Power Struggle over NJ reef donations?

[DarkSkies]

There has been some recent controversy over the Pots off the Reefs rallying, funding for NJ reefs, and who will be managing any monies spent by the legislature for these purposes in the future.

I don't know where I stand on this latest controversy. I don't feel I have enough info to make an informed analysis, as of yet.

We have some members here who are partial to one group or another. I understand people have loyalties, that's a fact of life. However, I think this whole matter needs to be talked about in the light of day. If there is anyone interested in joining the discussion here, or voicing your opinion, please refrain from attacking what you perceive to be the "other side".

As I said, I think it's too early in the game to start pointing the fingers and making accusations. I do think that all parties who have an interest in this would be willing to discuss this openly. If not, that in itself sometimes arouses suspicions in peoples' minds.

As administrator, I will do my best to see that this thread doesn't turn sour, and ask you members to exercise maturity in keeping the tone civil. Thanks for your cooperation. If anyone wants to defend their position or explain things for us, now would be the time...

Thanks folks! :)

[DarkSkies]

Sent in by Finchaser, thanks.






RFA OPEN LETTER TO AP PRESS & NJ STATE GOVERNMENT

"Power Struggle Over Reef Donations" Finally Publicizes 4-Year Private Process


With regard to the Asbury Park Press article (http://r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?llr=hclmspcab&et=1105639764038&s=10015&e=0010fhwLGa7ITaAIliv-kk4q0jMVtEGnME4eGwBg-2m9XSQ-fuG4ITqgWG0B-S6qLq1GkoQYeabp80Y7FqgkkeF-kU4phG6Rnhba8aD3g8TsjQ2dhbUNbv6XCJwm7aUIMnzGijLoa4 gsnCu5ARdyylPe6Ggn1fcug5NT3KnHam9tW8YsuwJGPQOB-CUcO33uZKxyH0n5MFlwBaXPSvo8YH1gA==) by Kirk Moore, for the official record, the Recreational Fishing Alliance (RFA) has no interest in managing or funding of any state's artificial reef program. As a non-profit, political action organization designated a 501(c)(4), it would be improper for RFA to manage funds donated by individual anglers and other non-profits for designation as reef materials. Furthermore, RFA believes strongly that no 501(c)(4) political action organization should ever be involved in the management and funding of New Jersey's artificial reefs, which is why our organization is disappointed with the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) for allowing a memo of understanding (MOU) to be coordinated privately through another 501(c)(4) politically motivated organization.

The fact that the MOU process has been developed, authored and guided by the state DEP and a political action organization in private as opposed to through a public review process is extremely disturbing. RFA has been in contact with several fishing organization and philanthropic groups who are equally frustrated by the lack of transparency in this MOU process as it dates back to 2007; we believe that original language that would've precluded any political action organization (including the RFA) from managing reef funding was actually stricken from the MOU amendment by the DEP and the group with whom they are currently working, which in itself raises concern.

Again, and for the record, RFA is adamantly opposed to any political action organization maintaining angler donations for reef purposes in New Jersey, and in response to the article that a 501(c)(4) organization, operating under premise of being an open coalition, have "been in discussions for more than a year with the DEP toward a new agreement that would allow qualifying nonprofit groups to manage donation funds for reef building," we are appealing to the state's Attorney General to actively investigate whether any improprieties have occurred, politically or otherwise, within the state government by (A) repealing federal funding of the artificial reef program, (B) terminating use of private donations coordinated through the 501(c)(3) Sport Fish Fund, and (C) authoring of an MOU between a political action organization and the state DEP outside of public forum.

Furthermore, RFA believes it's time that all correspondence going back to 2007 between NJDEP and private groups and individuals regarding New Jersey's artificial reef program be released to the public and members of the news media. RFA's stated mission "to safeguard the rights of saltwater anglers, protect boat, marine and tackle industry jobs and ensure the long-term sustainability of our nation's fisheries" mandates that we ask these questions on behalf of our members and lobby the government for answers. Our mission precludes us from participating in non-profit funding of state reef programs, particularly through angler donations, but it does demand that we ensure that no politically motivated organization ever takes control of the gracious support of donors and benefactors to New Jersey's coastal resources.

For over 25 years, groups and individuals with deep interest in New Jersey's artificial reef program have donated literally millions of dollars to the Sport Fish Fund. If the determination made in 2007 to terminate use of these individual donations through a private non-profit fund was politically motivated in any way, the public has a right to know the truth. If 2007 was the same year that the US Fish and Wildlife Service got involved in the reef management discussions with both the state DEP and then start-up political action organizations, then a Freedom of Information Act may become necessary to ensure that sportsmen and members of the public are given full access to all communications between groups, individuals, representatives of the state of New Jersey and those within the federal government.

New Jersey's artificial program has been a 25-year success because donations made by the general public were deposited and managed by a non-partisan, non-profit, and non-parochial fund. RFA believes that efforts to 'fix' a problem that only seems to have materialized since 2007 are dubious at best given the 4-year timeline; RFA echoes the concerns of the major reef benefactors and state anglers that public resources should never be politicized for private gain.

[captnemo]

[FONT=sans-serif]Furthermore, RFA believes it's time that all correspondence going back to 2007 between NJDEP and private groups and individuals regarding New Jersey's artificial reef program be released to the public and members of the news media.

Yessir. Something stinks here and it isn't the salt air!

[stripermania]

Original article

Power struggle over reef donations

Big contributor could pull out

9:41 PM, May. 21, 2011
Written by
Kirk Moore (kmoore@njpressmedia.com) | Staff Writer

Staff writer Dan Radel contributed to this story. Kirk Moore: (732) 557-5728; kmoore@ njpressmedia.com

A long-running debate over commercial fishing gear on artificial reefs has morphed into a power struggle among recreational groups, as the state Department of Environmental Protection prepares to revamp a funding system for handling donations to the reef program.

One coalition of the groups Reef Rescue and the New Jersey Outdoors Alliance has been in discussions for more than a year with the DEP toward a new agreement that would allow qualifying nonprofit groups to manage donation funds for reef building.
That’s riled up a rival organization, the Recreational Fishing Alliance, whose leaders contend they have been shut out of the process despite requests to the DEP and Gov. Chris Christie’s office.

New Jersey’s network of 15 reef sites is a big contributor to the Shore tourism economy, and state biologists estimate one in every five fish taken by anglers comes off the reefs. For decades fishermen have helped pay to sink old ships that become encrusted with sea life to provide new living spaces that increase fish populations and fishing grounds. That has made the artificial reefs – seafloor clusters of sunken ships, old rubble and even obsolete Army tanks and subway cars – vital destinations for the state’s recreational fishing fleet.

The political squabbling, and a recent decision by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to withhold funding because of commercial fishing on the reefs, has some worried about the future of an immensely successful program funded for more than 25 years with donations and federal sport fish restoration aid.

“They’re all vying for political gain. That’s the cause of the problem,” said Brian Nunes-Vais, a trustee of the Ann E. Clark Foundation, who has warned the governor’s office the foundation may withdraw its support after contributing $491,000, or more than 10 percent of reef-building funds since 2000.

“I could care less about these turf wars. All I care about is the reef program,” Nunes-Vais added. “Frankly I think we’re seeing the politicization of the reef program.”
Funding is a looming problem now for the reefs, after complaints from recreational advocates about commercial trap lines on reefs led to withdrawal of federal Sportfish Restoration Fund aid.

“We've been engaged in this issue since 2007. The decision to terminate funding could have been made back then, but the New Jersey Division of Fish and Wildlife has been a good partner with us and approached us initially about the problem and sought our guidance on resolving it,” John F. Organ, chief of the service’s Division of Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration, said in an email.


The new framework for handling donations, called a memorandum of understanding or MOU, would work a lot like the Sport Fish Fund, set up in the 1980s by former publisher Peter Barrett of The Fisherman magazine in Point Pleasant as a charitable cause for the then-budding reef program.

In 2007 state auditors stopped the DEP from selling books and T-shirts to raise money for reefs, or accepting money from the Sport Fish Fund, until a protocol was developed so that the DEP could direct reef plans without being directly involved in handling money or contracts for placing ships and material on the reefs, according to people familiar with the program.


Proponents say the forthcoming memorandum of agreement can be used by any group that sets up a fund qualified for accepting tax-deductible contributions under 501(c)(3) status under the federal tax code.


“The state doesn’t like to deal with donations, and the state doesn’t like liability,” said William Figley, a retired DEP biologist who managed the reef program for many years. “People think this is some kind of takeover of the Sport Fish Fund, which is totally untrue. The Sport Fish Fund itself could sign an MOU to work under this system.”
One important issue is liability insurance costs, which are considerable when barging rubble or towing an old ship out to sea. “You’re towing out those old leaky boats that could sink any minute,” Figley said. “If you have a ship sink in Ambrose Channel (the New York Harbor approach) that could be a $1 million salvage.”


Under the planned agreement, there are three actors – the DEP to approve the placement of material, the 501(c)(3) group handling donations and the material donor who hires contractors and handles liability costs.


“If a guy has an old tugboat but it’s going to cost him $15,000 to clean it up and tow it out, he could contact” a nonprofit reef group that has money for the job, Figley explained. The DEP’s involvement would be limited to approval of the plan. The material donor would maintain responsibility for the boat until it safely “hits the bottom,” and the nonprofit would then pay for costs.


“It’s a template for any third party to help build reefs,” said chairman Anthony Mauro Sr. of the New Jersey Outdoor Alliance. Its charitable arm, New Jersey Outdoor Alliance Environmental Projects, has done such work as restoring quail habitat and now will work with the Greater Point Pleasant Charter Boat Association on reefs.
One skeptic is Jim Hutchinson, a former editor at The Fisherman and now managing director for the Recreational Fishing Alliance.


The Sport Fishing Fund “was A-OK for a long time. It was a 501(c)(3) and it had no relationship to the state of New Jersey,” Hutchinson said. “It was basically a stand-alone just as this MOU is being guided.”


“Why were other groups like RFA not contacted?” Hutchinson said. “We have asked for meetings with the commissioner (DEP chief Bob Martin).”


The RFA asked Gov. Christie’s office, too, and got a reply saying the group was on the DEP’s list of invited groups, Hutchinson said. “But we were never invited, whatsoever,” he said.


DEP officials say the agreement is no secret. “Reef Rescue and Outdoor Alliance approached us about helping out ... but the Clark Foundation and any group can participate,” DEP spokesman Larry Hajna said in an email. “We welcome and encourage the support and participation of any and all groups and encourage them to participate under the MOU.”
__________________


The Ann E. Clark Foundation has been talking to DEP officials, too, but trustee Nunes-Vais said he is not comfortable with the idea that politically active advocacy groups such as NJOA or RFA would have associated tax-deductible charities to handle donations.


“They’re a political action committee. That’s what they do.” Nunes-Vais said. “It may be technically legal … but there is no way I as a trustee am going to approve giving money to a 501(c)(3) under a PAC.”


“The Sport Fish Fund was great because the money would go in, the people at The Fisherman who had control of the fund had no say in how it was spent,” he said. “The beauty of it was it was totally nonpolitical.”


Figley said the forthcoming agreement might actually spawn new groups to raise money for reef building. “The idea is to have numerous groups start up reef programs for their areas,” Figley said. One principle of the reef program has always been to use donors’ money in the areas where they fish, and generally “everybody got what they wanted,” he said.


The agreement will allow both public and private entities to donate materials, while the DEP continues to have control over deciding what material is acceptable, cleaning and other preparations before sinking, and where new material goes, Hajna said.
Checks that come into the fund earmarked for specific projects cannot be used for anything else, under those tax rules. Contributions can be a few dollars toward a “reef ball” – a prefabricated concrete sphere emplaced on a reef bed – to tens of thousands for cleaning and sinking an old ship.


Already, the squeeze from losing federal money is being felt, Nunes-Vais said. He’s been told the state had to cancel plans for 500 reef ball installations this year.


http://www.app.com/article/20110521/NJNEWS/305210043/Power-struggle-over-reef-donations (http://www.app.com/article/20110521/NJNEWS/305210043/Power-struggle-over-reef-donations)

[ledhead36]

This guy is as elusive as Binladen, njreef rescue, doesn't he have like 3 internet names? Isn't that the same guy who does the njoa? I read his posts on all the internet sites. When this subject came up he went awol. You don't see him posting anymore,and he didn't respond to any of these threads on the internet sites. They say truth is the best defense. Lack of any defense at all can mean you are guilty or just dont care. When he was looking for donations from people he cared a lot and posted a lot. He is not posting anything at all to defend himself now. I have to believe that he is in alliance with the officials in back office deals and was going to profit from the reefs legislation. I dont trust politicians one bit, whether they are in govt or in a grass roots alliance like this guy said he was in. He certainly didnt disappoint, because he showed me he cant be trusted either.http://stripersandanglers.com/Forum/images/icons/icon13.png

[captnemo]

I agree ledhead, he has completely dropped out of sight.