"If the actual official "Official Adopted Plan" (whatever that is and if ever it is found) differs drastically from what was represented as being the Adopted Plan, then there are more serious questions about what is actually going on in this city with regard to the waterfront development."
It is widely known that New Jersey is the most corrupt state in the Union; that said who would be surprised that official government documents at any level, remain official only until their currency becomes dated and their subsequent currency is determined to be insufficient to compensate those who paid, in good faith, to acquire whatever they may have wished from whichever governments that were then peddling public wares. I'm breathless. --- In [email protected], "dfsavgny" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I asked the city why the Plan was removed from its website. The > answer I received raises more questions in my mind (which I posed to > them), as I am sure it will in yours. It appears that when I cited > pages from the Plan (which I obtained from the city website) > relating to the C-8 site, the city could not find the same > references in its "official" copy of the Adopted Plan. The cover > page of the Plan from its website, and I believe the one from which > reference, is dated June 5, 2002 (Amended), which coincides with the > official date of adoption by the City. > > The City now maintains that that copy of the Plan is not that which > was adopted by the Council, and thus, had it removed from its > website. I might also add that it is my understanding that this is > the same version which has been supplied to the public in hardcopy > and for intents and purposes, has been portrayed as the Adopted Plan. > > Pursuant to the City, the plan that was "officially" adopted by the > Mayor and Council on 6/5/02 has a cover page with a date of DRAFT, > March 15,2002 and a latest amended date of "to be determined," > whatever that is supposed to mean. That is almost the same language > used for the purchase price of the Triangle which was actually > conveyed almost 3 years ago with the price to the City still yet to > be determined. > > The City also maintains that the Official Adopted Plan will also > contain all of the amendments adopted to the plan by Mayor and > Council by ordinance numbers 2607 and 2729, and that WHEN it finds a > copy of the Official Adopted Plan, it will be posted to its website. > > Now before I, or anyone, jumps to conclusions of malfeasance, let me > say this: Even if the Official Adopted Plan (when found) is > identical to the Adopted Plan which we all thought was "official", > the City, in the words of Ricky Ricardo, "has some splainin to do." > > I would like to know who prepared the Amended June 5, 2002 Plan and > for what purpose? This is the version of the Plan we were told > represented what the City adopted as a result of the input, > suggestions and testimony of the Planning Board and the public by > means of a series of meetings. This is the version of the Adopted > Plan that the public was given in both electronic and hardcopy > format. > > I have heard suggestions that it was commissioned by Asbury Partners > in response to the changes that were were supposed to be adopted as > a result of the public meetings and Planning Board input. In fact, > it is the same version which the city clerk has and until recently, > assumed was the Adopted Plan as amended by ordinances enacted > subsequent to 6/5/02. No one can own up to creating this document. > Now if it turns out that in fact Asbury Partners created it and it > is touted as being an "official" document, but now IS NOT, I think > that proves what many of us have been saying, that is, that Asbury > Partners is the preverbial tail wagging the dog. > > If the actual official Official Adopted Plan (whatever that is and > if ever it is found) differs drastically from what was represented > as being the Adopte Plan, then there are more serious questions > about what is actually going on in this city with regard to the > waterfront development. > > Far be it from me to unnecessarily cast suspicion, however, this > entire process was hatched badly (Weldon) and has done nothing but > raise further questions along the way. The most simplest part should > be to say WHAT THE PLAN IS. We can't even say that. I am not making > this stuff up. I couldn't. Watch the road. ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/Y2tolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AsburyPark/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
