Dams power down in the largest US dam removal

By PHUONG LE, Associated Press Posted Sat May 28, 2011 2:55pm PDT

The Elwha Dam on the Elwha River, with Lake Aldwell behind it, is seen near Port Angeles, Dec. 10, 2008. On June 1, nearly two decades after Congress called for full restoration of the river and its fish runs, federal workers will turn off the generators at the 1913 dam powerhouse and set in motion the largest dam removal project in U.S. history. Contractors will begin dismantling the dams this fall, a $324.7 million project that will take about three years and eventually will allow the 45-mile Elwha River to run free as it courses from the Olympic Mountains through old-growth forests into the Strait of Juan de Fuca. (AP Photo/Elaine Thompson)

PORT ANGELES, Wash. - The Elwha River on Washington's Olympic Peninsula once teemed with legendary salmon runs before two towering concrete dams built nearly a century ago cut off fish access to upstream habitat, diminished their runs and altered the ecosystem.

On June 1, nearly two decades after Congress called for full restoration of the river and its fish runs, federal workers will turn off the generators at the 1913 dam powerhouse and set in motion the largest dam removal project in U.S. history.

Contractors will begin dismantling the dams this fall, a $324.7 million project that will take about three years and eventually will allow the 45-mile Elwha River to run free as it courses from the Olympic Mountains through old-growth forests into the Strait of Juan de Fuca.

"We're going to let this river be wild again," said Amy Kober, a spokeswoman for the advocacy group American Rivers. "The generators may be powering down, but the river is about to power up."

The 105-foot Elwha Dam also came on line in 1913, followed 14 years later by the 210-foot Glines Canyon Dam eight miles upstream. For years, they provided electricity to a local pulp and paper mill and the growing city of Port Angeles, Wash., about 80 miles west of Seattle. 

Gov. Christie arrives at son's high school baseball game in State Police helicopter

Published: Tuesday, May 31, 2011, 7:05 PM     Updated: Tuesday, May 31, 2011, 7:20 PM

 By Star-Ledger Staff 

Aristide Economopoulos/The Star-LedgerGov. Christie exits a New Jersey State Police helicopter in Wayne in this file photo. Today he took a brand-new helicopter to his son's high school baseball game.

TRENTON — Gov. Chris Christie arrived at his son's baseball game this afternoon aboard a State Police helicopter. 

Right before the lineup cards were being exchanged on the field, a noise from above distracted the spectators as the 55-foot long helicopter buzzed over trees in left field, circled the outfield and landed in an adjacent football field. Christie disembarked from the helicopter and got into a black car with tinted windows that drove him about a 100 yards to the baseball field.

During the 5th inning, Christie and First Lady Mary Pat Christie got into the car, rode back to the helicopter and left the game. During a pitching change, play was stopped for a couple of minutes while the helicopter took off.

Christie's eldest son, Andrew, was the starting catcher for Delbarton High School, in Morris Township. The governor played the same position of catcher when he was in high school.

The game was being held at St. Joseph Regional High School in Montvale in Bergen County. Christie watched the game from the stands, flanked by State Police security guards.

"It is a means of transportation that is occasionally used as the schedule demands," said Christie spokesman Michael Drewniak in an email. "This has historically been the case in prior administrations as well, and we continue to be judicious in limiting its use."

The governor had no public events on his schedule, offering no insight to where he might have been traveling from. He had a private meeting at 6:30 p.m. at Drumthwacket, the governor's mansion, in Princeton. He is meeting with a group of Iowa donors who have publically expressed a desire to persuade him to run for president in 2012.

Christie was ferried to the field in a brand-new AugustaWestland helicopter, purchased at a cost to taxpayers of $12.5 million. 

The State Police has received two of the five helicopters purchased so far, according to testimony from Attorney General Paula Dow during a May budget hearing. They were purchased to replace aging Sikorsky helicopters that the State Police have flown for about two decades.

The helicopters, which can reach nearly 200 miles per hour with its twin turbo-shaft engines, are designed for homeland security duties and transporting critically injured patients.

Christie befriends upstart Democrats in Hudson County

Published: Tuesday, May 31, 2011, 11:55 AM     Updated: Tuesday, May 31, 2011, 12:02 PM

 By Star-Ledger Staff 

Saed Hindash/The Star-LedgerGov. Chris Christie discusses matters with West New York Mayor Felix Roque after swearing him in May 26, 2011 outside West New York City Hall.

WEST NEW YORK — Republican Gov. Chris Christie was deep behind enemy lines in the Democratic bastion of Hudson County on Thursday night, but he wasn’t undercover or even unwelcome. In fact, he was the guest of honor, invited to ceremoniously swear in newly elected West New York Mayor Felix Roque, a Democrat.

After finishing the oath of office, Roque turned to the crowd and said: “This is like a dream come true to have the governor — the governor, ladies and gentleman, of New Jersey! — here with us in West New York.”

Christie later stepped down from the stage and, instead of scurrying toward his black sport utility vehicle, plunged into the crowd — shaking hands, kissing grandmothers, posing for pictures.

Christie’s presence was a direct shot at his political nemesis, U.S. Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.), the king of Hudson County politics who enthusiastically backed the incumbent mayor that Roque ousted and who faces re-election himself next year.

It was also the latest example of how the Republican governor is stirring the pot in this fabled Democratic stronghold, drawing city mayors into his fold and undermining the powerful Hudson County Democratic Organization.

“To go for the jugular there is a testimony to Christie’s political brassiness,” said Montclair State University political science professor Brigid Harrison. “He’s willing to go into the belly of the beast.”

Saed Hindash/Star-Ledger StaffGov. Chris Christie swears West New York Mayor Felix Roque May 26, 2011 outside West New York City Hall.

Besides Roque, Thursday night’s ceremony was stocked with Democratic Christie allies, including Union City Mayor Brian Stack — also a state senator — and Hoboken Mayor Dawn Zimmer.

All three mayors have butted heads with the Hudson County Democratic Organization. In recent interviews, all three said they would consider backing Christie in a re-election run — no small matter in a county where mayors can mobilize powerful grassroots organizations.

Jose Arango, who has slogged through more than a decade as Republican chairman in a county where registered Democrats outnumber Republicans six to one, is thrilled.

“Not since Tom Kean” — who in 1985 became the only Republican governor in recent memory to win Hudson County — “have we seen the reception we’re getting here,” Arango said. Asked if Christie was making inroads, he simply took stock of who was in the crowd: Christie, not Menendez; the Republican chairman, not the Democratic chairman.

“It’s a reality,” he said. “You can see it. You can touch it.”

DIVIDE AND CONQUER

Dating to the days of boss Frank Hague in the first half of the 20th century, Hudson County has been known as a Democratic power base, churning out huge votes for the party. But it’s also famous for bitter family feuds, presenting Christie with an opportunity to divide and conquer.

“There’s always factions fighting each other there. And if you’re willing, you can take advantage of it,” said William Palatucci, Christie’s friend and political adviser. “Governor Kean did it very well, and Governor Christie is doing the same.”

At the very least, Christie’s visits have the Democratic establishment on edge, said Jersey City Councilman Steve Fulop, who is planning a run for mayor in 2013.

“Every time he comes here, he sends the Hudson County Democratic Party in a frenzy,” he said. “Christie is not delusional in thinking that he can win Hudson County, but if he can peel off votes, that’s a success.”

Asked Thursday if he could turn the county Republican red, Christie said, “I don’t know about that. That’s a little ambitious even for me.”

Former Gov. Jon Corzine trounced Christie with 68 percent of the vote there in 2009. But political analysts said victory isn’t the goal — it’s disruption.

“What the governor is doing here is a little bit of triangulation, trying to maintain that division within the Democratic Party,” said political scientist Joseph Marbach, provost of La Salle University. “Anything the governor can do to cause dissension in the ranks will pay off in the long run.”

Kean praised Christie’s efforts but said it’s always tricky dealing with the county’s famously tumultuous political scene.

“You have to know exactly what you’re doing,” he said. “It’s a bit of a minefield.”

A ‘HISPANIC GOVERNOR’

So far, Christie is working most closely with politicians who have defied the Hudson County Democratic Organization. That includes Roque, an Army reservist and doctor, who said he first met with Christie 18 months ago.

Roque led a recall petition against former West New York Mayor Sal Vega, then beat him in the city’s nonpartisan election on May 10. Christie sent two aides to Roque’s private swearing in ceremony on May 17, the new mayor said.

Then two days later, the governor joined Roque and Stack for an espresso at Las Palmas, a popular Cuban restaurant, in a highly public show of support. In an interview later, Roque called Christie — who is Irish and Italian and doesn’t speak Spanish — the “first Hispanic governor of New Jersey.”

Stack, who made headlines earlier this year by calling Christie “the greatest governor this state has ever had,” led an insurgency against the Hudson County Democratic Organization in 2007. Although there’s been a sort of détente, Stack isn’t sure how long that will last.

“This is like the Cold War between the Russians and the U.S.,” he said. “Something’s going to happen.”

Assemblyman Jason O’Donnell (D-Hudson), an ally of county party chairman and Bayonne Mayor Mark Smith, downplayed the fault lines, saying “Hudson County remains as strong of a Democratic stronghold as it has been.” Smith did not respond to messages.

Longtime political consultant Paul Swibinski also questioned the governor’s moves.

“A Chris Christie endorsement is quite unpopular in Hudson County,” he said.
Swibinski doubted Christie can damage Menendez on his home turf when the senator is up for re-election next year.

“The only real question going into those elections is turnout, and I don’t think Christie can do anything about that,” he said.

Menendez, who won Hudson County with 76 percent of all votes cast in 2006, declined to comment through a spokeswoman.

The Hudson Democrats say Christie’s attempts to win friends may pay off with endorsements in a 2013 re-election campaign, but stressed that’s a long way off.

“If the election was tomorrow, yes,” said Zimmer. “But there’s two more years. A lot can happen in two years.”

Rev. Jesse Jackson warns Camden crowd of 'toxic wind' wiping out workers' rights across U.S.

Published: Tuesday, May 31, 2011, 11:40 AM

 By Christopher Baxter/Statehouse Bureau 

Getty ImagesThe Rev. Jesse Jackson, seen in a 2008 photo, today spoke to a crowd in Camden about what he calls a "toxic wind" blowing across America.

CAMDEN — The Rev. Jesse Jackson today warned a crowd of union workers and their supporters gathered in Camden that a “toxic wind” was blowing across America to wipe out collective bargaining and the rights of working-class families.

“Save the workers, save the families. Save the workers, save the families,” chanted Jackson, who spent much of his youth in the struggling South Jersey city. “The police, the teachers, the firemen, the nurses, save the workers, save the families.”

The outspoken civil rights activist said the country was too focused on its wars overseas while failing to reinvest in cities like Camden, where services including police protection are being cut as a result of dire budget times.

Jackson said the battle for workers rights and collective bargaining has already been won, and called on the crowd of about 70 people not to let Gov. Chris Christie roll back the clock on those achievements.

“Workers are being dumped on as if you are the reason we’re in an economic crisis,” Jackson said. “State workers must hold ranks and fight back. When we fight back we never lose.”

He added: “You have the votes. You must not let this governor break your spirit.”

The rally was Jackson’s second stop in a two-day “Solidarity Tour” of the New Jersey area aimed at firing up public workers, who are under pressure by Christie and state Republican lawmakers to relinquish some pension and health benefits.

Gil Scott Heron - Message to the Messengers

Proposed law would ban N.J. public colleges from paying commencement speakers

Published: Friday, May 27, 2011, 4:30 PM     Updated: Friday, May 27, 2011, 6:33 PM

 By Kelly Heyboer/ The Star-Ledger 

John O'Boyle/The Star-LedgerGrammy award winning singer John Legend at the Kean University 2011 commencement. He earned $25K to speak and perform two songs.

TRENTON — New Jersey’s public colleges would be banned from paying for commencement speakers under legislation introduced in Trenton this week.

The bill comes two weeks after Rutgers and Kean universities cut big checks for celebrity speakers to headline their graduation ceremonies.

Rutgers officials paid Nobel Prize-winning author Toni Morrison $30,000 for her May 15 speech at Rutgers Stadium. Kean paid singer John Legend $25,000 to speak and sing two songs at its May 12 ceremony at the PNC Bank Arts Center in Holmdel.

John DiMaio (R-Warren), one of the bill’s sponsors, said he objects to public institutions paying celebrities at a time when student costs are rising and state funding is shrinking.

"We’re in very, very difficult times," DiMaio said. "Tuitions are up. The amount of aid we have to offer is down."

Though Rutgers and Kean officials said they paid speakers to give their students the best graduation possible, DiMaio said it is not necessary to offer commencement speakers monetary compensation.

"That’s an honor enough to be asked," DiMaio said.

The bill, introduced in the Assembly Monday, has bipartisan support. It is co-sponsored by Assemblyman Patrick Diegnan (D-Middlesex), chairman of the education committee.

The legislation says if a public college or university pays a graduation speaker, the state treasurer will deduct the equivalent amount from the school’s state aid.

Rutgers officials said they plan to have their attorneys review the proposed law.

"We haven’t yet had the bill reviewed by the counsel’s office," said Greg Trevor, a Rutgers spokesman. "Once that is done we look forward to discussing its provisions with the sponsor."

More lawmakers opposed to forcing N.J. workers to pay more for health benefits through legislation

Published: Saturday, May 28, 2011, 6:00 AM

 By Statehouse Bureau Staff 

Noah Addis/The Star-LedgerA view of the exterior of the Statehouse in Trenton in this 2005 file photo.

TRENTON — Opposition hardened Friday toward plans to change state employee health benefits through legislation, a day after Gov. Chris Christie acknowledged that he had begun negotiations with the unions.

Christie remains determined to have lawmakers force state employees to pay more for health insurance but the Democrat-controlled Legislature, already reluctant, is backing away from the idea.

Assemblyman Joe Cryan (D-Union) said there was little support for legislating changes to health care among Democratic colleagues even before the governor began to negotiate, and now opposition is growing.

"The people I’ve talked to believe this should be collectively bargained, and there should be no bill taking away that right," said Cryan, a political foe of the governor. "We are a collective bargaining state, and we should respect that."

A spokesman for the governor, Kevin Roberts, said that "fundamentally" nothing has changed in his effort to get legislation passed.

"We have no doubt that there will be sufficient support in the Legislature for comprehensive health care reform," he said.

Senate President Stephen Sweeney (D-Gloucester) has said he has enough votes to pass the legislation, which also includes a pension oevrhaul. The Star-Ledger has reported that Sweeney plans to enlist Republican support to get the measure passed.

"The Senate President is committed to reducing the burden of New Jersey property taxpayers, but in a manner that is fair to middle and lower income workers," said a Senate spokesman, Chris Donnelly. "He will continue to push for fundamental and systemic change of the pension and health benefit systems until it happens, whether it is through negotiations or legislation."

Lawmakers, looking at re-election, expressed their strongest opposition to passing a bill and said the governor should first work out an agreement with the unions.

"If the governor is negotiating, then we should allow that process to take place, and I don’t think its appropriate or necessary for us to intervene," said Assemblywoman Bonnie Watson-Coleman (D-Essex), who has long opposed a bill.

Sen. Linda Greenstein (D-Middlesex), who represents a district heavily populated by state workers, said she is encouraged by the governor’s decision and that with the negotiations, the bill is unnecessary.

Christie was also facing possible pushback on his plan to legislate the changes from the Public Employee Relations Commission, which is reviewing a complaint from the CWA, the state’s largest union, that his refusal to negotiate health benefits violated state law.

A ruling from PERC could have quickly stopped efforts in the Legislature.

Brigid Harrison, a political science professor at Montclair State University, said that Christie’s effort to negotiate could be a sign that he lacks the votes to get the bills through the Legislature.

Christie has made lawmakers’ reluctance to act on his proposals a frequent point of criticism at his town hall meetings. But Harrison said that from a practical standpoint, it’s difficult to negotiate the same issue on two fronts.

"He will continue to put the blame on the shoulders of the Legislature, but how can you have dueling solutions?" she said.

Assembly Speaker Shelia Oliver (D-Essex) has borne the brunt of that criticism and is more reserved in her outlook.

"Everyone agrees changes are needed to protect taxpayers and workers, and the Assembly has always believed collective bargaining would be the preferred course for negotiating health benefits changes," she said in a statement. "I encourage the governor to continue aggressively engaging in collective bargaining, but in the meantime I will continue my efforts to bring all sides together with the shared goal of property tax relief and reasonable benefits for workers."

Vote No on S-2718

CLICK HERE for the Vote "NO" on S-2718 flier.

Please use the YouTube embed link to place this video on your website.

Public employee health benefits must be negotiated not legislated. Senate Bill 2718 seeks to legislate health benefits, undermining the collective bargaining process. We must make elected officials hear our voices on this important issue.

We ask you to please call the toll free number (888) 724-6474 and urge your State Senator to vote “NO” on S-2718.

During your call you will be asked to enter your zip code to be connected to your State Senator’s office. The recording will tell you the name of your State Senator.

When you speak to the Senator’s staff, ask them to please honor and respect our collective bargaining rights by opposing Senate Bill 2718. Senate Bill 2718 would effectively end our ability to bargain over health care insurance and force public employees, on average, to quadruple the amount they pay for family health care insurance.

Again, please ask them to honor and respect the collective bargaining process and oppose Senate Bill 2718.

Obama Challenges Israel to Make Hard Choices Needed for Peace

By HELENE COOPER

Published: May 22, 2011

In his remarks to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, the president, while offering praise for the relationship with Israel, did not walk back from his speech on Thursday, which had infuriated Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahuof Israel. Rather, the president took indirect aim at Mr. Netanyahu, first by repeating what the Israeli prime minister so objected to — the phrase pre-1967 borders — and then by challenging those whom he said had “misrepresented” his position.WASHINGTON — President Obama, speaking on Sunday to the nation’s foremost pro-Israel lobbying group, repeated his call forPalestinian statehood based on Israel’s pre-1967 borders adjusted for land swaps, issuing a challenge to the Israeli government to “make the hard choices that are necessary to protect a Jewish and democratic state for which so many generations have sacrificed.”

“Let me repeat what I actually said on Thursday,” Mr. Obama said in firm tones at one point, “not what I was reported to have said.”

“I said that the United States believes that negotiations should result in two states, with permanent Palestinian borders with Israel, Jordan, and Egypt, and permanent Israeli borders with Palestine. The borders of Israel and Palestine should be based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps, so that secure and recognized borders are established for both states.”

The president emphasized the “mutually agreed swaps,” then went into an elaboration of what he believes that means. Mr. Netanyahu, in his critique of Mr. Obama’s remarks, had ignored the “mutually agreed swaps” part of the president’s proposal.

“Since my position has been misrepresented several times, let me reaffirm what “1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps” means,” Mr. Obama said. “By definition, it means that the parties themselves — Israelis and Palestinians — will negotiate a border that is different than the one that existed on June 4, 1967. It is a well known formula to all who have worked on this issue for a generation. It allows the parties themselves to account for the changes that have taken place over the last 44 years.”

“There was nothing particularly original in my proposal,” he said. “This basic framework for negotiations has long been the basis for discussions among the parties, including previous U.S. administrations.”

Mr. Netanyahu’s furious reaction last week to what many administration officials viewed as a modest compromise from the more dramatic all-encompassing American peace plan that some of Mr. Obama’s advisers had been advocating, infuriated the White House. In particular, administration officials were angry by Mr. Netanyahu’s lecturing tone during statements the two leaders gave on Friday. American officials were also irritated by Mr. Netanyahu statement directly after Mr. Obama’s speech that used the phrase “expects to hear” in saying that Mr. Netanyahu expected to hear certain assurances from Mr. Obama during their meeting.

Mr. Obama also assured the group that the administration was steadfast in its “opposition to any attempt to de-legitimize the state of Israel,” but he warned that Israel would face growing isolation without a credible Middle East peace process.

Sunday’s audience, which had been quiet, cheered Mr. Obama, although the cheers were far more muted than the standing ovation they had given at other points of Mr. Obama’s speech, like when he talked about Iran and when he reiterated that his opposition to a looming United Nations vote on Palestinian statehood.

“I know very well that the easy thing to do, particularly for a president preparing for re-election, is to avoid any controversy,” Mr. Obama said. “I don’t need Rahm” — former chief of staff Rahm Emanuel — “to tell me that.”

But, Mr. Obama added, “as I said to Prime Minister Netanyahu, I believe that the current situation in the Middle East does not allow for procrastination. I also believe that real friends talk openly and honestly with one another.”

Others close to the administration have also pushed back against the notion that Mr. Obama was signaling a major shift in American policy on Thursday. “No, he wasn’t,” said his newly departed special envoy to the Middle East, George Mitchell, when asked that question on Sunday.

“The president didn’t say that Israel has to go back to the ’67 lines,” Mr. Mitchell said on ABC’s “This Week”.  “He said ‘with agreed swaps.’ Those are significant.” 

Mr. Mitchell went on: “ ‘Agreed’ means through negotiations; both parties must agree. There’s not going to be a border unless Israel agrees to it, and we know they won’t agree unless their security needs are satisfied.”

It was a quietly delivered speech that lasted 20 minutes, and at the end, the packed hall of at the Washington Convention Center stood up for Mr. Obama and clapped — some even cheered. There were no boos or hisses, as some of the president’s allies had feared. 

Mr. Obama’s arrival on stage, before a backdrop collage that meshed fragments of the Israeli and American flags, was met with loud applause. But that was at least partly because it followed an introduction by Lee Rosenberg, the group’s president, that ended with a guaranteed applause line: “Thank you, Mr. President, for ridding the world of Osama bin Laden.”

Brian Knowlton contributed reporting
.