A bill backed by a New Jersey Senate committee Tuesday would enable offshore wind developers to site power cables and equipment on public land regardless of local or state government opposition, casting aside the state’s vaunted “home rule” tradition in order to meet the threat of climate change.

The bill, S3926, would give a qualified developer the authority to put “wires, conduit lines and associated infrastructure” connecting an offshore wind project with the power grid on public streets, thoroughfares or any public property. “No municipality, county” or state body could prohibit the placement, according to the bill.

In response to concerns expressed before the meeting, the committee inserted an amendment to the bill that would require the wiring and equipment to be underground, except for the connecting equipment, which could be above ground.

The bill also states that if local authorities deny a qualified wind project an easement, right of way or “other real property interests” on public property that is needed for construction of the project, the developer could petition the New Jersey Board of Public Utilities (BPU) for help.

“If the board determines that the requested easement, right of way or other real property interest are reasonably necessary for the construction of the qualified offshore wind project,” the BPU can grant those rights to the project, the bill states. The developer must then pay “fair market value” for the property, the bill says.

The legislation drew praise from some stakeholders who say it is needed to prevent New Jersey’s clean energy projects getting derailed by bureaucracy, and concern from others that the bill is a heavy-handed response that gives too much power to project developers.

Committee Chairman Bob Smith (D), who co-sponsored the bill with Senate President Stephen Sweeney (D), called it a “pretty powerful bill if you want to get windmills off the New Jersey coast. And it’s powerful because it ain’t easy to get to do whatever you need to do on the land in New Jersey.

“It’s very hard to get this stuff up and running, not just because of the capital costs, but because of so many of the legal impediments as well,” he said. The bill “feels a little radical. And here’s what’s radical about it. We hold it sacred in New Jersey: home rule, mayors [and] the council, the planning boards [and] zoning boards of every town should be the deciders on what happens in their community.”

Lawmakers and state officials say that New Jersey’s high population density and 130-mile coastline make it particularly vulnerable to the effects of climate change, especially from rising sea levels. But such is the power of local sovereignty that construction projects in New Jersey routinely face opposition from area residents. And the offshore wind proposals are no exception, with opposition from residents of the Jersey Shore and the tourism and fishing industries. (See NJ’s Offshore Wind Project Faces Criticism, Support.)

‘Railroading Decisions’

The bill drew support from one of the biggest trade groups in the state, the New Jersey Chamber of Commerce, but split the environmental advocacy sector. The New Jersey Sierra Club backed the bill, as did Clean Water Action, saying the far-reaching measures were necessary.

Henry Gajda, public policy director at the New Jersey League of Conservation Voters, an environmental advocacy group, agreed that the legislation is much needed. But he said the organization opposed it, in part because “railroading decisions on permits through the local level sets a very problematic precedent.” He suggested that if a permit is not granted, there should be a public hearing into the issues, rather than a BPU ruling.

“We want to see turbines in the water; we just want to make sure that we’re not setting any problematic precedents as we go and do that,” he said.

The bill, which was introduced on Thursday, arrives as the BPU prepares this month to announce the developer of the state’s second offshore wind project. The agency in 2019 named Ørsted as the developer of the first project, the $1.6 billion Ocean Wind project that will put 98 wind turbines 15 miles off the Jersey Shore. The agency has two bids for the second project: one submitted by Ørsted, and the other by a joint venture between affiliates of Royal Dutch Shell and EDF. The project is expected to generate 1,200 to 2,400 MW.

The state expects to approve six offshore wind projects by 2035 in an effort to generate 7,500 MW as part of the target to achieve 100% clean energy by 2025.

Urgency Needed

Marc Reimer, project development director for Ørsted’s Ocean Wind project, welcomed the bill, saying that state officials “did not anticipate some of the problems that we are dealing with.”

“We believe this [bill] is one of the only ways for New Jersey to meet its 7,500 MW offshore wind goal by 2035,” he said. “We are quite serious about that.”

David Pringle, campaign director for Clean Water Action, agreed, saying, “We can’t move far enough, fast enough, on offshore wind.” The bill, he said, “removes barriers to offshore wind that need to go.”

But Tom Gilbert, campaign director for energy, climate and natural resources for the New Jersey Conservation Foundation, urged the committee to take more time to analyze the bill.

“We fully support responsible development of New Jersey’s offshore wind resources, with downsizing,” he said. “But as written, we don’t believe that this legislation contains adequate safeguards to meet those goals. And it tips the balance of balance too heavily in favor of offshore wind developers by taking away the power of local governments, and even state entities, to have a say regarding appropriate siting of transmission infrastructure.”

Responding to Gilbert, Chair Smith said the threat to the environment and to “your children and grandchildren” is too great to delay.

“We’ve got to get this stuff going,” he said. “And putting in more hurdles to it is going to mean that it’s going to be later, [and] the later it is, the less the chance that we’re going to be able to actually survive as a species. Every once in a while, you’ve got to go outside the box to try and get the job done.”