Community Corner

COMMENTS: The Daly Field Debate

Patch users respond to a 2-2 Borough Council vote that meant Fair Lawn would not appeal a ruling in favor of Landmark L.L.C.'s Daly Field development.

Last week's Borough Council meeting saw numerous residents voice their opinions to the council both for and against Landmark L.L.C.'s proposed 165-unit development on Daly Field and the Hayward Parcel—and the discussion has carried over to Fair Lawn Patch.

The council's 2-2 vote on a motion to authorize an appeal of a court ruling in Landmark's favor and reject the development company's settlement meant the borough took no action on the matter and did not appeal the ruling. Tiffony Kidd Schindler kicked off the dialogue in the comments field of by asking "What's next?"

Julia Enerson responded by writing, "What is next is Mr. Lustgarten (Fair Lawn's attorney) notifies Landmark that no appeal goes forward and that Landmark deposits in escrow the amount specified in the contract." Enerson also noted Councilman Ed Trawinski's advice for residents that although the borough itself won't appeal the decision, "that does not stop a citizen—or citizens—from filing an appeal on his/their own behalf."

Find out what's happening in Fair Lawn-Saddle Brookfor free with the latest updates from Patch.

Evelyn McHugh wrote of Mayor Joe Tedeschi and Deputy Mayor Steve Weinstein, who voted against the motion, that "The two who smiled for the cameras a year ago and pledged to keep Daly Field green betrayed that pledge" and "betrayed every single resident of this town by giving in to a builder's extortion and a group of eight self-perpetuating 'trustees' who represent only their own self interests and not the interest of the residents of town, or even those of Radburn."

Kathy Moore thought the Daly Field matter should have been put out for a public vote in Fair Lawn.

Find out what's happening in Fair Lawn-Saddle Brookfor free with the latest updates from Patch.

"If the council isn't sure what the public really wants they should put it out for a vote," Moore wrote. "The Radburn Association never had the guts to do that because they know what the answer is."

On the other side of the argument, LENNY agreed with Tedeschi and Weinstein's sentiments that Fair Lawn was fighting a losing battle in court and spending too much money during tough economic times.

"Enough tax payer money has been wasted when this was not a whole town battle but a fight inside their own little world," LENNY wrote. "Tell the town workers who lost days of pay which hurt their family, the cuts in our police dept and other cuts that will be coming down on all of us, think of our senior citizens, [who] again [have] no increase in social security but [pay] more to taxes to lose a court battle for a few."

Moore responded to LENNY that "the little money used in litigation by Fair Lawn will be extremely exceeded by the costs of having a residential development on top of polluted capped property." In an attempt to settle the dispute between Patch users, Stuart Pace wrote "make peace and yams."

Get more local news delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for free Patch newsletters and alerts.