iStar Is Trying to Control Asbury Park’s Planning Board. Don’t Let Them.

Don’t get lost trying to untangle the rats nest of connected LLCs, corporations, joint ventures, subsidiaries, etc., that iStar/Asbury Partners/Madison Marquette have set up to drain money from Asbury Park, destroy our historic buildings, gentrify us and take school money from the kids.

In this latest episode, we will refer to the developers collectively by their commonly used name, The Morning Star.  

Oops! I’m sorry, I meant “iStar.”

These developers have put on a business clinic on how to control and silence a small town like Asbury.  You can read here how they have successfully silenced the artists, the musicians, the Chamber of Commerce, the media, the charities and other important people around Asbury.

Now they hired the largest law firm in New Jersey to target and silence one of our Planning Board members.

Let me introduce you to an Asbury Parker named Dan Sciannameo, MAI. 

In 2001 after Asbury Park was released from being a hostage to a different developer’s bankruptcy,  that stalled beachfront development for ten years, Asbury started to be infused with much needed new talent, as people began to move back in.  

Before that from 1970 through 2000, we suffered from middle-class flight (of all races) and since we are a small town, it caused a real talent shortage.  I say that without fear of being insulting because I am including myself in that – I was still here.  We were limited in Asbury Park to voting for those who kept winning elections then going to jail, and that’s as much on me as anyone, because I was here.   Today I gleefully welcome the many new and talented people who have moved here.  

Dan Sciannamao is one of those talented people who arrived about 22 years ago.   Lucky for us, he is a life-long licensed real estate valuator.  He operates for decades in the most sophisticated, expensive, complex and treacherous real estate market in the world – New York City.

That means Dan has seen everything a monied developer can do, can’t do, can hide and try to get away with.  Dan knows more about real estate development than the rest of us could learn.    Guys like him aren’t common, but a rarity.

What does a small town do when a talent like Dan moves in?   You put him on the Planning Board, that’s what.  Let’s face it -  in most small towns Planning Boards are populated with well-meaning butchers, bakers and candlestick makers.  That’s not to diminish them – I’ve appeared before Asbury’s Planning Board and walked away impressed.

Having a guy like Dan Sciannameo on there is like a good team being graced with an all-star.

You know who else knows Dan is a real estate all-star?  iStar.  That’s why they are demanding  that he be disqualified from hearing any of their Planning Board applications.   Picture the Boston Red Sox demanding the Yankees bench Aaron Judge.  It would be for the same reason.

Here is why iStar and the largest law firm in New Jersey pretend they have the right to demand Dan’s disqualification:

On March 25, 2026 Dan spoke at a City Council meeting, in his capacity as a resident; not for the Planning Board.  It was a “public session,” so it was not limited to any topic.   Dan spoke about our deteriorating historic buildings on the “waterfront,” and he named them: Casino, Power Plant, Convention Hall and Paramount.

Because of what he said, iStar sent a letter from their preppy, white shoe law firm, under the false pretense that Dan was referring to “the triangle property” being developed by something called APW Redeveloper LLC.    That’s not iStar or their related companies.  Of note, the “triangle property” runs along Cookman to Bergh Street.    No self-respecting Blue Bishop would call Bergh Street “waterfront.”

Dan spoke not about any project individually; he gave a history lesson about the 24-year-old Waterfront Redevelopment Contract as a whole, and how the master developer has taken their share of the quid pro quo – making tens of millions of dollars building condos- while denying Asbury Park our part of the quid pro quo, which was supposed to be restoration of the boardwalk buildings.

We can be sure that was his topic because at the outset Dan referenced the brief written by yours truly, found here, and I am here to testify it concentrates on that very same quid pro quo.

iStar is afraid of Dan and now claims he has a conflict of interest because he gave an historical recitation, thusly:

1.    Dan said Asbury Parters and Madison Marquette failed to meet obligations on the waterfront to repair four shuttered historic boardwalk buildings.  He called their failure a deal with the devil, not because who they are but because of that indisputable failure to develop.

2.    He said Developers in general don’t care about you, without naming any. 

3.    This part is important:  He said the City Council is the 800-pound gorilla, and THEY (not the Planning Board) shouldn’t let the developers get a cup of coffee in this town, let alone build more condos on the waterfront, until they finish their part of the quid pro quo.

Keep that in mind -  Dan said nothing about the Planning Board, only the City Council who are a party to the 24-year-old Waterfront contract.  You know- the one where we indisputably didn’t get our quid pro quo.

The sinister law firm out of a John Grisham novel claims Dan has a conflict of interest.  So now we must look at some law to see why they are wrong.

The statute that covers what is a conflict for a Planning Board member says it is this:

1.    A direct or indirect financial interest in the project

2.    A direct or indirect personal involvement  in the project

Here is what learned treatises cited by NJ Courts have said those things are:

“Direct pecuniary interests:” when an official votes on a matter benefitting the official's own property or affording a direct financial gain;

“Indirect pecuniary interests:” when an official votes on a matter that financially benefits one closely tied to the official, such as an employer, or family member;

“Direct personal interest:” when an official votes on a matter that benefits a blood relative or close friend in a non-financial way, but a matter of great importance, as in the case of a councilman's mother being in the nursing home subject to the zoning issue;

“Indirect Personal Interest:” when an official votes on a matter in which an individual's judgment may be affected because of membership in some organization  and a desire to help that organization further its policies.

Dan Sciannameo has none of the above.

As always, one must peruse the case law to decide what that means, and we start with this:  The law recognizes that Planning Board members operate better when they are thoroughly familiar with the activities in the town.   A Planning Board member is not disqualified for expressing opinions about the activities within the town, because that serves the important function of keeping the public appraised and educated.

Planning Board members do get disqualified when they have more than just an opinion about City business.  Something additional must be present that conflicts with the application before the board. Let’s look at case law examples, and see that Dan’s mere historical recitation of the contractual breach on the waterfront (factually indisputable) is nothing like these:

In The Ridge v East Amherst, the Mayor (and Planning Board Member) accused the developer of crimes, and passed legislation aimed just at them, voiding all their prior approvals.

In Wyzykowski, the Planning Board member was appointed to 3 paid positions by the Mayor, and it was the Mayor’s application.

In Piscatelli, the Zoning Board members were disqualified because the applicant was a board of education member who had the power to vote on the jobs of their family members.

In Whiteman, the City’s planner acted as a litigation specialist and shaped the record.

In Diamond Chip Realty, the Planning Board set up a competing organization to the applicant, and had other members join.

In Pyatt, a vote was voided about an ordinance where councilmen were employees of corporation that substantially benefitted. 

Barrett, voiding vote where councilman's mother resided in nursing home favored by zoning amendment.

Sokolinski, enjoining a vote of board of adjustment members employed by or related to employees of board of education who benefitted by variance. 

Marlboro Manor, voiding vote where councilmen were members of church opposed to transfer of liquor license. 

S & L Assocs., invalidating zoning amendment enhancing value of property owned by certain voting members of governing body.

Aldom, voiding zoning ordinance where employer of councilman who voted for enactment would be benefitted. 

Hochberg voiding zoning amendment permitting enlargement of horse track at which participating councilman operated horsemen's kitchen.

Bracey voiding ordinance where architect-member of planning board stood to gain by urban renewal ordinance benefitting his client-agency. 

See what those cases have in common?  Nothing about a Planning Board member merely educating the public with an historical speech about breach of contract at the boardwalk, while not targeting any application before the Planning Board.

Nor will the well-vested law firm working for iStar be able to cite one.

Oh and there is one more beautiful part of the law that is recited by Courts in evaluating conflicts:  Does the Planning Board member hold a differing position than that of the rest of the City?

Good grief iStar is going to lose on that!  The entire City is so fed up with their breach of contract that serval activist groups have formed to do something about them, and the City has contracted with retired Supreme Court Justice Lee Solomon to help decide what they can do about that very breach of contract.  That breach is the most pressing and discussed issue in Asbury Park.

Let’s also look at 3 things Dan Sciannameo DIDN’T say:

1.     Dan didn’t say that if enough Planning Board members call out sick and there isn’t a quorum, the board attorney can invoke the “Doctrine of Necessity,” so disqualified members get to vote anyway.

2.    Dan didn’t say that if enough board members call out sick so a quorum can’t be reached, iStar will just have to wait until that flu goes away or they fix our boardwalk buildings, whichever comes first.

3.    Dan didn’t say that it would be really something if the activist groups in town started interacting with potential condo buyers – like showing up to open houses with picket signs and pamphlets.  Or buying ads that tell potential buyers they are contributing to historic destruction and gentrification.  Let them know that they “won’t be able to get a cup of coffee in this town” if they buy one of those condos.   It would be awful if they still bought one and people started hanging their pictures around town like old fashioned WANTED posters in the post office.

Not that I’m trying to give anyone ideas.

WHAT YOU CAN DO NOW

         On June 1 the Planning Board will meet, and a developer application will be considered, but first, the board attorney will have to deal with the request to disqualify Dan Sciannameo.

         Bring all your friends and family to that meeting and use your 3 minutes of microphone time to tell iStar, their lawyers, the City, etc., how disgusted you are at this.

         Imagine so many people using their 3 minutes that this meeting goes until the next morning.  Good thing I have insomnia.

         Oh, one more thing. Under New Jerey’s Sunshine Law if the room fills up and Asbury has no overflow room with audio and video and a speaking microphone so you can be heard inside, effectively eliminating public participation, the meeting must be rescheduled.

Wouldn’t that be awful?