Following is a 6- part series exploring Union County’s $45 million solar initiative that originally ran on www.njvoices.com:

I. The Power Chart

I’ve asked in Cranford and Summit.  I’ve called in to the mayors of Linden and Clark.  I’ve investigated and reported back yet I still have questions about solar panels coming to Union County.  Hence this series where I will take this project in steps.

First, the brochure.

From which you learn nothing.  The first diptych consists of pictures of the freeholders and a glossy cover page, followed by an introduction to those pushing this project, a brief blurb on solar energy and, presumably as all the explanation you would dare ask for, a chart.

I like charts.  They make comprehension easier.  But, not this one.   A line labeled Solar Energy goes from the Local Unit to the UCIA when you would think it would be the Local Unit receiving Solar Energy.  Project Capital has a line with two arrows.  Savings seems to flow from the Power Provider through the UCIA to the Local Unit with no indication of how the Provider is able to provide those savings.

After what I’ve seen, this chart makes far more sense.

II. The Pushers

It needn’t have been solar power.  It could have been some combination of windmills, wheels, and hamsters;  anything that would get bonding done through the Union County Improvement Authority (UCIA) to benefit the pushers of  this project:

DeCotiis, Fitzpatrick: General Counsel to the UCIA with a hand (over $6.6 million worth since 2004) in the till of every project run through the UCIA.

PMK/BSG Group: Of course they’re big-time campaign donors but they also have an ex-county employee, who happens to go on treks with the county manager and his wife spearheading this deal.

Bond Underwriter: Financing through an Improvement Authority allows for the negotiated sale of the bonds, which is considered an advantage, though not necessarily for taxpayers.

III. The Morris Model

The Morris County Improvement Authority began their Renewable Energy initiative, as spearheaded by DeCotiis, Fitzpatrick, earlier this year.  Based on what I can tell so far, those buildings that took the panels will be paying a little less for electricity but New Jersey taxpayers and, possibly bondholders, will take a bath.

Here is the Official Statement for the bonding which includes the repayment schedule (page 24) and where those repayments will come from (page 16).

In steps:

1) On February 1, 2010 $21.6 million was bonded of which $313,360 will be the cost of issuance and $436,640 will be for administrative expenses.  The remainder will pay to have some Company install solar panels on 17 buildings by February 18, 2011.

2) Solar will provide about 10% of the power for those buildings.  That 10% will indeed cost less, maybe 30% less, so total savings would be about 3%.  Here is the Feasibility Report with the anticipated savings for each project charted in the last few pages.

3) The bonds will be repaid over 15 years starting on August 15, 2011 with a payment of $2,682,145.  Total debt service through 2025 will be $29,803,465.

4) Those debt payments will be made by the Company that put up the panels who will get that money from 3 sources:
a) Set electricity fees from the buildings (22.22%)
b) Tax Credits/Benefits (20.40%)
c) SREC Revenue (57.38%).

IV. SRECs

They’re Solar Renewable Energy Certificates which are supposed to pay off 57.38% of the debt accumulated to put solar panels at 17 sites in Morris County which are projected to save 2.36% ($84,355) off of electricity bills at those sites in 2011.  Here’s the deal:

After the solar panels are put up there will be two bills those sites will be paying for electricity - about $3 million to their current fossil-fuel provider and $500 thousand to their new solar provider who will use that money to repay debt.  However, $500 thousand won’t cover that first $2,682,145.44 debt payment due on August 15, 2011.  So where is the rest of the money to come from?

Another half a million dollars is expected from ‘Tax Credits/Benefits’* that the solar company receives and the rest from ‘SREC Revenue’.

An SREC is a tradable certificate that represents all the clean energy benefits of electricity generated from the solar electric system and can be sold or traded separately from the power. It is issued once a solar facility has generated 1000kWh (1MWh), through either estimated or actual metered production, and can be listed on the bulletin board at the SREC website.

Electric suppliers under New Jersey’s Renewable Portfolio Standards (RPS) — one of the most aggressive in the United States — must procure 22.5% of the electricity they sell in New Jersey from qualifying renewables, including 2.12% solar, by May 2021 (details).  It’s a variation of cap-and-trade where the under-compliers buy credits from over-compliers to meet their obligations.   The Morris Model anticipates the sale of 3,774 SRECs (currently priced in the $600 range) annually which should more than cover the debt payments.  So what’s the problem?

Either (a) electricity will be a lot more expensive as providers of non-renewable energy pass on the substantial cost of having to purchase these SRECs to their customers or (b) energy providers will put up solar panels on their own to cover their RPS minimum requirements again passing on those costs but, at the same time, destroying the market for SRECs which would cause defaults of all those bonds sold to finance public purchase of solar panels.

Either way we pay more and, on top of that, are stuck with a bunch of ugly solar panels blocking out portions of God’s green earth.

V. The Numbers

Morris County was sold on a plan to bond $21.6 million to ‘go solar’ at 17 sites by talk of 30% savings in electricity at no cost.  Here are the real numbers:

A) 2.36% savings on electricity.  Instead of paying $3,571,857 those Morris County sites can expect to pay $3,487,502, an annual saving of $84,355.

B) 29,803,465.44 in debt service will be paid over the next 15 years by the Solar Provider who will get the money from various groups of taxpayers and electricity users.

C) 77.78% of debt service is expected to come from tax breaks and energy credits which translates into the general taxpayer and energy consumer.

D) 3,773,882 kilowatt hours (kW-h) expected from solar (16.8% of total kW-h) which would buy 3,773 SRECs.

E) $8,953,465 to be paid to bond investors and administrators who pushed this model.

The portion of electricity coming from solar might cost less (if it doesn’t snow too much) but that portion is projected to be 16.8%.  The remainder will surely cost more as providers of ‘non-renewable’ energy pick up the costs of subsidizing renewable energy.

The bonds will either be paid off by the Solar Provider with 77.78% help from subsidies and tax credits or defaulted if the volatile SREC market tanks.

There were over 100 pages of tables, charts, and obfuscating language to go through to get to the real numbers.  That appeared to be by design.

VI. The Risk

Union County officials have been told that there is no risk to spending $45 million to put up solar panels on some of their buildings.  They have been told this by the ones who are pushing this project for whom there really is no risk since they get their money up front.  However, for taxpayers and completely aside from the merits of solar energy, this scheme is doomed to failure simply because of the financing.
In the Morris Model 78% of the debt service is supposed to come from government subsidies including 58% from the sale of SRECs.  The first payment Morris County’s solar provider must make is $2,682,145.44 on August 15, 2011 and over $1.5 million of that is supposed to come from the sale of SRECs.  If the system generates 2,500 Megawatt hours of solar electricity and SRECs sell for $600 a MWh they’ll make it but……for how long?

SREC prices are artificially high compared to other states that have the program because New Jersey has set the cost of avoiding going solar very high ($693 for SACPs in 2010).  If that price keeps coming down (it was $711 in 2009) so will the price of SRECs but there is a much more dangerous, and more likely, scenario looming.

The market for SRECs are Oil and Gas energy providers in New Jersey who would purchase them to avoid paying SACPs.  However if Atlantic City Electric, JCP&L, Orange/Rockland Electric, Elizabethtown Gas, New Jersey Natural Gas, and PSE&G go solar voluntarily to meet their RPS requirements then they won’t need to buy SRECs since they’ll get them on their own.

That is happening.  Without anyone to sell their SRECs to the Solar Providers won’t have that $1.5 million to service their debt and will go bankrupt.  The county, which backed the bonds, will foist that cost onto taxpayers.

I brought this exact scenario up in public and the officials responding didn’t seem to have considered anything beyond what the DeCotiis people had assured them as if they were buying a subpirme, ninja ARM that looked too good to turn down.  It seems like an obvious scam with significant financial perils, but then, I have the benefit of having read the fine print without blinders.

Submitted by: John Paff

This is a video of former Police Officer Gennaro Mirabella trespassing in the Garwood Borough (Union County, New Jersey) offices. Background on how I came to obtain this video (which is more interesting than the video itself) can be found HERE and the links contained therein.

Last August 20th the Union County Alliance’s Exeutive Director, Ed Zarnock, took exception to my questions about his organization at a public meeting.

Zarnock has attended another meeting or two since then, he praises the freeholders for whatever is on the agenda, and never gets into the specifics of what the Alliance does for our taxdollars.

In recent years I have asked both the State and Federal Attorney General’s Office as well as the Office of the State Comptroller to investigate the relationship between the Union County Alliance and the County of Union.

It’s been over a year since my last request. Investigations aren’t confirmed or denied however, the Alliance is still in existence with county tax dollars as its major funding source. Open Public Records Act requests have produced no proof that any work listed in their proposal is actually done. Perhaps, there is nothing wrong there. No laws are being broken at least. Being a shady operation while spending public funds apparently isn’t illegal in New Jersey.

Isn’t that right State and Federal Attorney General’s Office and the Office of the State Comptroller?

That’s comforting to know, isn’t it Union County taxpayers? In fact the Alliance’s funding increased $10,000 since then so everything must be okey-dokey & A-O.K. It went from $322,125 in 2008 to $332,125 in 2009. In 2008 it was $265,125. The Alliance also receives a separate $29,000 to produce the Union County Directions Newsletter which is the only piece of work that shows up in OPRA requests for proof of work performed for $361,125 in county tax dollars.

The Alliance president is Michael Murray. In 2002 Murray was a county employee, his title was Director of Public Information. In 2003 he starts being listed on the county payroll as an employee of the Alliance. In 2005 he is not listed on the county payroll, despite still being the President of the Alliance. Then he returns to the employee rolls in 2006 and 2007. Murray’s last county salary was listed at $104,000 and he had use of a county-owned 2002 Ford Explorer. Since the Alliance’s funding increased by $67,000 in 2008, Murray no longer appeared on the county payroll and it appears he no longer has use of a county vehicle.

Michael Murray married the Union County Manager’s ex-wife which makes him step dad to George Devanney’s children. Devanney’s uncle is State Senator Raymond Lesniak.

In 2007 the county began giving the Alliance a separate $29,000 to produce the Union County Directions Newsletter. I haven’t checked whose been picking up the postage tab lately, that would be approximately $24,000.

There is no proof that anything in the Alliance proposal for funding is actually produced. The Alliance website has been reported on this blog in the past to not have been updated in years. Today it ceases to exist.

The UC Alliance claims in their proposal that their strength is in its membership, which includes representation from business, labor government and education.

Doesn’t any of their members need to visit a website to access the services the Alliance claims to be providing?

Obviously, the services performed by the Alliance can’t be quantified in writing.

Their annual proposal states: The Union County Alliance, Inc. will provide professional services in the following categories, including its role in providing support for the Long-term planning for the continued economic revitalization. This description is meant to be comprehensive, but not restrictive.

Information Services: Provide research and analysis of information within the scope of the Union County Master Plan.

Communications Service: Develop, create and maintain as needed web-based communications Writing, editing and publication development and production

Business Services: Provide research and information to potential developers and businesses with interest in locating in Union County; Develop and coordinate targeted conferences relevant to the business climate Contract Amount

Union County Alliance Executive Director Ed Zarnock “The UC Alliance is not a shady operation”.

Star-Ledger - Dems deny flier is campaign lit / Republicans say newsletter should focus on programs, not politicians

First I will apologize for a mistake I made assuming that the unwavering support of Freeholder Betty Kowalski by letter to the editor was from Edwin the husband, but Edwin is actually her father. Odd though that in the correcting letter from Edwin to the Suburban News, he only objected to the familial connection and not to the points I had brought up regarding his freeholder daughter insulting a resident at a freeholder meeting. Should the readers assume that he couldn’t refute those major points?

And I commend Edwin as a true parent being always supportive of actions of their child whether questionable or not. My mother at 90 years old thinks I was an exemplary son way back. A parent can only teach the values of life that are required, but whether they are instilled or practiced by that child are itself only by the child’s volition.

One way our children are judged is by those they hang out with. You should inquire exactly where Betty goes every other Thursday night. We find those Thursdays, she is hanging out in Elizabeth with some dubious gang that call themselves “the chosen freeholders”. If one paid attention during the times they hold their gang meetings they are wantonly spending nearly half a billion of our tax money every year without care, question nor expertise. Many taxpayers consider this close to extortion. To back up this feeling, the freeholder gang’s threats are written on signs throughout the county: “We are connected to you”. The residents should be afraid. Their schemes and agendas dissipate that huge amount of money and there is nothing to show for it. Look around the local towns throughout the the county. Do you see where any of this half a billion dollars goes every year?

A while ago Edwin, they actually made your daughter gang leader for a year and it appears that it may have been then she started the abuse of residents. Back then when members of the public confronted her with questions about where nearly half a billion dollars disappears to every year she denied them saying that this is not a Q&A session and they could only comment. Accountability, she has none. Maybe you weren’t aware of her egregious actions until just now when she verbally abused that Cranford resident and it appeared in newsprint. Yet you still disavow what she apparently has become. Pay attention when she comes home those Thursday nights. Ask her what she ate, and just as that gang noted in the past to the public, she may say just “a pizza and a sandwich”. However, her clothes may divulge the aroma of roasted chickens, beef ribs, cakes, pies and 15 types of cappuccino; a sumptuous feast for each gang meeting for such little work, all costing 10’s and 10’s of thousands of extracted taxpayer dollars over the years. They dine on our dime like the kings that they wish they were.

Make no mistake; she has become a gang member with blind allegiance to “the chosen freeholder” gang. Their gang mantra seems to be- Arrogance, disrespect, abuse, waste, answering to no one. We have all seen it.

As a good father we are sure you tried. But your daughter has become a sworn member of that gang and you can’t miss the signals. Possible intervention toward her would be the only resolution to return her to becoming a productive, honest and respectful person in the community. I am there if you need me to help. Good luck, Dad.

Interesting read of Steve Silva’s post - $111,420 worth of public propaganda (referring to Mr. D’Elia) AND John’s post - Go Green (2) The Pushers, commented on by jbkenrenhata (who I’m led to believe is the same Mr. D’Elia). In both, Mr. D’Elia comments on MOU for the 20 year lease extension with Covanta, the operator of the Union County Resource Recovery Facility.

Union County announces $276 million tax relief and waste disposal savings plan

“… lease extension.. that once finalized, will result in at least $276 million in tax relief… during the lifetime of the agreement.” I note that the agreement is for 20 years, the extension running until 2045, which, to me, indicates it would begin in 2025, 15 years from now.

“Under the lease extension terms, the County and its taxpayers will realize an additional $276 million in revenues - and tax relief- over the life of the proposed contract…. entering into a 20 year lease extension until 2045…” “the lease extension would also give Union County a 10 percent revenue share of proceeds from the sale of energy generated at the facility beginning in 2029 ” - (19 years from now).
The County’s 2010 budget is $472 million which represents a daily expenditure of $1.29 million per day.

The $276 million tax relief, over the 20 years, comes to $13.8 million per year or 10.7 days of expenditures in TODAY’S world. However, the $276 million wouldn’t start to be realized until 2025 when the extension is scheduled to begin. Based on the fact that the County’s budget has increased from $272 million in 1996 to $472 million in 2010 ( taken from the County website), an increase of 73.5% over that 15 year period, their budget could well be $819 million by 2025 when the lease extension takes effect. If that budget should happen, the County would then be spending $2.24 million per day and the $13.8 million would represent 6 days of County spending.

“As negotiations are ongoing, final details will be released later”

Do you think the headline for the press release once final details are released will be: Union County announces $276 million tax relief, to begin 15 years from now ??? representing 6 days of County expenditures per year
(I didn’t think you would!)

Steve Silva nailed it - public propaganda

Submitted by:
John Paff, Chair
New Jersey Libertarian Party’s
Open Government Advocacy Project

As previously reported, I filed an Internal Affairs complaint on May 12, 2010 against Garwood Police Chief William Legg for submitting a false certification in a civil case that misled a Superior Court Judge. Background on this matter is on-line.

By letter dated July 30, 2010, Union County Prosecutor’s Office’s Chief of Detectives Robert T. Buccino informed me that my complaint
was “determined to be unfounded” and was dismissed. A copy of my complaint and the dismissal letter is on-line here.

According to the Attorney General’s Internal Affairs Policy & Procedures, Revised November 2000, a complaint is considered “unfounded” if the investigation determines that “the alleged incident did not occur.” The Policy & Procedures manual is on-line here.

Union County Prosecutor’s Office Law Enforcement Code of Ethics:
…. I will keep my private life unsullied as an example to all and will behave in a manner that does not bring discredit to me or to my agency…… Honest and thoughtful in deed both in my personal and official life, I will constantly strive to achieve these objectives and ideals, dedicating myself before God to my chosen profession….Law Enforcement.

Today is the one year anniversary of the release of the Office of the New York State Inspector General’s report on the Waterfront Commission “Plagued by Abuse and Corruption.”

An anonymous caller brought my attention to the involvement of employees of the Union County Prosecutor’s office namely former Assistant Prosecutor Jon Deutsch and current First Assistant Prosecutor Albert Cernadas, Jr. The Star-Ledger’s coverage, I could only find one short story, didn’t mention the Union County Prosecutor’s office connection; therefore if you live in Union County you would have had to have gotten a phone call, read Bob Ingle’s book The Soprano State, or read the report.

Excerpts from report:
Former Union County Prosecutor & Waterfront Commission General Counsel Jon Deutsch:

….Deutsch also engaged in a series of improprieties involving his relationship with Al Cernadas, Jr., the First Assistant Prosecutor of Union County, New Jersey, and Deutsch’s former co-worker and friend. In the first instance, Deutsch did not recuse himself from the questioning of Cernadas, Jr.’s father, a subject of an official joint investigation with the United States Attorney’s Office, Eastern District of New York. Cernadas, Jr. testified to the Inspector General that he was unaware that Deutsch conducted the questioning of his father. Deutsch also inappropriately intervened in a police investigation for a friend of the Cernadas family, Jimmy Zamuz. When asked why he, rather than members of the Commission’s police division, obtained police records from New Jersey, Deutsch testified, “I was a prosecutor in Union County. I mean, New Jersey’s a little different than New York. I mean, we know people…. .”

Jon Deutsch was dismissed from the Waterfront Commission on October 14, 2008 as a result of misconduct.

Union County First Assistant Prosecutor Albert Cernadas, Jr.:
Cernadas, Jr. contacted Deutsch on February 21, 2008, after learning that Commission detectives had attempted to contact Costa, and the two men met for dinner that evening. Although Cernadas, Jr. initially stated that he had only discussed general reporting requirements with Deutsch, once confronted with telephone records, Cernadas, Jr. admitted to Commission investigators that he told Deutsch at dinner that members of the Waterfront Commission were looking for his uncle. Deutsch testified to the Inspector General that Cernadas, Jr. explained to him that Costa was the victim of an assault, and that, after receiving a telephone call, Cernadas, Jr. requested that Deutsch find out why members of the Waterfront Commission were looking for his uncle. At the time, Cernadas, Jr. was First Assistant Prosecutor of Union County, but had no official involvement in the Machado-Costa altercation. During Deutsch’s testimony to the Inspector General, he emphasized that the Union County Prosecutor’s jurisdiction includes the New Jersey piers.

I happen to believe that the behavior of our public officials, especially law enforcement, is cause for public concern. They should “keep their private life unsullied” and all that. But, what happens when they don’t? What happens when government becomes the lawbreaker or disrespects the law – what higher authority holds them accountable?

In New Jersey – that would be - no one.

Obviously content of character isn’t a criteria when appointing chief law enforcement officers. But this is New Jersey, and we’ve stopped expecting our government officials to have moral character – just be connected. County Prosecutors are political appointments and they answer to politicans not the public or God.

I don’t know if Union County’s First Assistant Prosecutor Albert Cernadas, Jr. was ever disciplined internally for his connection with the Waterfront investigation by his boss Prosecutor Romankow or Romankow’s boss the State’s Attorney General. I highly doubt it.

In the early 1990s, Romankow then in private practice, successfully represented Linden Mayor John Gregorio, who waged a legal battle to return to the political arena after being indicted, convicted and then pardoned by Gov. Tom Kean on conspiracy charges stemming from his hidden interest in two Linden go-go bars.

All involved with the Waterfront abuse and corruption were punished in some way from losing their jobs to being prosecuted. Detective James Sutera is scheduled to be sentenced today in New York. Cernadas, Jr. didn’t even make a headline in Union County. I somehow doubt that lying to investigators, as Cernadas did as stated in the report issued by the Office of the New York State Inspector General – not some blog, wouldn’t be cause for removal from his position as the 2nd in command to the Chief Law Enforcement Officer in Union County. “Cernadas Jr. initially stated that he had only discussed general reporting requirements with Deutsch, once confronted with telephone records, Cernadas, Jr. admitted to Commission investigators that he told Deutsch at dinner …..”

Sweeping this under the rug with no public response seems dirty. A prosecutors office should be beyond reproach even in New Jersey. These people are charged with prosecuting citizens for crimes, and they don’t have to answer to the public for their behavior. They are the law.

The Union County Prosecutor’s office doesn’t seem to be suffering from public scorn either.

In July, 2010 Gov. Chris Christie created a commission to examine a potential overhaul of county prosecutors’ offices. The governor signed an executive order to authorize the commission, which is chaired by Attorney General Paula Dow. He said the panel will review a range of options, from a total takeover to eliminating redundant functions.

The Union County Prosecutor was chosen to serve on the commission. And guess what – Theodore Romankow is against a state takeover.

Gov. James McGreevey named Theodore Romankow Union County Prosecutor in 2002, he was 61 years old. Mandatory retirement age for prosecutors is 70. Governor Christie will appoint the next Union County Prosecutor.

I recommend you download the entire 67 page report. Not one page of it is boring.

Excerpts naming former and current Union County Prosecutor employees and family members from the press release and report from the Office of the New York State Inspector General:

Deutsch, who was “plagued by conflicts of interest,” engaged in a series of violations involving the Cernadas family. He leaked confidential information to his friend, Al Cernadas, Jr. He improperly intervened in a police probe of a Cernadas family friend arrested on a weapons charge. And, he took a primary role in an investigation of union official Albert Cernadas, Sr., his friend’s father, before Cernadas, Sr., was indicted in a contract-steering case.

(Note: According to Bob Ingle’s “The Soprano State” a Brooklyn, New York grand jury described Cernadas, Sr. as an associate of the Genoveese crime family who handled union jobs and contracts for organized crime. Albert Cernadas, Sr. was indicted along with ILA leaders.)

The ILA was under federal investigation when McGreevey allowed them to pay for a five-night trip to Puerto Rico for him and his family, where McGreevey would attend the union’s national convention, and deliver a speech. The invitation came from Albert Cernadas, Sr. then president of Local 1235 in Newark and executive VP of the ILA.

(Note: According to a New York Daily News Article published in Jan. 2004, “Meet the fattest fat cats of the American labor movement, the bosses of the International Longshoremen’s Association”. Albert Cernadas, Sr., 68, was paid $317,545 as the ILA’s executive vice president while holding a second full-time job on the other side of the Hudson, making $160,742 as president of 700-member Local 1235 in Newark, which boosts his haul to $478,287.)

Cernadas, Sr. who was indicted in a contract steering case and later pled guilty a week before the trial began to a lesser charge - wire and mail fraud conspiracy and was sentenced to only two years probation. His lawyer was Jack Arseneault, who according to Politicer.nj.com was nearly James E. McGreevey’s Attorney General. 292 letters were presented to U.S. District Judge I. Leo Glasser asking for leniency.

General Counsel Jon Deutsch
Former General Counsel Jon Deutsch, in direct violation of the Waterfront Commission Act, helped felon Frank Cardaci concoct a scheme to keep his port business despite a federal racketeering conviction for storing illegally diverted international goods in his port warehouse.

Deutsch, who was “plagued by conflicts of interest,” engaged in a series of violations involving the Cernadas family. He leaked confidential information to his friend, Al Cernadas, Jr. He improperly intervened in a police probe of a Cernadas family friend arrested on a weapons charge. And, he took a primary role in an investigation of union official Albert Cernadas, Sr., his friend’s father, before Cernadas, Sr., was indicted in a contract-steering case.

Deutsch also engaged in a series of improprieties involving his relationship with Al Cernadas, Jr., the First Assistant Prosecutor of Union County, New Jersey, and Deutsch’s former co-worker and friend. In the first instance, Deutsch did not recuse himself from the questioning of Cernadas, Jr.’s father, a subject of an official joint investigation with the United States Attorney’s Office, Eastern District of New York.

Cernadas, Jr. testified to the Inspector General that he was unaware that Deutsch conducted the questioning of his father. Deutsch also inappropriately intervened in a police investigation for a friend of the Cernadas family, Jimmy Zamuz. When asked why he, rather than members of the Commission’s police division, obtained police records from New Jersey, Deutsch testified, “I was a prosecutor in Union County. I mean, New Jersey’s a little different than New York. I mean, we know people. Who did I know? I knew a special assistant to the mayor of Newark. It happened in Newark, I believe.”

According to Cernadas, Jr., he knew that Zamuz was arrested but he did not ask Deutsch to obtain records or otherwise assist Zamuz. Following these two incidents involving the Cernadas family, Deutsch again abused his authority as Commission general counsel by providing non-public Commission information to assist Albert Cernadas, Jr., regarding Cernadas family members under investigation for an altercation in a bar. Deutsch then attempted to secure the suspension of one of the combatants, who was at the time estranged from the Cernadas family…………..

Deutsch Failed to Recuse Himself from an Investigation of Albert Cernadas, Sr. The Inspector General found that Deutsch improperly took a primary role in the investigation of Albert Cernadas, Sr., a union official and the father of Deutsch’s close friend. Only after Cernadas, Sr. was indicted did Deutsch cease his role in the investigation.

Prior to his employment at the Waterfront Commission, Deutsch served as a prosecutor in Union County, New Jersey, where he became friends with Albert Cernadas, Jr., who later became the First Assistant Prosecutor of Union County. Deutsch and Cernadas, Jr. have known each other since approximately 1993 and have remained friends. Deutsch and Cernadas, Jr. meet regularly for lunch or dinner, and Deutsch invited Cernadas, Jr. to his daughter’s bat mitzvah. Both men sit on the board of Crime Stoppers of Union County.

Beginning in 2000, when Deutsch headed the Commission’s Licensing Division, the United States Attorney’s Office, Eastern District of New York, and the Waterfront Commission conducted a joint investigation into certain members of the International Longshoremen’s Association, a 65,000-member union headquartered in New York. At the time, Albert Cernadas, Sr. was the executive vice-president of the union and was one of the subjects of the investigation.

In March 2000 and October 2003, under the authority of its Compact, the Waterfront Commission interviewed Cernadas, Sr. Despite his close personal ties to Cernadas, Jr., Deutsch led both interviews. During the March 2000 interview, Deutsch stated on the record “For simplistic purposes of the record, I will ask the questions.”

Kevin McGowan, who participated in the October 2003 interview, stated that he knew Deutsch had worked with Cernadas, Jr., but Deutsch did not disclose the extent of their relationship. It was not until after Cernadas, Sr. was arrested that Deutsch recused himself from the Cernadas, Sr. case.

When questioned by the Inspector General about his participation in the joint investigation, Deutsch argued that a conflict of interest only arose after Cernadas, Sr. was indicted.

Q.: Why did it change?
Deutsch: Because I felt that was a major event that now he is being accused of being a member of organized crime.

Q.: But a civil RICO investigation wasn’t enough?
Deutsch: No, I think it was the – I think it was — no, no. With the civil RICO, God, that went on for months. They were just trying to build a case. They didn’t say, oh, we got a sure-shot thing here, this guy is a member of organized crime. They were trying to build their case.

Cernadas, Jr. testified to the Inspector General that he was unaware that Deutsch conducted the questioning of his father. He recalled a conversation that he had with Deutsch after his father was indicted, where Deutsch stated that he was not going to be involved in his father’s investigation because of Deutsch’s relationship with Cernadas, Jr…………….

Deutsch Improperly Assisted a Friend of the Cernadas Family

Deutsch abused his position at the Waterfront Commission to obtain police records and interceded on behalf of a friend of the Cernadas family. As noted above, Albert Cernadas, Sr., was a senior official of the longshoremen’s union, and Albert Cernadas, Jr., is a close friend of Deutsch.

Jimmy Zamuz, a friend of the Cernadas family, was a registrant of the Waterfront Commission. On January 7, 2008, the Waterfront Commission learned that Zamuz was arrested during a homicide investigation. Unaware of Zamuz’s role in the homicide, the Waterfront Commission initiated steps to suspend him, concerned that he may be a danger to other workers on the piers.

Although the Police Division was responsible for obtaining records, Deutsch used his influence to obtain police records of the homicide investigation, and personally retrieved those records in Newark, New Jersey. The records revealed that Zamuz, although arrested for weapons possession, was not suspected of the homicide. With these records, Deutsch interceded to prevent the suspension of Zamuz’s Waterfront registration.

Deutsch testified that it was only after he was in the process of obtaining the records that he learned from De Maria about the relationship of Zamuz to Cernadas, Sr. Deutsch claimed that he was unaware that the Zamuz and Cernadas families were friendly or that Jimmy Zamuz and Deutsch’s friend, Albert Cernadas, Jr., were close friends. Deutsch further testified that he did not obtain the records at the request of Cernadas or anyone else outside of the Waterfront Commission. Rather, Deutsch claimed that Executive Director De Maria and Acting Chief of Police McGowan asked him to obtain necessary documentation regarding Zamuz’s role in the homicide investigation.

When asked why members of the police division would ask him to obtain these records Deutsch testified, “I was a prosecutor in Union County. I mean, New Jersey’s a little different than New York. I mean, we know people. Who did I know? I knew a special assistant to the mayor of Newark. It happened in Newark, I believe.”

Both then-Executive Director De Maria and then-Acting Chief of Police McGowan testified to the Inspector General that Deutsch’s assistance was never requested in this matter. Rather, since Zamuz was facing suspension, Deutsch took it upon himself to obtain the records to protect Zamuz’s employment. De Maria and McGowan both stated that they knew of the relationship between the Zamuz and Cernadas families, and of the relationship between Deutsch and Cernadas, Jr. McGowan testified to a conversation he had with De Maria after learning that Deutsch was in New Jersey in an effort to obtain the Zamuz records. According to McGowan, De Maria stated:

I just called [Deutsch] on the phone, and I told him, ‘get your ass out of there now and get back here,’…do you believe that this guy with all the things that has gone on with Al Cernadas, that this guy would interject himself in this again? Does he ever learn?

De Maria agreed that he made the above statement to McGowan, in substance. Cernadas, Jr. acknowledged that Zamuz is a friend of his and his family.

According to Cernadas, Jr., he knew that Zamuz was arrested but he did not ask Deutsch to obtain records or otherwise assist Zamuz……..

Deutsch Provided Non-Public Information to Albert Cernadas, Jr.

Following the two incidents involving the Cernadas family, Deutsch again abused his authority as Commission general counsel by providing non-public Commission information to assist Albert Cernadas, Jr., regarding Cernadas family members under investigation for an altercation in a bar. Deutsch then attempted to secure the suspension of one of the combatants, who was at the time estranged from the Cernadas family.

Deutsch was suspended as a result of this improper intervention, as were two police detectives who lied during an internal Commission investigation of the matter.

The facts of the incident are as follows. On February 21, 2008, two members of the extended Cernadas family, Ray Costa and Robert Machado, were in an altercation at a bar. Another Cernadas family member, Henry Machado, was present. All three men are registrants of the Waterfront Commission and were attending a union meeting when the fight erupted. At the time, the Machados were estranged from the Cernadas family because Henry Machado was in the process of divorcing Cernadas, Jr.’s sister. Ray Costa is Cernadas, Jr.’s uncle. Lieutenant Scott Politano learned of the incident from an anonymous call. Politano assigned Detective David Bistacco and others to investigate the incident and interview Costa and Robert Machado.

Cernadas, Jr. contacted Deutsch on February 21, 2008, after learning that Commission detectives had attempted to contact Costa, and the two men met for dinner that evening. Although Cernadas, Jr. initially stated that he had only discussed general reporting requirements with Deutsch, once confronted with telephone records, Cernadas, Jr. admitted to Commission investigators that he told Deutsch at dinner that members of the Waterfront Commission were looking for his uncle. Deutsch testified to the Inspector General that Cernadas, Jr. explained to him that Costa was the victim of an assault, and that, after receiving a telephone call, Cernadas, Jr. requested that Deutsch find out why members of the Waterfront Commission were looking for his uncle. At the time, Cernadas, Jr. was First Assistant Prosecutor of Union County, but had no official involvement in the Machado-Costa altercation. During Deutsch’s testimony to the Inspector General, he emphasized that the Union County Prosecutor’s jurisdiction includes the New Jersey piers.

At approximately 9:00 p.m. that same evening, Deutsch called Lieutenant Politano to communicate Cernadas, Jr.’s question of why Commission detectives were looking to interview Ray Costa. Deutsch had previously been instructed to follow the chain of command within the Police Division; therefore, he should have contacted then-Acting Chief of Police McGowan. Deutsch stated to members of the Waterfront Commission during an interview, “I called Lieutenant Politano, I explained that I had dinner with the First Assistant, that he indicated to me that Ray Costa was a victim of a crime, and that Ray Costa says somebody from the Waterfront Commission is looking for him but he doesn’t know who.” Deutsch admitted that he knew that Cernadas, Jr. was making a personal request to find out information about his uncle. Politano informed Deutsch of the cause of the Commission’s investigation, and Deutsch immediately relayed the information to Cernadas, Jr. Politano told internal Commission investigators that it was unusual for Deutsch to call him at all, especially in the evening to request information about a case.

The next morning, February 22, 2008, Deutsch described the altercation, as imparted to him by Cernadas, Jr., to then-Director of the Law Division Joy Kelly, who was previously unaware of the incident. According to Kelly, Deutsch wanted Robert Machado’s registration suspended as result of the incident. Deutsch denied requesting Machado’s suspension, and testified to the Inspector General that he only told Kelly that Costa was willing to cooperate and make a statement. Deutsch testified that he wanted to help resolve the matter quickly. Kelly stated to the Inspector General that Deutsch was not typically involved in this type of investigation.

Deutsch testified to the Inspector General that he also contacted then-Acting Chief of Police McGowan to facilitate Costa’s statement. McGowan testified that the information which Deutsch told Cernadas, Jr. would not have normally been made public, and that the information Cernadas, Jr. requested of Deutsch was for ernadas, Jr.’s personal benefit. When McGowan learned of Deutsch’s involvement in the matter, he initiated the internal investigation that led to Deutsch’s suspension.

On February 2, 2005, the Waterfront Commission adopted the Code of Ethics remarkably authored by Deutsch. Section 4(F) of the code prohibits the release of confidential Commission information:
Confidential information (information not available to the general public) shall not be: willfully disclosed to unauthorized persons either during the Commission service or after separation from the Commission; used by the employee or member to further his or her private interests; or used by the employee or member, directly or indirectly, for pecuniary gain or to make any investments or other financial transactions.

In addition, section 4(B) of the code states the following:
No employee or member should use or attempt to use his or her official position to secure unwarranted privileges or advantages for himself, herself or others.

Deutsch also testified that he had circumvented the Police Division’s chain of command because there is no official chart listing the chain of command within the 21Police Division. That testimony notwithstanding, Deutsch later admitted to knowing the basic command structure of a police department.

In early 2008, the Waterfront Commission conducted an internal investigation of this incident and found that Deutsch conveyed non-public information to Cernadas, Jr., in violation of the Waterfront Commission’s Ethics Policy. As a result of this violation, Deutsch was suspended on March 5, 2008 and terminated on October 14, 2008.

During the internal Waterfront Commission investigation regarding Deutsch’s disclosure of non-public information to Cernadas, Jr., Lieutenant Politano and Detective Bistacco made false statements to Acting Chief McGowan.

When initially questioned, Politano falsely told McGowan that he had not spoken to Deutsch about the Costa/Machado investigation. After Deutsch informed Politano that he had already confessed to the conversation, Politano claimed to McGowan that he had forgotten the conversation. Politano later admitted to internal Commission investigators that he had lied to McGowan because he feared repercussions from Deutsch.

Detective Bistacco, who conducted some of the inquiries surrounding the altercation, contacted Deutsch to warn him of the internal investigation after being questioned by McGowan. Deutsch testified that Bistacco called him after speaking to McGowan and told him, in substance, to “watch out” and that “this is De Maria’s doing.”

Phone records corroborate that Bistacco phoned Deutsch shortly after his conversation with McGowan about the incident. Bistacco lied under oath to Commission investigators, denying that he had contacted anyone regarding the internal investigation.

Politano and Bistacco were both suspended as a result of their false statements.

Madonna refused to terminate Bistacco for the statements he made under oath. Instead, Bistacco’s duties have been restricted…….

Read the full report.

Tina Renna is president of the Union County Watchdog Association, she can be reached at tinarenna@unioncountywatchdog.org.

Submitted by:
S T E V E S I L V A

Countywatchers note: When asked if this email exchange between Steve and the County’s Public Information Officer could be published Steve responded:

You can surely post this!

You can make my name in large letters - just like John Hancock!!!

They asked John Hancock why he signed his name so large: He responded, “So King George can read it without his glasses!!”

Steve Silva
________________________________________

I sent a short e:mail to Sebastian D’Elia asking about Union County taxes.

This is his response. (Notice: he let me know he “was off” when he supposedly responded.)

Keep up the great work.

Steve Silva

Sent: Saturday, August 07, 2010 2:07 PM
To: Sebastian Delia sdelia@ucnj.org
Subject: Union County - second highest taxes in the United States?

Sebastian D’Elia
Union County Information Director

Mr. D’Elia,

Hello.

Is it true that Union County has the second-highest taxes of any county in the United States?

If this is true would you kindly let me know why?

Thank you kindly.

Steven J Silva
Cranford
________________________________________
From: sdelia@ucnj.org
Sent: 8/8/2010 11:53:37 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time
Subj: RE: Union County - second highest taxes in the United States?

Dear Steve: thanks for writing to me.

While I am off today, I am more than happy to take the time to answer your question.

I am afraid the answer to your question requires making three separate inquiries, since i can only account for County Government taxes—you should also contact Cranford, and the Cranford Board of Education to ask them the same question.

That is because your tax bill is comprised of three portions—Local government (Cranford in your instance), your School taxes, and your County taxes.

County taxes are the lowest portion (least amount) of your taxes in Cranford. The School Board is the highest amount you are taxed for, the Cranford municipal government is second largest piece of the pie.

Cranford’s municipal taxes have increased well over 70 percent since 2002, one of the highest rates of increase per municipality in the County. This year in 2010, Cranford municipal’s taxes –when combined with the sewer fee (which was split apart this year by the town and commissioners) rose about $185, bringing the average homeowner’s tax bill to approximately $8,905. In fact, you may want to email Mark Smith—he is the Mayor of Cranford, and can answer questions about his portion of the tax bill–the municipal end. His email is: M-Smith@cranfordnj.org
The study you refer to about your tax bill that you have heard about is here:
http://www.forbes.com/2009/01/23/taxes-homes-property-forbeslife-cx_mw_0123realestate.html.

You may read it and see what explains what metrics it uses.
As I can only speak for Union County government, I can tell we have embarked on a long-range tax relief plan that will provide $276 million in tax relief over the long haul to our municipalities. You may want to read it, I’ve enclosed it below. And thanks for writing to me.

Union County announces $276 million tax relief and waste disposal savings plan
Published: Wednesday, August 04, 2010, 1:56 PM Updated: Wednesday, August 04, 2010, 1:59 PM
Cranford Chronicle

ELIZABETH—The County of Union announced it will enter into a lease extension with Covanta, the operator of the Union County Resource Recovery Facility, that once finalized, will result in at least $276 million in tax relief as well as waste disposal rate savings for all of Union County and its municipalities during the lifetime of the agreement.

“At a time when all governmental authorities are suffering from a dramatic drop in revenues, it is more important than ever that we seek to maximize an asset that has reached peak value and can help deliver tax relief to our taxpayers,” Freeholder Chairman Daniel P. Sullivan said. “This action would do that while guaranteeing that our municipalities and residents maintain low disposal rates at the Union County Resource Recovery Facility.”

Under the lease extension terms, the County and its taxpayers will realize an additional $276 million in revenues–and tax relief–over the life of the proposed contract, and there will also be an immediate rate reduction in the disposal fee from $64.44 to $61 per ton providing relief to Union County municipalities, private haulers and residents.
The Union County Board of Chosen Freeholders voted last Thursday to unanimously pass a resolution of a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), entering into a 20-year lease extension until 2045 with Covanta, which currently leases and operates the Union County Resource Recovery Facility (UCRRF), located in Rahway. The lease extension also gives Covanta the option extend the lease an additional five years to 2050 at the end of the term.

The lease extension would also give Union County a 10 percent revenue share of proceeds from the sale of energy generated at the facility beginning in 2029.
As part of the MOU, the Freeholder Board also authorized representatives of the Union County Utilities Authority to begin the process of finalizing various agreements, including obtaining an approval of the extension from several State agencies. As negotiations are ongoing, final details will be released later.

The UCRRF currently generates electricity while disposing of all municipal solid waste generated in Union County at rates which are already among the lowest in the region.
The State originally mandated all 21 of New Jersey’s County governmental entities to build their own incinerators during the early 90s, a mandate Union County reluctantly complied with at the time.

The UCRRF, which originally began operation in 1994, has delivered significant economic value to the County.

The average cost of municipal solid waste disposal in the County in 1995 was around $120 per ton. In 2008, the average cost was only around $75 per ton. The taxpayers of the County have already realized well in excess of $100 million in savings when compared with other waste disposal options in the 16 years UCRRF has been in operation, Sullivan said.

At the UCRRF, municipal solid waste is burned at high temperatures in combustion chambers, and the heat is used to generate steam which drives a turbine to produce 45 mega watts of clean, renewable electricity enough to satisfy energy needs of 35,000 homes annually.

In investigating this solar panel scheme the UCIA is pushing I went to a Summit council meeting this week and, seeing as it’s a slow summer Sunday, rather then throwing out what I learned about solar panels I’d like to throw out two questions about what I might have learned about politics.

When you’re at the podium and don’t know the back-stories of who you’re addressing it’s difficult to interpret some answers.  For example, did this guy imply that I was a political hack in this clip?

Secondly, knowing practically nil about Summit or backroom deals* I can’t verify if there really is a Summit staffer in the back pocket of someone at Union County.  Can anyone out there, in your anonymity, enlighten me on this?

I’ll get to solar panels soon, including hearing from a town that accepted the deal, but, if you’re interested, here’s the full clip of what they had to say in Summit.
.
.
.
.
* No insiders seem to want to confide any behind-the-scenes machinations to me, for some reason.