To the editor,
I am confused. I will admit that at my age it is sometimes easy to confuse me.
We have a Hunterdon Freeholder who was found slumped over the wheel of his vehicle on the side of the road at 5:30 p.m. on the 5th of August but was not cited until September. Is that because he is a Freeholder and running for re-election?
I was told he had been at a golf outing during the day. Maybe the sun was too much for him. Right. I have gone to numerous outings and the only thing more available than golf is alcohol and cigars. However, one month later, why a month later, the Freeholder was cited for DUI and reckless driving. I wonder if he told the respondents he was a Freeholder when he was revived. His lawyer says, and I quote: “The matter will be resolved fairly in another jurisdiction.” He also said that the Freeholder suffered a medical emergency which, if not for the respondents, could have resulted in a “life threatening” situation.
I guess it would have been a “life threatening” situation if he hit someone that was jogging or walking along the road. Or a child or someone walking their dog.
If, hypothetically, the Freeholder has a condition that could cause this type of situation, he should not be allowed to drive. You or I wouldn’t be allowed. Is it acceptable because he is a Freeholder? Epileptics that have seizures lose their license in situations like this. Why not a Freeholder?
I think it is time for Hunterdon County residents to stand up and say that this type of conduct is not acceptable for an elected official. Regardless of the outcome of his offenses he should step down. If, not the residents of Hunterdon should not re-elect him. Stand up and be counted and say, “I am angry and I won’t take it anymore.”