Common Sense For New Hampshire

The meeting opened with the mayor and council members talking about the problems with the Seafood Festival, but, of course, taking no responsibility for it.  They seemed almost to be acting as if the Seafood Festival is something that happens to us instead of being something we created.

Many of us have voiced concerns in the past that the Seafood Festival was causing overcrowding and that things seemed to be getting out of control.  Last year Jim Bean suggested in a campaign letter that we scale back on promoting the event in order to help alleviate the problem.  Instead, this year we promoted it more than ever.  What we experienced this past weekend was not some kind of unforseeable “perfect storm”.  It was perfectly predictable and was predicted.  Anyway, they’re putting together a committee to make sure “it never happens” again.

My suggestion?  Hold it in February.

Of course the important thing about the meeting was the petitions.  The workshop session discussing the petitions and the unbundling begins at the 13:50 mark of the tape I made.  The petitions are handed in at the 25:20 mark.  This is all required viewing right up to around the 54:00 mark.  Please scroll down to the tape below and begin.  When you’re finished you may return to this spot right……..

…..here.

OK.  I’m sorry I put you through that but you had to see it for your self.

Some remarks, if I may:

1)  None of the petitioners and none of the petition signers are against the Lake Como project.  That is why there was a second petition demanding the project go forward.

2) Tom Dilberger is not the only resident who does not want a new pavilion built at 5th Ave.  Many people I collected signatures from felt the same way as Tom and none of them looked like ogres.  Just like Tom, they were all very nice people.

3) The petition collectors didn’t go through all that work simply because they wanted two ordinances instead of one.  The true cost of Taylor is just as opaque now as it was before.  The reason for stopping the combined ordinance was to get the Lake Como project out of the line of fire when we start firing on the $4.1 million Taylor proposal which is unchanged from what the voters rejected last year.  It needs to be fired on and it will be fired on.  At least by me if no one else.

4) ALL OF THE MONEY THAT IS SUPPOSEDLY TO BE USED TO MAKE TAYLOR PAVILION “FREE” IS UNDER LITIGATION.  I repeat: ALL OF THE MONEY THAT IS SUPPOSEDLY TO BE USED TO MAKE TAYLOR PAVILION “FREE” IS UNDER LITIGATION.  The mayor has called the suit frivolous, which means he is probably going to lose it.  When substantially less of the money that he plans to use actually becomes available to use for Taylor, who will pay the difference?  We need to wait until the lawsuit is adjudicated before borrowing any money to start building.

5) Nobody needs anyone’s permission to turn in petitions.  Jim Lang and Ed Bonanno were being too nice to them.  If Janis Blackburn wants to blow the whole thing up by voting no, let her.

6) The mayor used to be a mortgage broker and understands that attorneys are officers of the court and when they hold something in escrow until the stated conditions are met they will do exactly that.  Pretending that Ed Bonanno might not do what he was legally obliged to do under the escrow agreement was an absolute outrage.  That whole business of giving the letter to Dupont to hold instead was unnecessary, childish and beneath the dignity of all involved.

I have to get to work now but there’s just a couple of more things I want to mention:

Mayor Doherty’s pick to be a member of Tom Burke’s Taylor Pavilion “cost-cutting” committee, James Carpino, is one of the plaintiffs in the “voter suppression” lawsuit brought by the state Democratic Committee against Jim Bean and other Belmar residents who challenged votes in last years election.  Just thought you should know that.

Also, during Tuesday night’s workshop the mayor announced to resounding applause that the state DEP has awarded Belmar a $225,000 grant and a $600,000 “low interest” loan to fix up Maclearie Park.

Well I guess the grant is ok but a $600,000 “low interest” loan?  Aren’t all loans nowadays low interest?  Would we have otherwise had to have gone to a loan shark to borrow money?  My wife bought a new car last year and the interest rate was 0%.  The state DEP wasn’t even involved.

I don’t think we should borrow another $600,000 on top of the tens of millions we already owe just because we’re getting “low interest”.