Pinelands Commissioner replaced

Sounds like it may be tough to get the pipeline approved but this move is clearly aimed to "eliminate" any pro-conservation votes. It's still an uphill battle but enough small changes can change the outcome over time.
 
Sounds like it may be tough to get the pipeline approved but this move is clearly aimed to "eliminate" any pro-conservation votes. It's still an uphill battle but enough small changes can change the outcome over time.

I've yet to see any studies that could categorize this as anything to do with conservation. All that I have read is it is about a well intentioned, but poorly worded, regulation in the management plan that the Commission is bound to enforce, although the interpretation is anyone's guess. Others just try to distort that. And yet, still others point to studies that indicate it would benefit the environment. Choose your poison. Perhaps it is time for a fresh review of the Commission, its operation and its purpose.
 
I'm wondering why commissioners with an anti-pipeline viewpoint are considered "recalcitrant". Are they not allowed to voice their opinions?