19 Comments

1. Cathi wrote:

   Wow!!!

   Saturday, June 13, 2015 at 10:34 am | Permalink
2. Jim Bean wrote:

   Why aren’t they revoking the $11 million bond at the same time? Its still good if the petitions aren’t turned in.

   Saturday, June 13, 2015 at 11:14 am | Permalink
3. admin wrote:

   We must be very careful.

   Saturday, June 13, 2015 at 11:31 am | Permalink
4. Ms. Sarcastic wrote:

   Say It ain’t so!

   Saturday, June 13, 2015 at 11:22 am | Permalink
5. ms.perspicacity wrote:

   Don’t be duped; there must be a trick in there somewhere.

   Saturday, June 13, 2015 at 12:00 pm | Permalink
6. sweetiepieface wrote:

   Have the people spoken again? It still isn’t walking like a duck even it appears to look like a duck.

   Petitioners don’t be fooled. Agendas can come and go; New ordinances and change orders abound, and another sucker is born every day.

   Saturday, June 13, 2015 at 12:49 pm | Permalink
7. Resident wrote:

   The petitions will be filed!

   Saturday, June 13, 2015 at 12:55 pm | Permalink
8. Eugene Creamer wrote:

   Ordinance 2015-22 was adopted JUNE 3, 2015 …. not June 5! …. ERROR.

   Saturday, June 13, 2015 at 3:22 pm | Permalink
9. Cathi wrote:

   What’s the difference really? If council approves nothing changes? Same amount of money being borrowed? They approved as bundle they will most definitely approve anyway it’s presented.

   Saturday, June 13, 2015 at 3:38 pm | Permalink
10. OLD MAN wrote:

    As James Cagney said many times “I smell a Rat”

    Saturday, June 13, 2015 at 4:15 pm | Permalink
11. nodee nyall wrote:

    Using the wrong date is like the old “hiding in plain sight” trick of placing the $925,000 settlement between two much, much smaller amounts on the bills-to-pay list, hoping no one notices. (Ha, ha, fooled ya!) And Councilman Brennan wonders about trust of the mayor and council. Everything they do and approve has to be scrutinized by sharp eyes and challenged if any little old thing seems out of place.

    Saturday, June 13, 2015 at 4:17 pm | Permalink
12. Resident wrote:

    Stay on course

    Saturday, June 13, 2015 at 10:01 pm | Permalink
13. Tulips wrote:

    I feel a threat to my security. Not that anyone cares.It truly is pitiful.

    Sunday, June 14, 2015 at 1:09 am | Permalink
14. Eugene Creamer wrote:

    In the current form (w/ wrong date & typos) …. Ordinance 2015-24 would be invalid upon passage, and existing Ordinance 2015-22 (bad) would survive and persist with a 20 day statute clock ticking since June 6, 2015 …. just more regime malarkey.

    Sunday, June 14, 2015 at 9:03 am | Permalink
15. Just Passing Through wrote:

    Don’t worry Tulips I will protect you.

    Sunday, June 14, 2015 at 9:46 am | Permalink
16. Batman wrote:

    13 Tulips turn on the searchlight I will come to your rescue.

    Sunday, June 14, 2015 at 9:56 am | Permalink
17. batman1 wrote:

    #16 Hey, I used that name first. “I’m batman!”

    Sunday, June 14, 2015 at 10:40 am | Permalink
18. Batman wrote:

    17 #2 You snooze you loose I did not see respond you too quick to rescue Tulips.

    Sunday, June 14, 2015 at 10:48 am | Permalink
19. batman1 wrote:

    Ok, no problem, just stay true to the Batman ethic. Gotham City can have only one, and you can be Batman and watch out for the citizens of Belmar. The original Batman ‘on this blog’ hereby gives you the right to use the name. Notice: any replies from Batman hereafter are not from “me”. Peace.

    Sunday, June 14, 2015 at 11:01 am | Permalink

Post a Comment