patching...
Welcome back, Patch Blogger!

Council to Consider Bond Measure on French's Landfill Solar Field

Solar field would be built at French's Landfill site

 

A solar field built at the former French's Landfill site on Sally Ike Road would save Brick taxpayers $13 million over 15 years – then more after that, a team of experts associated with the project said Tuesday night.

A group of individuals representing companies responsible for planning, arranging financing, designing and facilitating the project gathered at the township municipal complex to provide new details on the plan to install solar panels at the former Superfund site, which is now being outfitted with a permanent cap.

"The solar panels were a nice passive use of the facility," said Noreen White, the township's financial advisor on the project.

Financial Questions

On Feb. 14, township council members will vote on whether to float bonds which will come to about $23 million. But under a redeveloper's agreement, a private company – not taxpayers – will pay back the debt.

"The township is at virtually no risk of the taxpayers ever having to pay the debt service on the bonds," White said.

Here's how the plan will work, according to officials: The township will borrow the cost to build the solar field at a special low interest rate only available to municipalities. Standard Alternative, LLC, the company selected to redevelop the site, will then reimburse the township as money is disbursed.

The township will benefit from an upfront $2.5 million payment from Standard Alternative as well as annual rent of the property between $50,000 and $85,000, depending on how much energy the site produces. After 15 years, the township will own the property outright, and will be able to generate electricity for property owned by the township and BTMUA, as well as sell solar energy credits to the power company for a profit.

In exchange, Standard Alternative will make money from the deal over the next 15 years by selling its own energy credits generated by the site.

During the 15 year period, the township and BTMUA will also be able to purchase energy for about 40 percent less than the rate at which they are currently paying, saving a minimum of about $300,000 per year, according to Business Administrator Scott Pezarras.

Over the course of 15 years, especially after the Oyster Creek nuclear generating station in Lacey shuts down in 2019, the savings on electrical costs could grow even more, said Thomas Brys, an energy consultant who worked on the project.

"Oyster Creek represents base load electricity that significantly reduces electric rates in service area," Brys said. "With that major change, it will go up significantly, unfortunately. That adds to the savings greatly."

Current models show the township eventually saving as much as $600,000 per year in energy costs.

Financially, officials said multiple layers of protections are added in to shield taxpayers from ending up on the losing side of the deal. The project is backed by multiple guarantors, and if Standard Alternative were to go out of business, the energy generated by the station would generate far more revenue than the township would be required to pay in debt service.

"If they default on anything, they're gone, and we have the fully functioning array which is enough to more than cover the debt service," said Township Attorney Jean Cipriani.

As to why the township couldn't simply build the array itself: special incentives that lower the cost of the project are only available to private companies under the Obama administration's stimulus package. The idea was to create jobs in the private sector, officials said.

Tech Specs

Standard Alternative, a company created a year ago and based in Hoboken, is owned 90 percent by another company, Iron State Development. That company was responsible for developing Pier Village in Long Branch, skyscrapers in Jersey City, marinas on the Hudson River and overseeing the Essex and Sussex project in Spring Lake.

Standard Alternative is a wing of Iron State that will focus on alternative energy redevelopment, according to Sam Faivus, the company's president.

"We are very, very experienced in redevelopment projects, brownfield projects," Faivus said.

The actual arrays will be constructed by Orion Energy Systems, a national company that designs large-scale energy projects for companies and public entities.

Orion representatives said solar panels can last for as many as 30 to 40 years, and are warrantied for 20 years. Faivus said after the site is turned over to the township in 15 years, the panels will generate about 80 to 85 percent or more of the energy they generated when new.

The solar field will take between 12 and 18 months to build, officials said, but neighbors should not worry about noise from construction.

"The construction activity for building a solar plant on top of a closed landfill is very different from capping a landfill," Brys said. "There is virtually no noise in the construction of a solar plant. There's no banging or digging, by design."

The site will also be aesthetically pleasing, Brys said, with part of the project focused on planting trees and green grass at the tract. Security systems will also be installed.

The Bottom Line

Between the upfront payment, lease fees and energy savings, township taxpayers stand to save about $13 million over the 15 years the redeveloper's agreement with Standard Alternative will remain in place, according to Cipriani. More revenue will be generated after that once the township takes full control of the site.

Township council members are set to vote next week on whether to award the bonds which would enable the project to move forward.

As for the capping process, officials say it is on schedule

Related Topics: Redevelopment, brick nj news, and french's landfill

iCanoe2

7:42 am on Wednesday, February 8, 2012

We get the solar farm with 5 years left of a 20 year warranty? Seems like a real gamble to me.

Reply
Comment_arrow

John Ciocco

10:36 am on Wednesday, February 8, 2012

Only if the cost to replace the solar panels is greater than the amount of revenue generated from the sale of electricity. Hopefully the advances in solar technology in the next 15 to 20 years continue as most technology will produce more efficient panels that generate more electricity then the current field would

Comment_arrow

George

8:17 am on Thursday, February 9, 2012

Sounds like one of those money pits where the Mayor is going to save us money no matter how much it costs us.

Lehigh

8:08 am on Wednesday, February 8, 2012

Sounds like a great plan! I am sure that the govt officials will be personally investing in this. Perhaps they could put up a bond of their own money and if the returnsto the town fall short they would be happy to make up the difference..think Solyndra, current Port Authority shortfall etc.

Reply
Comment_arrow

John Ciocco

10:34 am on Wednesday, February 8, 2012

Solyndra manufactured solar panels the company did not build solar fields or generate solar energy.

Comment_arrow

George

8:18 am on Thursday, February 9, 2012

Lehigh they will you save you money no matter how much it costs you.

BW

8:22 am on Wednesday, February 8, 2012

"""The township is at virtually no risk of the taxpayers ever having to pay the debt service on the bonds," White said.""

And I have some ocean front property in the nevada desert for sale.

Reply

Lori Morrison

9:05 am on Wednesday, February 8, 2012

The only concern I have regarding solar panels is the proper disposal of the materials when they are damaged. Does anyone know if there is a proper disposal procedure?

Reply

John Ciocco

10:32 am on Wednesday, February 8, 2012

A clean Solar energy farm sure sounds like a great use for what has been an environmental disaster for many years. Don't forget the town received something like $3.5 million settlement from the former owners insurance companies also. This project is an example of the town officials banding together doing what was right for the town and surrounding residents from the time it was purchased.

Reply
Comment_arrow

Ryan Meyers

6:08 pm on Wednesday, February 8, 2012

Would one of those officals be the councilman that is reportedly going to be infront of a hearing at the MUA ? Someone asked what happens if the company goes out of business in the next few years ?

Comment_arrow

George

8:29 am on Thursday, February 9, 2012

Sounds like they never thought about that Ryan and we could take a big hit if that happens.

Comment_arrow

John Ciocco

10:38 am on Thursday, February 9, 2012

It has been clearly stated in the articles and at any meeting I have attended if the company goes belly up, the town gets full control of the site and 100% of the revenue right away instead of in 15 years.

Mark Story Jenks

10:39 am on Wednesday, February 8, 2012

I wonder how well the panels can hold up in a hail storm. Don't laugh, it happens. During one short lived storm last summer some the size of Walnuts came down in my yard. I wish I had a video of them hitting the river, splashing like crazy all the way across to Wall Township. It looked like good sized fish were jumping all the way across and up and down from Lightning Jacks to the 70 Bridge. It came and went in less then a minute.

Reply
Comment_arrow

John Ciocco

10:57 am on Wednesday, February 8, 2012

Good point! i would hope they are designed to take something like that and that insurance would be required and in place to replace the damaged panels. Truly I don't think a municipality can issue bonds without some type of gurantee fund for replacement of the revenue producing asset to protect the bond investors.

Comment_arrow

CmdBash

12:46 pm on Wednesday, February 8, 2012

I have had solar panels on my house for the past 3 years. Not one is damaged, and im sure you can recall the weather we have had.

Comment_arrow

George

8:32 am on Thursday, February 9, 2012

Mark it's a big sum of money to lose if it crashes but they will save us money no matter how much it costs the taxpayers.

Dennis

11:15 am on Wednesday, February 8, 2012

Why do I get an uneasy feeling when I read: The township is at virtually no risk of the taxpayers ever having to pay the debt service on the bonds?

Reply

Mark Story Jenks

11:24 am on Wednesday, February 8, 2012

I guess you're right, John.
I think the event I mentioned happened when the other side of town had all those trees torn up, and some people reportly saw a funnel cloud. We missed the worst of it over here where I am.

Reply

Brian

11:49 am on Wednesday, February 8, 2012

While I'm actually a big believer in this project, Id like to see who owns the other 10% of Standard Alternative.

"Standard Alternative, a company created a year ago and based in Hoboken, is owned 90 percent by another company, Iron State Development. "

Seems that the owners of the remaining 10% will be getting a nice cut of the pie.

A company like Iron State is big enough to do the project themselves. If they needed help they would have create a partnership more in the 60%-40% range.

They would only slice off 10% as some type of kickback.

Who is getting that money for nothing??

Reply

Vince Latchford

1:31 pm on Wednesday, February 8, 2012

Eventually the majority of Brick voters will come to the conclusion that authorizing bond issues is mostly a bad idea. Basing a bond issue on the testimony of the companies who will profit from the project is not good management. Advocating for the closure of the nuclear plant which is a low-cost energy producer and replacing it with solar power, which is the most expensive type is fiscally irresponsible, but then again, most of the energy decisions being made these days have nothing to do with economics, and everything to do with partisan politics.

Sign here. Our studies show virtually no risk. You can't lose. The stuff we install will last forever. You'll make lots of cash at no cost. Right.

Reply
Comment_arrow

George

8:36 am on Thursday, February 9, 2012

I agree with you Vince it's like rolling the dice with the taxpayer's money.

Oscar Wilde

1:49 pm on Wednesday, February 8, 2012

these people cant even predict correctly what is going to happen next year , let alone what will happen in 15 years !!!

dont be fooled by the sychophants and charlatans

Reply

IGGY

4:41 pm on Wednesday, February 8, 2012

What will the mainyance costs be after the fact, like clening and long cost repairs. Who pays for that. Has anyone figured these costs into the big picture?

Reply

Robert

5:33 pm on Wednesday, February 8, 2012

what happens if Standard Alternative goes out of business in the near future ?

Reply
Comment_arrow

George

10:36 am on Thursday, February 9, 2012

Robert you notice how quiet they get when you ask this question sounds like they never thought about that.

Comment_arrow

John Ciocco

10:40 am on Thursday, February 9, 2012

The answer I hear when this question is asked is that the town gets immediate control of the field and 100% of the revenue generated instead of waiting 15 years

Comment_arrow
Patch_comments_icon

Daniel Nee

2:27 pm on Friday, February 10, 2012

George -- Actually, they've pretty much shouted this from the rooftops at the council meetings. As John C. said, the town would take immediate control of the array, which would actually be the best case scenario, financially.

Joseph Lamb

6:25 pm on Wednesday, February 8, 2012

The Acropolis administration in Brick has plans to award a $34 million solar panel contract to a sole bidder, Standard Alternative, that uses his apartment as the company address. The entire process is riddled with inadequate finances, misleading and vague information.
There is no company office and no other employees. This company only started doing business in 2011 and has never taken on a project this size. Standard Alternative is not financially strong enough to take on a project this size so a company, Iron States Development, is a guarantor on the project.
Iron States is supposed to be a shareholder of Standard Alternative. The financials of Standard Alternative and the guarantor, Iron States, are not available for public review. The financial advisors, Acacia Financial and the Bond Counsel have contributed the maximum allowed by law to Mayor Acropolis’s campaign. This contribution doesn’t provide a feeling of independence to their findings that the project is financially viable.

Reply

Joseph Lamb

6:26 pm on Wednesday, February 8, 2012

The bottom line for me is that Brick shouldn’t be taking on debt and thereby risk for a private enterprise. That’s what the company is in business for. If Iron States is willing to be the guarantor, let them take on the debt and risk. Obviously Standard Alternative can’t take on the debt because no financial institution will provide it to Standard Alternative. It’s bad enough Brick is in the real estate business but do they have to be in the banking business also?
Then there’s the $2.5 million payment to the Town by Standard Alternative that should be applied directly to the net debt of $23.5 million reducing it to $21 million. Why do we want the town to blow through the $2.5 million? Next year is an election year and the mayor wants that in his budget to say he reduced taxes. Meanwhile our debt increases!
The savings generated from this solar panel project are hypothetical from a company that never took on a project this size, if at all. If it doesn’t work out, Brick is stuck with the debt and bills.
So, if I understand correctly, the Acropolis administration projects have been Traders Cove, Ocean Ice Palace and Foodtown and they have all been financial disasters. Brick is or would have been paying through the nose for all of them. Why does anyone think this will be any better?

Reply
Comment_arrow

paul b

6:50 pm on Wednesday, February 8, 2012

Mr.Lamb, give it a rest. Please consider that there are many people's lives who are impacted by your continual distortion of facts. And I say this with reservation because I really do want to respect your right to an opinion but please attempt to adhere to the facts. Facts are stubborn things and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations or our passions, we cannot alter the state of facts and evidence. Your vendetta is becoming counterproductive.

Comment_arrow

John Ciocco

10:52 am on Thursday, February 9, 2012

bottom line is that Mr Lamb is spinning facts and distorting financial figures so fast and at such a rate now he can not even keep what he is saying strait in his own mind. He is against one shot revenue deals, but he wants to use the money like a one shot revenue to reduce what he calls the "cost" to the tax payers. He wants no risk, but the advance money provided to be used to pay bond holders should be used to reduce the cost of the project not held in escrow to prevent financial problems he is claiming are just around the corner. We are stuck with debt and bills? Mr Lamb forgets to add the fact that the site will be generating eledctricity no matter what happens to the general contractor or construction company. That provides the revenue used to pay the bondholders their interest and eventually return their principal investment (what Mr Lamb is calling debt and bills) He then adds numbers double counts them and then uses percentages to make his numbers sound more convincing and gloomy. you know if you pay one cent for something today and 2 cents for it next month, it isn't a lot but if you spin it like mr lamb, the price has doubled, or it has increased 100% ... and finally in the end the fact is that if this was your buddy or any other administration proposing this you would be quite at home and never say a word.

Comment_arrow

Mrgrumpass

11:59 am on Thursday, February 9, 2012

Joe Lamb I have been to many meetings where you have spoken and the last council meeting was just another in a long line of un-true accusations and half-truths, I don’t know what drives you to act in such a foolish manner don’t you have any pride or self-respect? Get your facts right and stop wasting oxygen!

Joseph Woolston Brick

11:45 pm on Wednesday, February 8, 2012

I'm totally confused. So this solar field is going to be used to generate electricity to power what? Are lines going to run from it to certain buildings in town? Or is it going to be used to generate electric where the town sells it to the electric company and in turn gives us credit towards what the township buildings use? I need more info.

Reply
Comment_arrow

frances

7:47 pm on Thursday, February 9, 2012

For any individual who would like more information, I would highly recommend that they tune in to the Caucus Council Meeting held on Tuesday, February 7th. The Solar Power Presentation may answer many of your questions.

With that said, I am in favor of the project. It is my belief that the past practice of "monotoring" the site was ineffective and costly. I commend our governing body for taking the steps mandated by the DEP as well as securing funding and guarantors for the project. In my opinion, this is a bipartisan achievement realized for the benefit of the public.

Comment_arrow
Patch_comments_icon

Daniel Nee

1:18 am on Friday, February 10, 2012

It will be connected to a JCP&L substation.

Mrgrumpass

7:05 am on Thursday, February 9, 2012

Joe Lamb I have been to many meetings where you have spoken and the last council meeting was just another in a long line of un-true accusations and half-truths, I don’t know what drives you to act in such a foolish manner don’t you have any pride or self-respect? Get your fact right and stop wasting oxygen!

Reply

knarfie

8:20 am on Thursday, February 9, 2012

This may be a very good deal for the township. The problem is, this Mayor and administration has been so self serving and greedy, and has been so untrustworthy, anything they do is looked upon as as scam.

Reply
Comment_arrow

paul b

4:34 pm on Friday, February 10, 2012

knarfie, you could not be more right! Mayor Acropolis and his Boss Juan Bellu or should I say Juan Bellu and his Boss Mayor Acropolis (interchangeable -isn't that unethical, immoral, and just plain wrong) taint anything that may be good for the people. In this case, I do believe that the project needs to move forward. It is a shame that the Mayor and his incompetent employer/employee lack credibility and therefore lend shame to anything that they touch.

Brick resident82

8:59 am on Thursday, February 9, 2012

Knarfie..I agree the Mayor and his merry men have done so many questionable projects that have been back door and hey look what were doing..My opinion the Mayor has to be replaced..And how ever goes to take over as our Mayor better be able to get Brick back to a respectable town .Lower our taxes like they ran there campaign and get out of the real estate business..Support the police to clean up the crime which is getting worse in our town..God WE NEED HELP...Who's going to step up ??

Reply

knarfie

11:46 am on Thursday, February 9, 2012

Hope, You are right on the money. Everything this administration has done was to enhance the positions of friends, cronies and relatives at the taxpayers expense. They have no credibility any longer. It's a sad state of affairs when a former Mayor who is a convicted felon is more popular than a sitting Mayor.

Reply
Comment_arrow

Brick resident82

3:19 pm on Friday, February 10, 2012

Knarfie..you know I always went out my way to talk to ex-mayor Joe because face to face he seemed like a nice guy and he didnt act like you were bothering him..But I can't say That about mayor evil eye Acrop..You know he's always been sarcastic ,rude,etc get my point..Never did and never will like him ..needs to go..But let me say who ever takes his position better come out and stick to his promises and clean up this mess as soon as possible and the 2 inline better start living up to there promises to support the families of Brick..

Joseph Lamb

12:07 pm on Thursday, February 9, 2012

Can you imagine that there was a sole bidder in this economic environment?
Of course it was tailored to Standard Alternative. Stop trying to make it sound like this was on the up and up.
Since Faivus is running the business out of his apartment, I guess his shoe box is accounts payable and accounts receivable.
This is disgusting!

Reply
Comment_arrow

Brick resident82

3:25 pm on Friday, February 10, 2012

I would just like to say with the advancements in solar power and electronics ..something purchased can be out dated in a few months..and we have to deal with this for 25 yrs..and the last 10 years will be profitable..WOW YOUR KIDDING ME ?? Tax payers will and are going to be screwed for 25 years ++...I'm hoping to be around to see those profits...hahahaha..

Joseph Lamb

12:40 pm on Thursday, February 9, 2012

Maybe the new group against this project will call it - SAPS Stop Acropolis Project for Solar. Afterall, that's what he must think of us.
A sole bidder??? Are you kidding??? His apartment is his office???
Why do we have to consider anything else?

Reply
Comment_arrow

John Ciocco

8:58 pm on Friday, February 10, 2012

How about SLFL & CIFF - Stop Lamb From Lying and Creating Imaginary Financial Figures

Not Sure

6:46 am on Friday, February 10, 2012

After doing some homework on the solar industry it appears that this may not be the best time to be jumping in and gambling with millions of dollars of tax payer’s money. This year it is projected that the solar industry in NJ may be 35 to 45 percent oversupplied significantly decreasing the rate of return. The price of a SREC has fell well below half of what it was worth just one year ago. Let’s hear about the other previous solar projects in town and how they are doing before committing to this enormous project.

Reply
Comment_arrow

John Ciocco

8:54 pm on Friday, February 10, 2012

In addition to the SRECs there is also the electricity generated by the site.

califwino

2:03 pm on Friday, February 10, 2012

Lets see, in the past 2 days I have seen articles about solar companies. One being NJ Resourses the parent company of NJNG, a very stable company and the other Trinity Solar which just relocated to Wall and is the fastest growing company in NJ.
The leaders in Brick are deciding to go with a new company with noemployees or track record.
Wonder if our newly elected officails read these articles before they vote ??????????

Reply
Comment_arrow

John Ciocco

8:54 pm on Friday, February 10, 2012

Did they bid on the project?

Joseph Lamb

5:19 pm on Friday, February 10, 2012

Lt. Gov. Guadagno was at a event today marking the opening of a 140,000 square foot facility in Wall for Trinity Solar with its 415 employees .
Lt. Gov. Guadagno said that Trinity Solar was the largest solar employer in the state, the largest solar integrator on the East Coast and installs more solar panels than its 10 closest competitors combined.
How did Brick not have this company as a bidder on the French's Landfill Solar Project?
Maybe the bid specs were tailored too much towards Standard Alternative?
This is nonsense that Brick only received one bid.

Reply
Comment_arrow

John Ciocco

8:53 pm on Friday, February 10, 2012

stop stirring the pot trying to create problems where non may exist you are starting to sound like you have a paranoid personality.

Comment_arrow

Mrgrumpass

8:24 am on Saturday, February 11, 2012

Mr. Lamb I can’t understand what drives you to make all types of semi –true-accusations and untrue statements always hoping something will stick, who appointed you advocate for the towns energy program, for the elderly, for public works, and education? You always have something derogatory and inflammatory to say regarding the present town administration! I expect your dedication to semi-truthful facts regarding the new council member’s decisions in the near future!

Not Sure

8:37 pm on Friday, February 10, 2012

Who cares about the bid, how about we see some numbers on how the other projects in town are doing, like the solar panels on Brick Memorial High School and the Municipal complex. Are these solar panel installations producing what was promised??. We will certainly never see a return on the wind turbine installed at the Drum Point sports complex for $175,000.00.

Reply
Comment_arrow

John Ciocco

8:52 pm on Friday, February 10, 2012

Not sure I don't think the town was the lead on the Drum Point Windmill I think that was a Board of Education project primariloy and It was financed by a grant. I dont think there was much out of pocket expense.

Dawn Marie White

11:14 pm on Friday, February 10, 2012

If the company goes belly up we get the panels and the profit. Check your facts and when you know for sure that this project is anything but in the best interest of Brick tax payers, then make your case by stating fact not opinion or spin.....

Reply

Joseph Lamb

11:22 am on Sunday, February 12, 2012

If Stanbdard Alternative goes belly up, it will because the revenue generated won't cover the expenses. At that point when Brick takes the solar field over, Brick will be incurring losses as well.

Reply

John Ciocco

12:24 pm on Sunday, February 12, 2012

That is the first reasonable and honest statement that you have ever made in public. Now lets have an honest and open discussion on why you feel this way other than you hate the Mayor and will do anything possible to trash him. Why do you approach everything this admin does as an opponent and in a dishonest way? There are laws and requirements to put together a municipal project and to issue bonds. Why do you act like the town is doing this blindly and without any expert input?? Don't you think that the Energy Consultant and Township Financial Advisor have been consulted to advise the Township and calculated the size and scope of the project and determined how much energy can be generated at a site of this size and calculated the cost and the financing and bond payments to make work? Of course you do you are just trying to create negative spin and dissent.

Reply

knarfie

7:48 pm on Sunday, February 12, 2012

Lets be honest
I don't know where you are going, with Ed Mueller, but you obviously didn't know him too well. Without besmirching someone who has passed on, I will make nofurtyher comment.

Reply

knarfie

10:18 am on Monday, February 13, 2012

Never thought he was dishonest or didn't care for this town. And you are right. Scarpelli and Acropolis were only in it for their personal gain.

Reply

Eric Witter

11:45 pm on Saturday, March 10, 2012

Why did they clear all the mature oaks around the site? They could have put enough panels internal to the site. It looks horrendous and will lower home values around there. It is pure greed. the mayors office should be the job trailer on that site.

Reply

Scott Pezarras

8:49 am on Sunday, March 11, 2012

Eric

It was required in order for the Twp to install the EPA required "cap" on the landfill. The cap is rubber compound and will be rolled over the landfill and then covered with aggregate, sand, and then a top layer so water cannot penetrate into the ground over the material in the landfill.

Reply

Joseph Lamb

6:21 pm on Monday, March 12, 2012

It's amazing that the Acropolis administration states that the federal government demanded Brick cap the landfill but Brick didn't receive a penny from the federal government even though the federal government provides funds for other superfund clean up sites. Why is it that Brick under this administration seems to be in that negative category?
One of 14 towns out of 566 to have a referendum question. The highest municipal tax rate increase in the state. The BTMUA was the only one of 31 public water systems tested by the EPA to have a likely carcinogen that is at a level to require testing. Because the BTMUA didn't bring this to the EPAs attention and the EPA found it, the EPA is requiring that the testing be performed by an outside independent lab.

Reply
Comment_arrow

John Ciocco

8:53 pm on Tuesday, March 13, 2012

Pure fantasy. As always spouting made up facts and figures that have no basis in reality. I would sugguest going to public meetings and asking any questions you may have and not listening to anything he says. The truth is available and has been told to him on many occasions, he just chooses to ignore it to spread his hate and lies.

Comment_arrow

BW

9:02 pm on Tuesday, March 13, 2012

Yes John the truth is available, too bad no one in town hall or elsewhere wants to tell it. Can you imagine giving 34 million to a shell company, a company run out of a high rise apartment in Hoboken.

Comment_arrow

John Ciocco

9:25 pm on Tuesday, March 13, 2012

BW yes just ask because I received the answer about the company that was set up to handle this project when I asked. It was pretty simple and made perfect legal and business sense when it was explained to me. It is nothing different than what developers do when starting a new project. You just need to get the correct answer from the person that has it rather than listening to Mr Lamb's propaganda and the other nameless hate mongers with a political agenda on the blogs and news sites!

BW

9:34 pm on Tuesday, March 13, 2012

John I did plenty of research on my own, I did not rely on anyone. Standard alternative is a shell company set up by a lawyer (interesting). The "office" of this shell company is located in an apartment in a high rise building in Hoboken.

Steve lead us to believe this company had billions in assests, when the truth is it did not, and this company have NEVER done a project like this before.

If this company was legit, they would have posted a surity bond to cover expenses incase they took off and let us holding the bag. Instead they give a letter of credit, which btw I have been unable to see when I asked, and the town is issuing bonds to cover the project, minus a measly 2.5 million "deposit" this shell gave us. I also find it interesting that they dismissed Pineland Development, and supposedly put it back out for bid, and this "paper company" was the only one to bid.

To quote Steve "something doesnt smell right.

Reply
Comment_arrow

John Ciocco

9:38 pm on Tuesday, March 13, 2012

The parent company has done several projects like this one and sets up a new corporation to oversee each individual project, the same thing a large developer does when begining a new housing development. Nothing sinister in those cases.

Comment_arrow

Scott Pezarras

12:42 am on Wednesday, March 14, 2012

BW

You are misinformed the company has agreed to offer a construction bond for the completion of the array, and they will be responsible to pay the debt service. This was discussed at many Council meetings in the past.

Comment_arrow

knarfie

8:32 am on Wednesday, March 14, 2012

BW This all may be perfectly legitimate. The problem is, this administration has been so sleazy and self serving, the worst Brick has ever had, that anything it is involved with is subject to doubt. John Cs' comments must br taken with a grain of salt, as he has this Mayor on a pedestal for some reason I can't understand, yet he sounds like an intelligent person.

BW

9:50 pm on Tuesday, March 13, 2012

I am very versed in how the bidding process works. And your spin is interesting. We used to do work for Hovanian (sp) and he NEVER set up a new corporation for a new project, he over saw every project himself. (had to laugh when he pulled in in his vet, with a girl 25 years his junior at his side)

He would advertise for bids for framers, masons, plumbers, etc. He would then award the bid and you got paid by him, not some dummy corporation in someones bathroom of a high rise.

Please save me your spin. I KNOW 1st hand how the process works.

Reply

Scott Pezarras

12:47 am on Wednesday, March 14, 2012

BW

I don't think you are familiar with the process for a redevelopment site, which the Landfill project is, it does not follow regular bidding laws under the Local Public Contracts Law. Hovnanian wouldn't follow this practice either because it is not a public entity. It is a private for profit entity.

Reply

Leave a comment

 

The Brick Patch
Valentine's Shopping Guide

See the full guide!

Patch Picks