From 2010-2014 Teaneck’s officials (both the Administration and Council) told Bergen County Open Space Fund administrators that the Town needed its current Votee Park roller hockey rink for the Township’s recreation program (see image on right)– and if the County would helped refurbish the rink, the Town would maintain the rink in that use for at least 10 years. This open space grant process involved many steps (see image below) But Teaneck got the grant after the County Freeholders approved it in 2011. And in late 2014 Teaneck told the County the rink resurfacing was done, that it would follow the rules and asked – and got – the County to send the agreed reimbursement $.
But even as its was using County Open Space funds for resurfacing the rink, Teaneck officials began taking many steps to replace the rink with a 4300 sq ft super-expensive  field house/pavilion: Yes, to change the rink land use that it had told the County it would preserve and maintain for at least a decade!

Meanwhile Teaneck plunged ahead with its plan to demolish the rink to make way for the field  house and finally In December 2018 Teaneck Council even approved a contract for the pavilion’s construction to start – in early 2019. Council ignored Teaneck residents’ strong opposition to the expense of that huge $1.8M two-kitchen field house pavilion.  (Click here to see contract full.)

When during a Council meeting on 2-11-2019 a resident tried to “remind” the Township of its commitment about preserving the hockey rink, Township Attorney Shahdanian claimed that the pavilion – not the rink – had always been the approved use – just view and listen to this 8-second video

Assuming for the moment the Attorney was not lying, then he was woefully poorly informed about a use of this twice-grant funded parkland that it was his responsibility to have known.
The remainder of this post and the allied pages it references will clearly demonstrate that the Township has not kept its commitment to County Open Space and has a continuing obligation to do so.
A summary of this information can be found in the verbatim of the resident’ Good and Welfare statement click here to which the Attorney responded by ignoring altogether the Town’s commitment to the county before making the erroneous claim that the land on which the hockey rink still sits today had always been designated for use as the proposed pavilion or field house.

You can also see below how the two timelines – hockey rink resurfacing commitments and commitments to field house design and its construction are on a collision course (click the image twice to make it more readable):