Skylands attacks solar whistleblower for Graham
Sussex County WatchdogThe hand of Graham -- Freeholder George Graham -- was obvious in the latest attack from the Skylands crew. It singles out solar whistleblower Harvey Roseff for abuse and attacks him in a very personal way.
Curiously, Skylands' abusive post mirrors language used by Freeholder Graham to describe Mr. Roseff, a Sussex County taxpayer who became an activist. On the issue of the failed solar program, the Skylands group takes the same snarky, overly-defensive posture that the Freeholder Board under Graham does:
Harvey is painfully long winded... He can write endlessly about solar without really explaining it at all. He began pontificating under the Herald comments and even began inserting himself as an expert without any credentials. It took a while, but the Herald finally saw through him and stopped taking his calls. He would contact anyone associated with the county, rambling on about how he knew everything about solar... As Ralph Kramden often would say; “I have a BIG MOUTH!” So does Harvey.
And who but a reporter -- or legal counsel -- would have such inside knowledge of what goes on at the Herald?
Why is citizen Harvey Roseff being attacked? Well, it is no secret that Roseff has questioned George Graham and the Sussex County Freeholder Board over the delayed and expensive (a half million dollars) report on how the Freeholders allowed Sussex County to lose as much as $40 million in taxpayers' money.
And for this, Harvey Roseff has been attacked by Skylands Tea Party members and the county politicians they answer to. Sad, isn't it?
Reader Comments (6)
The hypocrisy of this post is comical. I distinctly remember this same blog bashing Roseff on multiple occasions for questioning the gas tax and bloated state spending. Yet, you will pretend to defend him for his questioning of the solar waste. I hope you are smart enough to realize that nobody takes this blog seriously. It is the mockery of Sussex County on both the left and right.
What an infantile mind you have. We bet you don't agree with your own wife (or mistress, for that matter) one hundred percent of the time and yet you, an elected county official, come on here and expect a blog written by people with very different opinions to agree with each other all the time. Well, we don't, and Mr. Roseff receives praise or blame accordingly.
Do you recall when we praised Tommy "I'll punch someone in the face" Walsh for his solar stance? Later we opposed his failure to abide by the Open Public Meetings Act. It isn't the person, it is his or her actions that matter to us.
Over 16,000 people in Sussex County get Watchdog. They don't open and read everything but they all read something. About a quarter of those read every week. Someone takes something seriously.
Great response. It just further proves my point. How would you know if I was an elected official when the comment system is anonymous? I can make up whatever name I want, yet you jump to conclusions and claim half truths or blatant lies as facts just like you do in your blog posts. But then again I guess it is easy to be wrong when you hide behind the keyboard isn't it? Even weathermen have more courage and they are almost always wrong.
Two solar farms, promised for year end commissioning on July 27, were cancelled 8 weeks later!!! Where is the return of the pre-paid construction funds?
Who is not, once again, allowing the exercise of the performance bond? Who truly did not perform after 5 years of promises?
Who will be held accountable for the failure to meet the next 15 years of solar revenue promises that garnered a $6,700,000 taxpayer bailout of a developer and the MCIA who had stiffed both the taxpayer and the contractor?
In 2015, promises were made to entice taxpayers to pay for legal judgements against our counterparty. Do we have an enforceable Consent III contract advised by Mr. Weinstein, partner of Bond Counsel Cantalupo who gave a $2000 donation to Freeholder Graham's campaign? Or were we conned again?
Are solar program revenues being sandbagged to drive up taxes?
Freeholder Graham, now in charge of the solar program, should explain the charade that was the July 27 meeting.
You really don't understand how things work, do you? We are the editors. You are not anonymous to us, only to readers and other commenters. Naughty, naughty.
As for anonymous speech. Try being an American for once. Here, in America, anonymous speech is protected by the First Amendment and the United States Supreme Court has ruled over and over again that it is there as a check on people with power (like you) so that average citizens can speak out against the powerful with less fear of retribution. We says "with less fear" instead of "without fear" because history shows that the powerful still find ways to get at those who speak out. But we will continue to speak and you will continue to hate freedom and try your best to subvert it.
P.S. The response above was to the elected county official going by the name "Andy Bradshaw?".