The Solar Scam continues under Graham

For months Harvey Roseff has been pushing the Sussex County Freeholder Board to answer a few basic questions about the troubling direction the Sussex County solar program is taking.  Freeholder George Graham, the boss of the Freeholder Board, has been less than forthcoming.  Why?

In July, Freeholder George Graham engineered a no-bid contract for a law firm that he and then Freeholder Gail Phoebus identified as being at the very heart of the solar scam that has cost Sussex taxpayers upwards of $30 million.  Here is what Freeholder boss Graham said in 2015 about the lawyers he turned around and gave a no-bid contract to in 2016:

"It's all the same people that dug the hole, and every time I ask for a clear, third-party fresh set of eyes, they throw in somebody else that appears out of the past. How many times can you recycle the same names? Are they protecting specific people, or are they protecting the county?” (NJ Herald, March 28, 2015)

This is what then Freeholder (now Assemblywoman) Gail Phoebus said:

"Mr. Weinstein had clear conflicts of interest. Far from recommending ‘independent' counsel to guide us through a complex negotiation, you led us to the partner of the attorney who shares responsibility with you for failing to obtain a performance bond... All of this raises serious questions.  (While) Mr. Weinstein negotiated the solar project settlement and rendered advice to the freeholder board, whose interests was he serving”? (NJ Herald, March 28, 2015)

So why -- under Freeholder boss Graham -- is Weinstein back?

...in September 2014, the county freeholder board appointed Weinstein as special counsel to guide it through that process.

The appointment of Weinstein -- whose law partner, John Cantalupo, had been on retainer to the county since 2011 for legal services related to county-backed bonds issued on the solar project -- was criticized last year by then-Freeholder Gail Phoebus, now a state assemblywoman, who called it a conflict of interest.

While offering praise for Wednesday's presentation, Roseann Salanitri -- also of Sandyston -- tempered her praise with criticism over the fact that a large portion of it was given by Weinstein.

"He was the same counsel that represented us on (last year's) settlement, and that settlement contained ‘hold harmless' clauses for just about everybody and their grandmother," Salanitri said. "I don't know Mr. Weinstein and have nothing against him personally, but I believe this presentation is not as credible as it could have been if it had been conducted by someone (else)." (NJ Herald, July 29, 2016)

Freeholder Director George Graham defended the appointment of Weinstein, saying:  "He's the only one who has institutional knowledge after all the other people who ran out the door." (NJ Herald, July 29, 2016)

Has Graham -- a one-time critic of the solar scam -- become its enabler? 

When Graham was on the outside, as a minority member (with Phoebus) of the five member board, Graham did one thing, now he does the opposite. Now, as the boss of the Freeholder Board (controlling three of its five members) Graham is comfortable with those he used to call the bad guys and has even taken campaign contributions from them.

Roseff poses the following questions for Freeholder boss Graham and his Board:

1. Why have solar farms, promised to be finished by the end of the year by contractor Jingoli and the Freeholders at a public meeting on July 27th, been cancelled?  Why was there no explanation about this broken promise and what affect will it have on the project's cost to taxpayers? 

2. Have there been any payouts to taxpayers on the performance bond for the build-out?

3. Why has the July 27th financial plan become so terribly distorted in just a handful of weeks?  Just how worse off are the taxpayers of Sussex County?

4.  How much of the construction funds will be returned to the taxpayer because of the cancellations?

5.  What portion of the cash flow hit from not reaching the 3300 kW level of solar generation will Sunlight corporation now be responsible for?   Remember that Sussex County taxpayers bailed Sunlight out based on this promise.

6.  Why didn't the Freeholders' new $3,100,000 bond (debt), used to pay off a Sunlight corporation loan from contractor Mastec, state what it was for?  Isn't this an ethical issue for the County?

7.  Which specific Freeholder Board resolution stated that Sussex County taxpayers were guaranteeing Mastec's loan for deadbeat Sunlight? If it doesn't exist, how can the Freeholders ethically do it and why did they?

Freeholder boss Graham's actions are questionable.  He has some explaining to do.

Freeholder boss Graham (center) and his Board (allies are to the right).

Herald ignores Freeholder candidates at debate

Did you check out the NJ Herald's coverage of the Freeholder candidates' debate in Ogdensburg?  If you missed it, here it is, in total:

"OGDENSBURG -- The Ogdensburg Firehouse, located on Main Street, was the place to be Tuesday night with well over 200 people coming out for the annual Meet the Candidates Night.

The annual event, hosted by the Ogdensburg Historical Society, gave the public an opportunity to meet those candidates that may represent them at the federal, county and municipal levels of government.

Attendees for the evening included 11th Congressional District candidate Joseph Wenzel (D) and 24th Legislative District Assemblywoman Gail Phoebus, who came to represent 11th Congressional District candidate Rep. Rodney Frelinghuysen (R), who was not in attendance."

The story was accompanied by a large photograph of Phoebus and Wenzel, with the following caption:

Photo by Warren Westura/New Jersey Herald - Democratic congressional candidate Joseph Wenzel and Assemblywoman Gail Phoebus, a stand-in speaker for Republican Rep. Rodney Frelinghuysen, listen to moderator John F. Kibildis of the Ogdensburg Historical Society (not in the photograph) at the start of the “Meet the Candidates” night at the Ogdensburg firehouse on Tuesday. Candidates at the federal, county and municipal levels attended.

Gail Phoebus?  She's not even a candidate for office this year.  When will the Herald's bias for Phoebus and against Steve Oroho end? 

Where are the names of the Freeholder candidates who are actually candidates for office this year?  Who are they?  What are their positions on the issues?  What did they discuss at the debate?  Why don't we get to know?  Why is the only picture that of Gail Phoebus?  Calling Eric Obernauer...

Lost is any report of the debate between George Graham, the boss of the Sussex County Freeholder Board, and his Democratic Party challengers.  Is the Herald in the bag for Phoebus consigliere Graham too?  Is that the reason for the news blackout on coverage of an important debate between the nominees of BOTH parties?  It is bad enough voters only have two parties to choose from, but if the media doesn't cover the debates, how do we even know who our narrow choices are?

The Freeholder Board spends millions and raises property taxes.  Don't the candidates to serve on that Board merit a little impartial attention from the Herald?

Sussex County's Obama Republicans

Many county insiders know the story of how George Graham, now the boss of the Sussex County Freeholder Board, when an elected local official switched from Republican to Democrat in order to vote in the 2008 Democrat presidential primary between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.  Graham had been a Democrat before switching to Republican but later switched back to Republican, his current party today (from D to R to D to R). 

Graham is not alone.  In February, Daniel Perez got a plum appointment to be a Commissioner at the Sussex County Municipal Utilities Authority (SCMUA).  Those old-line GOPers probably had no idea that Perez was a donor to the presidential campaign of Barack H. Obama and Joseph R. Biden Jr.  An attorney, Perez' liberal views on abortion and other issues are not well known outside legal circles.

According to the SCMUA website:  "The SCMUA Board of Commissioners are appointed by the Sussex County Board of Chosen Freeholders.  Commissioners are appointed to serve a five-year term as provided for under NJSA 40:14B.  The Board of Commissioners serves as the governing body to the SCMUA which oversees the Sussex County Solid Waste Facility and the various wastewater treatment facilities, including the Upper Wallkill Water Pollution Control Facility.  Meetings are conducted in accordance with the NJ Open Public Meetings Act NJSA 10:4-6 et. seq. also known as the Sunshine Law."

Borough of Franklin Mayor and Facebook warrior Nicholas Giordano is another one.  Nominally a Republican, Mayor Giordano bragged on Facebook to constituents that he had voted for both Bill Clinton and Barack Obama.  The Mayor, who is said to be seeking a political appointment at SCMUA, has been a somewhat controversial figure in Franklin since replacing longtime Mayor Paul Crowley last year.

What's up with the Sussex County GOP?  Who is doing the screening?

Obama voter: Mayor Nicholas Giordano

Phoebus lies: The Juice Bar Johnny Episode

New Jersey Herald reporter Eric Obernauer has a very close relationship with Sussex County politician Gail Phoebus.  Instead of behaving like a proper journalist, Obernauer advocates for Phoebus to the extreme.  In fact, Phoebus has used Obernauer on several occasions to spread rumors about politicians, officials, and even county employees.

For example, there was the appointment of Sussex County Attorney John Williams in June of 2015.  Williams was being appointed to fill the vacancy left after the retirement of longtime County Attorney Dennis McConnell.  Phoebus, then a county Freeholder, just days before had won the Republican primary for Assembly over Marie Bilik and Nathan Orr. 

Phoebus wanted to oppose Williams, but a friend of Phoebus had been dating Williams, so Phoebus used Obernauer to put out a rumor about Williams and who some of his clients had been.  They even came up with a nasty name to mock Williams by:  "Juice Bar Johnny."

At the June 10, 2015, Freeholder Board meeting, Phoebus broke with Freeholder colleague George Graham to vote for Williams.  But she was content that the rumors against Williams, spread by Obernauer, would do their work and eventually undermine the County Attorney and force him out. 

Subsequently, the inside joke she shared with Herald reporter Obernauer became such that they became reckless and Obernauer included someone on an email to Phoebus that he shouldn't have.  The "Juice Bar Johnny" reference was questioned and brought to the attention of the Herald's management, resulting in a reprimand of some sort for reporter Obernauer but no ramifications for politician Phoebus.

This is the power of rumors and "whisper" campaigns.  It is how politics is sometimes conducted in close-knit communities -- when smiles are lies and honesty is at a premium.  It almost destroyed the career of County Attorney John Williams.   

Watchdog agrees Gray & Gorman are liars

At 3 PM today, the campaign of David Gray and Kathleen Gorman sent out another email trying to impersonate this website.  They have done this throughout their campaign.

+ + +

FOR THE RECORD. . .  Watchdog isn't supporting any particular candidate in the June 7th Republican Primary.  We have found it necessary to step in because Freeholder candidates David Gray and Kathleen Gorman have used our name to disseminate information -- some which has been grossly false -- about their opponents, George Graham and Sylvia Petillo.

Now this is real dirt bag behavior and suggests to us that Gray and Gorman couldn't be trusted to honestly represent the people of Sussex County. Maybe they can't help it?  Maybe, like the Clintons, they were just born liars?  We don't know why and we would prefer it to be none of our business, but when Gray and Gorman use our name to attack others, it becomes our business.

So that is why each and every time they misrepresent us, we put out our own "corrective" to even the score.  It keeps Watchdog balanced, even-Steven.

+ + +

Oh, and did we mention that knucklehead David Gray is being sued by the office manager of his own law firm? 

Gray is being sued under New Jersey's Conscientious Employee Protection Act.  The plaintiff, Juliette Bresnahan, is a single-mother of three who worked full-time as the office manager of David Gray's law firm.   Here's what the lawsuit alleges: 

". . . around mid-October 2015, Gray informed Bresnahan that he received a tax bill for around $62,000.  Gray indicated that he was unsure how he would pay this bill. . .

. . . Gray's directive was aimed at intentionally falsifying and fraudulently increasing the bills to generate more revenue to the firm to extricate it from its current financial predicament."

Read the entire complaint against Gray here.