♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ From NJ PBS Studios, this is "NJ Spotlight News" with Briana Vannozzi.

>> Hello, and thanks for joining us tonight.

I'm Joanna Gagis.

Briana Vannozzi is off.

Coming up in the broadcast, we talk with the new DEP Commissioner about his goals and his agency's response to a suspected cancer cluster.

Plus, New Jersey's Supreme Court won't take up the school segregation case, at least for now.

We'll look at what comes next for both sides.

But first, it was a chaotic weekend at Delaney Hall as clashes between protesters and law enforcement continued.

We'll get the latest from a reporter who's been covering it all.

That's next.

Major funding for NJ Spotlight News is provided in part by NJM Insurance Group, serving the insurance needs of residents and businesses for more than 100 years.

The scenes outside of Delaney Hall in Newark this weekend were nothing short of chaotic.

The clashes between protesters and ICE agents intensified in the early part of the weekend, and on Saturday, Governor Sherrill sent in New Jersey State Police to control the crowds.

That scene also escalated with some press entangled in the altercations.

The governor said that some protesters began attacking the barrier between them and law enforcement, throwing projectiles at officers, setting a fire on the street even.

Many on the ground have denied that allegation.

Newark Mayor Raz Baraka also sent in Newark police to work with the state troopers.

Journalists and protesters alike were forced to leave the area and just before midnight on Saturday, Mayor Baraka set a curfew from 9 p.m.

to 6 a.m.

within a half-mile radius of Delaney Hall.

On Sunday night, many protesters were arrested after refusing to comply with the curfew.

New Jersey Attorney General Jen Davenport said many were "armed with helmets, shields, and gas masks."

Now, since the onset of police presence, the Sherrill administration's received both praise and criticism.

Some saying the crowd control was necessary.

Others saying that state police simply replaced the aggressive tactics of ICE officers.

For a more direct accounting of the last few days, I'm joined right now by Daisy Calabia Robertson, who has been covering this for NJ.com.

Daisy, good to have you on the show.

I want to help, just ask you to help us kind of fill in the blanks as to some of the things that transpired over the weekend.

You were on the scene in front of Delaney Hall on Friday until three in the morning, as I understand it.

Can you just describe that scene and what it felt like there?

Yeah, it was very chaotic.

There were many protesters, you know, chanting at ICE, you know, with expletives, bad words, curse words.

There were people who ended up getting arrested, people who were tear gassed.

There were times where it was just like one big scuffle, ICE agents, protesters, all kind of in a rumble, people shouting, people wearing gas masks.

So there was a lot of unrest on the scene that day.

We know on Saturday that Governor Sherrill ordered the New Jersey State Police to come in.

Newark Mayor Raz Baraka also sent in Newark police.

Were you there on the scene when they arrived?

We're hearing that state police arrived on horseback.

Were you there?

Did you see that?

I was not there.

I arrived shortly after and interviewed people who were there at the time, and they described to me what that was like.

You know, they were given a few minutes to disperse.

They weren't sure what was going on, but basically the officers on horseback and officers in riot gear pushed everyone who was present towards the southern entrance of Delaney Hall.

People said they were tear gassed, and again, another chaotic night.

We're hearing a lot of differing perspectives.

On the one hand, Governor Sherrill, the Attorney General, Newark Mayor, Raz Baraka and the Chief of the, the Colonel, the Lieutenant Colonel of the State Police are saying that protesters engaged police first, that they were attacking them, that they were throwing things at them, that they tried to break through the barricade.

On the other side, we're hearing protesters say, no, it was the state police who actually broke down the barricade.

There is some video that we can see of that happening.

Whether that was the initial encounter, we're not sure.

Did you, have you gotten any clarity there in terms of where things started or kind of who initiated that, those clashes?

It's very difficult to know for sure.

You know, as I was telling you earlier, there's the official statement and then there's what people on the ground are saying.

And what I've realized is that it's two completely different stories, right?

So being able to discern what is the truth, I would say it lies a little bit in between, right?

Like on the time that I've been there, I have seen both things.

I have seen some protesters who are, like I said, cursing at ICE agents, getting in their faces, saying things, you know, that are inflammatory.

But I've also at the same time seen ICE agents completely unprovoked going up to protesters and shoving them to the ground, cursing at them.

At one point even trying to make fun of what protesters are wearing or saying.

So it really is animosity coming from both groups.

Yeah and we have seen even within the protesters and it's hard to say exactly who's on what side, what appears at times to be both anti-ice protesters, perhaps different groups or from different areas, even clashing with each other, although we do know that in one example, a far-right person named Cam Higby was wearing a pro-Palestinian scarf, right, so sometimes it is hard to tell kind of who is actually there on the scene.

But of course all of this did start because folks inside were complaining and telling their loved ones about some of the atrocities that they say are happening inside.

Folks being tear gassed and beaten, worms in the food that's completely inedible.

What can you tell us about what's been happening inside since all of this has escalated outside?

Sure.

So, this for me is like a boiling pot that's been on the stove for a while now, and now is when it's finally overflowing or exploding.

For months, detainees have been sounding the alarm about the inhumane conditions inside the facility.

As you said, maggots in the food, detainees who are sick and have life-threatening conditions not getting the medications that they need, not getting the medical care that they need, people who are elderly, who have diabetes, there's people who have HIV inside the facility, who aren't getting the medical attention that they need.

And so this is something that has had a lot of lead up to what we're seeing now and the unrest that we're seeing outside the facility.

Families of detainees and advocates have been pretty much begging Governor Sherrill to help them, to listen to them, to come to the facility and conduct an oversight visit.

And that hasn't happened.

Even now it hasn't happened.

You know, she did come to the facility briefly and was turned away and quickly after left.

So that's a lot of the anger that is felt right now by protesters, families of detainees and advocates on the ground.

Sure.

And, and congressional representatives who were able to gain access have said that that same authority does not apply.

We know the rules are such that that does not apply to governors.

We also know the New Jersey Department of Health did attempt to make a full inspection.

They were only allowed a partial inspection.

We're still waiting for that report to come out.

But just in terms of folks being able to see their loved ones inside when all of this erupted outside, DHS stopped visitation.

What can you tell us about where visitation stands right now?

We have heard that it's at least partially reopened for family members to again visit their loved ones inside.

Is that happening?

Is that real?

What can you tell us?

Well, we're getting mixed reports there as well.

So you know, it was announced that visitation was back on, but I've spoken to some relatives of people detained at Delaney who are still telling me, "I haven't been able to see my loved one.

I went down to the facility and was turned away.

Visitation is limited right now."

So what that means is, as before, people were able to visit their loved ones kind of all on the same day, but at different hours.

And now that's changed where it's some units on some days.

And I'm guessing the reason for that is, you know, they're trying to diminish the amount of people coming down to the facility each day.

And that might be the logic behind that.

It's not clear.

That hasn't really been explained.

But that's what people are telling me who've been trying to go visit their loved ones.

And of course, as we understand it, there is this curfew in place now for anyone between the hours of 9pm to 6am.

You cannot be within, I believe, a half a mile of Delaney Hall.

Is press allowed closer to Delaney Hall during the daytime as of right now?

Do you know?

Yes, press is allowed closer to Delaney during the daytime, but they've also kind of narrowed the definition of who is press, right?

You have to have an NJ Press Pass, right?

You can't just have a shirt that says "Press" or say "I am Press" or even with a jacket.

You have to have credentials, and if you don't have credentials, then you're not allowed to pass through.

All right.

Daisy Calavia-Robertson.

Let me say that again.

Daisy Calavia-Robertson, thank you so much for providing some insight to what's happening there on the ground.

We're going to keep following you as you follow all of that.

But columnist with NJ.com, appreciate it.

Thank you.

-Thank you so much for having me.

-A years-long legal fight over alleged segregation in New Jersey public schools has hit a setback.

The state Supreme Court declined for now to take up a case brought by the Latino Action Network, other advocacy groups, and the parents of nine students who attended public schools in what they say are highly segregated districts.

Here to explain what the high court's decision could mean for New Jersey families and what comes next is Larry Lustberg, the lead attorney for the plaintiffs and a partner at FBT Gibbons.

Larry, thanks so much for joining us today.

I want you to just explain the case that you've brought against the state of New Jersey claiming segregation here in our schools.

Sure.

Actually, we brought this case in 2018 on the anniversary of this historic United States Supreme Court decision in Brown v. Board of Education.

And our case argues that the New Jersey schools, elementary and secondary public schools are unconstitutionally segregated.

And the evidence of that is truly overwhelming.

Talk about the evidence there.

You list 23 towns and municipalities where this is evidenced.

Can you explain that?

Sure.

I mean, those are just examples of what were, of the segregation.

We chose those 23 because they happen to be large and they represent literally hundreds of thousands of students.

But the problem is, as anybody who's looked at it recognizes, a statewide problem.

It's a statewide problem because there's state statutes that underlie it.

It's a statewide problem because the New Jersey schools, all of them, are literally controlled by the state.

That is, while there's some local control, at the end of the day, the state is responsible for elementary and secondary education in the state.

And it's a statewide problem because if we look at those 23 districts, they span the state from north to south and east to west.

But make the case for us, Larry, for our audience, when you talk about the data that shows that these districts are segregated, what are the numbers?

What do they show?

- Sure, I can get into this more granularly, but at the end of the day, about half of all black students in New Jersey attend schools that are 90% or more minority.

About half, a little bit less, of all Latino students attend schools that are 90% or more minority.

Even sort of more sadly, about a quarter of all black students in New Jersey attend schools that are 99% or more minority.

Many black students never see a white face.

Many Latino students never see a white face.

It is the very definition of segregation.

I should say that the definition of segregation has been a big issue in this case.

The state has claimed that we don't have a definition, but if you read some of the amicus briefs in our case, including by excellent social science and legal scholars, what you see is that under any definition of segregation, New Jersey has among the worst cases of segregation in the entire country.

We are fifth worst in terms of segregation of Latino students and we are ninth worst in terms of segregation of black students.

So even though New Jersey fashions itself a very progressive state, there just can be no question but that students in New Jersey are overwhelmingly subjected to segregated education in elementary and secondary schools in a segregated setting, mostly either all white or all minorities.

Let me jump in here, Larry, because as you said, the case was brought in 2018.

The news now, though, is that you did bring this case to the New Jersey Supreme Court.

They dismissed it.

Chief Justice Stuart Ravner dismissed the case, sending it back to the appellate court.

Let me just ask you why you attempted to circumvent the appellate court here and go straight to New Jersey's highest court.

Sure.

To say that the Chief Justice dismissed it is not accurate.

There is a process in New Jersey, which I will say is rarely allowed, where you can circumvent the, as you choose your phrase, you can bypass the appellate division and go directly to the Supreme Court.

There are two circumstances under which that's appropriate.

One is where it's an incredibly important issue that the Supreme Court is going to eventually take anyway, and we have no doubt that that's this case.

And second is where the lapse of time itself causes significant issues.

I mean, this case has gone on so long that some of our plaintiffs have already graduated from high school.

Day to day, students are being segregated, are being educated in a segregated setting.

The social science and the law say that that is in and of itself, not only unconstitutional, but harmful, stigmatizing, and in so many ways, a poor way of being educated.

And so our effort to get to the Supreme Court was not for a lack of respect for the appellate division.

We're happy to proceed in the appellate division and we will do that.

It was just an effort to get to a resolution more quickly.

And the Supreme Court made very clear in their order that they'll entertain this after we get through the appellate division.

So all this has done is to have slowed down the ultimate resolution of this case.

That's extremely unfortunate.

I wish it weren't the case, but this is not by any stretch of the imagination, a major defeat.

We will continue to litigate and litigate aggressively now in the appellate division and eventually necessary in the Supreme Court.

- Yes, it was without prejudice, so it can, right, make its way back to the Supreme Court.

I just wanna ask you this.

What would you like to see, what are you asking for in terms of relief?

How would you like to see the state mitigate what you're calling this deep segregation?

- Right, so to be clear, we have really not gotten to that phase of the litigation yet.

In our complaint, we suggest certain types of relief that may be appropriate and that may work.

One of them is a greater, is greater choice for parents to educate their kids in school districts other than the ones in which they live.

Another is the proliferation of magnet schools.

There's been some discussion of regionalization as a potential remedy, but here's the truth about the remedy.

We've not gotten there yet.

And we can't get there until the state recognizes that it has a problem.

And the state is refusing to recognize it has a problem.

And so we're going to the court to gain that recognition.

This is the fact.

The segregation of New Jersey schools has been known for years and years and years.

The legislature has never done anything about it.

That's what caused us to go to court.

And that's why we need a judgment that says that, yes, New Jersey schools are unconstitutionally segregated.

Once that judgment takes place, then a remedial phase will kick in.

That's a phase where our clients, for example, will be very involved in helping to craft the remedy.

I think there are experts around the country who will assist us and here in New Jersey who will assist us.

All stakeholders will be involved and we'll come up with a remedial plan that works.

- Yeah, still a bit of ways away from that, as you explained.

Sorry to have to cut you off, but Larry Lassberg, the lead attorney for the plaintiffs in this school segregation case.

Thank you so much for coming on and being with us today.

- It's my pleasure, thank you.

- New Jersey has a new commissioner of the Department of Environmental Protection, Ed Potasnick, who's the former executive director of the New Jersey League of Conservation Voters, was just confirmed on May 28th.

Now he's leading the DEP as the state's facing a number of challenges, including several toxic contamination sites and concerns over flood protection and the rules governing it.

Let's get into it with the commissioner himself, Ed Potasnick, as part of our Under the Dome series.

Commissioner, thanks so much for joining us.

I want to congratulate you on being confirmed in this role.

This is big news for you.

I'm glad to be here and I'm very excited as well.

Thanks so much.

There's a whole lot happening.

We're going to get into as much as we can, but I want to start with what's been happening in Keyport.

Just for context for our audience, 16 years ago there were several chemicals found around this Aramarin landfill.

Benzene, arsenic, PCBs.

Now residents are raising concerns about what they believe is a potential cancer cluster.

There have been about 180 cancer cases in the area around that site.

I want to talk about what you just did recently.

Your office, your department conducted some additional testing.

Can you help us understand what you're looking for, what you tested for?

Well, yeah.

So first of all, I just want to say the department is committed to moving quickly through this testing phase and also making sure that we're very transparent about the information that we have on file from previous testing and any new testing that we get and working closely with the community to address their concerns.

Recently we worked with a potential buyer for the development, the site, to get some expeditious testing done.

Over the last week they've been collecting samples that they're going to be sending out to the lab.

The most recent testing was in 2010 and it showed that there was contamination but not at a level high enough to be a pathway to human exposure.

But we want to make sure we get the latest tests and we have the latest data and then see where that leads us and make a plan forward if any additional testing is needed.

And, you know, of course, make sure the public is fully aware of what those results are.

In addition, we're working separately to test the surrounding water bodies, the Bay and the Chingora Creek, to see if any of the contaminants are making it from the landfill site, the Keep Work sanitary landfill, into the nearby waterways.

Yeah, thank you.

You just answered the question I was going to ask you.

Can you explain if, one, if there was enough to be leaking out in a period of 16 years since the original testing, does that require a different type of testing?

I believe the initial tests were above groundwater tests.

Are you conducting anything deeper in your water testing?

We're going to be testing basically a whole bunch of different ways.

We're going to be testing in the what we call sampling wells at the sanitary landfill.

We're going to be doing soil testing and then as well the surrounding water bodies.

And that's going to give us a whole new body of scientific evidence that we can then make assessments from.

So for us, that's really critical to figure out what the next plans forward are and to answer the community's questions about their concerns.

And of course, you inherited this problem.

Some folks are angry, some are wondering why in the 16 years since some of those chemicals were found, why weren't there wasn't more remediation of the site?

Is there any requirement for remediation, even of the chemicals that you know exist there?

That's the first part of the question.

And then we're going to get into some of the fines that I know have already been put in place.

Yeah, so our goal is to ensure the proper closure of the landfill.

And that is the current owner's responsibility.

And this data will be used to determine the plan to make sure that that site is secured and none of the contamination that's there.

And we do know there is some can make its way into the surrounding community.

That's critically important.

Again, the 2010 results show that it was at a level that didn't have a pathway to human exposure, but ultimately the safest way for that landfill is a permanent closure.

And there was a closure plant previously approved, but it had never been put into place.

So that means that it's kind of waiting this proper closure that keeps the contaminants on site and from having any leaching into the surrounding community or anything like that.

That's critically important for us and that's our priority goal.

But in the meantime, we really want to get the latest data to determine what the levels of the contamination are, what is there, and if it has a pathway now to human exposure.

It's important for us to know.

I know there is a high threshold to prove a cancer cluster in the state of New Jersey because cancer rates are so high.

I remember in our coverage of that Colonia suspected cancer cluster.

Just very quickly, is that something that you'll be working with the Department of Health to investigate?

Yeah, we work very closely with the Department of Health.

We're obviously coordinating closely with Governor Sherrill and her team and also federal partners.

And, you know, each step of the way, again, we're committed to transparency, ensuring that all the information we have is publicly available, and then providing the scientific and technical resources to help the public and elected officials, other stakeholders, understand how to interpret the information that we have.

Yeah.

Let's switch gears.

The real rules are the resilient environment and landscapes rules are a set of rules that were put in place under the Murphy administration that required an additional four feet of elevation for any redevelopment or new development along coastlines four feet above FEMA's flood projection levels.

Excuse me.

You made an announcement this week after urging from both sides of the political party, political spectrum, to pause those rules.

Can you explain why and what you're going to be looking into in this next year as those rules are paused?

- Yeah, Governor Sherrill and the Department of Environmental Protection are on a mission to deliver on the saving time and money agenda that the governor has.

And that includes speeding up our permitting processes at the Department of Environmental Protection while we still protect health, safety, and the environment.

And what we're doing is basically extending the legacy period, which we're currently under for the real rules, one year, so that we can make sure that the reforms that we're working on right now at the department align with these new policies and that they can be implemented in a way that helps communities not only be safer, but also save money on their projects so that the processes that we're using are right one step lockstep, I might say, with the new rules as they go forward.

In addition, we're gonna be doing some extra.

- I imagine that'll be, go ahead.

- Oh, I said, in addition, we're gonna be doing some more listening and talking to communities about what some of their concerns are and see if there's any changes that might be necessary to help address those concerns.

- We'll keep following that, we'll check back in, but congratulations on the start of this new venture for you.

Ed Potasnik, Commissioner of the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection.

Thank you so much.

- Thank you, appreciate being here.

- "Under the Dome" is made possible in part by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, a private corporation funded by the American people.

- That's gonna do it for us.

I'm Joanna Gagis for the entire team here at NJ Spotlight News.

Thanks for being with us.

We'll see you next time.

- New Jersey Education Association, making public schools great for every child.

And RWJBarnabas Health.

Learn more at rwjbh.org.

- Is that?

(child laughing) - It's gonna be okay.

(laughing) (dramatic music) (upbeat music)