A.P. Council Meeting Notes - from Asbury Radio                                        Home   Site Directory

NYT and APPress Laud City's revised agreement with Asbury Partners...

4/05/06- Asbury Radio's report: City of Asbury Park Council Votes for Supplemental Agreement with Asbury Partners - www.cityofasburypark.com ~ With only Exhibit F, not A - E,  provided to the public, 4 out of 5 council members approved in resolution form the revised agreement. What got Asbury Radio's antennae up? Under Penalties for Non-Performance, you won't find a dollar sign, but you will see "Disputes will be confidential" Download docs in PDF Goals Joint Issues The Partners weren't fulfilling their contractual obligations so now we've agreed to use an arbitrator. Is this a union agreement? Would you settle for this from your contractor? No, you'd fire the contractor!! (If the new agreement had been introduced as an amendment to the existing agreement that was passed by ordinance, the revision would've been subject to two public readings and unlimited public comment during the council meetings.) Also tonight (4/5) appraisals go ahead on Baronet Theater, Wonder Bar, Kingsley Deli and others... All come under eminent domain.  Your opinion? Click 

March 1, 2006 - At the council meeting, city attorney Fred Raffetto told Asbury Radio that our request that the public be informed of the nature of matters, carried over from the executive or closed session for vote, so that the public can make comments and ask questions during the public comment, prior to the council taking action, has been reviewed and approved. Starting that same night the council discussed the first such matter during the workshop in order to inform the public, prior to the comment portion for the meeting. We thank the council for acting on this request and showing a sincere interest in participatory government.

January 18th council meeting should be a hot one.  AP Action, Asbury Park's political action committee, plans to air some grievances. Asbury Partner's deadline to start restoring the boardwalk landmark buildings and its pavilions, declared by the City's Council in unanimous vote last meeting, comes due. See resolution below. And that's not all.

A.P. Council Passes Resolution to Get Restoration Going on the Waterfront Buildings and call a Moratorium on DCA Approvals of Condo Conversions in the city at Dec. 21 Meeting-

Two Waterfront Plans -December 7, 2005 - Councilmember James Keady again proposed that the city investigate how Asbury Park ended up posting a waterfront redevelopment plan that contained the following paragraph regarding treatment of the site where the unfinished hi-rise from the 80's still stands. The June 2002 plan read:  "If the former Ocean Mile structure on block #176 is demolished, the height limits for the new structures on this block shall match those for block #161." The maximum height for #161 is eight stories.  UPDATE: APP 12/31/05 Report calls it a "Mistake" on DEP Application. Click here.

In their own words: John Clarke's statements regarding the treatment of that structure and site, made at that time, are available on this link. and here: Listen to Planner John Clarke April 2002  - Councilmember John Loffredo May 2002 on WRPlan

Soon after the new owners of Block #176 (also called C-8), Metro Homes, which had obtained approvals to build a 16-story hi-rise on the site, announced that they would not be able to reuse the existing structure, the City withdrew the plan - dated June 5, 2002 - from the City's website and thereafter disavowed the plan. The city insisted the legitimate plan was a conglomeration of a March 15, 2002 plan with various changes adopted into an ordinance. Keady also questioned how people seeking to do business with the City could divine the plan from such a cumbersome set of documents. The planner, John Clarke, who is employed by Asbury Partners, admitted authoring the June version, but when asked where he got the information for the changes, told the council he did not remember. Keady is not satisfied with that answer and estimated that the City's decision to disavow this version is worth upwards of $100 million to Metro Homes. 

Keady's focus on the issue provoked obvious frustration from his four council members, who want to proceed with getting the development built. Keady said he wants the same, but with some consideration shown the City - monetary or otherwise - for amending its plans for the site - a change he said is worth upwards of $100 million to Asbury Partners and the developer, Metro Homes. He said if he wasn't able to get the city to cooperate in rendering the meeting minutes and tape recordings necessary to investigate the origin of the June plan, he would have to seek help from an outside agency.

Keady's insistence that the City needs such revenues seemed to be underscored by a $700,000 emergency appropriation passed that night for police and fireman's salaries.


Nov. 14, 2005 -  In what was said to be a response to the Asbury Park Press article, by Nancy Shields, about resident Nina Summerlin's experiences trying to raise two sons in the drug dominated streets of the West Side, the council and city manager invited Deputy Police Chief Reid, Dir. of Housing and Community Development Hazel Samuels, and city social worker Cheryl Pearsall, to address the council's work session. Following Shields' article, on Nov. 5, Jerry Jules, a 22 year-old man was gunned down within view of the Bangs Middle School children. On Thursday, Nov. 10, following that murder, Summerlin called into Asbury Radio.  During that interview host Maureen Nevin asked officials to join the discussion and explain why the drug problems persist after five years. She also announced plans to follow the issue in subsequent shows.

Samuels told the group that she was amazed at the number of recreation programs already available to children in the city, and said hours at some facilities might be extended. "The notion that kids deal drugs because there aren't enough recreation programs is false," said Samuels.  References were made to the preparation of a comprehensive report about how some four, related departments work together and compare with one another. Pearsall noted some 30 programs or activities for a wide range of ages, and said that their numbers are on the city's website. Samuels and Pearsall said the problem was in motivating children to attend the programs.

Dep. Chf. Reid reported some crime statistics, the cooperation of the area candy store in remaining closed until after school starts, gave some demographic information and closed his remarks saying, "The children still are our future."

Councilperson Jim Keady responded that the city agencies, the three represented, had obviously done a significant amount. "Unfortunately," said Keady, "it's been totally ineffective. You really need to rewrite the book on this one."  Keady then turned to Reid. "You say the dealers scatter when the police come and return when they leave. Don't leave!"  Keady asked the three if there was a city sponsored basketball team this winter. They answered no.  "What are we waiting for?" Keady asked.

Keady also criticized the police department for not having an officer on duty when the school let out the first school day after the man was murdered in broad daylight and questioned the absence of social service workers to help the community deal with the violence. "Your approach to the problems in that corridor is not working," said Keady. "What's happening now is unacceptable."