The Fight

Sign In or Create an Account.

By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy

Spotlight

A Solar Developer Strikes Back at ‘Corrupt’ Officials in Pennsylvania

Rockland Solar accuses East Fairfield, Pennsylvania, of “municipal extortion.”

An alleged bribe.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

A solar developer is accusing a Pennsylvania town of requesting a $150 million bribe to get its permits, calling it “municipal extortion.”

Rockland Solar – a subsidiary of utility-scale solar developer Birch Creek – filed a federal lawsuit last week accusing officials in the northern Pennsylvania township of East Fairfield of intentionally moving the goalposts for getting permits to build over the span of multiple years. Rockland’s attorneys in the litigation describe the four officials controlling the township’s board of supervisors as engaging in “corrupt” behavior to deny the project, “ultimately culminating in the solicitation of a bride of more than $150,000,000” in exchange for approval of its application to develop land in the township.

The federal complaint scans as a horror story in solar development. Applications for Rockland Solar’s project were first filed in 2021 and granted approval from the township’s zoning officials in 2022, per the company’s legal complaint. But things seem to have gone south when Rockland Solar sought approval of its first land use application from the town, as replies to emails from town officials became scattershot and sporadic.

In August 2024, per the lawsuit, East Fairfield officials scheduled a crucial public meeting to decide whether to approve the application without notifying Rockland Solar itself, which the company claims was an intentional move “in corrupt and underhanded bad faith” meant “to consider, and then deny” the application “without providing due process.” According to the lawsuit, one of the reasons for the denial was that the project was located within the township – despite it already being approved by zoning officials.

Rockland Solar then took the town to Pennsylvania claims court over the decision because it was reached after a statutory deadline, according to the lawsuit. Amidst this legal fight, the company submitted a second application to build the project – making what the company says were many size and setback changes intended to address the reasons for the apparent denial. East Fairfield ultimately denied the project again. But the developer kept trying, negotiating in apparent good faith with the town’s lawyers to try and reach an agreement.

Then came the alleged request for a bribe. Per a letter cited in the legal complaint, officials asked the developer to pay the town annual payments every year the project was operating – starting at $5,000 and then increasing 25% “every year for the life of the facility,” and that land owners bordering the property would also need to be “compensated 10% of their current property value.” Rockland Solar’s attorneys calculated the annual payments alone to total at least $3 million in the thirtieth year of the project and $30 million a decade later.

Altogether, Rockland Solar’s attorneys landed on the whopping $150 million figure, stipulating that this figure doesn’t include the payments to neighboring property owners. The company argues that this “solicitation of money by a township commissioner to a developer” in exchange for “favorable treatment of a land use application” violated the state bribery statute.

I’ve seen a lot of conflict writing The Fight – including lots of lawsuits filed by developers and residents alike – but I’d never seen an escalation this profound. Normally, suing the town you’re building a project in is a bad idea because it can spoil the well of public trust. I can’t help but think this maneuver was a last resort for Rockland Solar.

It’s also quite rare to get an inside look at the negotiations between a developer and a town. We’re used to seeing community benefit agreements and compacts come and go and I’ve told you how those deals have mixed results. Rockland Solar is now a case study in perhaps one of the worst ways those talks can end up.

I reached out to Rockland Solar’s attorneys, as well as Birch Creek, but failed to hear back. I also tried to reach officials in East Fairfield to hear their take on these extraordinary claims, but no dice. Here’s hoping that writing this leads to them reaching out as well, because this is fascinating and I want to learn more for all of you!

This article is exclusively
for Heatmap Plus subscribers.

Go deeper inside the politics, projects, and personalities
shaping the energy transition.
To continue reading
Create a free account or sign in to unlock more free articles.
or
Please enter an email address
By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy
Q&A

How to Talk to Climate-Minded Investors About Data Centers

A chat with Colette Lamontagne, senior director for electric power at Ceres.

Colette Lamontagne.
Heatmap Illustration

This week’s conversation is with Colette Lamontagne, senior director for electric power at the sustainability finance advocacy group Ceres. Her team just released a shareholder engagement guide for the utility space around data center development. I’ve been wondering when the ESG crowd would enter into the AI infrastructure fray, so I asked if I could chat with Colette about what the guide could teach my lovely readers and whether the data center backlash portends a new wave of boardroom fights between electric companies and institutional investors.

Our conversation was lightly edited for clarity.

Keep reading...Show less
Yellow
Hotspots

The Most Important Data Center Vote You Haven’t Heard About

Plus more on this week’s biggest development fights.

The United States.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

1. Washtenaw County, Michigan — The Mitten State made itself the center of the data center backlash this week, as multiple AI skeptics won key Democratic congressional primaries. Yet the most significant election result wasn’t a primary vote, but rather a quiet referendum in a small town outside Ann Arbor.

  • On Tuesday, the town of Augusta voted by a nearly 9-1 margin to overturn a land use ordinance enacted by the township government the previous year allowing a data center on agricultural land. This means developer Thor Equities will either have to find a way around clear local rejection or abandon Augusta for its proposed data center.
  • Augusta sits on the border of Michigan’s 7th congressional district, where Sunrise Movement cofounder Will Lawrence pulled off a surprise upset against a moderate establishment-backed candidate. Lawrence’s victorious primary campaign was rooted almost entirely in advertising against data center development and tying his opposition to supporting the industry.
  • I believe the Augusta result proves the case made by Lawrence’s candidacy — voters will resoundingly back ways to fight data centers. A Lawrence campaign memo published by Politico after the primary makes the argument he will defeat incumbent Republican Tom Barrett almost entirely on this issue, too, calling it “the hyperscale elephant in the room.” The memo also claims there are “data center voters” who have “not traditionally been available to Democrats [but] have been highly motivated by hyperscale development in mid-Michigan.”
  • “Will’s strong stance on this issue and his consistency in showing up and standing alongside residents in data center fights expands his potential voter base in the general,” the memo states.

2. Travis County, Texas — I’ve been getting a lot of texts from sources about Texas Governor Greg Abbott issuing a stop to data center permitting. Let’s get into what really is happening here.

Keep reading...Show less
Yellow
Spotlight

How the National Park Service Wound Up in a Data Center Deal

The agency is reportedly considering a land swap that would allow AI infrastructure in one of northern Virginia’s largest green spaces.

The Prince William Forest Park entrance.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

A national park site and Civil War conflict area in Virginia is now a battleground in the fight over data center development on federal real estate — and Congress is starting to get involved.

On July 23, the Prince William Times reported that Trump’s National Park Service is “considering a land swap” to allow “at least four data centers” on land within the boundaries of Prince William Forest Park in northern Virginia, one of the largest green spaces in the Washington D.C. metro area and a flashpoint during the Civil War. Since then, my colleagues and I have confirmed based on interviews with sources familiar with the plan, public lobbying disclosures, and previously unreported correspondence from Congress to the Park Service that, indeed, there has been a concerted behind-the-scenes effort to make this swap happen, going back more than a year. Many of those concerned about the idea of this exchange told me they’ve been unable to get clear answers from the Park Service on the likelihood of the swap.

Keep reading...Show less
Yellow