Because the court merger went so smooth

OWWT: With all due respect, the Republican council members in both the Beach and the Boro in the fall of 2010 were not interested in acknowledging the fundamental flaw in what they previously put in place. I believe the political focus of both groups was on capturing the Mayor's seat in both towns.

As far as why the Boro did not focus on the court agreement in 2011, you would have to ask the Boro governing body; however, I suspect it may relate to the fact that they had major budget issues including a negative "surplus" (which effectively amounted to an overdrawn SAVINGS account) they inherited. For my part, the focus was on fixing the problems created by the 2010 budget and negotiating with our unions regarding givebacks and furlough days. We did, however, meet about the Court and Tom Gannon our borough attorney in 2011 was involved in trying to fix the agreement. Once again, I would stress that the Boro had huge budget issues and that was probably their priority.

What's not true? There were numerous conversations regarding the court shared services agreement. All I said was fixing the agreement might have been less of a priority for the Boro than the major budget problems its governing body inherited.

...but yous wanted to fix the agreement...No? And according to that article: things didn't get rolling until some 8-9 months later. So your pointing fingers at the Borough because of their alleged budget woes. . .why the Beach did not follow up the March 2011 discussions? You bought up politics for 2010. . . Wasn't that the year you were recalled? And last year you also were running for Mayor in a tough race. So are you saying beach politics had nothing to do with it last year as well. . .

You are all over the place, thus the pin ball analogy. I will note once again as I did earlier that the Beach can not under the agreement put in place by the council in 2010 unilaterally change or withdraw from the agreement until it expires on June 30, 2013.

If you are upset because you believe the Boro governing body did not act quickly enought, I suggest that you attend one of their meetings and express your opinion to them. I am sure they will listen to you as you reside in the Boro.

What is not truthful. Any changes based upon annual reviews could not be done without the written agreement of the Boro, for the third time the Beach could not implement changes unilaterally, nor as you noted could we terminate the agreement unilaterally. Until you recognize that, there is no sense continuing on with this.

What OWWT implies I gather; was that you complained, when in 2010 as you say about the flaw in the Court sharing agreement(with no documentation put forth)...or you said nothing that year. Then after you didn't get defeated in 2010, and the Democrats took over the Borough Council. . .there was no change bought about until some 18-20 months later. . .and all you can say is "it took two to tango". . .Oh that's right...they were preoccupied last year with their budget woes. . .and of cause I guess you weren't preoccupied running for Mayor...that had nothing to do with it?

A copy of the original agreement is on file in the clerk's office at 416 New Jersey Avenue.

Pretty strong statements in that post....any proof anywhere to back them up? That would be great information to have....

OWWT: Perhaps you should change your alias to "F. Scott Fitzgerald." You have some real promise as a writer of creative fiction.

One who was there. You were the problem, and how dare you drag me into the mess you and your crew created. I tried to have the meetings open to the public, and you and yours had me and others removed. The Regular Beach and Boro Republicans tried to play God for personal gain. Some achieved their financial goal and the others are gone. This had nothing to do with politics just personal greed.

Mr. Corbally: I am afraid I don’t understand your post. What mess was created by what crew? The Court agreement was a good one. It could have and should have had the Boro providing specials to do security, as has now been proposed, back in January of 2011. It was not done because after the Boro Dems were elected, and your election shifted the Beach council back to Barrella, neither your Council nor our council wanted to make it work; it was easier to let the Beach police reap an overtime benefit then admit that those you ran against had a good idea.

To what meetings do you refer? Governing body meetings are, as you well know, open to the public. How did either the Beach or Boro republicans get a personal gain from this Court agreement? How did they try and “play God?” Who achieved “their financial goal?”

I understand you dislike republicans because they refused to nominate you for council, recognizing, I’m sure, your “ends justify means” mentally revealed by the deceptions you used to get your beloved parking plan implemented in the Beach, but how was what happened to the Court agreement about greed?

Sure looks to me like it was about you and Barrella playing politics instead of looking out for your taxpayers.

In the Boro you have the republican ex-council president, leading the charge working for the state, councilman now working for the county, in the Beach you had republican council member working for the county, and one voting in favor while working for his clients simultaneously. That's just the beginning of the corruption, and behind the scenes action you guys play. Their was no verbiage in the original agreement to deal with the "specials" and the Boro hiring them. Maybe if you spoke with the respective police departments, and building departments before going off on the 'Queens" demands you have have saved us all money and time. The court deal will work once properly executed, by the Beach getting it's fair share from the Boro, and the Boro hires the "specials" for our court.

I'm not against Republicans at all, but when you're told "we want you to run but you need to vote the way we tell", I have a problem with that Party. You evidently don't, nor do the candidates that the Regular Republicans the Beach are running this year. Party politics is corrupt, and unfortunately our County probably mirrors the State and Country.

The "what's in it for me" politicians need to be voted out. What happened to serving the residents/taxpayers because it's the right thing to do, an honor?

One who was there, if you are proud of being "there", I'd think you be proud enough to use your name!

Mr. Corbally: You seem to be confused. Ex-council presidents working for the State had nothing to do with the Court agreement, neither did any Councilman’s working for the County, nor did personal clients of councilmen have anything to do with the Court agreement.

And as to being told how to vote, you have voted with Gordon Tooker and Barrella on virtually every issue. Seems you are being told how to vote. The difference is you are not being told how to vote by republicans or democrats, but by Barrella, who is part of a party----except instead of naming it democrat or republican, he names it “independent.”

And I agree the politicans like you and Barrella who are in it for the ego need to be voted out.

OWWT- not for nothing, but I'm reading the 8/20/2010 Ocean Star... and back then Lt. Dikun is quoted saying that the Court sharing agreement would raise O/T bill for the Beach. So he was right. Then they discussed using Boro Specials and according to the article, Lt Dikun said Point Beach special officers cannot be hired by both boroughs to perform security for the courts in a shared services agreement...

Now that statement contradicts what there saying now, unless were parsing words here. . .both municipalities can't hire Specials. . .but now the Borough can. . .Which is it Lt Dikun. . .and why didn't you make this point when you discussed the matter?

...now let's look at where the Council left off...

...Councilman Jeff Dyer said there would have to be a meeting between the boroughs to discuss the issue of the use of Point Pleasant Beach Police officers.

“I think that we will have to address that,” Councilman Dyer said...

So 'one who was there' what happened. . .and why was this not worked out. . .What gamesmanship was being played here. . .seems a little ridiculous if not stupid, not to have saved Beach taxpayers money in regular police O/T, in lieu of hiring Specials. . .Was Trenton tying their hands. . .Did they need some kind of order from there to hire Specials?

http://starnewsgroup.com/weekly/2010/08.20.10/council_agre_08.20.10_61936.html

Mr Corbally- what political affiliation do yous have. You embarked on grass roots political activism...I mean. . . it his what it is. As for the Mayor not making appointments. . .I don't think he could with that mess you got there. As for appointing Council attorney. . .have reservations about putting that out for bid. Probably explains cause for some confusion there. Having different lawyers... who even like our Supreme Court. . .are not above politics? The Boro went with Starkey last year...but he Kenneally, his partner was a tax attorney, hardly experienced in municipal law. Some times you get what you pay for?

Spooner,
I'm not a yous! I am not affiliated with any party or group locally. I like it that way. I will do what I think is best for all the taxpayers of Point Pleasant Beach. I certainly will make mistakes, but they will be mine, and I will own them.

...can't stay with the same attorney. . .more an indication of Barrella's acumen...in running the government. . .and just how unsettled politics has been under Barrella's leadership?

In 2011 the Boro's attorney was Kevin Starkey. The only reason the Beach has had a different attorney in 2010 and 2011 is because the Republican Club councilman decided that they wanted to change attorneys.

Mayor- the party labels and their addendums; if I might be permitted to use that expression, has become a laughing stock of Beach politics. . .and the fingers point to you and John Gelson, I believe he's one of your supporters...Am I correct? Now I would love to say that in 2011 you had a split Council, but looking at the political mishmash there, I would be verboten to say that! Just think...maybe you could split up each of the 4 EDs into quadrants, giving you 16 political entities to vie for the spoils of government largesse...how about four attorneys a year. . .Professional appointments are made by the Mayor. But from what you're telling me. . .you don't have that clout. I wonder why. . .Now your supporting another Independent with No club backing??

...what's that expression Oliver Hardy saids to Stan Laurel. . . well, here's another nice mess you've gotten me into!

Changing attorney's doesn't change the contract or the law. Unlike the Boro, we selected our last 2 lawyers based on qualifications and price, not on political affiliation. Appointing professionals based on needs and quality would be refreshing. How about eliminating any professionals from accepting appointments from anyone they financially supported? Lets eliminate the influence peddling all together.

The court agreement would have worked if those involved simply spoke with the Beach police department before signing off on the deal. The "Queen" didn't care and her merry group of followers didn't know any better. Being a Governor drone was more important than their respective stakeholders.

Who are you trying to kid? Tom Gannon has much more experience and cost a lot less than Sean Gertner. The only reason the Beach changed from Gannon to Gertner was to pay Gertner back for his unwavering support of Barrella. You are paying much more for much less with Gertner than you did with Gannon. You did see the APP article on Gertner's latest loss to Mullen in the Driftwood case, didn't you?

Mike yous were the ones that got the short end of the stick. . .then again I'll pose the question: after Lt. Dikin said you couldn't use Specials for both towns under shared services, and Councilman Dyer said they were going to look into that. . .nothing happen!

http://starnewsgroup.com/weekly/2010/08.20.10/council_agre_08.20.10_61936.html

Watchdog, is that Mr. or Ms. Watchdog? Seriously though, I am not going to get into which lawyer is more expensive or who is a better lawyer. Their billing rates are about the same within a couple of dollars. Tom Gannon is still working for the Beach primarily as labor counsel and has also been involved in other matters this past year. I respect them both.

Spooner: I recall a letter iin the Ocean Star a few months back where the writer said that party labels mean nothing in the Beach and that the groups on council were divided into those that were pro-resident and those that were not.

There is no difference between the Republican Club insiders and the Democratic Club insiders. They are a single political unit which is balanced out by the independent movement in the Beach.

The hourly rates for Gannon and Gertner may be similar, but the amount of time billed is much greater by Gertner. He is well known as one who pumps up his time. Just compare the amount the Beach has spent in the years Gertner has had the job against what anyone and everyone else who has had the job has been paid.

The Beach Council is divided into those who try and balance what is best for residents AND business vs. those who pander to squeaky wheels to get elected. The Independent Club insiders are in the latter category and provide no balance

Watchdog: Now you are just embarrassing yourself.

Watchdog...why don't you ask the Mayor to have his CFO put out and break down all the Council attorney's cost indices and figures by quarter for the past three years, starting Jan 1, 2010, and post it on the town's website or in the Ocean Star. . .

PS: Mayor when you quote the Ocean Star, please either provide the link or the publication date, and your simplistic comment is not representative of the Beach politics as I recall...Republican insurgents, then Republican/ Democrat flippers. . .Now it's Independents?