Judge to Freeholders, ‘not so fast!’

Judge to Freeholders, ‘not so fast!’

Republican Freeholders tried to sneak past the voters an award of more than $1 million to Republican Mayor Andrew Lucas. But Democratic Manalapan Committeeperson Michelle Roth and Democratic Freeholder Amy Mallet raised the alarm resulting in widespread public criticism of the transaction. And Democratic Freeholder Candidate Larry Luttrell asked Freeholder Burry to recuse herself because of perceived conflicts. She refused and the Republicans were able to bulldoze the approval through with funds then quickly disbursed to Lucas. But Candidate Larry Luttrell and others didn’t give up.

Here is what we know so far. While serving as mayor in 2010, Lucas applied for an Open Space grant shortly after buying approximately 97 acres of land in Manalapan. He refused to disclose what he paid for the property.  In October 2011, Lucas hosted a $300 per person fundraiser for Republican Freeholder Lillian Burry on the same property that was awaiting funding for the Open Space grant. Burry subsequently voted in favor of funding for Lucas’ grant on February 28, 2013.  Less than two weeks later, Lucas received $1,158,024 in Open Space funding for the property. But Democratic Luttrell refused to let this deal stand without a proper investigation of the perceived conflict of interest and filed suit. Despite the Freeholder’s motion to dismiss, a Monmouth County Superior Court judge last week ruled that the suit should proceed to discovery and the matter “explored further”.

The Freeholders keep talking transparency but practicing secrecy. The recurring result of this Freeholder secrecy is scandal after scandal where campaign donations are accompanied by million-dollar payouts to political allies. Freeholders refused to disclose their contributions from Birdsall, refused to demand that Lucas disclose what he paid for the property, and tried to silence my questions and criticisms on these and other matters with a threatening letter. (But they refused to follow up on their threat when challenged).

 The judge didn’t buy the Freeholders’ secrecy arguments and neither should the voters.