Best news I have heard all day: McGlynn noted that on Friday afternoon, he, Jenkinson's owners Anthony and Frank Storino, Scott Bassinder, owner and president of Martell's, his father, David Bassinder, Ron Gasiorowski, attorney for Martell's, Mayer, Gordon, Barrella, and Borough Attorney Sean Gertner, had a good meeting to discuss a possible "settlement agreement."

I still want the details of how much it will cost the town to enforce the new parking rules and who will actually go around checking every permit to see if the are valid.

This whole thing is a complete joke. Everyone forgets about all the LOCALS who work in these establishments and depend on the tourist to make their money. Say 2 hours won't hurt much... Give me a break, whose going to come to a Point bar knowing they need to be gone by 12 and can't leave their car in a certain area in case they drank to much. People need to relax and realize where THEY choose to live. You live by a boardwalk in a summer town, please tell me you didn't think it would be loud at night down there. Along with that many of these stories of passing out all over the place and peeing all on houses is slightly exaggerated to get THEIR point across.

Joe, get a grip, life changes and you have to deal with...
Companies fold, people have there hours cut, etc...
We/you cannot control the world.

Joe, the residents in the beach area should not have to tolerate bad behavior just because they bought a house by the beach. There are a lot of residents in other towns that live by the beach that do not have these problems. Their town officials put a stop to it with strict ordinances. If tourists or businesses do not like these ordinances then to bad. They can go some where else. To a town where they will allow tourist and businesses to do what ever they want and allow bad behavior. Joe, Part Timer is right, you need to get a grip, things change, Companies go out of business, hours are cut, you can't expect the residents to pay for problems that are created by tourist that visit the businesses in our town because many of their hours or jobs have been cut.. Some even have to sell their house because of the problems. The residents can't keep on affording large tax increases every year because they are paying for some of the tourist that visit the businesses.

Does anyone find this strange....the state possibly passing a bill that might impact the town's ability to impose fees on bars that serve alcohol later than midnight.
Officiials have indicated the state legislature may introduce the bill on Thursday. Gov. Christie told a radio station it will be passed by July 1. Wait,where were Christies fundraisers held?????Maybe a coincidence......It goes both ways people and until people recognize that,we will get nowhere.....

Mr happy must not be so happy this morning since the council is caving and the parking ordinance will get tossed after the courts decide.

Who's What are you talking about. This is not about parking and what does the court have anything to do with it?

To "Marlene" and a few others who have double entendre comments here and on the other Point Beach council story: Stop it now. Also, readers: no more comments trying to guess the IDs of those behind fake names. Yes, I wish everyone would use their real names, but we can't have people guessing because you have no way of verifying that and neither do I. I've deleted a few comments from the other story and one from here. Let's try to keep it civil.

Like I have been saying----and in direct contradiction to the Mayor’s comment above (“the May 15th meeting, and we carried this, and we find ourselves with the state usurping our authority”)-----the State/Governor would not be taking power from the Mayor. The Mayor doesn’t have the power. The only power a municipality has comes from the State, so if the state does not give, municipality does not have. Governor wants legislature to tell us that, not the Courts---seems it will save all lots of money in legal fees.

Now it is also clear what the right answer is: Governing Body needs to admit it doesn’t have the power---unless they want to fight the BW and the Governor---and withdraw the ordinances. Then BW needs to make donation. Not fees so out of Governor’s hands----Governor does not have the power (and the Mayor doesn’t either) to stop a donation

Mike, thanks for the info,do you have a link or a number for the bill. I want to see what it says. I have not heard of it before last night. thanks

Jonathan,I have never accused anyone of being in with the BW. Yes, I found the timing of the bill extremely strange,M Brodeur cleared it up for me. I don't know if the council has or does not have the power to impose fees for bars but they do have the power to close the bars at 12:00 which I don't think would be good for anyone so with that being said,It should not be about power....

joe, you said,
Last time you checked there are not many other beach towns that resemble Point Beach at all.
Joe, do you get out much... ok not to many with a BW, but how about all the towns that have Bars joe...
Lets take Beach Haven for example, bars, rides, stores, restaurants (serving alcohol) and you do not here one sound at night. Signs posted around bar areas telling people that these are quiet streets, zero tolerance.

The Council never tried to stop a donation. I can safely say it never will!

Joe, you said,
Everyone forgets about all the LOCALS who work in these establishments and depend on the tourist to make their money.
Did anyone care when my career changed on Wall street do to electronic trading systems, NO. So instead of complaining on deaf ears, i went out and re-invented myself and became a very successful Financial Advisor.
If they owners and employees do take a cut in income then maybe they need to take a look at there business model or career path and re-invent themselves as well.

Well at least they realized what a dumb idea this was and are looking for alternatives. Hopefully it wont be the Three Stooges comedy routine of round 1.

And I STILL dont have an ounce of sympathy for someone who bought a home 2 blocks from a busy tourist destination, only to complain when tourists (all kinds) show up.

Ms. Kelly, you say that you've never accused anyone of being "in with the BW." I'm sorry if I got confused then. If you did not mean to accuse anyone of being "in with the BW," can you explain what you intended to say when you wrote this statement at 11:52 pm last night: "Does anyone find this strange....the state possibly passing a bill that might impact the town's ability to impose fees on bars that serve alcohol later than midnight. Officiials have indicated the state legislature may introduce the bill on Thursday. Gov. Christie told a radio station it will be passed by July 1. Wait,where were Christies fundraisers held?????" What was your point in mentioning where Christie's fundraisers were held?

Ms. Kelly, perhaps the problem is that you're not paying careful enough attention to what you post when you write it? For example, at 10:34, you said "I was surprised by the bill being signed on Thursday." Well, that's not what you wrote earlier. You wrote: "Does anyone find this strange....the state possibly passing a bill that might impact the town's ability to impose fees on bars that serve alcohol later than midnight. Officiials have indicated the state legislature may introduce the bill on Thursday. Gov. Christie told a radio station it will be passed by July 1. Wait,where were Christies fundraisers held?????" So, what you first wrote was that there's a possiblity of a bill being introduced on Thursday. But, then you later wrote that it was going to be signed on Thursday. Those are two entirely different sentences, don't you see? Just because something MAY be introduced, doesn't mean that it's going to be signed, right? So, let's get back to my original question: what was your point in mentioning where Christie's fundraisers were held? I don't think it should be kept a secret. I don't think that it IS a secret. But, what was your point in bringing up that reference last night, and doing it the way that you did? What made you decided "oh, I should mention this when I talk about the bill being introduced" if it was not to suggest that Christie is "in with the BW"?

Jonathan, I also wrote: I found the timing of the bill extremely strange,M Brodeur cleared it up for me. The words are not EXACTLY the same words but the meaning is the same. I asked you,Is it true that the bar fees were just added recently? I read the article and I posted on it. I don't believe that anything that I said was not true. I find it comical when on the last few articles that have posted with the numerous amount of lies and misinformation that was being posted,you did not feel the need to correct any of it. Why is that?

Also, Gov. Christie told a radio station it will be passed by July 1. He didn't say maybe,he said IT WILL be passed by July 1.

Ms. Kelly, so you think that saying that "a bill being signed on Thursday" means the same thing as saying that "the State legislature may introduce the bill on Thursday"? I'm not trying to argue with you. I'm just trying to find out what you actually think. Do you think those statements mean the same thing? And, again, what was the point in your mentioning where Christie's fundraisers at the same time that you mentioned the possibility of that bill being introduced? You also just posted "I find it comical when on the last few articles that have posted with the numerous amount of lies and misinformation that was being posted,you did not feel the need to correct any of it. " Are you trying to suggest that what you've been posting are lies and misinformation, and that's why I'm correcting you? All I've tried to tell you is that it's not helpful, especially for someone who wants the BW and the Council to work something out about this bar situation, to then try to make negative suggestions about someone being "in with the BW" and I mentioned how that is how I read your comments about where Christie holds his fundraisers. You said that you've never accused anyone of being "in with the BW" and I'm just trying to figure out why, if you did not intend to suggest that Christie was "in with the BW," you would write something about where Christie holds his fundraisers at the same time that you that bill.

I oppose the parking plan (The cost to the town to implement the P. Plan is estimated by Councilman Corbally at $15,000- covering the cost of the parking passes, postage & handling,& signage), and both ordinances restricting bar hours. My broader concern is that no member on the governing body has indicated either of these being part of a long term plan for success for PPbeach. Existing ordinances that have not even been addressed, and work against us. The biggest example of this is the PPbeach ordinance forbidding any new liquor licesenses (newly aquired) to be used within 500 feet of an existing license. This prevents creating districts/clusters. The benefit of creating districts is that the police can monitor neighborhood behavioe more effectivly and efficiently (and therefore cheaper) when the activity is clustered in one area. As the law is now, if a new license was to be bought (for example- if the southern house license was to be bought), the only locations in PPbeach it could go is near Golds Gym, Near McDonalds, and on Route 35 N & S, by Hoffmans). Our own ordinance designs sprawl. I do not see how this benefits anyone. I've raised this issue to our council before- only to have them VOTE AGAINST changing it. The current controversial legilations are reactionary,exclusionary, anti-business, and yet another infraction against capitalism in this country. And an example of a lack of negotiating skills on the part of our Council- to the detriment of residents & business.

Haha,you are funny. Let's use a Hypothetical situation shall we. Let's say that IF the BW used their connections(unless of course it is a secret that they might have 1 or 2 connections) to get the bar fees included in the bill. The Bar fee ordinance is squashed,the council in turn will probably just shut them down at 12:00 all together. Once again,that will leave the residents holding the bag...It's all hypothetical of course......So now i will say again,I am not on EITHER side. I am a realist and I think that both sides should work it out as opposed to any power plays that are coming into effect. I should have said that The bill would be passed by July 1 and left it at that,i'm sorry that I didn't...

Jonathan P: don't believe what Cathy Kelly said. . .Ms Kelly does not exactly tell the truth. . .much more, she likes to spin and makes up stories?I was going to post one of her many-many, but...there too numerous to list. Ms Kelly is a Barrella, Corbally and Tooker supporter. She would love nothing better than the tourist to stay away from her home. . .much less don't even come to Point Pleasant! This dispute: largely between the transplants, like her, has been going on for a long time . . .starting probably in the early 80's, with the influx accompanying the then building boom. . . picking up again with another real estate boom in the 90's up to the housing collapse. Ms Kelly and the others on both sides of this issue will all play their politically correct roles to cover up their own prejudices. At times it's somewhat amusing to read all these stories out of the mouths of all the parties. . .how nobody is talking about any "quid pro quo". . .That just ain't true. . . that's not how it works? . . .but we'll go along. . .for more of the same?

Ms. Kelly, in response to your hypothetical, if the State passes a bill that squashes the bar fee ordinance, and then the Council turns around and closes down all the bars at midnight, how is it that the residents are left "holding the bag"? What bag? See, this is where that extortion thing hits home to me. If the Governing Body thought that the real best solution to solving the quality of life issues was to hire more police, then they should never have gone down this path of early bar closings and bar fees. Now, I personally think the solution is the police. But, some people who got elected believe that solution is to close the bars early, and they seem to have the support of some residents. So, if those elected people think that the solution to solve quality of life is to close the bars, close the bars. If they wanted more police, then they should've figured out a way to pay for that, and I would've suggested asking the BW for money to do that. Take what you can get, and do what you can with it, and see if it works. But, that's not how it went. They threatened the bars with the early bar closings and the bar ordinance fees, so now, yes, the residents have a bag to hold: the costs of attorneys fighting in court. And, regarding your hypothetical, I think the ABC is already watching what's going on, and I'm sure they've called the Governor on it. No one needs to use any connections with this situation. It's already got attention because it's so crazy.

I am glad they post-poned readings. Hopefully indefinitely. Let's move on now.

it is a shame what is happening to a small beach town- all bad publicity and nothing but district against district----quality of life should begin at home--

When the Freeholders take action, you will probably know before me.

First to Part Timer: I would like to take you up on your 4th of July offer but where would I park? Second, I think we should get out our dictionaries and look up the word "extortion". Yes, this term does apply to this situation and it is against the law no matter how justified or desperate you feel about your problem. I strongly agree you do seem to have a problem with certain visitors. But the "E" word that should help you is ENFORCEMENT. Your town, starting with the mayor, has seemed to come up short on that job. He is in charge and the "Buck Stops Here". You must ask: "Why is no one reining in these troublemakers"? Do not accept excuses. A STRONG police presence will make a difference. Either they will behave or be ticketed. If that does not work then arrest them. A disorderly person cannot wake you from a sound sleep nor relieve themselves on your property if they are in a jail cell. All of this talk is just a smoke screen for your pols' shortcomings. You should have replaced them when you had the chance. Good Luck!

JimmyCarterIsSmarter,
I think is safe to say we all love the Boardwalk along with the rides games etc. As for my family and I we also love to watch the tourist as they walk by our home. Very friendly people that even stop and say hello during the day and early evening. But when the clock stikes 12, everything changes.
As for what the BW businesses can do if there is a early close, why not eliminate the club like atmosphere and create a four star restaurant that can still serve alcohol like the restaurants in Long Branch.
By the way, I am only 47 years young...

Opinionated, that has to be one of the best posts that I've read on the Patch. And, as much as I don't want to mess with the perfection of your post, I have to add...how is it that someone can be the Mayor of the town, and in one year (2011) can help design the municipal budget, himself, can choose to cut the police department's budget which results in cutting the Special police officers, can support the refusal of additional money offered to increase police services, can then witness one of the "worst summers in history with regard to crime" and not take any personal responsibilty for the situation?

CAUSE: Sharp reduction in police force a couple years back and a change in the way the town was policed
EFFECT: Sharp increase in offenses and upset townspeople with noise and disturbance; labored police department
SOLUTION: Sharp increase in police and preparation for a busy summer season with zero tolerance. A return to the way the town was successfully policed
CHALLENGE: Need additional funds for police costs
ANSWER: Boardwalk business owners pay $140,000 to cover police costs

It seems to just make too much sense.

Stephen, that sounds like a good plan. My question is how do we make it happen so it is not a one time deal. Do they see how much money is generated from it and determine whether it is needed next year?. Do they come up with some ordinance strictly for the coverage of Police(which I thought some said is illegal)? Do they sign some sort of contract? Do they renegotiate it every year. I would love to see the money taken and see if that corrects the problem.

Ms Kelly: stay on Message. . .no one cares about what happened on August 26th. . .

...and "I owe Ms. Halverson an apology". . .that's got to be a mouthful from you? Hey. . .that's politics! Halverson, or the Storino's are no angels. . .as former Mayor Hennessy pointed out. Last year the BW attracted the Jersey Shore MTV clowns called the "guidos and guidettes" from that Snooki farce they produced down here(didn't see your letter in the OS opposing it). . .

The boardwalk promotes it's business model. Those businesses generate tax & fee revenue for the states coffers "big time" Here I agree with Barrella?. . .They attract(bring) the crowds which contribute to compromising the quality of life. . . while the state and the BW sucks up the money. . .and the town gets nada. . .Yet constrained by the 2% cap...they still have to pick up the tab for the extras. . .

Stephen, I agree 100% I certainly hope they are prepared to give the discussion a fair shot. I also hope that after these discussions are done,agreed upon or not that the truth is put out there so the residents will know who to thank or who to hold accountable......Trust me,I will personally Thank all involved if they can agree and get something done.....

If the ABC wants it can take the power away from the town on all liquor relayed things like closing time and fees then the town really looses

Mr. Happy, you lost all credibility with me and many others when we saw the comments you left here on the patch last night that Ms. DeStephan appropriately deleted.

Hey Joe, once again geta grip..
The high school children that are working there will not be affected by an early closing.
There maybe a few college kids there but most of them are grown adults. I can say this because they all park on my block from 6:00 AM TILL ?
One last thing, nobody will be loosing there jobs, they still need the same amount of people to work up until closing. Nice Try...

Joe, hate to break it to you, the residents are not in business therefore they should not have to pay for anyone's salaries. It is not our problem. If the bars close early, we will not need as many police, we can cut everywhere. It is away to bring our budget down which will result in less taxes.

Walk with me, my friends, down memory lane. I was Googling "bar closings" to try to find information about what towns in NJ have early bar closings, and came across this 2009 article about PPB. I found it particularly interesting. It seems like this idea to close the bars early has really been a constant "stick" for Barrella. Back in 2009, he was using it to justify the paid parking plan. Read it for yourselves & enjoy: http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2009/03/point_pleasant_beach_mayor_say.html

Ms. Kelly, I'm posting to you down here so that you might be able to see this post better than trying to find it in with the others. You left me, I think, a post at 7:19 tonight, and I'm not sure if it's posted correctly. It's posted under something I posted in response to Opinionated, but it references another post that I left to you at 1:23pm. You seem to think, somehow, that I have an agenda? Um, okay. What's my agenda? I want the BW to pay money to the town so we can spend the money on more Specials. I think that they should've taken the $140K like a week or two ago, and put this whole thing to bed. I don't like a parking plan and I don't like early bar closings because I don't think either of them will solve the problems but, instead, will create more. I think that the Council members who really think that the early bar closings will solve the problems should poop or get off the pot. Oh, and anyone who is serious about supporting these "negotiations" with the BW, shouldn't slur the BW at the same time that they're saying that they hope everyone works together. So, where's my agenda?

Good info here. If a parking plan had been put in place then, we wouldn't be in the situation we face now. Love him or not, you have to admit the guy (Barella) is a visionary.

This is ridiculous, just close the bars early already. All this back and fourth, I want money or else. Just do it! Because charging extra money to stay open will not help the quality of life so many here complain about. Again, every side and everyone is not telling the truth.

Hey Joe,
I like going to the Tiki on Thursday nights, Ark and Frankies on the weekend, Broadway bar on Tuesday.
Hey Joe, you care so much then go stand outside the clubs at 12:00 and give them the tips yourself...Then I would like to see them return the favor when you cry the next time your taxes go up and you can no longer afford to stay in town.
Keep trying...

Hey Joe,
I think is safe to say we all love the Boardwalk along with the rides games etc. As for my family and I we also love to watch the tourist as they walk by our home. Very friendly people that even stop and say hello during the day and early evening. But when the clock stikes 12, everything changes.
As for what the BW businesses can do if there is a early close, why not eliminate the club like atmosphere and create a four star restaurant that can still serve alcohol like the restaurants in Long Branch.

I keep forgetting to ask this of all of you Patch readers and posters...where's the money going, if we get it from the BW, either through the negotations or through the bar fee ordinance? From what I heard, the municipal budget's already been approved, our taxes already established. And, Chief O'Hara requested his police dept budget, which included the number of Specials he wants to hire and what he needs to cover expenses, right? And, that was fully approved (no cuts were made to O'Hara's requested budget), right? Really, do I have all of this right so far? So, assuming that I do, if, let's say, we get $200K from the BW, does that mean that all of us taxpayers are getting a rebate in our taxes? Or, are they just going to use that money to pay for more police services (more than Chief O'Hara already thought we were going to need)? Anyone know how this is going to work?

Jonathan,the other point that you and others are missing is that there are so many residents reading these comments but will not post on here because they just want the problem solved and they do not want to be attacked. There are ALOT of residents that feel it is all about control for the BW. I have defended the BW as well as the Council because I believe the truth is the truth so when people post on here only answering questions that benefit "their side"people see right through it. The residents are intelligent people and again,you would be amazed at how many people are actually reading the comments. Thats why I think it should be kept fair and honest....Again,I have been accused of alot of things but I will answer any question regardless of who it benefits.....I am a resident that wants to see a solution to a problem....thats all...

Ms Kelly: that's not what Halversen said. . .stop ad libbing!

This is what was reported by the 'patch': ...Scott Bassinder, owner and president of Martell's Tiki Bar Inc., and Marilou Halvorsen, Jenkinson's Boardwalk director of marketing, said in separate phone interviews that the offer had no conditions...

Ms. Kelly, I cannot, for the life of me, understand why you would get so annoyed with me, and accuse me of not being willing to answer your questions or suggest that I'm only answering questions that benefit one side just because I needed your help to find the statements from Halverson that you were asking me about. Maybe the reason why new people, like myself, are reluctant to post on the Patch is because people like you and the other regulars have so little patience with those of us who are new to Patch and have a little more trouble following along. And, it doesn't help that you're 10:31 post to me isn't under my post. It's under Mr. Happy's 7:41 post (which I don't think is your error. I think it's a Patch problem). I am happy to tell you my opinion on those quotes, now that I've found them (btw, aren't we supposed to comment only on the articles above, and not on other articles? I would've thought that was the rule?). I'm going to have to answer in another post, though, because I think I'm going to run out of space on this post. I hope that doesn't offend you.

Ms. Kelly, okay, now I'm trying to post here, while flipping back and forth between the articles (my computer seems to have a lot of trouble with that). Halvorsen didn't say "without strings attached" although she does say something like "without any conditions." She later says that their hope was that enough money would be offered so that the Governing Body wouldn't feel the need to adopt those ordinances, the parking plan and the bar closing ones are what I think she means. That all makes sense to me. The BW can't offer the town the money with "conditions" because, well, that would be a bribe, wouldn't it? Honestly, I think that whole "bribe" thing from last year is making everyone worry about how they choose their words, and that's part of the reason that we're seeing some of these statements that seem strange. But, obviously, the BW doesn't want the parking plan or the bar closing ones, which is why they're in these negotiations in the first place. We all know that, and the BW lawyer made that clear in his letter, too. So, the bottom line question for everyone is how much money does the town need to provide the type of enforcement to reduce the bad behavior problem without having to resort to the parking plan and bar closing ordinances, and that's what I hope everyone involved is trying to fairly work out. I hope that answers your question. I have to go to bed now because I'm on baby duty tonight as my wife is out of town on business. Have a good night.

I meant Not the councils fault or Bw's fault

Now if we could get Corbally to drop the post hole diggers and step away from the curb. How is he going to encourage talks when he is already on the line for $15k in signs?

All this is going to do is have people drink at the bars here till 11:30pm then get in their car drive to another town drink there till 2am and then drive back. can anyone see a bigger problem here??? A Retired Cop

It does not matter either way they are going to get in their cars after drinking for hours. It is no ones fault but their own. This is not the bar owners or the town's responsibility. They should not be drinking for hours then get behind the wheel of a car. The reality is that they do and they are the ones who is responsible and the ones who should be punished and pay the consequences.

JohnnyT- You are incorrect, again. It is absolutely the bar's legal responsibility for how much someone is served. Fact check buddy.

mailman, I am not incorrect. How do you know where someone starts drinking and where they end up by the time they get in their car. They could leave the bar fine, go to someone house party or another party. Drink, Drink and Drink then they get in their car. It is pretty hard to measure. You have to know yourself. You can be fine one minute and then it will all of a sudden catch up to you. That has never happened to you before. You have to know better not to get in that car and drive away. This is the problem with the world today. Everyone want to blame others for their own actions. How about everyone take responsibility for themselves?

mailman, That is how I at least see it! You see it a different way. You want to blame the bars, towns and parents I guess.

JohnnyT- I agree with the complexities you mentioned. However, in the State if NJ, both bars and bartenders are legally responsible for how much patrons are served. Im not blaming anyone, just stating the law. You would have to take the personal accountability issue up w Christie.

bayboat- A bar and / or bartender can be liable if a person they overserved causes an accident and hurts someone. How else would they be liable for overserving people. Plenty of recent cases on this.

Many years ago LBI was able to shut down the club that was just over the bridge heading into LBI. How did they do this? With the help of the police dept, every ticket that was written to someone they also asked them what bar did they just come from. eventually they were able to determine that a large percent of the problems were coming from this bar and took away there liquor license.

No disrespect to the LBI government, but, I think our PPB police officers recognize that drunk people, who are getting tickets, are prone to lie. And, if people are carrying beer bottles or dropping beer bottles in the street, those bottles aren't coming from the boardwalk bars.

Part Timer: apparently you like to talk the talk. . How about focusing on what other people say before you post. . .like the Police Chief above quoted in the 'patch' article...

...Regarding the nature of the greatest amount of problems during the summer weekends, O'Hara said, "I can say they're alcohol-related. Where that's being consumed I really can't pinpoint. You could have a group out of control at the train station. Where did they all drink? Who knows?"

For example, if someone on Ocean Avenue is drunk, there are four to five different liquor licenses in that one area, so it's hard to say exactly where they drank, O'Hara said. "They could have started at one place and then went to another place. They could have drank at a rental. It's hard to pinpoint."

Is it true that councilman Corbally and mayor Barrella got a letter in February stating the county had serious issues with implementation of a parking plan on county roads ? Did they push this through and disregard the letter ? I thought the parking plan couldn't work without the county roads being involved.

Part Timer - the extra cops have been hired and will take care of that. But if everyone has to move their cars at midnight, anyone who has been drinking has to drive. That's unsafe for the town and more of a risk to the bars who are happy to provide the number for a cab

Ms. Kelly, did you attend Tuesday night's meeting? If so, did you hear anything about this letter from the County to Corbally in February about the parking plan?

PT- it doesn't matter what time the bars close. If they don't move their car by midnight, they would get a ticket.

Parking Plan: I was at the meeting. If I'm not mistaken, the county responded that they were "against" PPB putting parking signs on county roads because it will have an effect on tourism. However, they did not say that PPB could not...Mayor Barella said he was going to wait to get better clarification. Mayor Barella also said that he was going to move forward with the residential areas regardless. I am for the parking plan and live in district 4, but I am concerned about the number of signs. My understanding is that there was 250 signs ordered. After talking to John Trout and the Police, it is believed that we are in need of 500-600 total signs just for district 4. The amount of signs may look "trashey" on or near the curb of my house. However, I will give SOMETHING a one time shot. Let's take action, try it for this year, see how it works. We can always amend or adjust. We need to do something, even if it's not the answer, but a deterrent.

Part Timer: the facts don't support your rhetoric. . .Here's the link. . . .and what was reported by the PD to 'patch' last year regarding BW arrests...Very few alcohol connected...as the Chief said above. . .Most of the other "disorderly conduct" charges not alcohol related, and were reported before or around 12:30AM?

http://pointpleasant.patch.com/articles/monday-nights-26-arrests-on-point-beach-boardwalk-followed-busy-weekend-of-83-arrests

Doesn't anyone else think it very disturbing that a very important correspondence is received in February from the county, regarding the parking plan and the counties position on the plan, and is apparently withheld from some council members? This letter should have been shared with the entire council immediately when it was received. This is what is going on with seven people who are sworn to run the town. Councilwoman Tooker claims she was unaware of the 140k offered by the boardwalk and blames only Councilman Mayer. That dispite Councilman Gordon being part of the negotiations, that Gordon calls discussions not negotiations. The vital county letter that was not voluntarily shared with the entire council, that has a great bearing on the parking plan, is not mentioned in the articles that followed.
Very troubling behavior at best.

BHB-...constantly butting heads with the BW, who think they "run" the town...intimidate us with the threat of a lawsuit, maybe not a great idea....but I give OUR elected officials credit for trying.
BHB...answer this question please, if the town wishes to implement any ordinance in the near future, should the town fret of an impending lawsuit?
Do we allow any other business to cause such a hardship to our town?
..and yes I do mean hardship.

BL----No the GB should not fail to pass an ordinance just because a lawsuit is filed. GB needs to evaluate chance of success and cost. Most ordinances are clearly legal. Neither of the proposed ordinances is even likely legal, according to OS. GB should never implement an ordinance that is beyond a municipality's power, or implement an ordinance in order to force a business to pay money they don't owe, or promise an ordinance, and pass that ordinance, when they know it can't be enforced.
Now a question for you: Why isn't enforcement the right answer?

So what I am getting out of all these posts. This council is no better than the prior council with all the hiding and lies they got away with.

Mr. Cavagnaro, regarding the parking permit sign that you had displayed in your window facing Baltimore Avenue up until sometime this week, was it an identical version of the signs that have been ordered by the town? Or, did you have it made yourself based on a drawing, photograph, etc?

BHB- The ABC has given the (GB)towns in NJ the right to early bar closings...that is a fact.
Second, our GB may not have the right, to put signage on county or state roads.
But they can on residential roads.....
You say it is illegal and can't be enforced?
....I may be wrong but I believe my above statements are to be true and factual.

You ask me-" Why isn't enforcement the right answer?"
We can't afford the police overtime or the specials as is!
And you want more enforcement?
I am not knocking our PPB PD(I think they do an excellent job), but I wish I had been cop in this town $$$,$$$.$$
Our town should be rich! Our GB should be wondering what to do with all the extra revenue...not the case here, we are scraping pennies together
Our GB is doing the best they can with what they have.
Say strong Vince, Mike, Tooker, and Gordon
Cathy Kelly don't give up. We need you to be vocal for ALL of us!

Ah yes, when facts are becoming overwhelming Cathy Kelly begins her spin to a different direction. (very typical) What letter to the bw are you referring to that was sent secretly ? The parking lot excuse is getting old. Let's say they did keep it open later, wouldn't the people who live along the boardwalk and the people who live in the condos then feel the burden of the so called urinaters, defacators, and sex fiends ? SOO Cathy Kelly, is it your position that as long as it ain't in your backyard that it's not a problem ?

Ms. Kelly, you are a funny woman. Why are you telling us what we should be asking? If you have questions, you should ask them, but you should let us decide what we want to ask, okay? Now, if I wanted to know about that parking lot, the first thing that I would do is some homework. Like see what approvals the BW had to get to use that parking lot. Are there any restrictions on that parking lot? See, towns can put restrictions on operation times. I don't know whether that parking lot has those types of restrictions, and I'm not really interested in looking, but if you have already looked, please share with the group and tell us what you found. If the BW has the ability to open up that parking lot for more hours, then I say make that suggestion and maybe it will happen! As for that letter that you *think* was shared by a Council member (and I'm guessing that you don't have any proof of that), let me first tell you what I learned along time ago about this town...there are no secrets. As a taxpayer, I'm glad the BW knew what the Borough Atty's advice was. It caused the BW attorney to write back to the Governing Body and tell them basically what they were up against if they end up in court. I think that's good for everyone. It gives the Governing Body a full picture of what they're up against with the law, allowing them to make better decisions, better than being surprised, right? I'd rather they know their chances in court before they spend our money.

I have tried over and over to let the one sided people with an agenda know that people are paying attention,,,Some people think that no matter how many times they distort the truth that people will buy it but again I am going to say,you underestimate the residents!!! People pay attention to every question that you skirt around and do not answer. If you think that you are helping the situation by ommitting facts and posting only what benefits you,you are not helping your cause,you are actually hurting it..,,,

Ms. Kelly---Late night, huh? I’m not sure I know where to begin---as to the memo from the Borough attorney sent to the BW----the idea that it was some one, other than Gordon or Mayer, who were conducting the negotiations, who provided the memo, has no basis in fact. The more likely scenario is Gordon showed it to the BW so that they would stop saying the ordinances were illegal---which from the OS article today on the parking plan, and the OS editorial on the bar closings we now know they are----and this idea that leaking this letter from Barrella’s hand picked political hack killed the negotiations is nonsense-----Mayer certainly knew this memo was nothing but political cover for illegal ordinances---the BW’s very expensive and very competent lawyer made mince meat out of the political cover provided by Gertner-----you really think BW did not have teams of lawyers working on this long before Barrella’s hack started looking---there was nothing in that memo the BW did not know long ago. And I have a question, considering you allege you always answer questions: In light of the fact that you have never criticized Barrella, aren’t you the queen of the “one sided people with an agenda”? If I am wrong please point to any criticism of Barrella from you.

Ms. Kelly, I'm sure that people do notice when questions are posted here but are left unanswered. So, let me draw the big "pink elephant" in the room questions to you, ones that have been left unanswered by everyone. Maybe if I ask them directly of you, you can answer them? What is the Governing Body going to do with the money that they collect, either from the BW through "discussions" or from the bar closing fee ordinance? As I understand it, our municipal budget, that was approved, gave Chief O'Hara all of the money he asked for, and we, the taxpayers, are footing that bill. So, if we get more money to pay for police, will we get a tax rebate or are we going to get even more police, more than Chief O'Hara thought that we needed to start?

To Part Timer: Back in my younger days, my friends and I used to sit on a friend's porch and watch the entertainment as they left Mary's Husband's Pub in South Belmar. Those were fun days. To Jonathan P: Thank you for the complement. You ar correct that the term "bribery" applies for the larger establishments and "extortion" for the smaller ones. As you can see by the posts here, this is not about controlling the "rowdies" , It is about "sticking" it to the boardwalk establishments. The Mayor and Council made a mistake in reducing your police force and did not realize the consequences. Now you have two trains of thought about this. One: they messed up and refuse to admit it. Or two, the cynical view, you could think it was done on purpose in order to create this problem and blame the Jenkison Group for everything in some sort of vendetta. I personally believe it is the first because; given their track record of getting into wasteful, expensive, and losing court cases; I don't think they are that clever. I need to stop reading this stuff because the courts will never go along with this anyway and it makes me reluctant to go into Point Beach and sample your fine restaurants. You know, if you turn off enough people, your businesses will suffer and perhaps close. Remember, be careful what you wish for.

Please all read the OS star article on the parking plan. The TRUTH has come out. Corbally did get a letter from the County dated February 15, 2012. It does say the COUNTY WILL NOt CONCUR with the parking plan----and that it can’t be enforced on County Roads unless the County concurs. Corbally says the letter is meaningless, but County Administrator Carl Block says County will not concur. Yes, the Freeholders must still vote. But County engineer says “public right-of-way is explicitly available for all of the public” and therefore Corbally plan raises “serious legal issues.” Corbally spent our money, even thought he knew this letter existed. He did not tell his fellow Councilmen. He did not tell the public. He just hid the letter for his own selfish purposes. I assume he was just trying to avoid the embarrassment of championing such an ill conceived plan, but maybe I’m wrong. Tell us why, Councilman?

CK---I have not noticed you to be evenhanded--the parking plan you cite was in 2008---so 4 plus years of pro-Barrella, and maybe it's just me-----but I think that shows a bias---made worse by your failure to recognize the bias---but no matter---you are going to get the chance to demonstrate how even handed you are-----first you can provide opinion on Corbally and Parking plan---but more importantly, I suspect all will soon recognize that these ordinances were extortion plain and simple, and all will, as Barrella has already tried to do, run from this whole mess, and we will all get to see if you are evenhanded---or if that is just spin---

Ms. Kelly, thank you for telling me what you know about the money. It's disappointing, isn't it, that none of us really know what's going to happen with that money, if we ever get it? Look, I've read numerous comments from Barrella where he says that PPB taxpayers are footing the bill for the extra police needed because of the BW businesses, and personally, I'm not comfortable with the idea of putting it into an account, waiting until next year becuase I don't trust that it will be there next year. And, if the BW businesses do end up having to contribute, voluntarily or through the ordinances, the taxpayers should get the benefit of that payment immediately, either through rebate or extra services. So, someone should tell us where that money's going. I think it's great that you're looking into that parking lot and whether there are any restrictions. Let me give you some cautionary advice, though. You probably don't know this because it may have happened before you moved into town, but a few years ago, the BW businesses wanted to create more parking near the BW. They proposed a fairly detailed plan for it, too. The residents hated it, so it got voted down. As someone else mentioned, if you pursue keeping that BW lot opened longer, you may find that people near that area are unhappy. Again, I think that if you believe it's a good solution, go for it. Maybe opinions have changed by now.

Corbally is not the only one who needs to go immediately. Administrator Chris Riehl and mayor Vinny Barrella were copied on the letter from the county so they are just as guilty.

For those looking for Solutions:

The solution is simple: For this year withdraw the ordinances and take the 140K.

For the future we need elect people who who do not make “standing” up to the BW their platform, because electing people who run on a platform of "standing up" to the BW ends in disappointment for their supporters or expensive litigation for the town.

Ms. Kelly, you keep saying that people who read the Patch notice when someone doesn't answer a question. Please answer mine, okay? Aren't you worried that by failing to share that letter, Corbally and Barrella (and I say Barrella only because he apparently was sent a copy of that letter, too, according to the Ocean Star article), have mucked up the whole negotiation process? Don't you think it was wrong of Corbally and Barrella to have gotten a letter from the County in February about the County's position on the parking plan and for them not to have shared it with the other Council menbers and the public? You're all hot and bothered about someone sending that borough attorney's letter to the BW. Why aren't you mad about Corbally and Barrella not sharing that County letter? Shouldn't it have been up to all of the Council members to decide just how important that letter was before they went ahead with the vote on the parking plan?

Nick, I don't know if every letter to individual council members is forwarded on to everyone. For example,when I had a conversation with Mr.Mayer about the Boro Attorneys letter regarding the ordinance,he said that letter was sent to him,gordon and Barrella (I believe) He said he only forwarded that letter to Reid and Lurie because he assumed that Barella or Gordon would have sent it to Tooker and Corbally so maybe the same scenario happened with the parking letter,I don't know.

Wouldn't the simple solution to this entire mess be to raise the amount of the fines typically issued to the intoxicated bar patrons late in the evenings? Let the drunks causing the problems pay for the increased police presence. Then everyone wins. The town gets their needed money for the police and the bars still function as they always have with the tax revenue still flowing full force.

Ms. Kelly, have you read the Ocean Star today? That letter gives an opinion about the parking plan, saying that the County is not going to approve use of its streets. Corbally has been asked at each meeting to tell everyone what's been going on with the County, and he never mentioned that letter. Corbally said in the article that he didn't think it was important. Forget about forwarding it to other people. Don't you think that Corbally and/or Barrella should've said something at the public meetings about the letter? Don't you think that everyone on Council should've known that it was likely that the County wasn't going to let us use their streets for this plan before they got to vote? We're not talking about procedures on who gets what letters. We're talking about open and honest government. So, one more time, aren't you worried that by hiding this letter, Corbally & Barrella may have mucked up the whole negotiation process with the BW? Doesn't it make you angry that this letter was hidden from the public and other Council members? Also, from what you wrote, it sounds like the Boro Atty didn't even send his advice to all of the Council members. What the heck is that? Mayer's a responsible guy, but what if his computer was down or he was sick? Lurie and Reid wouldn't get the info? That's just wrong. Talk about problems working together. The Boro Atty seems to be playing games, too.

Nick: Gertner is a political appointee...the "pay to play" type. . .oh that's right . . .they don't have them any more!

. . .this whole BW issue is riddled with politics up the gazoo? Last year they could have funded the needed enforcement when the BW offered $40,000...but because Reid was the BW's candidate...they didn't want him getting the credit. . . so they called it a bribe! The games Barrella, Corbally, Tooker, and their fifth columnist Cavagnaro...along with officials, employees, and others have been playing. . .would give an historian a night mare. . . in trying to ferret out facts and truth...from lies, distortions...agendas, innuendos and hear say?