Neighbors think ‘consent judgment’ for Grasmeyer gun range is a loss for their safety

This is an archived article and the information in the article may be outdated. Please look at the time stamp on the story to see when it was last updated.

DALTON TOWNSHIP, Mich. -- Safety concerns over stray bullets flying from a Muskegon County gun range were under the spotlight Monday night in Dalton Township.

The FOX 17 Problem Solvers have been following this since August. The Grasmeyer Gun Range has been unwilling to make changes, and the township is running into legal hurdles to force them to follow township ordinances.

Monday night the Dalton Township board made a decision that neighbors who live near the gun range say is not enough, but the board says it’s a step in solving the problem.

The board passed a consent judgment, which board members say will hold the gun range accountable in front of a court if or when it violates regulations. What is contained in the consent judgment is not available to the public yet. The judgment has to be signed by the courts, the township and Grasmeyer before it can go into effect.

Some neighbors who have lived near the gun range for years said they are tired of this fight, and they want a resolution.

“I think the bottom line is all of you (board members) should be concerned about the safety of our community. If bullets are flying all willy nilly then who’s to say when someone is going to get hurt?” said Norma Reinhart, who along with many others at Monday’s board meeting spoke their minds about the threat the gun range poses to their safety.

“The neighbors and the neighborhood are beaten down, which is really sad. I mean neighbors won’t go outside when the shooting is going on. Even on a nice day, they stay inside. They won’t bring their children out. It’s just really sad,” said Brian Sukup, who also got up to speak his mind to the board.

Monday night the board registered a unanimous vote for the consent judgment. For the most part, board members claimed it was the right thing to do, with a step in the right direction. A few reluctant board members said this was really the only choice in trying to make the community safer.

“It’s a big win for Grasmeyer’s and a loss for the neighbors,” said Sukup.

Grasmeyer’s owners were not present for the meeting Monday night. Dalton Township Supervisor Jerry McIntyre said the whole problem with regulating the gun range is that the township ordinances don’t have any legal teeth behind them. For example, even the tickets and fines that the township tried to assess to the gun range on account of violations are “laughable.”

“I believe it (the consent judgment) could work well, because now it takes it out of the planning commission’s hands and puts it in the court’s hands,” said McIntyre.

McIntyre said the group has spent $27,000 this month alone on a lawyer to try to figure the mess out. They are hoping with a consent judgment that the gun range will have to answer to the courts for code violations. The township hasn’t been able to do much without concrete proof. For example, a few neighbors have had close calls and were able to locate the bullets that almost hit them, and were able to hand them over to the police as evidence. However, for a lot of other neighbors that see or hear bullets go past them, finding the bullet can be tough when it ricocheted off something.

Neighbors contested the decision at the meeting, because they are skeptical this will hold the gun range accountable.

“I think the thing is they are expecting the gun range to comply with this. He does not have a track record with complying at all so far,” said Sukup.

The obstacle now is getting the gun range to sign the consent judgment for it to go into effect. There’s no telling how long that will take to happen.

Sukup is not optimistic about the board’s decision.

“So it’s not ‘if’ this consent judgment will be violated, but ‘when,’” he said. “Then what will be done when it is violated?”

People such as Sukup are wondering if time is on their side through these slow moving steps.

“I think it will take someone getting hurt,” he said. “I don’t think property damage is enough, but I think what will happen is someone will get hurt before something is done.”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

8 comments

  • Andrew

    The solution here is obvious. Does Dalton Twp. want tax-paying property owners or one single business? Because that is ultimately what the choice is going to be for them no matter what is in that consent agreement. If the township can not or will not keep its residents feeling safe, they will sell and move. Even if that sale comes at a loss, which is likely to further depreciate the value of the land.

    This is not a new problem, and it invariably plays out this way everywhere it occurs. The question for the township is whether the tax revenue is important to them. The question for residents is whether they are going to tolerate living in a township that is willing to put its residents at risk in this way. You see, whether you live downrange or not this foot-dragging reflects pretty poorly on the township’s overall concern for the health and well-being of its residents. Today it is the gun range in this neighborhood, tomorrow might be tainted water in another, the day after that it could be meth lab disposal in still another.

    I don’t see this as being a problem that even needs to go to court. Just have the township consult an accountant and do the math to see what happens to the bottom line when a large percentage of the residents move elsewhere.

  • GinaRStark

    G­­o­­­o­­­g­­l­­e­­­ i­­s­­ <­­-p­­a­­y­­i­­n­­g­­ 9­­7­­$ p­­e­­r h­­o­­u­­r! ­­W­­o­­r­­k ­­f­­­­o­­r ­­f­­­­e­­­­w­­ h­­­­o­­u­­r­­s ­­a­­n­­d h­­a­­v­­e l­­o­­n­­g­­e­­r w­­i­­t­­h­­ f­­­­r­­i­­e­­n­­d­­s & ­­f­­a­­m­­i­­l­­y­­! ­­O­­n ­­t­­u­­e­­s­­d­­a­­y I g­­o­­t ­­a­­ g­­r­­e­­a­­t ­­n­­e­­w­­ L­­a­­n­­d­­ R­­o­­v­­e­­r ­­R­­a­­n­­g­­e ­­R­­o­­v­­e­­r­­ f­­r­­o­­m h­­a­­v­­i­­n­­g e­­a­­r­­n­­e­­d­­ $­­8­­7­­2 t­­h­­i­­s ­­l­­a­­s­­t­­ f­­o­­u­­r­­ w­­e­­­­e­­k­­s.­­.­­ I­­t­­ s­­o­­u­­n­­d­­s­­ u­­n­­b­­e­­l­­i­­e­­v­­a­­b­­l­­e­­ b­­u­­t ­­y­­o­­u w­­o­­n­­t f­­o­­r­­g­­i­­v­­e ­­y­­o­­u­­r­­s­­e­­l­­f i­­f ­­y­­o­­u ­­d­­o­­n­­’­­t­­ c­­h­­e­­c­­k i­­t­­…
    ➤➤➤➤➤➤. Click.Here.To.Read.Full.Detail

  • NO PC FOR Me

    Who was there first, the range or the neighbors.
    I’n gussing it was the range because they could never have gor a permit to buikd a range nears homes.
    Sorry folks but you should contact the realtor who sold you the house, they knew.
    BTW, state law protects the range if in deed it wad there first,
    Why doesn’t any one use common sense. The NRA list guidlines for range safety and will even give a grant to build a large sand berm .
    our range has 30 foot tall sand berms. we also eject unsafe shooters and ban them from returning.
    There are solutions, sounds like the neighbors just don’t like other people’s rights and are unwilling to accept a safe solution.
    How many times have we heard about hipsters moving out the country to be close to nature and then whine about the smell of country air.