Skip to content

Mark: I’m Somewhat For It

UPDATE: Click on the image to view the article in my Google drive.



  1. admin wrote:

    I tried clearing out all my cookies but still can’t open the article.

    Thursday, February 13, 2020 at 10:40 am | Permalink
  2. eugene creamer wrote:

    NYC to Jersey ferry ride…

    Thursday, February 13, 2020 at 11:28 am | Permalink
  3. Only For Subscribers wrote:

    Cant read the APP.COM article, you have to be a subscriber.

    Thursday, February 13, 2020 at 11:59 am | Permalink
  4. OLD MAN wrote:

    Scrub the whole damn thing

    Thursday, February 13, 2020 at 7:03 pm | Permalink
  5. Tom Dilberger wrote:

    The whole thing about a ferry is just more smoke and mirrors. It’s all about diverting attention from what they really want.

    Friday, February 14, 2020 at 6:06 am | Permalink
  6. Matt 2.0 wrote:

    This new crew is the same as the old crew. This guy is ready to name DOBCO as the town’s main developer without any input from residents. Every time I post on this blog I ask the same old question “where are all you Walsifer supporters?” and “how can you possibly support this guy with these shenanigans put forward?”. CRICKET. Does anyone else out the get the feeling we need to vote this guy out too?

    Friday, February 14, 2020 at 8:21 am | Permalink
  7. Bananaland wrote:

    Walsifer is far from Matt 2.0 please stop living in Banana Land. Matt and the Queen of Mean had a reign of terror on this small town and its residents. Walsifer is no where near that. Try again fools

    Friday, February 14, 2020 at 6:23 pm | Permalink
  8. legion wrote:

    Don’t get all upset (yet). Another proposal from another developer is in the works, way more scaled down.

    Friday, February 14, 2020 at 8:36 pm | Permalink
  9. Anonymous wrote:

    #7, you are sooooo wrong. Get ready Belmartians.

    Friday, February 14, 2020 at 9:59 pm | Permalink
  10. Tom Dilberger wrote:

    #6 – Sir/Madam, I did support Walsifer until he pulled that baloney in Jan. 2019 and told us how hurting we are financially and then refused to cut any spending. I’m done with that guy and am looking to support a man who will actually work for the best interests of the citizens of Belmar.

    Sunday, February 16, 2020 at 6:13 am | Permalink
  11. OLD MAN wrote:

    #10 I agree

    Monday, February 17, 2020 at 8:48 am | Permalink
  12. Another Highrise wrote:

    As I said – The 9th ave 4 story project was just the start. Since they were able to sneak that through and get away with building that big, the floodgates are now open.

    Monday, February 17, 2020 at 9:03 am | Permalink
  13. Guest wrote:

    9Th ave project is back on the agenda Tuesday night.

    Monday, February 17, 2020 at 1:05 pm | Permalink
  14. Thanks wrote:

    #10- Thanks Tom. I know you are out and about town quite a bit. Can you tell me where all of the Walsifer supporters have gone? They are no longer on this blog. Maybe they are too busy pushing for Bernie. Seems like a very similar platform. Tax, tax tax. No cuts. And I guess they maybe tired of blaming everything on the past admin.

    Monday, February 17, 2020 at 1:43 pm | Permalink
  15. Belle wrote:

    I supported Walsifer. I now regret it! No tax cuts, no tightening the belt as far as town expenses go. These dreams of overdeveloping our town into GOD knows what is insane. Belmar doesn’t need to be Hoboken, Jersey City, Long Branch. Let Belmar be Belmar, have some common sense.

    Tuesday, February 18, 2020 at 9:31 am | Permalink
  16. flower power wrote:

    Repair and upgrade the current municipal building. Referendum time? Or is it too late? As I recall, Mayor Walsifer said early on that the possibility of a new muni building is maybe four years down the road. This plan has been brewing since Magovern ruled the roost, such as it was, probably planted by his predecessor. This is what happens when some people put their faith and support in leaders. They always let ya down.

    Tuesday, February 18, 2020 at 10:40 am | Permalink
  17. Another Highrise wrote:

    #16 I would suspect there’s definitely enough support for referendum/faulkner act petition. How many people voted in the last election? Need just 10% of that. The petition against the 4 story building on 9th ave had close to 300(?) signatures I believe. Maybe it’s time to remind these guys who they represent?

    Tuesday, February 18, 2020 at 1:06 pm | Permalink
  18. flower power wrote:

    #17 As Ragnar Lothbrok stated in an episode of Vikings, “Power is dangerous. It corrupts the best and attracts the worst. Power is only given to those who are prepared to lower themselves to pick it up.” Not saying that Walsifer is stooping, but the lofty seat upon the dais can create an oxygen shortage and affect the brain, speaking poetically here. I would guess that this blog has been instrumental in getting him elected. “Raise a king, then tear him down when he fails the people.” ~flower power~

    Tuesday, February 18, 2020 at 3:45 pm | Permalink
  19. Search wrote:

    I had to look it up.
    The Faulkner Act offers four basic plans (mayor–council, council–manager, small municipality, and mayor–council–administrator) and two procedures by which the voters of a municipality can adopt one of these plans.[2] The Act provides many choices for communities with a preference for a strong executive and professional management of municipal affairs. Twenty-one percent of the municipalities in New Jersey, including the four most populous cities (Newark, Jersey City, Paterson and Elizabeth) all govern under the provisions of the Faulkner Act. More than half of all New Jersey residents reside in municipalities with Faulkner Act charters.

    In all Faulkner Act municipalities, regardless of the particular form, citizens enjoy the right of initiative and referendum, meaning that proposed ordinances can be introduced directly by the people without action by the local governing body. This right is exercised by preparing a conforming petition signed by 10% of the registered voters who turned out in the last general election in an odd-numbered year (i. the most recent General Assembly election). Once the petition is submitted, the local governing body can vote to pass the requested ordinance, and if they refuse, it is then submitted directly to the voters.

    The Faulkner Act was created to provide municipalities with greater flexibility than provided in New Jersey’s traditional forms of government (city, township, borough, town and village) and to expand on the reforms provided in the Walsh Act and the 1923 Municipal Manager Law.

    As originally enacted in 1950, the Faulkner Act provided for three forms of government: mayor–council, council–manager, and small municipality. Within each form, letter codes designated predefined aspects of each form and its individual arrangement of options, such as partisan or nonpartisan elections, concurrent or staggered terms, all at large or a combination of ward and at large seats.

    In 1981, the Faulkner Act was significantly amended. The letter codes were eliminated, and the number of varieties within each plan was greatly increased. The council–manager plan was amended to include the option of having a mayor chosen by the electorate. A new form, mayor–council–administrator, was added. Municipalities were also given greater flexibility to amend their Faulkner Act charter without having to place the entire charter on the ballot.

    Tuesday, February 18, 2020 at 4:17 pm | Permalink
  20. Anonymous wrote:

    Any APP comments? I don’t subscribe bc too many commercials. Oh and Fake News, liberal slanted reportage only.

    Tuesday, February 18, 2020 at 5:04 pm | Permalink
  21. fed up wrote:

    #19 Interesting. Does anyone know how many people voted in the last election? How would you find that out? Asking April?

    I also wonder what a conforming petition means?

    Wednesday, February 19, 2020 at 7:54 am | Permalink
  22. admin wrote:

    Wednesday, February 19, 2020 at 8:13 am | Permalink
  23. Tom Dilberger wrote:

    Here’s an interesting article. But as some of the commenters to it have said, if you choose to move away from NJ or NY, don’t vote the same way that made NY&NJ economic wastelands.
    EXODUS: New York, New Jersey Face Largest Population Decrease In Country…

    Wednesday, February 19, 2020 at 9:37 am | Permalink
  24. Registered Democrat wrote:

    #21 1,793

    Wednesday, February 19, 2020 at 8:05 pm | Permalink
  25. fed uo wrote:

    #24 where did you find that number out? That seems low.

    I am starting to think that major changes in development like higher density than normal or taller height than normal should be put to a vote by the town as a ballot question. Major projects would need to convince the community that it is in their interest, not just convince the few on the dais.

    Thursday, February 20, 2020 at 9:14 am | Permalink
  26. CORRECT wrote:

    #25- You are absolutely correct. The other alternative is to vote these people out. They were elected to protect the residents not to bend over for these developers. Also we need an updated Master plan development. This town is out of control. AND, be prepared for another property tax increase. These guys refuse to make cuts.

    Thursday, February 20, 2020 at 10:36 am | Permalink
  27. Registered Democrat wrote:

    #25 county website under voter turnout please double check my numbers but that’s what I came up with about a 35% turnout

    Thursday, February 20, 2020 at 11:11 am | Permalink
  28. Anonymous wrote:

    Voting out doesn’t seem to work. This crew told me when they were running that they were going to get over-development under control. I agree with previous 2 posters.

    Thursday, February 20, 2020 at 11:18 am | Permalink

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared.