OT: NJ Gov't to shut down #1 Disc Golf course in NJ
- Thread starter yessir321
- Start date
Home - DISCGOLF.LAW
THIS IS THE MOST IMPORTANT TIME IN THE HISTORY OF OUR SPORT The worldwide disc golf community is unlike any other. Since its official inception in 1976, disc golf has emerged as the game of choice for individuals and families seeking a challenging and relaxing way to stay fit. Meanwhile...
discgolf.law
The likely already have, but they need to talk to Chris Clark. Paul Uliberri’s lawyer and the guy responsible for the Disc Golf Law YouTube series
Disc golf is pretty passive and low impact to the environment. Just don’t hold anymore tournaments there. The sport is literally baskets and probabaly a small section where you tee off from. You walk around with your buddies and throw a disc. I’d argue the most passive sport you could set up in a park. It’s literally walking along paths. People prob puff the magic dragon on a hole or two along the way. If a disc going into the Winery is a problem move that hole away from that area.
One of the issues is Stafford is very much THE tournament course in NJ and the gov’t has never had issues prior.
For equivalence to traditional or as we call it, ‘ball golf’, this would be like New York State deciding they were going to remove Bethpage Black
I'm at a terrible computer this week, and so I can't check New Jersey's regulations. But if New Jersey follows an approach like this one, then the disc golf course does not qualify as a passive use. Whether a use is active or passive depends on whether it involves development, which the disc golf course appears to. In fact, the golf people complain in their petition that they are being forced to remove their structures. https://www.studocu.com/ph/document...munication/passive-active-recreation/22126809
The structures are porta potties in the parking lot. Despite the disc golf course being pulled it’s still going to be a park’ however the njdep won’t even allow porta pots on the location anymore.
If this was an issue, there’s no way it would have taken 12 years to come to light, particularly when the njdep had conducted no short of 4 previous assessments of the disc golf course with no issues.
Actually, the main "structures" which are not allowed, according to the NJDEP, are the 30 or so paver tees (about 5'x10' in size; some holes have long and short tees) and the baskets. As you noted, though, how this did not come to light as an issue in 3 previous NJDEP inspections of the property since it was installed in 2012 is beyond me and a little bit suspicious. According to the FB page, the course leadership said that if the appeals to common sense fail, "we are already in the process of retaining one of the largest law firms in New Jersey to file injunctions to have this action stopped immediately."
Hey @retired711 - what do you think of the following "acquiesecence "argument I've seen from the main guy in charge of the course? "Given that the property passed DEP inspections in 2014, 2017, and 2020, the DEP was well aware of the land use (which has not changed), and thus failed to exercise their rights as landowner. As they have allowed an inexcusable amount of time to lapse before enforcing their rights as landowner, they have acquiesced to the properties current use." I know such arguments are used for property boundary lines, but not sure if they've been used for property usage. Thanks...
You're speaking of adverse possession or estoppel by detrimental reliance . Neither can work against a public entity. Maybe they should, but they don't. If an inspector says in 2014, 2017, and 2020 that Merck is not in violation of requirement X, then Merck is still subject to enforcement action in 2023 when the inspector concludes that Merck was in violation all along. But we'll have to see what the litigation brings -- maybe there's some important fact we don't know.
Adverse possession can't be used against the government no matter how long the period. And, even if the inspector said, "what you're doing is all right," the government is not estopped (as lawyers say) by those statements.
Thanks for the insight and correction - that's why I pinged you as I know you know a ton more about the law than I do (or the guys posting on Facebook about this). Passive vs. active is absolutely a grey area, though, often depending on the state, so my guess is either the DEP needs to be convinced that DG is passive or the town needs to step in and confirm the great positive impact of the sport on the local community (especiallly patronizing businesses) and help in this fight.
With regard to impact, DG doesn't require clearing a large area of vegetation and levelling, like all field sports do (they're all considered active uses), so its land impact is trivial with regard to installation - even the paver tees are a tiny % of the total park land - and playing simply involves walking through the woods while occasionally throwing a disc, which has trivial impacts. In fact the community of volunteers has made huge improvements in the park area, removing litter, debris, and dead trees, installing wooden benches, and clearing the walking paths that had become overgrown. With regard to economic impact, 60K+ rounds per year (30K per year are logged on the UDisc app, but only about half of all players use UDisc) or ~165 per day on average is a lot of potential customers, even if only 20-30% spend some $$ in the area.
Here's more of what was posted on FB about the argument with regard to estoppel. No idea if the precedent cited applies in any way.
Under NJ property law, a landowner has a reasonable amount of time to enforce the restrictions of a deed. Given that the property passed inspections in 2014, 2017, and 2020, the DEP was well aware of the land use (which has not changed), and thus failed to exercise their rights as landowner. As they have allowed an inexcusable amount of time to lapse before enforcing their rights as landowner, they have acquiesced to the properties current use.
See Laches
https://www.law.com/njlawjournal/almID/1202427618899/
“Described as inexcusable delay in asserting a right, laches is essentially a specialized form of estoppel. Amir v. D’Agostino , 328 N.J. Super. 141 (Ch. Div. 1998), aff’d., 328 N.J. Super. 103 (App. Div. 2000). More often than not the application of laches will turn on whether a party has been misled to his harm by the delay. For example, in Cooper River Plaza East, LLC v. Briad Group , supra, laches barred enforcement of a deed restriction where the delay was “significant” in that “it resulted in the construction of a building whose nonconformity easily could have been cured if notice had been provided at the outset” and no “reason [was] given for the delay.”
Stafford Disc Golf - Voorhees Township
We regret to inform you that after years of providing a space for disc golf enthusiasts to enjoy their favorite sport, the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection has notified Voorhees Township officials that Stafford Woods Disc Golf Course must […]
voorheesnj.com
Unfortunately it’s not looking good. What’s really sad is the voorhees township doesn’t want the course to go. Absolutely no one besides this winery owner wants the course gone. I just don’t understand why people like this winery owner are such jerks.
Last edited:
Oh you haven’t seen the porta potty posts?
That doesn’t matter though. Glad to hear they are retaining a firm. I would still recommend reaching out to Chris Clark as he would likely work pro bono on this.
The disc golf pro tour is about to make a statement as well.
If there’s maybe one positive spin to make on this, I don’t think this winery owner realized thd headache he was about to endure when he made the initial complaint. There’s no doubt he’s sweating with a 1.5 star google rating on his fancy new farm that’s not even open yet
Last edited:
Well, at least we're getting some good press on this from the Inquirer and there are now over 12,000 signatures on the petition. It's a start.
https://www.inquirer.com/news/new-j...B7GacoD4tb_j_evxDwV5674dvGz2yMItX7BaupElF_g4I
https://www.inquirer.com/news/new-j...B7GacoD4tb_j_evxDwV5674dvGz2yMItX7BaupElF_g4I
They could change the regulation and define disc golf as meeting the requirements either passive or active that would make it allowable on the site.Stafford Disc Golf - Voorhees Township
We regret to inform you that after years of providing a space for disc golf enthusiasts to enjoy their favorite sport, the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection has notified Voorhees Township officials that Stafford Woods Disc Golf Course must […]
Unfortunately it’s not looking good. What’s really sad is the voorhees township doesn’t want the course to go. Absolutely no one besides this winery owner wants the course gone. I just don’t understand why people like this winery owner are such jerks.
I know some people who work at DEP when I see them I will ask them about this.
As you can see, the petition talks about how awful it would be to remove its structures. That makes me think that constructing the structures had an impact, too. "The most glaring example of the NJ DEP’s overreach is their mandate to have all structures removed at the property including the porta potties. Doing so would greatly disturb the natural environment, create harmful erosion, and leave the property in a state of disrepair.
These doctrines don't work against the government. If a government official makes a statement, e.g., "what you're doing is legal," nothing stops the government from taking the opposite position in court. There's a *lot* of case law on that.
It’s really not impactful though, and wasn’t deemed impactful for the first 11 years of its existence. I get the argument earlier on if something was missed in an inspection, but when the activity itself is the thing that was ‘missed’ I question how any of this is legal. Not arguing with you it just doesn’t make sense to me. It’s like setting up a basketball court then shutting it down because shooting hoops isn’t allowed. How was the court allowed in the first place? In this case, how could the njdep change their minds on the approval they made for the activity in this park?
Glad there’s lawyers like you to sort it out bc it doesn’t make sense to me.
Thanks. The latest I saw was that the DG leadership are now talking more about getting a variance from the NJDEP for allowing the DG course to remain, as part of the "public good" - which a strong case can be made for.
Erik,
(Yeah we know each other man, haha) not sure if you have seen but Bill Green the owner of the winery has started to lose it on social….
Well, his winery is down to 1.4 stars, with half of his reviews having come in the last few days, lol - what has he said? Link?
I understand. FWIW, they didn't give it an approval in the sense of giving it a license like a driver's license. They decided not to object to it, which isn't quite the same thing. But I understand your frustration.
So they can instead go next door and become ‘manly men’ by sipping on Chardonnay?To help men from becoming sissies via playing "disc golf":
Weird
He’s gotten a lot removed. This am it was at 1.1 and had over 150 reviews.
Kinda hilarious though that Brian schweberger left a review.😂😂. Words’ getting out
Just post the link - the Voorhees Township page disabled comments on the announcement of the course closing and I've seen the reviews of the winery, but haven't seen anything from Green and am curious to see what he's saying.
He’s claiming to be innocent in all of this and being villainized by the DEP and members of the disc golf community. He says they forwarded a vandalism police report to the DEP in January and ‘next thing you know I’m the villain’. Goes on to say how terrible his family is being treated
I had no idea who this guy was but since I grew up and now live about 15 mins away from this course I did a little researching on this guy.
Let’s just say the couple articles I read and a scroll through of his LinkedIn page scream that this guy is in love with himself and doesn’t surprise me he tried pulling this selfish move and also that he’s losing it haha.
Lol I don’t even wanna think about what that LinkedIn page looks like..🤣
Absolute perfect example of a keyboard warrior with internet muscles. If you think someone like Ben Askren is a sissy, your dare is to let him know face to face.
Hey don’t forget about Julian Marquez, Dylan Cease, and I’ll throw Bert Kreishner in there simply because of the security he would have next to him🤣
Stafford Disc Golf - Voorhees Township
We regret to inform you that after years of providing a space for disc golf enthusiasts to enjoy their favorite sport, the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection has notified Voorhees Township officials that Stafford Woods Disc Golf Course must […]
Unfortunately it’s not looking good. What’s really sad is the voorhees township doesn’t want the course to go. Absolutely no one besides this winery owner wants the course gone. I just don’t understand why people like this winery owner are such jerks.
I'm guessing Czar Murphy is friends with them
trying hard to make this political. Someone already tried and failed.
of course its political, this is NJ. Why else did it operate with no issues until now?
