Remaining gay friendly isn't just "neither here nor there." Redevelopment literature actually advises developers to entice gay gentrification to resurrect urban areas that have fallen on hard times. (Actually, redevelopment seminars advise developers to supply housing to art students as an anchor in the gentrification process as the best choice; and then the average gay community is second choice - third choice being all other types of grad students.) The fact is that gay gentrification is a prime source for resurrecting places such as Asbury Park and without it Asbury would be a very different point right now and in the future. Unless you think a large prestigious art school is going to open a branch here soon, I think that the present gay community is literally indispensable to Asbury's future.
-----Original Message-----
From: AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com [mailto:AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com]On
Behalf Of Skip Bernstein
Sent: Friday, April 29, 2005 4:19 PM
To: AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [AsburyPark] "live and let live" - tell me how - have a gay old
time
"...will [Asbury] remain popular to gays. I don't believe that this
Council is dedicated to retaining that beauty. I believe that the
amount of preservation that is undertaken will have a bigger effect on
Asbury's gay future than retaining this Council - even with the
occasional mention in the New York Times. Also I think the lack of
expertise on the Council raises serious economic concerns that could
stop the whole process based on basic budget failures anyway. That's
my take on the debate. We should be arguing about WHY such and such is
more important not calling other people stupid, crooked or whatever."
For me it, Asbury's popularity to gays, is neither here nor there. I
acknowledge that gays have and are playing a very important role, but
in pluralistic societies I believe `who' matters far less than what
and why. No town has a hope if it stakes its existence on any
minority or majority; communities survive and prosper because they
tolerate and appreciate difference, to do otherwise is to travel the
mistaken path of the melting pot and homogeneity, which have created a
unique but troubling can of worms.
Obviously my tolerance does not extend to quietly standing by as a
council, varied in race, orientation and class but virtually
homogenous in their deficiency of skills, scruples or schooling.
Very simply I'm not prepared to watch this council have a gay old time
destroying that which is left after so many years of straight abuse.
--- In AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com, "Tyler, Mark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> And this gets to what is really at issue. I think both sides of the
> debate agree a great deal about what the Council has done right or
wrong.
> The debate is really about whether the things they've done right are
more
> important than what they've done wrong. You and Dan and others
think the
> ability to deal with developers and ensure Asbury's future economic
interest
> through those skills and budgetary skills are most important.
> Where others feel that ensuring that Asbury stays gay friendly is
> more important to its future economic interests. They feel that
Asbury's
> gay friendly reputation has been the vehicle that has moved
gentrification
> and been the source of a great deal of single home purchases and new
> businesses. They want this Council because, by their standards,
it's come
> thorugh so far in that area.
> Personally, I am a hybrid. I don't think that Asbury's reputation
> for gay friendly should be underestimated as a basis for its
recovery. It
> is still all important. But I don't think this Council is all that
> important to that reputation. Many of the stalwarts that came here
under
> previous Councils - came because one could still see how beautiful
Asbury
> was. I did and so did Dane and Joe. As long as that potential remains,
> unless the town becomes openly hostile, it will remain popular to
gays. I
> don't believe that this Council is dedicated to retaining that
beauty. I
> believe that the amount of preservation that is undertaken will have a
> bigger effect on Asbury's gay future than retaining this Council -
even with
> the occassional mention in the New York Times.
> Also I think the lack of expertise on the Council raises serious
> economic concerns that could stop the whole process based on basic
budget
> failures anyway. That's my take on the debate. We should be arguing
about
> WHY such and such is more important not calling other people stupid,
crooked
> or whatever.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com [mailto:AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com]On
> Behalf Of Skip Bernstein
> Sent: Friday, April 29, 2005 1:44 PM
> To: AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [AsburyPark] Re: Big influence - "live and let live" - tell me
> how
>
>
> "...the present Council did a few things very right. For example, the
> gay marriage vote... I'm sure the Council analyzed the business impact
> of the move. ...I just want to make the point that there are things on
> both sides worth discussing and shutting people down isn't the point."
>
> Mark, I'll see your "gay marriage vote" and raise you. Council was
> also `very right', or lucky, in hiring Terry Reidy, Don Sammet and
> choosing Ed Johnson to replace Kate. Unfortunately these and other
> `right' choices they've surely made don't come close to the
> horrendously poor choices made with regard to the waterfront, Fishman
> and dealing openly with the citizen taxpayers of Asbury.
>
> Further, I agree wholeheartedly that "there are things on both sides
> worth discussing"; however, if I've actually `shut people down' you'll
> have to tell me how.
>
>
> --- In AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com, "Tyler, Mark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Skip - I like it when people post things I disagree with - it
makes blog
> > life interesting. JJ, Dane, AsburyCouple, Rod and Joe have all
> altered my
> > opinions even though I don't agree with them on everything. I
like that
> > people can make their case and change my opinion. Obviously I agree
> with
> > you and Dan on many things, but let's leave room for people with
> different
> > opinions. Otherwise - what's the point?
> > The all black and white thing leaves no room for discussion. Even
> > though it's unlikely I'll vote for anyone but Ed Johnson on the
> council, the
> > present Council did a few things very right. For example, the gay
> marriage
> > vote was not only a vote of conscience it was also a very wise
> business move
> > for Asbury. It provided a lot of positive press, made Asbury seem
> like a
> > fun place and probably sustained an extension in second home
purchasing.
> > I'm sure the Council analyzed the business impact of the move.
> Personally,
> > I think it was inspired and bold. I could go on but I just want to
> make the
> > point that there are things on both sides worth discussing and
shutting
> > people down isn't the point.
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com [mailto:AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com]On
> > Behalf Of Skip Bernstein
> > Sent: Friday, April 29, 2005 8:19 AM
> > To: AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: [AsburyPark] Re: Big influence - "live and let live"
> >
> >
> > You're largely right; Dane is doing no more than supporting the `party
> > line', in this case the party is that of both APAC's and tCN's.
> > Unfortunately, regarding the current council "live and let live",
> > ignoring council's past sins of omission and commission, prolongs the
> > threat to Asbury's life.
> >
> > --- In AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > Dan:
> > > Everything doesn't have to be a huge fight. Dane is merely
> > > campaigning for his candidates. I don't see a diatribe in there at
> all.
> > > You know I don't agree with the choices but people are entitled to
> > > promote the candidates they believe in. If you want to take issue
> with
> > > the endorsement then that's great but I don't see a problem with
> how he
> > > did it.
> > > Some of what you say is true. APAC used no rating system for
the
> > > candidates - so those of us willing to use APAC's research can't
> > > compare to the entire list of candidates to see how they might
be on
> > > certain issues. Certainly Stuart Koperweis would have to have
> excelled
> > > on such a scale. Whenever a political group endorses a slate of
> > > candidates I look for their rating basis and apply it to all the
> > > candidates. Without a stated, comparative basis for an
endorsement, I
> > > usually assume its based on favoritism, party insider, or, in the
> case
> > > of a small town like Asbury, friendship, clique or affinity. I
> think we
> > > in Asbury should be more concerned with an "us against them"
attitude
> > > adopted from larger scale political contests than who will win this
> > > race. Camps form in politics and may be a necessary evil in larger
> > > scale contests. But in a small town I don't know that it's
necessary
> > > and certainly has its draw-backs. The town is too small for
> > > blood-feuds. So how bout "live and let live?" You certainly have
> your
> > > say on this list - I think Dane is entitled to his.
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: dfsavgny <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > To: AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com
> > > Sent: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 03:03:49 -0000
> > > Subject: [AsburyPark] Re: Big influence ?
> > >
> > > Dane's diatribe is not really worth responding to, but I'll do it
> > > anyway. In short he is saying that we should forgive the incumbents
> > > for what? Not being on spot even some of the time? What are their
> > > qualifications? Diversity? When did that become the litmus test for
> > > public office? Sorry, but I will take some homogenity in return for
> > > competence. And what is this constant talk about the other
> > > candidates' lack of experience? It is obvious that Dane and his
> > > cohorts have not examined some of the candidates' experience. Cote
> > > spent 15 years in Holmdel governmet, 2 of which were as mayor.
> > > Schneider is and has been on the AP Planning Board for many years,
> > > including as chair. Koperweis has worked with municipalities
for the
> > > past two decades and helped put Jersey City on the economic map.
> > > Keady has organized substantial social causes and business
plans for
> > > not-for-profits. Some of the others, including Lamberton and Suggs
> > > also have some similar experience. And what about John Hamilton? Is
> > > he not diverse enough? He certainly has experience serving two
terms
> > > on the AP council, the last of which he was the only one with a
> > > backbone. And who is spreading hate? Very few here have said
> > > anything other objective criticisms. What, the council is
allowed to
> > > do anything they want and no one can say anything? I have a message
> > > for Dane and his candidates, "if you can't stand the heat, get out
> > > of the kitchen." On paper, Loffredo, Sanders and Bruno shouldn't
> > > even be on the same ballot with the likes of Schneider, Koperweis,
> > > Keady, Cote, and some of the others, when it comes to
experience and
> > > qualifications. I have another message for you Dane, COMPROMISE
is a
> > > two-way street, not ASBURY PARTNERS BOULEVARD.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
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/
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 the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
