Robert Selna, Selna Partners, LLP

Larry Altman’s July 14 article, Roof Panels Could Save Acres from Development – about a report concluding that rooftop solar can preserve lands that solar farms might occupy – provides background information on a man named Larry Gosselin and devotes several paragraphs to his opinions about the benefits of solar farms. In a glaring omission, the story fails to mention that Gosselin has provided professional services in support of the 350-acre Aramis solar farm proposed for North Livermore Valley, right in the middle of open space and agricultural land protected by Alameda County voters through Measure D. Specifically, Gosselin is one of two authors of the Aramis project’s Agricultural Management Plan, a public document, available to reporters and other interested parties. On behalf of Aramis, Gosselin also has advanced the notion that the project is an “agrivoltaics” project, whatever that may actually mean. Many believe that Gosselin’s work for the Aramis project is in direct conflict with his position as an Alameda County Agricultural Advisory Commissioner working on solar issues. Gosselin prefers solar farms to rooftop solar. Surprised? That would be fine if he wasn’t providing professional services for one and not the other. In the July 14 article, Gosselin disputes the solar report’s positive conclusions about rooftop solar. Gosselin argues that in comparison to solar farms, rooftop solar is too costly and does not provide enough energy. The July 14 article describes Gosselin is rancher and a former horse veterinarian. Wouldn’t it have been more useful for readers to know that Gosselin has written reports that support the Aramis solar farm project and that he has advocated for its approval?