Looks like Christie isn't going to skate as smoothly on his Exxon Mobil settlement as Governor Schwarzenegger did on his Enron settlement. Accepting 2.7 cents on the dollar has generated more than a little attention. Members of the New Jersey state assembly have
filed a counter suit, are planning
hearings and are calling for the
resignation of the current state attorney general. And if you need to have it spelled out, no less than the venerable
New York Times put in their two point seven cent's worth with an editorial titled
Chris Christie’s Exxon Settlement Is Bad for New Jersey (an
editorial -- they're in the business of all the NEWS that's fit to print). But is everybody overreacting? After all, nine billion dollars IS a lot a money, and courts have been known to reduce lawsuit settlements they deemed excessive.
Well, according to a couple of court documents that have been released:
Quote:
Why was the state seeking $8.9 billion?
According to a report prepared by Texas-based 3TM Consulting, the footprint of the contamination spanned more than 1,800 acres at the two sites...
The state's "primary restoration plan" was estimated to cost $2.63 billion. The consulting firm hired by the state also recommended an additional $6.4 billion to restore enough wetland and forestland "to compensate for the decades of harm at the two facilities."
|
So if all the money were spent on the environmental cleanup, the state would only break even? No wonder Christie slipped in that poison pill that would divert all but $50M of the settlement to the debt-ravaged state general fund! But that doesn't explain why Christie would settle for less money -- surely it doesn't take that much longer to write a $9 billion check than a $250M one.
Quote:
|
Critics say the temporary provision is an incentive for Christie's administration to settle quickly by lessening the fines, so the governor can use the cash to fill budget gaps or finance corporate subsidies. "Christie was trying to get this settlement in...because we won't repeat it in the (next) budget," (NJ State Senator Raymond) Lesniak said.
|
You mean, Christie's problem is that he wouldn't have TIME to spend $8.95 billion dollars -- especially if he plans for his next stop to be the White House -- and if he can't have it, nobody can? I'm sorry, Senator, but that doesn't explain it, either.
Quote:
|
IBTimes: The reported settlement follows a flood of campaign cash from the company to the Republican Governors Association, which Christie chairs. Exxon Mobil has donated ($1.457 million) to the group since Christie's first run for governor in 2009. When asked whether the settlement reduction represents a gift to Exxon Mobil, Lesniak...said "one can certainly see it that way."
|
DING DING DING -- State Senator Raymond Lesniak, you're our grand prize winner -- THAT certainly explains it!!!
Quote:
In two letters obtained by the IBTimes...Acting Attorney General John Hoffman said the state and Exxon Mobil were involved in "serious settlement negotiations" and asked Judge Michael Hogan to "defer" issuing a decision in the case.
Hoffman sent a third letter to Hogan dated Feb. 20 reporting the parties had reached agreement that would be published in the April 6 issue of the New Jersey Register and on the Department of Environment Protection's website for at least 30 days for public notice and comment. Both parties will then submit the settlement to the judge for final approval by mid- to late May "unless comments received during the public notice and comment period necessitate a change," according to the letter...
|
"Unless comments received...necessitate a change"? Obviously just a formality -- why would asking for 2.7 cents when you were supposed to ask for a dollar necessitate comment, never mind a change? Well, like it or not, a change IS gonna come -- take it away,
Jon and Betty...