NJDEPMcCabe

Mail: 401 E. State St.
7th Floor, East Wing
P.O. Box 402
Trenton, NJ 08625-0402

Phone: (609) 292-2885
Fax: (609) 292-7695


New Jersey Senate Majority Leader Steve Sweeney

Twitter: @NJSenatePres


US Senator Cory Booker

Twitter: @CoryBooker

Mail: One Gateway Center
23rd Floor
Newark, NJ 07102

Phone: (202) 224-3224 or 973-639-8700

Fax: 973-639-8723

Email of helpful Aid: Zach_McCue@booker.senate.gov


US Senator Bob Menendez

Twitter: @SenatorMenendez

Mail: One Gateway Center, Suite 1100
Newark, New Jersey 07102

Phone: 973-645-3030
Fax: 973-645-0502

Tim Hillman Aid Direct: 973-645-6640


US Congressional Representative Frank LoBiondo

Twitter: @RepLoBiondo 

Mail: 5914 Main Street Suite 103
Mays Landing, NJ 08330-1746

Fax: 609-625-5071

Phone: (202) 225-6572 or 609- 625-5008

Email: lobiondo@mail.house.gov

 

 

Advertisements

An environmentalist and a civil engineer talk about the future of Money Island

I had an interesting meeting with a well-connected civil engineer on site here at Money Island yesterday afternoon. Hours earlier, I had a long telephone conversation with the Money Island project manager for The Nature Conservancy. Both conversations added valuable insights.

The TNC official echoed an opinion that I hear often from environmentalists: although they personally support Money Island’s sustainability plan, they believe that certain people in mid-level state management at NJDEP do not. Some state employees would prefer that people abandon Money Island to nature. This is commonly referred to in environmental discussions as a “retreat strategy”. The retreat strategy is certainly worth full consideration. Eventually, with three feet of sea level rise, our town and millions of acres of shoreline will be gone. My response is always the same two points:

  1. More water is actually good for the future of aquaculture! It may not be good for roads, buildings or traditional infrastructure but we can certainly work around that with currently available construction modifications. Our core mission of providing public, industry and government access to local waterways will not be impaired by future water level rise. (I usually continue the conversation to discuss how Rutgers’ most recent forecasts of tidal impact and flooding trends for the next 30 to 50 years are built into our sustainability plan but don’t need to go into that detail here).
  2. Life is too short to fight the government. If I suspected that the  retreat path was the opinion of state leadership, including NJDEP leadership, then I would change course. Life is too short to be in a battle against the prevailing force of government. But this is not the case. Every high-ranking official in NJDEP and state government that I’ve spoken with – probably more than two dozen by now – have all told me that they support the project and urge m to ‘stay the course’. Some warned me that the road will be difficult and that I will need to be persistent and ‘keep fighting’. Many of these government leaders have even given me pep talks to keep me going through this current struggle, pointing out how important this mission is to future generations. That’s what motivates me. That’s why I stick with the project.

The engineer had more pragmatic comments:

  1. He agrees with the prevailing opinion that NJDEP should not be taking the current prosecutorial actions against marina infrastructure (our docks) that predate the beginning of permitting requirement laws in the 1970s. Granted, there are a lot of factual details that muddy the situation (historic photography, old land surveys, post-Sandy reconstruction law, etc.) but the core fact remains that our original marina and docks were built in the 1930s before land use permitting were required and therefore should be grandfathered to some extent.
  2. He asked several times “Why are they…?” and my response in each instance was that we don’t have the legal muscle to show where the state has made factual or legal errors in their prosecution of Money Island stakeholders. In contrast, the state has unlimited legal resources and seems intent on using these resources against us rather than negotiate through traditional problem-solving channels. I referred these factual and legal errors in the courtroom but the judge did not seem to give my objections serious consideration. Without a budget for legal defense, I don’t see any reasonable chance of addressing the state’s errors.
  3. He says that the fundamental underlying problem is that the state has not yet come to grips with the impact of water level rise on our wetlands and the infrastructure resources in these locations. While viable management approaches are proposed, we aren’t making adequate progress toward implementation. We discussed different aspects of thin layer dredge spray that is part of the Money Island sustainability plan. I suspect that not many people are familiar with this proposal so I would say only that it is public policy that makes a lot more sense from a public policy perspective than our current strategy of pumping sand on the Atlantic coast beaches! Workable sustainability solutions are available if we choose to pursue them.
  4. The usual first step in planning a project like this is called a pre-permit meeting with a wide range of stakeholders. He doesn’t understand why our requests for a meeting were declined. We discussed the thinking of certain department officials and how those have been addressed in other similar projects. His opinion, based on our exchange of bits of facts and third-party conversations,  that our project does have the support of the most influential people who have been effective recently in getting the NJDEP to change their thinking about bayshore sustainability. We discussed the cost of this permitting and told me what I already knew: I would need to find a loan to cover the cost of land use permitting. we didn’t discuss that I’m already working on it or my frustration that the process is moving so slowly.

 

State of New Jersey vs. Tony Novak, et. al.

Baysave was named as a defendant along with its controller Tony Novak in a lawsuit filed May 4, 2018 by New Jersey Attorney General Gurbir Grewal. The lawsuit focuses on properties acquired for stabilization and sustainable aquaculture redevelopment after Superstorm Sandy under a gift/sale to the state. The State does not allege that Baysave, Novak or our associates did anything wrong, but rather that we are the current titleholders of the distressed properties after the state decided that it did not want the properties. The stabilization, recovery,  transfer, sustainability planning and compliance phases are taking much longer than expected and the issues are proving more complex than anyone had hoped.

The underlying issue is that the entire Money Island Marina campus, and in fact most of the small rural port community of Money Island, was built more than a half century ago without building permits, water well or septic system permits, land surveys, tideland leases, etc.

Before Superstorm Sandy, we agreed with the state on a solution to these issues. We assumed these properties would be acquired by the state like other local working waterfronts and that would transfer these issues to the state to deal with (as happened with other local marinas like neighboring Fortescue). Our verbal and written communications indicated that the state would acquire these properties at our cost and lease them back to local watermen just like Fortescue State Marina. But in the years since Sandy, none of this has actually happened. The state switched from being a cooperative partner with Baysave in our restoration efforts to being an unreasonable adversary. We don’t know why. We suspect the action is not taken in good faith.

The lawsuit comes down to this: the government has declined at least 15 permit applications, license applications or pre-application inquiries since Sandy and is now suing us because those same permits are not issued.  It is, in our opinion, unconscionable for the state to be both the denier of permits based on false assumptions and simultaneously bring charges for failure to have permits that should have been addressed decades ago.

Most significant in this matter is the observation that the NJDEP abandoned its normal problem-solving mechanisms (pre-permit planning meetings, application review and comment and alternate dispute resolution) to opt for decline of applications and direct to lawsuit with no attempt at resolution. One NJDEP program director said that this was the first time in her career that she saw this pattern of action by her department and so she did not know what to advise.

Public officials like State Senator Van Drew wrote letters on our behalf to urge the state to act reasonably to communicate and negotiate a solution. Public support and political endorsements have had minimal impact.

We are asking the State to the legal prosecution of this case to allow time for consideration of the issues in dispute. We are asking the Governor’s office to force the NJDEP to discuss the errand assumptions underlying their complaints and discuss ways to resolve the problems that does not include suing the people trying to recover from Superstorm Sandy.

Here are the legal documents:

Letter to Senator Van Drew

This is a copy of an email and the attached letter sent to State Senator Van Drew today. Our community working to sustain Money Island believes that Senator Van Drew is in the best position to influence the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection to address the inconsistent and possibly illegal internal actions of a relative few staff members who do not support the larger redevelopment and compliance plans of Money Island.

“Dear Senator Van Drew:

I’ve attached a letter drafted with the help of our community advisers to call your attention to the mean-spirited and sometimes illegal actions of the NJDEP in blocking the sustainable recovery of Money Island, New Jersey since superstorm Sandy. We believe this issue can be resolved by your influence in pushing NJDEP to negotiate with me and our community leaders.

Money Island is the state’s second largest seafood landing point and the planned site of future aquaculture expansion. We serve five local universities and a range of recreational users and environmental tourists. We have a viable plan for a sustainable and fully compliant future as the region’s second largest seafood landing. We are poised to support the anticipated tremendous growth as an aquaculture site. Yet NJDEP has blocked 10 of our 11 attempts at obtaining state permitting over the past five years and now taking legal action against those committed to Money Island’s recovery. I’ve been financially crippled by the Department’s actions and their unwillingness to even hold discussions. This pattern of behavior is not in line with the best interests of public policy nor the leadership of the NJDEP so we think that stronger action is required to address this problem.

I thank you and your staff for your long term support on bayshore issues and I look forward to the opportunity to discuss how we can make this a ‘turning point’  in recovery of our bayshore regional economy and, specifically, the environmental and economic future of our small working waterfront community of Money Island, New Jersey.

Tony Novak, CPA, MBA, MT

Cell/text: 856-237-9199

 

One step forward, one step back

In our long-term effort to restore Money Island and repurpose the resources for a future of sustainable aquaculture, it often feels like we are taking one step forward and one step back. Today the two extremes hit particularly hard.

“Fall seven times. Get up eight.” – Japanese Proverb

On December 30 Senator Booker sent an online message to Tony saying that he was interested in receiving more information about Baysave’s project at Money Island. That sparked a flurry of follow-up activity, calls and referrals that kept us busy all week. It is clear from multiple sources that the federal government wants to see us succeed. Early this morning I had a scheduled phone call with one of New Jersey’s best business financing experts. She works in North Jersey but was referred by Stockton SBA and has been helping us for several months. She said that she had brought our redevelopment plan to a lender who wants to fund the project and match the USDA’s program to expand aquaculture here. Great news! I worked on some spreadsheets to support the idea and we scheduled another call for Friday.

Then only a few hours later a representative from the New Jersey Department of Environmental Resources called to say that the state declines to discuss a resolution of the old land use and permitting issues that existed before the Baysave project began. She seemed surprised to support the result. We discussed that this is unusual for the state to refuse to participate in alternate dispute resolution. This is copy of the confirmation letter denying alternative dispute resolution: BaySave ltr from NJDEP.

I can imagine no respectable reason why the state would refuse to enter into discussions on resolution of environmental issues under any circumstances. Most personnel in the department support our efforts. I have occasionally been critical of the agency and once even turned in an employee for attempted bribery years ago. This most recent action, unfortunately, represents the agenda of a small minority of NJDEP officials.

In reality, the state’s action today probably has little to do with us and has more to do with swampy politics. Nevertheless, we will continue to work our restoration and redevelopment plan one step at time, relying on the strong support expressed by the many other forces of government and the community.

Thanks LoBiondo for environmental support

lobiondo-at-mi

Congressman Frank LoBiondo has been a strong supporter of the Delaware Bay region, our environment and our businesses. This photo was taken on his recent visit to Money Island in August 2016 where he spoke about the difficulty in promoting our environmental interests in Washington. His efforts are largely responsible for the EPA-funded restoration projects here.

This week NJ.com recognizes LoBiondo as one of only a few Republican leaders nationwide willing to stand up to the to repeal environmental restrictions on the coal industry.

Earlier in 2016 the Congressmen met with me and a group of other concerned residents still fighting to settle Sandy insurance claims years after FEMA fraud admissions.

I am grateful for Congressman LoBiondo’s efforts and feel blessed to have him represent us in Washington DC.