Letters to the Editor (continued from page 12) believed he could understand the nature of the problem: thin material on a substandard bracket. I contacted Mayor Monahan many times about the noise from the backboards, late-night use of the courts, foul language, and even the taunting of my children by players at the court. Only once did I receive a direct response from the mayor, indicating that the bolts were tight on the backboards. Looking at the minutes from council meetings, the incidents and contacts to the mayor were never mentioned. In September 2011, we were again awakened by people playing basketball at 1 a.m. After contacting Mayor Monahan about the latest incident and including Councilman Pruiksma, the courts are finally secured when the park is closed --two years after the issue was raised. For members of the administration to suggest that there was only one report to the police about after-hours use of the courts is disingenuous, and symptomatic of the problem we have had over the last year and a half. It could not be further from reality. Looking at past meeting minutes, I see council members repeatedly raise concerns brought to them by residents. My mistake was relying on Mayor Monahan to do the same. So for $200 and over a year and a half of grief, I hope the problem will finally get fixed. James R. Trommelen Midland Park Dear Editor: This letter is in response to that posted in the Oct. 19 edition by Mr. and Mrs. Sinnott of Wyckoff. They are complaining about the opening of a gun dealer in Midland Park and have made statements that I wish to counter. This is not meant to be an insult to the original writers as it is possible that they are not familiar with the firearms laws of the United States and New Jersey. In addition, I must add that this is not a defense of the business owners, as I do not know them in any capacity. To sell firearms in the United States, one must secure a federal firearms license from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms. Similar requirements exist by the New Jersey State Police. The background checks and qualifications are most intensive. For an individual to purchase firearms legally in the State of New Jersey, one must secure a firearms owners ID card from his/her local police department. This involves fingerprinting and an extensive background check. Depending upon the jurisdiction in which one resides, this first step can take up to six months. To purchase a handgun, the buyer must also secure a pistol permit from his/her local police department. This process typically takes less time, but many police departments in larger cities throw up roadblocks, such as the limited hours and days the issuing officer is available. At every step, a fee is required. Once the permit -- which is actually a permit to purchase and not carry a firearm -- is issued, the buyer typically has a limited time to make the purchase before the permit automatically expires. One very odd requirement is that, even after the buyer has met these requirements and walks into the gun dealer, he/she must then go through yet another background check by telephone for which he/she must pay another fee. Please note that active police officers must also secure a permit to make a purchase. Average citizens are not permitted in New Jersey to carry a firearm for personal protection. Only retired police officers, employees of private detective agencies, and other security related employment may apply for a carry permit. Again, this process can easily take six months and cost the applicant over $700 in fees and range qualification costs. This is also in addition to the background and training requirements set forth in the Security Officers Registration Act. All of the above assures a firearms dealer that the prospective buyer is authorized to make the purchase. The statement by the residents that the dealer will not be able to tell who the “good guys” are is not defensible. As for the safety concerns, as an NRA-certified instructor and range officer, I concur, however, that licensed gun owners in New Jersey have a safety record that is beyond compare. Keep in mind that having a shooting range requires even more extensive requirements and no range is part of the proposed business. I trust the facts described above may allay the fears of the original authors. Michael J. DiPalma Wyckoff Dear Editor: In the 1990s, the Army Corps of Engineers declared Maple Lake in Wyckoff unsuitable for residential development due to the poor condition of the dam holding back the lake. Mysteriously, and at night, the dam was breached and the lake subsequently emptied out. I guess someone was hoping for a change in designation. Fast forward to 2009: Wyckoff can, and does, re-zone the property for single-housing development. This move also made it eligible for preservation, much to the delight of Brian Scanlan and his open space Friends of Wyckoff. The township then proceeded to tax the property as residential and entered into negotiations with the owner to purchase the property (value $7.4 million) in hopes of preserving it as open space. After all, it had both the money set aside from an open space tax imposed upon us through a successful push from the Friends of Wyckoff and grant money from Bergen County (our money also, by the way). But wait! A judgment recently handed down by the Bergen County Tax Board asserts that taxing the land as a residential site was not appropriate. Wyckoff must refund $525,000 in tax money to the owners of Maple Lake as a result. We have to float a bond and hopefully get permission to stretch the payments out over five years. Does this mean the property is not eligible for preservation and that, by its very nature, it cannot be developed? What is its designation? Does this mean it is meaningless to even be in negotiations with the owner at all? That he couldn’t develop it even if he wanted to? That would, by the way, mean free open space for Wyckoff. These are good questions for our candidates this election season. Charles J. Harper Wyckoff Dear Editor: As Wyckoff residents for 16 and 25 years, respectively, we never interacted with the zoning board until last November. We objected to construction of an adjacent McMansion with huge windows, balcony, three dormers, cupola, and weathervane that required five variances, including both side yards. Our objections to this out-of-scale, out-of-code structure on a 98-foot wide standard lot atop a hill were dismissed as not expert testimony. After non-unanimous approval by the board, Chairman Christie commented: “I understand how you feel sandwiched between these two Goliaths (the October 26, 2011 THE VILLADOM TIMES I • Page 15 Questions status of Maple Lake Stringent process may allay concerns neighbor on another side had previously been granted a 10foot side-yard variance), but it is what it is, folks.” With these variances, the board overstepped its mandate. It overstepped Municipal Land Use Law 40:55D-2, requiring zoning regulations “be in accordance with a comprehensive plan designed to provide adequate light and air; prevent the overcrowding of land or buildings.” It overstepped Wyckoff ‘s comprehensive master plan emphasizing goals “to limit the height of buildings and structures” and “to encourage smaller scale buildings that promote a small town feel.” Originating in 1975, those goals have appeared in every master plan since. Overdevelopment doesn’t affect just us, our homes, and our street. Board minutes (Feb. 17, 2007 through Jan. 20, 2011) during Christie’s tenure reveal 40 side-yard variances were considered; not one was denied. Piecemeal granting of all such questionable hardship variances is resulting in a hodgepodge of homes, affecting aesthetics of established neighborhoods, and squeezing McMansions onto R-15 and RA-25 lots. Among his sensible goals, Brian Scanlan hopes for a floor-area ratio ordinance limiting oversized houses on small lots. Nov. 8 is our opportunity to choose a leader who demonstrates respect for residents’ concerns about sprawl and overdevelopment. Doug Christie’s public service record is commendable, but his zoning record reflects poorly on his leadership capability for the township. Brian Scanlan is the better choice. Margaret Terry Patricia Booth Wyckoff Finds Scanlan’s goals sensible Dear Editor: Growing up in Wyckoff, and now as a young adult, I have witnessed firsthand the involvement and commitment Tom Madigan and Doug Christie have to family and others in our community. I have had the privilege of knowing Tom Madigan and his family form a young age, as I was best friends with his youngest daughter, Bitsy. When she passed away tragically, I lost a good friend, but I am blessed that to this day the Madigans are like family. Tom Madigan is a strong leader in his family and his township committee position, and I know that will continue to serve Wyckoff proudly and positively. I have also known Doug Christie since I was on his recreational soccer team with his daughter Rachel during elementary school. I admire Mr. Christie for taking the time to volunteer to help teach us sportsmanship and teamwork. Also, I commend his service as a volunteer firefighter for over 25 years. I cannot think of better people to serve our town. I fully support the Tom Madigan and Doug Christie team for Wyckoff Township Committee and hope that you will too! Lauren Murphy Wyckoff The letter from Martin and Lorraine Sinnott that appeared in the Oct. 19 edition of Villadom TIMES contained a typographical error. The letter should have read as follows: “We’re glad we live in Wyckoff and that we’re able to circumvent the section of Godwin Avenue where the good guys, wherever they live, will be exercising their constitutional right to buy lethal weapons from these Midland Park friends.” Madigan and Christie provide leadership Correction