To the Editor: I read a recent article about how Canton would like to lead the “Solarization” of the North Country. Please reflect on the following: Two years ago Clarkson University had a solar …
This item is available in full to subscribers.
To continue reading, you will need to either log in to your subscriber account, or purchase a new subscription.
If you are a digital subscriber with an active, online-only subscription then you already have an account here. Just reset your password if you've not yet logged in to your account on this new site.
Otherwise, click here to view your options for subscribing.
Please log in to continue |
To the Editor:
I read a recent article about how Canton would like to lead the “Solarization” of the North Country. Please reflect on the following:
Two years ago Clarkson University had a solar array built by a private company from Pennsylvania. This 5 million dollar project was legally conveyed to another private, for-profit company named Clarkson Solar LLC. Via e-mail, Clarkson University openly admits to not knowing who owns this array. This company is legally allowed to keep all profits for its private use, and by using the solar power exemption (RPTL487), they will have no tax bill whatsoever.
Because the exemption for solar power has no distinction between private use and commercial use, this multi-million dollar company was able to use 1.6 million dollars of taxpayer money from New York State Energy Research and Development Agency, make a profit, have no employees, remain anonymous and be 100% exempt from taxation.
Most don’t realize it, but there is an opt-out clause for this solar exemption. If a school or government opts out, which over 160 schools and governments already have, the owner of a solar project can approach the taxing authority, and ask for a PILOT (Payment in Lieu of Taxes). Perhaps a residential project may have a minimal increase, but a multi-million dollar private project could be rejected and pay full taxes. This is the only fair way to regulate this exemption, until our representatives legally separate commercial and residential solar usage.
Another reason to opt-out of this exemption is that 90 percent of the world’s solar panels come from China and Taiwan, whose environmental records are dismal. Less than 5 percent of panels are manufactured in the USA. As a Teamster, I believe the property owner should prove their panels are domestic to receive this tax break. We need to practice what we preach to the younger generation.
There has been no discussion of the disposal of these systems when their useful life has expired (estimated 25 years.) These panels contain and use a stew of dangerous components including silane gas, silicon tetrachloride and sulfur hexafluoride, reportedly the worst greenhouse gas per molecule. Legislation is needed to regulate the disposal of panels and arrays. Taxpayers should not pay for companies leaving their waste behind.
Until these issues are resolved, I urge every taxing entity in St. Lawrence County to opt out of this unfair tax exemption and review solar on a case-by-case occurrence.
Peggy Brusso
Potsdam