Lillian Burry Opposes Beach Replenishment in Upper Freehold and Millstone

Freeholder Director Lillian G. Burry Photo by Vinnie Amessé © www.amessephoto.com

Freeholder Director Lillian G. Burry
Photo by Vinnie Amessé © www.amessephoto.com

In a column in the current issue of the triCityNews, Freeholder Director Lillian Burry said that one of her opponents in the coming election was right when he accused Burry of not supporting “agricultural and farmland preservation in “coastal” towns.  “It’s for the same reason I don’t support beach replenishment in Upper Freehold and Millstone. There aren’t any beaches there, just as there aren’t a lot of farms in Red Bank or Long Branch or Asbury Park.”

Burry points out that there in only one parcel in the region qualified for the farmland preservation program, in Long Branch, and that the owner of the property has not applied to sell the development rights to the program which is funded by municipal, county and state dollars.

At issue is beachfront property at the north end of Asbury Park that is slated for residential development.   There is some vocal opposition to the proposed development and Democratic Freeholder candidate Joe Grillo is trying to jump on that band wagon to get traction in his fledgling campaign against Burry and Deputy Freeholder Director Gary Rich.

Grillo is confusing land acquisition programs…the farmland preservation program is not the same as the open space program..and he is attempting to confuse the public by making the beach front development a county issue when, at this point, it is a Asbury Park issue.  Neither the owner of the property nor the Asbury Park governing body has expressed a desire to prevent the development by selling the property to the governments.

Grillo and the local opponents of the development are hoping to create further confusion on Thursday when the Freeholder Board holds its meeting in Asbury Park.  They are rallying the public to come to the meeting to oppose the development, as if the Freeholders make those decisions.

The freeholders should not take the bait, no matter how silly the circus gets on Thursday.  They should let the members of the public know that, if and when, Asbury Park and the owner of the property apply to preserve the property through whatever appropriate program is available, that the county will consider it.  Until such time, it is a local issue and the locals need to figure it out.

The Monmouth County Board of Chosen Freeholders should not usurp the planning and zoning decisions of municipalities.  That, in effect is what Grillo and the opponents of the beachfront development are advocating.

 

Posted: June 23rd, 2014 | Author: | Filed under: Asbury Park, Lillian Burry, Monmouth County, Monmouth County Board of Freeholders, Monmouth County Park System | Tags: , , , , , , | 14 Comments »

14 Comments on “Lillian Burry Opposes Beach Replenishment in Upper Freehold and Millstone”

  1. MLaffey said at 8:03 am on June 23rd, 2014:

    As if Grillo was not winning Asbury Park anyway. He is farming his own back yard.

  2. JRSMITH said at 8:43 am on June 23rd, 2014:

    Mrs Burry going negative so soon.Gruss she does not want to talk about the Lucas land deal

  3. The Director said at 10:07 am on June 23rd, 2014:

    wrote the article in response to the FALSE, negative article in the local rag- why is it that when someone tries to answer and clarify MIS- information/ lies, carelessly thrown around by the opponents, THEY get branded as “going negative??” – And, like it or not, the “Lucas land deal” will be beaten to death by the opposition, for the next 5 months- a deal that was vetted and properly handled, over years in the program, on three levels. If the man himself falsified any personal documents, well, that is to be proven in court,and the guy will be punished. Good Lord, if this is all the Dems have to gripe about in the county, they will embarrass themselves once again,with another stunning defeat, this year.

  4. JRSMITH said at 10:47 am on June 23rd, 2014:

    MRS Burry call Joe Grillo campaign fledgling that’s negative. maybe burry is getting to old for the job Joe Grillo has nothing to do with the issue of the north end property in Asbury Park its Joe Woerner.

  5. Sancho Panza said at 10:54 am on June 23rd, 2014:

    2″a deal that was vetted and properly handled”

    Not when the public records were not made available, but everyone knew anyway. A result:

    2012R00320/JEC/VK
    UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. ANDREW LUCAS
    Criminal No. 14-18u.s.c.§§981, 982, 1001, 1014I, 1028A, 1343, 1503I, 1519, 1957 and §2;28 u.s.c. §2461
    INDICTMENT
    The Grand Jury in and for the District of New Jersey, sitting at Trenton, charges . . . http://www.justice.gov/usao/nj/Press/files/pdffiles/2014/Lucas,%20Andrew%20Indictment.pdf

    Yes sir, nothing like a case of federal criminal fraud that was “properly handled.”

  6. Joe Woerner said at 11:23 am on June 23rd, 2014:

    Clear misrepresentation of the facts here. The AP City Council has applied for Green Acres funding for the purchase of the development rights from the developer, iStar. And the iStar has stated publicly they are willing to sell at fair market value. You can make this a political issue, but we are not.

  7. Joe Woerner said at 11:32 am on June 23rd, 2014:

    Let me clarify, the City is in the process of submitting an application. The passed the resolution at the first meeting in June.

  8. If it's said at 12:02 pm on June 23rd, 2014:

    his first run for county office, it is “fledgling”-simply a fact- look it up. Grillo the candidate is FROM Asbury.. the PROGRAM was properly handled-and funded- at 3 levels of government. Again, another FACT-inferring,and wishing for those who voted to buy a farm with dedicated funds, to be involved in something improper,does NOT make it so! Once more, slowly, if Mr. Lucas did anything wrong, he will be punished according to law- so, it is really, on that worn-out point, more than enough.

  9. JRSMITH said at 12:11 pm on June 23rd, 2014:

    Its only a fact in your Republican minds.And all you Republicans do not have the right to say what is a issue and what is not but you think you do and that is sad.

  10. Jim Granelli said at 12:42 pm on June 23rd, 2014:

    @ If it’s

    You are correct about the use of fledgling. But, candidates who have nothing to run on will use any crumb like that to paint their Republican opponent as mean or evil despite the facts.

    It’s like Democrats trying to any word or attack on issues such as “Chicago” or “voter id” as a racist attack on President Obama.
    Sorry, “that dog don’t hunt” with intelligent people. Only low information voters will by into such distractions.

    That is why Republicans need to stay on message and use the facts while the Democrats make themselves look like Looney Tunes as their heads explode.

    Oh, wait a second. Was that a negative attack?

  11. JRSMITH said at 2:01 pm on June 23rd, 2014:

    @Jim- All you do is attack democrats.You have no message your just a bitter old man and your Republicans pal tell you that.

  12. @JRSmith said at 2:25 pm on June 23rd, 2014:

    JRSmith, you are correct about Jim Granelli. If you don’t sing the praises of the Republican Party–your no good; your crap; Your a Liberal. I have heard it so many times from him and I am a Republican. I have been very negative here in the last few years because I don’t like the direction the Party is going.

    Lets discuss Ms. Burry: She remained silent over the Brookdale fiasco. She vocally supported president Burnham (now doing time for fraud), she supported Birdsall (in hot water over circumventing election laws) and she supported her campaign manager Canatalupo. Ms. Burry even sat on the Board that oversaw finances; Mr. Cantalupo was even praising Ms. Burry as being a very “ethical” person. Hmmm, the fact that these two had a financial and political relation should have precluded Ms. Burry from being on this Board—VERY UNETHICAL!!

    Secondly, when then-Freeholder Director, Ms. Burry, failed to say anything when Sheriff Shaun Golden was funding people in his Sheriff’s Department, she failed to ask why Golden would be funding a person in a make-believe position—yes, a position that did not exist. We all know by now why this was done. So a gentleman by the name of Michael Donovan could simultaneously collect a pension and a county salary. THAT’S UNETHICAL!

    And as has been brought up the Lucas land deal. We all know Lucas got indicted. Now here’s the big question: If he gets convicted, does the land and its proceeds get forfeited to the government?? If so, the town of Manalapan, the County and the state all lose their hard earned tax dollars— AND THE LAND!! I don’t think this aspect has been even talked about.

    What then? It would be nice to hear if the government seizes the land, they would return it to the tax rolls of Manalapan, and let Manalapan become the owner whereby they can donate it to the County for purposes they deem appropriate for its residents.

    Yes Mr. Smith and Granelli: I am a Republican–a disgusted and embarrassed Republican. Not of myself, but those that say they are ethical and do the right thing for the taxpayers.

    Only John Curley gets that endorsement from me. That Irish Bastard will get my vote always!!

  13. Thomas E. Burke said at 5:46 pm on June 23rd, 2014:

    You position on this issue makes a lot of sense Madame Freeholder Directio.

  14. Jim Granelli said at 3:45 pm on June 27th, 2014:

    So, let me get this straight.

    Asbury Screwed Up & Sold The Development Rights. But Now, They Want The County & By Extension, County Taxpayers To Bail Them Out?

    Funny. No, Not. If Asbury Was A Vibrant City, They Would Have Their Own Money To Bail Themselves Out, But They Have Squandered Opportunity After Opportunity To Set Themselves Straight.

    Sorry Asbury. Fix Your Own Problem.