This council isn't responsible for anything having to do with the redevelopment, simply because they're irresponsible.
This isn't totally their fault; in a system where `pay to play' is the norm, no one is responsible, that's the beauty of the system. The fact that The Fishman was a contributor to McGreevey's election, that Fishman was allowed to remove asbestos from both the Casino and Carousel House without environmental review, that he has carte blanche to employ minimum wage labor to effect the $36 million restoration of the Casino, that he can acquire the triangle for less than ½ million despite offers to the city from third parties of $10 million, that in 2 ½ years he's built nothing; means nothing. Responsibility will not, can not exist in a vacuum; Asbury is a vacuum. Of course you have it wrong. --- In AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com, "dfsavgny" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Asbury couple got me thinking, and since I am not conversant with > all of the historical facts about who was and wasn't in charge at > the time, I looked up this timeline from Restore Radio. Check it > out. Seems to me this council was there right after this deal was > done. I know that the MOU was signed in April 2001 because I have a > copy, and didn't this council approve the restated and amended > agreement? Do I have it wrong? > > http://www.restoreradio.com/WeldonTimeline.htm 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/
