Did you get an illegal robo-call?

On Monday, January 25th, Sussex County residents got a prerecorded "robo-call" asking people to attend Wednesday's meeting of the Sussex County Freeholder Board and oppose an investigation of the Sussex solar bailout that has cost county taxpayers millions.  The recorded message repeats the argument advanced by Freeholder Richard Vohden -- that the Freeholders should hold off commissioning an independent county investigation until after the status of state and federal criminal investigations are determined. 

Vohden knows that means holding off on a county investigation indefinitely because the state and federal investigations now underway are criminal investigations.  The Federal Bureau of Investigation, the United States Justice Department, the NJ State Police, and the NJ Attorney General's office are not permitted to comment on active criminal investigations.

The reason Sussex County needs a independent investigation is simple.  The solar scam cost $88 million.  Sussex taxpayers are on the hook for $24 million and they just borrowed another $7 million and the bill for that is coming due shortly.  It will likely cause a sharp increase in property taxes.

It is not the job of those law enforcement agencies to protect the interests of Sussex County.  They could even cite Sussex County officials for malfeasance and who would pay for that?  The federal authorities will try to claw back the federal money involved in the scam.  Who is looking out for Sussex County taxpayers?

That's where an independent county investigation comes in.  It is a fact-finding mission to build a case to get some of those millions back through civil action. 

The FBI and State Attorney General's office are looking for criminal indictments.  That may punish those responsible, but it won't get our money back.  That is why the investment in an independent county investigation is money well spent.

Vohden is joined in his opposition to the independent county investigation by the corporate vendors, legal counsel, consultants, and political players who made millions off the solar scam.  Unfortunately for whoever paid for the call, they appear to have not followed the law under which robo-calls are permitted.

First, "the prerecorded message must truthfully disclose who is responsible for the call and the telemarketing-related purpose of the call."

Second, "the prerecorded message must disclose a call-back telephone number which would allow the recipient to call back within normal business hours and make an opt-out request."

The prerecorded message sent into the homes of Sussex County residents did not abide by these legal rules.  In fact, it could be argued that the call was deliberately misleading and made it appear to come from the County Clerk's office.  A prosecutor would have to determine if the robo-call was an attempt by those who paid for the call to hide their identity and to impersonate an innocent party.  In 2009, the State Attorney General brought a successful prosecution against a similar incident in Bergen County. 

In any case, there is enough to warrant action by the Federal Communication Commission under the expanded Telephone Consumer Protection Act regulations that came into force in June of last year.  So look for this issue to figure in the Freeholder races in both Sussex and Morris counties.

If you would like to add your name to those reporting this robo-call to state and federal authorities, please contact Watchdog at:  info@sussexcountywatchdog.com

Update on Tuesday, January 26, 2016 at 2:06AM by Sussex County Watchdog

Update:  Apparently, the robo-call was sent from the Philadelphia area.  It may be entirely unconnected, but readers will remember that in preparation for the reorganization of the Freeholder Board and Freeholder Vohden's initial attempt to delay the solar investigation, Vohden travelled down to Philadelphia to huddle with former Freeholder Director Richard Zeoli, the politico who first introduced the Morris County solar operators into Sussex County. 

Subpoenas sought in alternative energy project

No, not here in Sussex County.  Not yet, anyway.  But just to let you know that we are not alone in being victims from things like the solar project scam, here is some fresh news from Warren County, New York, near Lake George.

The numbers are smaller than what we could end up losing in Sussex County, but there they are pushing forward with their investigation.  Good for them.

Subpoenas sought in Siemens probe

GEOTHERMAL INVESTIGATION MOVING FORWARD

January 08, 2016 7:30 pm  •  DON LEHMAN dlehman@poststar.com 

Warren County sheriff’s investigators are seeking subpoenas as the agency looks into an alternative energy project that some believe resulted in the county being defrauded of hundreds of thousands of dollars. 

Subpoenas served on potential witnesses would compel them to cooperate and provide whatever evidence is requested as they look into whether the county has gotten the savings it was told it has through a “geothermal” energy project at Warren County Municipal Center.

The subpoenas could be issued in conjunction with a grand jury investigation, or without grand jury intervention.

Travis Whitehead, an electrical engineer and government watchdog, has analyzed the $4.3 million project and concluded the county did not get hundreds of thousands of dollars in energy savings that it was guaranteed by contractor Siemens Building Technologies. Whitehead filed a complaint with the Sheriff’s Office seeking a criminal investigation.

Siemens has maintained its projects have saved the county money. A company spokeswoman issued the following statement Friday after a request for comment:

“Siemens completed an energy savings project at the Warren County Municipal Center in 2008, which included the replacement of an aging heat pump system with a new, energy-efficient, geothermal heat pump and condensing boiler system, as well as the installation of a new energy management system and energy-efficient lighting throughout the building.

“Siemens is proud of the work we have completed, which has provided the Warren County Municipal Center with an improved infrastructure that has reduced its energy consumption and its environmental footprint.”

The Sheriff’s Office did not use subpoenas during the investigation of a natural gas cogeneration project that was built at Westmount Health Facility, as it awaited a possible grand jury investigation. The purported savings from that Siemens project have been questioned as well.

Among the witnesses who refused to meet with police during the cogeneration inquiry was John Haskell, the former Thurman supervisor who was chairman of the county Facilities Committee, which oversaw the project.

The Sheriff’s Office has requested assistance in the geothermal investigation from the Warren County District Attorney’s Office, which was involved with the cogeneration investigation for years until determining that a special prosecutor was needed.

That determination occurred when the Sheriff’s Office concluded there was probable cause to charge the county administrator with official misconduct, though no charges were filed.

The state Attorney General’s Office was given the case, but declined to file criminal charges and instead indicated it may take civil court action.

With the geothermal inquiry having just begun late last year, no such potential conflicts of interest have been identified, so the Sheriff’s Office has been working with the office of Warren County District Attorney Kate Hogan.

Warren County Sheriff Bud York said he could not discuss the “geothermal” inquiry this week, other than to say it was progressing.

“We are moving forward and awaiting replies from prosecutors,” York said.

Hogan said she could not comment on the matter this week.

Glens Falls 2nd Ward Supervisor Peter McDevitt, who was among the first county supervisors to raise questions about the Siemens projects, has said he believes an independent engineer review is warranted. He said half of the cost would be paid by the New York State Energy Research Development Authority if the county chose a state-sanctioned firm.

“We need an independent voice to tell us: Are we saving any real money?” he asked.

Solar scams are happening all over America

If Freeholders Richard Vohden and Phil Crabb were not such stubborn old men, they would realize that they are only a small part of a nationwide group of victims of taxpayer-supported solar programs -- "a no brainer" as Crabb called it -- that turned out to be an old fashioned scam.  It is happening all over. 

What is it about Vohden and Crabb that leads them to want to own the solar scam?  Too proud to admit they made a mistake?  Or are they protecting someone?

Our very political County Administrator

Maybe you heard this already?  John Eskilson, the Sussex County Administrator, has gone into the opposition research business.  This isn't so much a change as an expansion for the very political Eskilson.  In 2012, Eskilson contacted the chairman of a campaign for Freeholder with the demand that the candidate for Freeholder not mention an issue Eskilson opposed:  A ban on county government borrowing without voter approval.

That's right.  The very reform that could have prevented the Sussex Solar scam in the first place, was the issue that Eskilson tried to deep-six through the back-door.

They have this reform in Warren County.  It is the law there due to the efforts of Warren County Freeholder Director Ed Smith.  But not in Sussex County.  Because in Warren County the elected Freeholders run the show, not the unelected County Administrator.  Warren County wouldn't stand for it because, for a start, it is unethical.  Professional government administrators like John Eskilson are supposed to abide by a Code of Ethics.  Part of that Code of Ethics reads:

Refrain from all political activities which undermine public confidence in professional administrators.  Refrain from participation in the election of the members of the employing legislative body

 So why is Sussex County Administrator John Eskilson gathering information on a sitting County Freeholder and using that information to undermine her campaign for public office?  Eskilson has been pushing this information to local reporters and to those who oppose the election of this Freeholder to higher office.

Watchdog will be filing a complaint and naming names, so those involved should expect to be contacted.  It is time to stop the politicization of county bureaucracy.  It is unethical and may be a misuse of taxpayers' money.

An epidemic of single-bidder contracts

As prosecutors get down to unraveling the complex web of relationships behind the "solar gold rush" that resulted in some politically-connected firms getting a lot of money while taxpayers in counties like Sussex were left holding the bag, they will no doubt focus on who knew whom way back in 2005 when these political alliances were forming.  The social circles these people travelled in -- gatherings in upscale Manhattan and the political cocktail circuit of some of the more expensive communities in Morris and Somerset Counties.  And let's not forget the hot tub parties hosted at a multi-million dollar shore house.  All gathering grounds for the chic and well-connected to play, exchange information, and make deals.

The result of all this was a notable absence of competition to facilitate the "solar gold rush" in New Jersey.  While some states saw scores of engineering and other vendors line up for a taste of taxpayer dollars, too often New Jersey saw a single bidder looking for a too narrowly-written contract.  This trend was getting noticed even before Sussex County decided to try its hand at going solar.

Consultants get a cut from North Jersey solar energy projects

JULY 24, 2011    LAST UPDATED: MONDAY, JULY 25, 2011, 6:37 PM

BY JOEL SCHECTMAN

STAFF WRITER | 

THE RECORD

Two politically connected firms at the front of the solar energy development gold rush are teaming with North Jersey improvement authorities to sell projects to local governments and school districts.

In the latest push, the firms, together with the Passaic County Improvement Authority, are pitching a no-money-down solar-paneling solution to the county’s municipalities and districts to help reduce electricity costs. It’s asking them to sign on to a 15-year pact in which a developer would install the panels and then charge the government entities rates lower than those currently paid.

Bergen County is using a different approach — private financing and smaller scale.

So far, Passaic County’s efforts have met with mixed results after numerous presentations. For instance, Clifton has signaled interest, and both the borough of Ringwood and the Lakeland school district signed on to the plan this month, but North Haledon’s Borough Council recently heard the pitch and took a pass, expressing concern about unknowns of the cost structure.

"The advantage of the program is having an outside agency look at the proposals and make sure there are real cost savings," said Clifton Mayor James Anzaldi.

But the project would include layers of professional fees from the collaborative efforts of the legal firm of Decotiis, Fitzpatrick and Cole LLP based in Teaneck and New York, and the engineering firm Birdsall Services Group of Sea Girt. The two firms have already spearheaded the same solar development model in Morris, Union and Somerset counties and are now helping evangelize the plan throughout Passaic County.

Decotiis is responsible for the legal side of the project, writing the contracts with the developers and drafting the wording of resolutions to bind local governments to agreements. Birdsall Services Group is responsible for the engineering side — helping governments select sites for the construction and vetting developers to build the panels once bids are sought.

 Former Decotiis partner Steven Pearlman, called the "godfather" of the plan by one county administrator, created the concept when he was general counsel for Morris County in 2008. The $21.6 million project is estimated to save the county $3.8 million over the 15-year life of the project. The plan became known as the "Morris Plan," and Pearlman pitched it to the Somerset County freeholders in 2009, signing the county onto the plan in 2010. Over the next year Union County brought the same team in to develop the plan for its towns.

Somerset County Improvement Authority project manager Yvonne Childress said that although the county went through a competitive selection process before signing on with the firms, the three companies selected were the only ones to apply: Birdsall; the Decotiis firm; and Inglesino, Pearlman, Wyciskala & Taylor LLC — a firm Pearlman helped found after leaving Decotiis.

Pearlman’s new law firm handled the bonding for the project, obtaining credit through the county. Birdsall, Decotiis and Pearlman did not respond to requests for comment.

"We have learned that more law firms are starting to model this program, so going forward, there may be more players in this game," Childress said in an email.

Both firms have contributed generously to election campaigns statewide, and have received impressive contracts from state and local governments.

Birdsall has contributed at least $669,910 to state and local elections since the solar push began in 2008 through 2010, the last date for which complete contributions are tallied. During that same period, the company received $70 million on all its state public-works contracts. The improvement authorities have not yet provided The Record with contract amounts for the solar projects.

Decotiis employees gave at least $200,000 to state and local campaigns, according to state election records. The firm received $45.7 million in New Jersey contracts in the same three years, according to public records.

In Passaic County, the group of consultants, along with the PCIA, has pitched the proposal to towns that include Hawthorne, Woodland Park and West Milford.

Nicole Fox, PCIA executive director, said she would not be available for comment by deadline.

In the solar-paneling project, the construction costs would all be paid by the developer, using cheaper credit from bonds written through the county. The builder would make back his money by charging the governments involved for the electricity produced and used by those governments. The firms pitching the deal are offering significant savings to government over the life of the program — Clifton, for example, would save as much as $85,000. Bonding through the county could, presumably, offer a lower rate than private financing and help the developer to pass on the savings to taxpayers.

In Passaic County, the developer, which hasn’t yet been selected, will have to charge governments enough to recoup construction costs and make a profit over a 15-year contract, and it also will have to add in the fees for Birdsall and Decotiis, according to the PCIA.

John Bonanni, commissioner of the Morris County Improvement Authority, the first to use the plan, noted those add-ons as significant.

"But someone has got to pay them," he said. "[The fee] gets baked into the cake."

Passaic County’s local governments and school districts have until the beginning of August to sign on — the PCIA will request proposals from developers by the end of that month, Fox said. Construction would start in fall and last one year.

Bergen County’s solar projects are of a smaller scale and without financing through public bonds. Instead a private solar financing company, Sunlight General Capital, is putting up the money and charging for the electricity. Bergen has built panels on the  Prosecutor’s Office in Paramus and the parking garage of the County Administrative in Hackensack.