Harvey Roseff: Letter to Voters
October 31, 2015
There doesn’t seem to be an end to related party dealings in the Sussex Solar Program. Sussex County
Watchdog has covered some past related party dealings, but the latest one was confirmed last week
at the Morris County Improvement Authority (MCIA) meeting. As part of Amendment I, Firstar
Development gained consent in 2012 to invest in our counterparty, Sunlight General Capital and its bevy
of shell companies, in yet another taxpayer-impactful way - via a tax equity deal.
However, Firstar Development is a sister company to the “Independent” Trustee, US Bank National.
Members of our legal community continue to falsely present Sussex Solar Amendment I as a minor need
to adjust construction dates. This fabricated falsehood just won’t die, despite the Arbitrators in the
Sunlight-Power Partner Mastec fracas having stated that Amendment I impacted
the taxpayer by:
327. …permit[ing] the Project Companies to draw down on the Project Funds to
reimburse themselves above the cap in the Lease Agreements, to pay the Authorities’
legal fees and expenses, to take liquidated damages even if disputed by Power Partners,
and to make lease payments to the Trustee from those funds.
You see, Sunlight and the MCIA could not make even the first finance payment. While Sunlight’s bid
promised it having $10million in current equity, $30million in a “solar fund”, and $7.8million in Sussex
solar equity contribution, somehow this money just wasn’t forthcoming. Who knew this and
when did they learn it?
Firstar Development is but an additional confirmed related party dealing to add to a long list that
generates an all-encompassing scenario of dark influence on the Freeholders. Who is there surrounding
the Freeholders who is independent? To see an “Independent Trustee” allowed to self deal
like this is breathtaking. But go and do an OPRA on “Firstar” or “tax equity deals” and you won’t gain
much insight. After months of trying, I finally received hundreds of pages of documents redacted
of all meaningful information. Government transparency doesn’t apply to solar deals.
Sussex County outright refused to provide any documents.
If taxpayers paid for the losses, it would be proper to learn just what the late arriving “Independent”
Trustee’s partner is investing in. If the “private” of the public-private partnership puts up little of its
promised capital investment, is there a public-private partnership here to
begin with? Should there be benefits showered on private hollow shell companies through “tax equity” deals,
restricted Federal 1603 money and public access to our guaranteed funding?
Is this any way to run a public service arrangement? The Sussex County solar program today has a long
train of companies, with considerable baggage, all feasting at our expense on the simple economic
model of placing silicon panels to generate electricity. Instead of the efficiency of the terrific Tinkers to
Evers to Chance trio, Sussex bloats out with the elongated Sussex County/Local Units to MCIA to
Sunlight to Power Partners Mastec to Vanguard Energy to sub contractors.
On Tuesday, help end Sussex County’s reliance on single bid contracts, ill-defined party-sponsored
programs and non-transparency in Government. Vote for
an Independent for Freeholder, Harvey Roseff.
Roseff – Independent for Freeholder
Watchdog is posting this letter from Harvey Roseff because it contains important new information regarding the Sussex Solar Scandal. It is posted in full and unedited because that is our policy to post ALL opinions that we recieve as they are written and unedited unless we have the expressed permission from the writer to edit something.
Watchdog has emailed the other candidates in the race for Freeholder and offered to post their views on the solar issue or indeed any issue they would like to write about.