Skip to content

Original P2P Ordinance Restored

To Borough website

Screen Shot 2016-05-05 at 5.44.00 AM

But still not on the state’s list:

Screen Shot 2016-05-05 at 5.56.37 AM



Screen Shot 2016-05-05 at 5.57.52 AM

(It’s important to be listed by the state so vendors know if they make a donation here it could make them ineligible to bid here.)


  1. linlee wrote:

    After reading today’s front page Coast Star story on the Pay-to-Play law, and knowing the Borough didn’t respond to Judge Gummer’s 4/27/16 ruling to immediately reinstate Belmar’s previous ordinance (and remove references to Ordinance 2016-01 within 48 hours from applicable Belmar and State sites based on the Falkner Act) I wonder if Belmar (residents) will be subject to a monetary judgement for contempt. Its so frustrating that each time Belmar’s elected officials blithely approve actions outside the bounds of law, and residents are compelled to use the Courts to set boundaries, the town, not the individuals responsible, pay the costs. Is that going to happen with ignoring last week’s Court order too?

    Thursday, May 5, 2016 at 6:20 pm | Permalink
  2. Eugene Creamer wrote:

    taxpayers always PAY when elected officials disregard the law.

    Thursday, May 5, 2016 at 9:12 pm | Permalink
  3. Anonymous wrote:

    Does anybody know what Belmar’s insurance liability is if the land upon which the Chef Marina building and Lot Street parking lot we gave them collapses like a sinkhole, etc? Are we paying an excess policy for such eventualities in light of Sandy? Did the Chair of the Dem party in Elizabeth right sa me for his buddy? If not, who?

    Friday, May 6, 2016 at 2:05 pm | Permalink
  4. Anonymous wrote:

    Fulops antithesis Norcross didn’t write such an excess policy and who would anyway?

    Friday, May 6, 2016 at 2:08 pm | Permalink

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared.