Skip to content

Occupy Belmar

Last November when the polls closed Mike Seebeck led his council race over Tom Brennan 956 to 840.  When the mail-in votes were counted Brennan ended up on top by 22 votes.

This Tuesday when the polls closed the NO vote was ahead  752 to 691.  We ended up losing by 17 votes.

And in this year’s council race,  746 people (the combined vote of Tom Burke and I) voted against Jennifer Nicolay at the polls.  Only 685 voted to give her another term.  After the mail-ins were counted she beat my and Tom Burke’s totals by 2 votes .

It’s pretty clear to me that the mayor is no longer supported by a majority of the people who give a crap and the only way he wins elections is to appropriate the votes of residents who don’t pay property tax, don’t care about quiet neighborhoods, and have no investment here.  Their votes are given away as gifts to their friends.  That’s if they even live here at all.

Belmar is under occupation friends and the occupiers’ weapon is the manipulation of the absentee ballot system with the mayor being able to plug into the large social network surrounding a certain popular nightclub.

With the exception of Asbury Park, opposition candidates in no other town in the county have to overcome the kind of vote gathering machine that exists in Belmar.  Belmar needs a game changer.

Maybe we need to give non-partisan elections a closer look.  Just might shake things up enough to end the occupation.


  1. admin wrote:

    Note: I will be out all day today. I can still moderate comments I won’t be able to respond to any. (For some reason my iPhone won’t let write in WordPress.)

    Saturday, November 7, 2015 at 8:26 am | Permalink
  2. Guest wrote:

    What if we elected people by district, a ward system.

    Saturday, November 7, 2015 at 9:26 am | Permalink
  3. admin wrote:

    They would have to be all the same size.

    Saturday, November 7, 2015 at 9:34 am | Permalink
  4. Anonymous wrote:

    we have the districts right now. run independent conmittee candidate in each.

    Saturday, November 7, 2015 at 10:23 am | Permalink
  5. grayman wrote:

    The force/money of organized labor has won the pavilion deal. Mr. Raia owns Jennifer’s votes. D’Jais with its messengers and clout own the mayor. The voice of the majority has been suppressed by apparent “mis-doing” of vote manipulation (in my opinion). A couple of million dollars passed off to taxpayers is not the same as “free” and that is still OK with the BDC and council members? And the mayor says he will appeal the judge’s decision. He is a megalomaniac. Recall him if the cost of the 5th avenue pavilion exceeds 4.1 million dollars; after all, the mayor said he would subject himself to a recall in that instance.

    Saturday, November 7, 2015 at 11:25 am | Permalink
  6. Tom Burke wrote:

    Question: Is the title “Occupy Belmar” intended to refer to “Occupy Wallstreet”? And if so is it being suggested, like that movement, that taking direct action rather the petitioning government is being presented as an option here in Belmar? If not, to what is the title making reference to?

    Saturday, November 7, 2015 at 2:17 pm | Permalink
  7. Tulip wrote:

    I like the explanation. Now we need a method to change it all. As you said
    Plus the building fiasco might show a way. If all the people who voted yes were in Taylor Pavilion at any given time we would have known. It is to small a town to miss that many people.I could see a change of government.

    Saturday, November 7, 2015 at 3:04 pm | Permalink
  8. Voter wrote:

    Burke no one likes you or your dumb posts. You have never had an original or intelligent thought. I can’t believe our wonderful loyal military by MI ballots were duped into voting for you cause you were in the Republican slot. Your crappy brown nose position was up the Democrats asses. Our military is loyal, honest and believes in camaraderie something you know nothing about. Traitor better describes you and in my opinion you are a rat worse than the mayor because he lies up front you stab people in the back while also lying about them. Sad.

    Saturday, November 7, 2015 at 5:31 pm | Permalink
  9. Belmar Planet wrote:

    I have come to view this town as its own planet. Nothing makes sense. On Tuesday, half of those who voted thought it was nifty to spend 4.1 million for an “accoutrement”. Let me explain. Basically the dictionary refers to an “accoutrement” as an accessory. However Belma’s business administrator in testimony several weeks ago stated to the judge that “the boardwalk included ALL accoutrements ( French accent noted ).
    Such an accoutrement ( under oath ) would be the Taylor Pavilion. Hence, the John Taylor Pavilion is an accoutrement. Only on planet Belmar.
    Further, I see that Mr. Burke is back on this blog. I found his recent comments on “we are headed North” interesting. Actually he wishes. The northern most district Belmar District 5 went NO. They probably voted solidly Schneck also. Regarding, Dave’s “occupy Belmar”, I am sure Dave was referring to “Occupy Democrat”, Councilman Brennan’s favorite website and not that we take to the streets of Belmar. Reason being, that Burke knows all to well that pedestrian safety remains a big issue here on Planet Belmar.

    Saturday, November 7, 2015 at 6:03 pm | Permalink
  10. Big On Burke wrote:

    Tom, I hear and feel your angst bro. Like Hamlet, “to be or not to be”. Whatever I can do to put you out of your misery and pain, well. You know the reality here in Belmar. Republicans can’t get elected, period. So if I were you, just take the one person reforming/changing the entire Belmar Republican Committee off the table. Feels good! right bro? Now, nobody will elect an independent. Great , take that off the table. Finally, the Dems like you, you have their respect and you talk and act like one. There’s your answer Hamlet. p.s. enjoy the darkside

    Saturday, November 7, 2015 at 6:18 pm | Permalink
  11. Eugene Creamer wrote:

    Request For Proposal resolution coming …. for bids …. from buddies …. for construction of bundled pavilions.

    Saturday, November 7, 2015 at 10:59 pm | Permalink
  12. Bipartisan wrote:

    Architect, no bid. Done,

    Take another look at Avon by the sea. Yep, suckers,50% at least.

    Accouterments*************Occupied Belmar

    Sunday, November 8, 2015 at 8:42 am | Permalink
  13. Tom Dilberger wrote:

    #12, Sir, I don’t understand what you mean. Could you be more explicit please?

    Sunday, November 8, 2015 at 9:40 am | Permalink
  14. Tulip wrote:

    I wish Mr. Burkes problems would be discussed on his blog. Why give him more time. They can always discuss him on his own blog that’s what it is for.He could always discuss them with the BA I’m sure they might be solved there. Why the element obstructionists
    terrorists and finally the nobodies we obviously are not qualified.

    Monday, November 9, 2015 at 9:29 am | Permalink

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared.