Enviro Groups Comment on Exxon Split Decision

Today the Appellate Court released their decision on NJ Sierra Club vs NJDEP on the Exxon settlement. They have ruled against our appeal based on merit but had a split decision on standing and right to appeal. The court decided that the environmental groups suing, have standing enough to appeal this case. By appealing the case, this decision comes after the constitutional dedication of settlement funds. This means that the money will not be able to be diverted for other purposes.

“We’re disappointed that the Appellate Division has ruled against us on the Exxon case. Although it’s not a surprise, we still believe that they are wrong. The Appellate Division tends to side with state agencies such as the DEP in this case, who have presumption of validity. However, what the Christie Administration did was so bad, we believe the courts should have seen through this sell-out of the environment and the taxpayers,” said Jeff Tittel, Director of the New Jersey Sierra Club. “Although we lost the case, we still won. We were able to stop the settlement money from being stolen by the Christie Administration for budget holes or tax cuts. We were still in court challenging this decision when the constitutional dedication passed. Now that the case has been decided, the money will go towards where it supposed to go: to the environment and communities impacted by Exxon’s pollution.”

In this settlement, out of the $225 million: $50 million is going towards legal fees. That means no monies will go to restoration or the environment and $175 million will go to the General Fund. State officials reported that this deal is in addition to Exxon spending about $260 million through 2014 to clean up the contaminated sites under a 1991 agreement. However, that was a separate ruling and not part of this case. It is clear that the Christie Administration wanted to settle this case fast.

“This court decision restricts the ability of citizens and organizations to intervene. The Exxon sell-out settlement is the worst-case example of the state letting polluters off the hook. The public needs the right to be able to fight against cases like this and we hope the Murphy Administration will take a different stance on this case,” said Doug O’Malley, director of Environment New Jersey.

Under this deal, Exxon does not have to clean-up sites to the extent that they had to before. That is a difference between site restoration and remediation. In the original court case, Exxon would have had to restore the site to its original conditions before the spill. They would have to remove all the oil and chemicals and then restore the wetlands to the state. Now Exxon can just cap the site, which is not really a clean-up.

“Governor Christie’s DEP and Exxon sought to rob the people of New Jersey, and our natural resources, of our rights to fair compensation and remediation for the damage Exxon inflicted. The lower court judge then compounded this insult and injury by denying environmental organizations representing communities and natural resources throughout the state from being able to intervene and challenge the sweetheart deal that had been cut. The court today recognized the right of the Delaware Riverkeeper Network, NJ Sierra Club, Environment New Jersey and Clean Water Action to stand in defense of the residents and resources of the state. This was a significant and important reversal of the lower court decision.  Unfortunately, in the final analysis, the appellate court upheld this betrayal of the public trust that allowed Exxon to pay a mere $225 million to cover the $8.9 billion worth of natural resource damages they inflicted, and they got an extensive release of liability to boot.  While the right of the people of NJ to stand up in their defense was upheld in today’s decision, setting important legal precedent for the future, the goal of protecting and restoring NJ’s natural resources was lost, and that is the very definition of a travesty of justice,” said Maya van Rossum, the Delaware Riverkeeper and leader of the Delaware Riverkeeper Network.

However, among the state’s environmental groups there were really over 70,000 submitted opposing the settlement. The public is outraged about this sellout by the Christie Administration of the environment and taxpayers. The public understands that this is a bad deal and understands the DEP is siding against the public and against the environment. One of the reasons we wanted to intervene is so all of the 70,000 comments will not only be included in the record, but for the Judge to acknowledge how important they are.

“The court’s decision continues an injustice to one and all – again denying the public standing in the Exxon settlement case,” said Amy Goldsmith, NJ State Director of Clean Water Action. “But thankfully, the public took action by supporting a 2017 ballot question to prevent future NRD polluter dollars from being used for anything other than restoring environmental and natural resource damages. We are looking forward to the Murphy administration increasing enforcement and collecting more settlement dollars from environmental wrongdoers to do environmental good.“