But it's definitely time to start paying attention again, because what the council does in the next few weeks will determine the Asbury Park we get for decades to come - and it could go either way.

On the fabulous side, the last major lawsuit against the beachfront redevelopment plan was officially knocked down by the state appellate court two weeks ago -- meaning there are no more legal challenges to delay rebuilding on Asbury Park's legendary boardwalk.

And, much to its credit, the City Council immediately set a 14-day deadline for the city and Asbury Partners to draft a new boardwalk redevelopment agreement.

According to the Feb. 1 resolution, the council will negotiate "among other things, the priority of the [boardwalk] buildings to be renovated, binding time frames for ... each renovation" and "consequences for any failure to perform."

Sound great? Absolutely -- as long as we're talking about our historic structures. We know what has to be done there, and they won't survive any more delays.

But when we're talking about everything else, a whole lot depends on that "among other things" phrase. Because experience shows that anytime we push Asbury Partners into a corner, what we get is no vision and breathtakingly bad architecture. And it's probably what we deserve. Let me explain.

Historic Preservation. By now, you can probably recite every historic building that Asbury Partners must restore according to federal preservation guidelines.

These "non-negotiables" include Convention Hall, the Paramount Theatre, the Casino carousel house and arcade, the south end power plant, and the Howard Johnson's portion of the Fifth Avenue pavilion. (And, yes, even Asbury Partners seems open to preserving the Arthur Pryor bandshell, which is currently slated for replacement with a new, ground-level facility.)

For each of these sites, the council must negotiate firm deadlines by which Asbury Partners will submit detailed construction plans -- with clear priority being given to the buildings (or even portions of buildings) that are most endangered.

This means that the council must seek expert advice -- now -- from agencies like the state Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) and the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP), and from the hand-picked team of architects, engineers and other professionals who sit on our Technical Review Committee and Planning Board.

Not to do so may cause unnecessary delays in getting SHPO and DEP permits. Worse, it could easily lead to tragic losses on structures already weakened by decades of city neglect.

The council must also negotiate enforceable deadlines for starting and pacing the actual work once building permits are granted, with intermediate milestones and clear non-compliance penalties to keep the plan on track. And, yes, that's just the easy part.

Everything Else. Which brings us to the "non-historic" aspects of boardwalk redevelopment, and the reason I instinctively reached for antacids after reading newspaper accounts and talking to a few key players.

Because, while it's extremely important to set "binding time frames" now to develop individual historic buildings, it would be sheer bone-headed folly to do so for the remaining boardwalk pavilions.

Why? As I described last time, creating a memorable boardwalk involves much more than running a few unrelated pavilion designs past the city -- as Asbury Partners did in alarming numbers during my last year on council. (And, trust me, some of them were real groaners.)

Instead, the city should work with Asbury Partners to develop a cohesive (and imaginative) plan for the entire boardwalk: one that encompasses the remaining commercial pavilions (including the private and public beach clubs -- remember those?), the new gazebos, and amenities like signage, decorative lighting and streetscaping.

You can't do that in piecemeal fashion. In fact, experience in other cities shows that it still may be too early to answer some key questions about boardwalk design: For example, should there be restaurants, shopping, entertainment? What kinds and how much? Does entertainment imply amusement games and rides, sports or music venues, movies, special events, or something completely different?

Even the concept of "seasonal" versus "year-round" is apparently under debate, with the mayor reportedly telling Asbury Partners, "You talk about year-round retail. Asbury's never been that and never will be. Asbury always has been seasonal."

Maybe that's our problem. And maybe that model no longer works if those traditionally large structures west of Ocean Avenue now house year-round residents rather than the seasonal hotel guests who deserted us.

In any case, the current beachfront redevelopment concept -- which calls for the boardwalk pavilions to open onto Ocean Avenue as well as the boardwalk -- certainly anticipates year-round uses, particularly if we expect the developers to invest countless millions in renovating our deteriorated beachfront.

Which doesn't mean that Asbury Partners can't get moving now on those historic structures. They must. And they can certainly improve and operate the existing boardwalk pavilions until the final plan is approved -- something they did with relatively greater success last summer.

But, as anyone who's ever sat in a negotiating session can tell you, they are way past due to hire the qualified redevelopment manager they pledged to hire almost two years ago. And it's definitely time to hire the most respected and experienced architectural firm available -- not the next person who leaves a resume in their office -- to design the overall boardwalk plan.

All these milestones must be included in the upcoming agreement. And, rather than set random deadlines for individual pavilions, the council should negotiate a process to ensure that the overall boardwalk design is done thoughtfully, at the right time, and with sufficient planning and input.

The next few weeks are going to be tough ones for the council and for city professionals, and crucial ones for the rest of us. It's definitely time to keep the pressure on.