Entries in Sussex County Taxpayers (144)

Wednesday
Oct182017

Weird algorithms over at the NJ Herald

Now this is some weird stuff.  If you use Google Images to find the Herald article titled  "Perez, Hamilton best choices for Sussex County" the following photograph comes up:

Seriously weird, but a picture is worth a thousand words... and when you think about it, the taxpayers will be in for a Friday the 13th style mauling if Democrat Dan Perez and his "bride" ever get the power to raise people's taxes.

Sunday
Oct152017

Is the Herald censoring letters to the editor?

Several people have complained to our contributors that the New Jersey Herald is refusing to print letters to the editor that they submit.  From the complaints it appears that the letters blocked are those that oppose the Democrat ticket this year -- especially Democrat Freeholder candidate Dan Perez -- and those that discuss school consolidation. 

 

We don't know why the Herald would do this, if indeed, they are doing it.  At the same time, those doing the complaining are very solid citizens, so we have no reason to doubt them either.

 

The Herald is not a blog.  It is a newspaper that is underwritten by the taxpayers of Sussex County.  The State makes taxpayers underwrite the private corporation that owns the Herald by mandating that county and local governments spend property tax revenues to advertise government notices in the Herald.  In the era of the Internet, most argue that forcing taxpayers to spend money on print advertising is out-of-date, inefficient, and a waste of taxpayers' money.

 

So you do have skin in the game.  And as the Herald gets your tax dollars to support its private, profit-making enterprise -- you have every right to complain if you feel the coverage you are receiving isn't fair or if you feel you are being ignored.

 

Here's how to make your voice heard.

 

You can write to the publisher of the Herald:

 

Mr. Keith Flinn

Publisher

New Jersey Herald

2 Spring Street

Newton, NJ 07860

kflinn@njherald.com

 

Or you can write to the out-of-state corporation that owns the Herald:

 

Mr. Ralph M. Oakley
President/CEO

Quincy Media Corporation
130 South 5th Street

Quincy, IL 62306
roakley@quincymedia.com

 

Please let us know if this helps to resolve your problems.

Sunday
Oct082017

Dan Perez has a six-year plan to bankrupt Sussex County

When you think back on all the spending "mistakes" that the Sussex County Freeholder Board has made since 2011, can we afford six more years of them?

Dan Perez thinks so. 

Dan Perez is a Democrat running for Freeholder.  Perez is a New York lawyer who has helped many a county insider with their legal troubles.  Perez is himself an insider, who has been appointed to two patronage jobs courtesy of the Freeholder Board. 

At the Freeholder debate on Wednesday evening, Dan Perez argued the case for the county establishment.  Perez said to "trust" county government.

Fortunately, most taxpayers know better.  They want their government back in their own hands.  They want a plan to get the county out of debt, so that we can begin to talk about getting property taxes under control. 

The people who pay property taxes know that the Democrats' talk of lowering them is pure bullshit (because they are the party of higher property taxes) and that the Republicans' hopes to lower them are pie-in-the-sky until we get spending and debt under control.  That's why we need a five-year plan to get out of debt, instead of Dan Perez' six-year plan to put Sussex County into bankruptcy.

Neighboring Warren County has such a plan.  They are on the path to a debtless future.

How are they doing it?  By putting county government on a diet.

While Sussex County was stumbling from crisis to crisis, from scandal to scandal, Warren County passed an ordinance that prevented its politicians from borrowing without first getting the approval of the taxpayers.  It is a reform that works!

What it does is this:  Before any long-term borrowing can happen, it must first go on the ballot for the voters to decide whether or not they think it is a worthy project and they want to pay for it.

Once this ordinance is passed, the politicians on the Sussex County Freeholder Board will have to ask the taxpayers for permission the next time someone comes up with a scheme to use tax money to place solar panels all over the place, or to build a new county administration building, or to finance the sale of the county dump to private investors.  It would put any of these crazy ideas on hold until the voters can properly scrutinize the plans and then place it on the ballot for the voters to decide.

It is the same thing that just happened in Newton, where the voters got to decide on a ballot question seeking voter approval for more than $18 million in bonds to fund the expansion and renovation of the Merriam Avenue School.  Voters were asked to approve $18.69 million in new debt (bonds), which would have increased the tax burden on the average home by $337 annually over the next 20 years.  959 voters said "no" and 238 voters said "yes" so the borrowing didn't happen.  

No wonder insiders like Dan Perez are pissing their pants!

Some insiders make an argument that begins with the words, "what about an emergency" -- when they darn well know that the ordinance makes exclusions for emergencies.  It also makes exclusions for anticipatory borrowing, where the money is promised to the county.  What it ends is borrowing just to spend money and give contracts to other insiders. 

Insiders like Dan Perez are livid over this legislation and at how it threatens them and their fellow insiders.  At Wednesday night's debate, Perez lied about the ordinance and used the term "gimmick" to describe it.  Now telling lies is something lawyers are trained at, so we shouldn't expect better from Perez, but we think "gimmick" better describes what Perez did when he tried to get the fine reduced for a convicted scumbag who tried to bring heroin into the country.  That was a "gimmick" and that was a convicted scumbag and that was Dan Perez.

Here's a copy of the ordinance passed by Warren County.  It's working!

RESOLUTION 97‐13

On motion by Mr. Smith, seconded by Mr. Gardner, the following resolution was adopted by the Board of Chosen Freeholders of the County of Warren at a meeting held on February 13, 2013.

RESOLUTION OF THE WARREN COUNTY BOARD OF CHOSEN FREEHOLDERS TO REQUIRE VOTER APPROVAL BY PUBLIC QUESTION OF BONDED INDEBTEDNESS OF THE COUNTY OF WARREN

WHEREAS, Warren County was created by an act of the New Jersey Legislature in 1825 as a Class III County (political subdivision) deriving its authority from the people and the State Legislature; and

WHEREAS, the creation of debt is addressed in part by the State Legislature in Article VIII, Section II, Paragraph 3 (a) of the N.J. State Constitution which requires that debt in excess of 1% of the annual appropriations of the Legislature shall be submitted to the voters for approval; and

WHEREAS, the Board of Chosen Freeholders is an entity of limited authority whose members are chosen by the voters of Warren County and who have solemnly pledged to exclusively represent their interests; and

WHEREAS, the members of the Warren County Board of Chosen Freeholders shall operate within the framework of the Constitutions of the United States and the State of New Jersey along with the laws enacted by the Legislature and who have a moral obligation to have its decisions reflect the will of the people they serve; and

WHEREAS, the citizens of Warren County have the right to transparency in the operations of County Government and to be informed of the decisions that affect the financial health, safety and welfare of the County.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Warren County Board of Chosen Freeholders in the County of Warren, State of New Jersey as follows:

1. It shall be the policy of the Board of Chosen Freeholders not to create nor authorize debt on behalf of the County of Warren that exceeds 2% of the annual appropriations of the County, unless such debt is approved by the voters pursuant to provisions of N.J.S.A. 19:37‐1, et. seq.

2. The Board of Chosen Freeholders further resolve that the citizens of Warren County have a right to be informed of the specific purpose of any borrowing authorized by its Board of Chosen Freeholders along with the overall costs to the taxpayers and the manner in which such debt shall be repaid and the terms and conditions of such debt.

3. It shall be the policy of the Board of Chosen Freeholders not to assume additional debt, nor enter into any bonding agreements not approved by the majority of the voters of Warren County.

4. Debts incurred by independent public authorities or boards who have their own governing body, established under statute, or when repayments of said debts shall be funded by revenues generated for the purpose of said authority or board, are not regulated by this Resolution.

5. Nothing herein shall prohibit the Warren County Board of Chosen Freeholders from making emergency appropriations when said emergency affects the physical assets of the County of Warren, or the public health, safety and welfare of the residents of the County of Warren.

6. This Resolution is not applicable to debt funded by sources other than the County Purpose Tax.

This Resolution shall take effect immediately.

I hereby certify the above to be a true copy of a resolution adopted by the Board of Chosen Freeholders of the County of Warren at a meeting held on February 13, 2013.

Steve Marvin, Clerk of the Board

Recorded Vote: Mr. Gardner yes, Mr. Smith yes, Mr. Sarnoski yes

And kudos to Republican Freeholder candidate Herb Yardley for proposing this for Sussex County.

Monday
Sep182017

LONEGAN: DAN PEREZ IS A FAR-LEFT DEMOCRAT

Contacted while fundraising among Sussex County's auto dealers, 5th District Republican congressional candidate Steve Lonegan was asked about Democrat candidate Dan Perez' characterization of himself as a "Tea Party Democrat."  Lonegan, the father of New Jersey's modern conservative movement and the founder of New Jersey's Americans for Prosperity couldn't have been blunter:  "Perez is no Tea Party anything," Lonegan said.  "He is a fraud, a leftwing Democrat fraud."

 

According to his resume, Dan Perez was an associate at the law offices of Marxist attorney William Kunstler.  Perez later managed Kunstler's old firm in partnership with Kunstler's old law partner, Ron Kuby. 

 

Pay attention to the Ken Burns documentary on Vietnam now airing on PBS and you will see William Kunstler in action, defending terrorists, communist agitators, American flag-burners, and the supporters of a North Vietnamese victory over the armed forces of the United States of America.  The clients Perez handled were a continuation of this Kunstler leftist mantra.

 

The Kunstler law firm defended members of the Catonsville Nine, Black Panther Party, Weather Underground Organization, the Attica Prison rioters, and the American Indian Movement.  But  Kunstler refused to defend groups like the Tea Party, on the grounds that: "I only defend those whose goals I share. I'm not a lawyer for hire. I only defend those I love."

 

Kunstler defended Joanne Chesimard (AKA Assata Shakur) who was convicted of murdering a New Jersey State Trooper and who escaped from prison with the help of fellow terrorists.  She is now on the FBI's MOST WANTED list. 

 

In collaboration with Dan Perez' law partner Ron Kuby, Kunstler defended Sheikh Omar Abdel-Rahman, head of the terrorist group Gama'a al-Islamiyah, responsible for the 1993 World Trade Center bombing; Colin Ferguson, the man responsible for the 1993 Long Island Rail Road shooting; Glenn Harris, a New York City public school teacher who absconded with a fifteen-year-old girl; Nico Minardos, indicted by Rudy Giuliani for conspiracy to ship arms to Iran; and associates of the Gambino organized crime family.

 

That's quite a line-up of scumbags.

 

Democrat Perez claims that he wants to "lower taxes by opposing wasteful spending" but the record shows this to be little more than election year b.s.   It was Perez who pushed the Freeholder boss to spend $500,000 to hire a New York City lawyer to tell the county what went wrong on its solar project.  Unfortunately for county taxpayers, the guy Perez pushed (and who was hired) was the same guy whose office had given the project the okay back in 2011.  So taxpayers paid $500,000 for a cover-up.

 

And it was Dan Perez who made his first proposal as a candidate a spending proposal -- to spend another $100,000 plus benefits on a patronage job because it "sounded like it might work."   Blindly throwing money at problems is bad public policy.

 

Democrat Dan Perez strongly supports funding Planned Parenthood and personally reprimanded Assemblywoman Gail Phoebus for voting against it.  As a Freeholder, you can bet that Dan Perez would spend our tax money on Planned Parenthood.  That's just for starters.

 

In a book he wrote on the subject, Steve Lonegan explained that conservatives believe in pulling power away from centralized governments at the state and federal levels and turning over more control to municipal and county governments.  Who runs local government is important because they set the agenda.  Liberals will fix their eyes firmly on the state and on Washington  for money and direction.  Conservatives will seek to break those bonds, while making sure to protect and defend traditional values at the local level through actions and the good use of the bully pulpit. 

 

Conservatives like Steve Lonegan understand that Dan Perez is a big-spending, high tax, leftist.  Perez is trying to paint a different picture of himself, but he has a long history that says otherwise.

Tuesday
Sep122017

Democrat Perez makes pretend he's a Republican

Was it just last month that Democrat congressman Josh Gottheimer, a political ally of Democrat candidate Dan Perez, called Steve Lonegan a "Tea Party Republican?"  Yes, Gottheimer issued that jibe in an August 24th email blast.  It was just about the worst thing the Democrat could think of saying about the Republican.

 

"Tea Party Republican."

 

Less than a month later, and now Democrat Dan Perez wants you to believe he's a "Tea Party Democrat."  What does that even mean?

 

Perez made his post-Labor Day opening pitch to the Skylands Tea Party group last week with the words, "I think if you were to put aside the lawyer thing and the ‘D' (Democrat) after my name and get to know me, you'd find that we really have a whole lot in common."

 

In common?  Like who Perez chose to train under to learn his skills as an attorney:  Marxist William Kunstler.  Yes, Perez trained under Kunstler, an avowed Marxist, and Perez later managed Kunstler's old firm in partnership with Kunstler's old law partner, Ron Kuby. 

 

Pay attention to the Ken Burns documentary on Vietnam airing on PBS later this month and you will see William Kunstler in action, defending terrorists, communist agitators, American flag-burners, and the supporters of a North Vietnamese victory over the armed forces of the United States of America.  Sure, that's as "tea party" as hell!

 

The Kunstler law firm defended members of the Catonsville Nine, Black Panther Party, Weather Underground Organization, the Attica Prison rioters, and the American Indian Movement.  But  Kunstler refused to defend groups like the Tea Party, on the grounds that: "I only defend those whose goals I share. I'm not a lawyer for hire. I only defend those I love."

 

Kunstler defended Joanne Chesimard (AKA Assata Shakur) who was convicted of murdering a New Jersey State Trooper and who escaped from prison with the help of fellow terrorists.  She is now on the FBI's MOST WANTED list. 

 

In collaboration with Dan Perez' law partner Ron Kuby, Kunstler defended Sheikh Omar Abdel-Rahman, head of the terrorist group Gama'a al-Islamiyah, responsible for the 1993 World Trade Center bombing; Colin Ferguson, the man responsible for the 1993 Long Island Rail Road shooting; Glenn Harris, a New York City public school teacher who absconded with a fifteen-year-old girl; Nico Minardos, indicted by Rudy Giuliani for conspiracy to ship arms to Iran; and associates of the Gambino organized crime family.

 

That's quite a line-up of scumbags.

 

Democrat Perez claims that he wants to "lower taxes by opposing wasteful spending" but the record shows this to be little more than election year b.s.   It was Perez who pushed the Freeholder boss to spend $500,000 to hire a New York City lawyer to tell the county what went wrong on its solar project.  Unfortunately for county taxpayers, the guy Perez pushed (and who was hired) was the same guy whose office had given the project the okay back in 2011.  So taxpayers paid $500,000 for a cover-up.

 

And it was Dan Perez who made his first proposal as a candidate a spending proposal -- to spend another $100,000 plus benefits on a patronage job because it "sounded like it might work."   Blindly throwing money at problems isn't conservative, Dan.

 

Democrat Dan Perez strongly supports funding Planned Parenthood and personally reprimanded Assemblywoman Gail Phoebus for voting against it.  As a Freeholder, you can bet that Dan Perez would spend our tax money on Planned Parenthood.  That's just for starters.

 

As that well-regarded local conservative, Mayor Steve Lonegan, explained in a book he wrote on the subject, conservatives believe in pulling power away from centralized governments at the state and federal levels and turning over more control to municipal and county governments.  Who runs local government is important because they set the agenda.  Liberals will fix their eyes firmly on the state and on Washington  for money and direction.  Conservatives will seek to break those bonds, while making sure to protect and defend traditional values at the local level through actions and the good use of the bully pulpit. 

 

Dan Perez is a died-in-the-wool leftist.  He tries to paint himself as an "efficient" leftist.  That is very different from being a conservative.

 

Dan Perez is not a conservative.  The word is out.  Steve Lonegan is on the case.