Friday
Oct062017

Democrat Dan Perez lied at Freeholder debate

New York City lawyer Dan Perez made a bald-faced lie to voters at the Freeholder debate on Wednesday night, when he failed to own up to the part he played in the no-bid hiring of a New York City law firm to conduct a 62-page review of the county's failed solar program that cost property taxpayers an additional $518,000.00.  The Herald reported that Perez claimed the "assumption" was "based on a misreading of a leaked email to a former freeholder."

First, Dan Perez lied.  The Freeholder was not "former" at the time the memo was written. 

Second, Dan Perez lied again.  His memo was circulated to the campaign team that included the three people who became the majority on the Freeholder Board and who voted to give a no-bid contract to the New York City law firm that cost property taxpayers more than half a million dollars.

Third, Dan Perez lied again.  It was his idea to hire the New York City law firm.  He was the first to raise the idea -- in writing! 

As Freeholder Richard Vohden later discovered through the Open Public Records Act, the entire hiring process of this non-bidder law firm was conducted in secret and behind closed doors.  There was nothing transparent about it.

And it began with Dan Perez, in a backroom memo he prepared to a political campaign team:

"Post to a website"?  Whatever could he mean?

And what is with the urge to file ethics complaints against every other attorney in the county?  Clearing away the competition?  Good thing cooler political heads prevailed, reminding people that this was only a political campaign and that after the election the winning candidates will want to be friends again with those they defeated.  Those cooler political heads prevented some with darker intentions from attempting to destroy the personal and professional reputations of others. 

PrintView Printer Friendly Version

EmailEmail Article to Friend

Reader Comments

There are no comments for this journal entry. To create a new comment, use the form below.
Editor Permission Required
You must have editing permission for this entry in order to post comments.
« Dan Perez has a six-year plan to bankrupt Sussex County | Main | A major Sussex County story not covered by the Herald »