fbpx

Burry and Curley tangle at Freeholders’ meeting

curlyandburry

Freeholders John Curley and Lillian Burry

The ongoing feud between Freeholder Director Lillian Burry and Freeholder John Curley , both Republicans, became public again Thursday afternoon at the beginning of the board’s work session meeting at the Hall of Records in Freeholder.

Click here to listen to Curley’s remarks and the ensuing exchange between him and Burry.  Curley’s remarks start at the 1:27 mark of the audio.  The exchange concludes at the 5:24 mark.

Curley announced that he had proposed a resolution that would have called on the State Legislature to prohibit elected or appointed officials, on any level, from participating  in New Jersey’s Farm Land Preservation Program.   He likened such participation to Wall Street insider trading.  Curley said that Freeholder Tom Arnone, a Republican,  was his second for the resolution and that Assemblywoman Amy Handlin, a Republican, was going to sponsor such legislation.  Curley said he was disappointed that “the freeholders” pulled his resolution from the work session agenda.

Burry said that Curley’s remarks were inappropriate in that that he did not go through “the chair” or follow proper procedures.  She said the resolution was going to be discussed in Executive Session and had been put off because it needed to be tweaked and properly vetted.

Listen to the exchange.    It’s much more colorful than summarized above.

The acrimonious exchange came at the last freeholder meeting date prior to the Monmouth GOP nominating convention.  Burry and Deputy Director Gary Rich are seeking to be renominated.  Howell Councilman Bob Walsh is pursuing a nomination. Walsh’s successes would unseat an incumbent.

Curley acknowledges that he supports Walsh and Rich for freeholder, but denies the timing his statements yesterday was political.  He told MMM that he’s been working on the ethics of the Farmland Preservation Program since last March when the Freeholder Board funded their portion of the Burke Farm inclusion into the program over his objections.  Curley said that it was just this month that Arnone agreed to second his resolution and that Handlin agreed to sponsor the legislation just recently.

Burke Farm is the property owned by Former Manalapan Mayor Andrew Lucas. Lucas sold the development rights for the farm to the Farm Land Preservation Program, which was approved and funded by the state, county and Manalapan Township, last March.  Lucas was indicted earlier this yea for alleged actions taken in his acquisition of the farm.

Burry and Curley have had a contentious relationship since they ran together in 2008. Curley blames his defeat in that race on bullet votes for Burry.  He said his acrimony toward’s Burry is personal. “Lillian looks down her nose at me, ” he said, “she doesn’t like people in the automobile business.”  Curry is the Vice President of Jim Curley Buick, GMC, Kia in Lakewood.

Curley said the would support Burry’s reelection in November is she is renominated by the GOP.

Curley’s support of Rich as expressed to MMM is an apparent change in his stance since he was the guest speaker at the East Jersey Tea Party’s February 6 meeting.  A that meeting he declared that he would not support Rich’s reelection.

In his remarks to the EJTP, Curley said that Rich was preventing the freeholder board from balancing its budget, that Rich was a do nothing freeholder until recently when he was challenged for renomination by Walsh, and he blasted Burry, Rich and Freeholder Serena DiMaso for not voting to sell Monmouth County’s nursing homes.  Curley said there was no difference between the Democratic and Republican Parties and the the GOP tried to get him out of office by drafting him to run against Congressman Frank Pallone without any financial support.

Curley said the Walsh told him of a phone call he received from DiMaso wherein she asked the Howell Councilman not to challenge Burry and Rich’s renomination this year, but to wait till next year and to run against Curley’s renomination.

 

More from my site

Posted: March 15th, 2014 | Author: | Filed under: John Curley, Lillian Burry, Monmouth County Board of Freeholders, Monmouth GOP | Tags: , , , , | 18 Comments »

18 Comments on “Burry and Curley tangle at Freeholders’ meeting”

  1. If it smells like a duck said at 9:04 am on March 15th, 2014:

    it is a duck. This is nothing but a political show by Curley.

  2. You Marvelous Irish Bastard!!! said at 9:13 am on March 15th, 2014:

    Thank you John for looking out for the taxpayers!!! We are watching the situation closely, and support you.

  3. Politicalpony said at 9:18 am on March 15th, 2014:

    In fighting aside and focusing on the issue. The state is and has been buying up way to much land for preservation. I’m not against preserving land but I have watched this happening for 20 years and ask where does it end? What’s happening is the Government ends up owning all the property. Sure it keeps everything pretty but it also keeps and makes taxes higher. Tax payer dollars purchase it and then tax dollars have to maintain it. Not to leave out the fact of when the put ball fields and tennis courts, swimming poles and large overhead nightlights in. This is Social engineering by that state at it’s best, and at it’s worst. They gobble up the properties in order to stop development. This stops innovation and economics. According to the Prosperity group, this next go around of property snatching which cost the taxpayer millions and into the Billing will give the state of NJ the equivalent in land to the size of the state of Delaware. Is that necessary? And of course I haven’t even touched on the obvious corruption that was mentioned in this article.

    A good example of this waist would be to drive from Freehold down Throckmorton into Englishtown. You pass a highschool on the right, as far as I can tell they have a nice big playing field. Across the street on the public property wad purchased and they installed lights and numerous playing fields for all games imaginable. Barley ever anyone in there. Sell the property back to the private sector and utilize the school property. That’s just one example of tax payer waisted money. You can drive Rt 537 in Colts Neck and see this very same waist taking place. Surely there are plenty more.

  4. Michael said at 9:47 am on March 15th, 2014:

    The Farmland preservation program does not buy the land. It puts an easement on the land that prevents it from being developed. This ultimately saves the taxpayers money. A farm uses about 50 cents in municipal services for every dollar it pays in Taxes. A residential development uses about a $1.50 in taxes for every dollar it pays. The program is basically zoning where the property owner who is affected by the zoning actually gets compensated for the diminution in the value of their property AND it is voluntary.

  5. BMG said at 10:28 am on March 15th, 2014:

    Burry must go! Aside from tremendous lapses of judgement, she is absolutely out of touch with her constituency. The most ineffective Republican Freeholder in the last 30 years.

    Signed,

    Republican,Outraged,Conservative

  6. Nothing more embarassing said at 10:38 am on March 15th, 2014:

    than self-aggrandizement and airing party dirty laundry in public- all ideas need to be discussed and vetted like grown ups, with no surprises or sneaking around, with false moral outrage.. it us a disservice to the taxpayers for any elected official to put their own egos and agendas first.. Better get your act together, people- it is getting very old and more unproductive by the day!

  7. Bob English said at 11:28 am on March 15th, 2014:

    After the Lucas farm fiasco you think that all five of them would be lining up to support the resolution backed by Freeholders Curley and Arnone. If they wanted to discuss it during the workshop (which is open to the public) that would have been fine (and expected) but I don’t see where it was a matter for Executive Session (away from the public behind closed doors.)

  8. Short memory? said at 11:32 am on March 15th, 2014:

    I seem to remember that it was Lillian Burry who fought against the effort to replace Curley with Councilwoman Kim Spatola the second time around- Curley never would have gotten that re- nomination without Lillian’s loyalty and help.. This is the problem with those who change like the wind and live for themselves at the moment. What a childish statement: Lillian doesn’t like care dealers.. Pretty sad and pathetic attitude, if you ask me…

  9. If you were there said at 11:36 am on March 15th, 2014:

    or listened to the tapes from both meetings, she said she was not against the idea, but the way he went about sneaking it into the agenda without all their knowledge and before being able to discuss it.. Stop taking just the pieces you want to absorb, without getting the entire context and picture!

  10. Keep fighting said at 12:16 pm on March 15th, 2014:

    Keep it up children. Can u say Director Mallet?

  11. God forbid! said at 12:39 pm on March 15th, 2014:

    Word is she isn’t running, but of course is foaming at the mouth to try and help the Dem dolts tear Lillian apart.. Well, if we could count on ALL the Republican elected officials to get over themselves and stick together as a team and a party, that frightening possibility won’t occur..

  12. Joe Wedick said at 1:20 pm on March 15th, 2014:

    As a former elected official, I resented anyone trying to stifle any type of discussion (with the exception of personnel issues and on-going negotiations) by those who think that your election is somehow meaningless, that you do NOT have the right to speak about things that you deem important. Unless the board attorney can site a specific legal reason for something to be out of bounds, then anyone else on that board trying to stop you from discussing anything you want to should be called out for trying to impede your ability to carry out the responsibilities of your office. Just because a topic may not be liked by some or that it might be uncomfortable for others is not a reason for “vetting” or attempts at control. ANYONE trying to force a vetting process or control should be rejected at the polls the next time they present themselves to the voters as wanting to be the voters advocates.
    If Burry is doing this, then she has to go – period.

  13. Barry said at 3:20 pm on March 15th, 2014:

    That rec field you state is not used, is very much used. Just because in the 5 minutes you saw it empty does not make your assumption correct.

  14. That is not the point here, said at 4:27 pm on March 15th, 2014:

    Because of their personal issues, the objection was to not giving a heads up to one’s colleagues- not whether anyone has a right to bring up a topic.. As a former elected official too, I know my colleagues communicated to each other things we’d like brought up on the next agenda, just some professionalism and courtesy should be observed, not continually wanting to play “oneupsmanship”.. It’s childish and unnecessary, and a waste of everyone’s time- staff, audience, everyone’s…!

  15. Joe Wedick said at 5:05 pm on March 15th, 2014:

    Het “That is not the point” apparently some professionalism and courtesy was observed what with having a seconding vote in place and other level officials being brought up to speed. “Vetting” is just another word for control – to stop someone from being independent of a lock step mentality. You might see that as “oneupsmanship” – I see it as someone feeling free to do their job which some might see as a threat to the status quo.

  16. Come to a few meetings- said at 6:45 pm on March 15th, 2014:

    -you’ll see what we mean.. Love the “supporters” of one or the other,whose views are never changed by facts.. Whatever!- it’s simply gotten so rote and old: same crap, same grandstanding and “I, me, my,” just another day!

  17. Wanda McHenry said at 11:34 am on March 16th, 2014:

    This is pure grand-standing. Curly attacking Burry helps no one but the Democrats. He is way too full of himself. Now imagine if Bobby Walsh of Howell wins (OMG what a mess!) and you have these two up there in Freehold. Lord help us. The only saving grace is inside 3 months Curly and Walsh will be at each other’s throats and bumping heads. You can count on it and then the whole place goes down the drain. Curly is a smart politician. Attacking Burry is not smart politics right now. And this stunt will come back to haunt us all. Count on it. And pray Burry and Rich get re-nominated. The alternative is nothing but a “mess” guaranteed to lead to our demise.

  18. Monmouth Girl said at 5:19 pm on March 16th, 2014:

    Wanda of course Curley is trying to help the democrats – he is one!!!!! He was Mayor Ed McKeena’s biggest supports in Red Bank until they had a rift.

    But in his heart he is a D and has been trying to get his fellow closeted D Walsh on the board for years.

    Lets rememberWalsh got elected mayor as an independent backed by the Howell dems.

    Walsh backed and financed the recall of the republican mayor.

    These two are truly RINOs!!!!!