WISCONSIN FARMERS FACE RUIN AFTER SIGNING SOLAR CONTRACT

“Don’t do it.” That was Jim Doherty’s response when asked what he would tell someone thinking about signing a solar contract. And Jim has good reason to be negative about solar contracts. That is because tomorrow, Jim and his wife Mary may learn whether a Columbia County judge will grant default judgment against them and in favor of Cambria PV I, LLC in the amount of $4,170,000.

Photo by Hush Naidoo Jade Photography on Unsplash

Jim and Mary thought they were doing everything right: going green; obtaining income to offset high input costs and low commodity prices; hiring a lawyer to review the contracts; and negotiating as a group. They did not anticipate that they were paving the road to Hell with their good intentions.

When asked what such a judgment would do to Jim and his wife, he responded by saying “it would bankrupt us.” Jim is a farmer and mechanic and his wife is retired from Alliant Energy. They bought around 300 acres in 1998, partly because they had farming in their blood. Both grew up on dairy farms, but decided to forego the cows, calves, and heifers to focus on raising wheat, corn, and soybeans.

In a two hour conversation Thursday evening, Jim reported:

“…five years ago…Galehead Development Corporation sent out letters and contacted us and they were looking for land for solar… all three of us got together, Adam Hahn, his wife Jill, Ron and Sandy Pulver, and Jim and Mary Doherty…[t]hey first offered us $600 [an acre, annually] and then they raised it to $800 and our son farms with us and we thought well, $800… that’s worth listening to them and talking to them…[T]he three of us hired a lawyer, we always had meetings together, which they didn’t like…”

According to Cambria, an affiliate of Galehead, it paid between $5 and $60 an acre per year as an Option Fee to obtain the right to lease the land from the Hahns and Dohertys. The Lease indicates that the $800 an acre annual payments would start when the solar facility started producing or two years after the Construction Notice Date.

For reference, rent for good tillable land in the area likely tops out at about $300 an acre, with $200 an acre not being uncommon rent. Many times competent farmers cannot even make $50 or $60 an acre if grain prices are low and inputs are high. It is an unforgiving business, but apparently not as unforgiving as dealing with global capital.

According to Jim, after the attorney’s contract review and modifications, the Dohertys, Hahns, and Pulvers signed the Options to lease their land. Jim was under the impression that the Option expired in four years. Then, a year and a half ago, Jim said:

“they [Cambria] came and they wanted us to sign another extension option. Well you haven’t done anything in four years, so we don’t want to do it. So they offered us another $200 for our land and a $50,000 signing bonus and all three of us originally said no - we don’t want it. And then, one of the parties, Ron and Sandy Pulver, they, they’re like 80 years old, and they don’t farm their own land, so, in the 24th hour when they [Cambria] threatened to sue us, Ron and Sandy signed the papers and sent them back. So they’re not being sued.”

But Cambria is suing Jim and Mary Doherty, their Trust, Adam and Jill Hahn, and Jeff and Beth Hahn (“Defendants”). In Cambria’s Complaint, Cambria claims that it:

“properly exercised its options to lease the subject property.” Cambria’s Complaint also indicates that “Defendants’ misconduct has caused damages of at least $15 million –– comprised of $3 million for environmental testing, permitting, design, and other development fees invested in the subject properties and $12 million for lost profits caused by Defendants’ tortious interference.”

Cambria claims, in its MOTION TO STRIKE ANSWERS OF JAMES AND MARY DOHERTY AND BRIEF IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT that Jim and Mary’s share of those damages is $4,170,000.

Jim and Mary are at extreme risk of having the $4,170,000 judgment entered against them without the ability to defend themselves going forward. According to Cambria, the Dohertys “have admitted to liability and failed to contest Cambria’s claimed damages.” Essentially, Cambria is saying that the Dohertys did not answer its Complaint within the required time and the result is that Dohertys automatically lose. The Court could readily agree with Cambria.

Jim and Mary, however, make a strong case as to why they did not timely file a responsive pleading. In talking with them, it was obvious that they do not understand civil litigation. Very few people do.

Jim and Mary worked hard at hiring an attorney who could help them understand what was happening and who could protect their interests. According to THE DOHERTY DEFENDANTS’ BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF THEIR MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT OF TIME AND IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT, the Dohertys did all of the following: contacted at least five attorneys, none of whom were able to help; told the Court about its attempts, and asked for an extension of time to answer the Complaint; personally attended at least three Court conferences; attempted to contact Galehead on several occasions, and Galehead never returned calls or emails; and contacted the attorney who reviewed the Option, but she said she could not represent them in the matter.

The Dohertys have finally found representation and it looks like the attorneys and the firm are doing everything thing they can to protect the Dohertys’ interests. Tomorrow is the Motion Hearing and the first step in learning just how cruel of a mistress the law is. Will the Dohertys live to fight another day and Pray to God preserve what they have spent generations building? Or will investors have even more capital to remove life-giving topsoil and install ugly, inefficient, subsidized, Chinese-manufactured solar panels?