Baez says Costanzas spread ‘misinformation'

To the Editor: In the Dec. 1 issue of the Township Journal, both Jim and Dawn Costanza posed some questions and presented misinformation that must be corrected. It is not surprising that Jim Costanza does not see the reporting of the town council meeting as one sided, since he was not at the council meeting on Nov. 7. Had he been present that night, not only would he have heard other residents of his neighborhood who did not share his narrow views of recreation and ATV use, but he would also have heard representative from the Police Benevolent Association refute his negative observations of the Byram police. They suggested that his negative view of the police may be a reflection of his former career as a police officer in Morris. Costanza further states that N.J. motor vehicle law supports his position. If this is so, why did he have me cited for riding an “ATV” under 39:3C-17, only to lose in court? If N.J. motor vehicle law supports his position, why did he have an article in the Township Journal following the defeat where he was crying that an ATV would now be able to go through the drive-through at McDonalds with impunity? Clearly, Costanza has blurred the lines between his opinion and reality. Dawn Costanza also posed some interesting questions in the Dec. 1 issue of the Township Journal that I am compelled to address. Ironically, Dawn Costanza questioned the source and validity of my information. I do not blame her. Contrary to her suggestion, my knowledge of the Costanzas’ lack of membership and years of unpaid lake maintenance comes from a conversation that I had with Jim Costanza in front of my driveway when he was walking his dog. This was years ago and before I was even a member of the lake. So when Dawn Costanza questions the integrity of my source, I do not blame her - she is living with him. Daven Baez Byram