"They make what…$90,000 a year? There’s no bar in town, little crime and this happened on a quiet Tuesday night, yet they still managed to not handle this properly," said Santana. "I don’t feel comfortable [having the officers back on the force]. It’s really an insult to me."

The three were fired in November 2006 for their roles in allowing two armed Pennsylvania-based bounty hunters to detain Santana after claiming she was Claudia Rincon, a fugitive on the loose for embezzling nearly $70,000. Despite Santana’s plea that she was not Rincon, the bounty hunters were able to seize her and it wasn’t until she was brought in for booking in Dover that police there confirmed she was not the fugitive.

The borough, decided to approve resolutions last week to resolve termination appeals brought before the state’s Office of Administrative Law by Sergeant Robert Buell and Officers Andrzej Hein and Christopher Esposito. Sergeant Nicholas Loizzi, the only officer to be criminally indicted in the case, whose charges were later dropped, did not yet reach a settlement. He still has an outstanding civil rights lawsuit filed against the borough. Mayor John Hipp said newly retained council James Guida, Jr. of Lyndhurst, who helped formulate the agreements with the three re-hired officers, is working to arrange one with Loizzi.

"Right now, we have not settled with Sergeant Loizzi, but it is my hope and full intention that we do," said Hipp. Hipp said it would be his hope that any agreement reached with Loizzi would also encompass him dropping the civil rights suit against the borough as well.

The move to bring the officers back comes just two months after administrative law judge Barry Moscowitz ruled in favor in the appeal of Esposito, who along with Hein was at the scene on June 28, 2005 when the bounty hunters seized Santana.

"I felt it was in the best interest of the town and the residents to make this good faith effort to bring them all back," said Hipp. "From the beginning, it was apparent that there was not enough evidence to support termination of these officers and after seeing the decision on Officer Esposito, we knew we would not be able to prevail against a wrongful termination suit and it would cost us a lot of money."

In the case of Buell, his settlement agreement calls for a demotion from sergeant to patrolman retroactive to Nov. 21, 2006, upon his termination. Buell was formally charged by the borough for internal disciplinary violations and violations of state statute that led to his termination. The second in command to Loizzi that night, according to Moscowitz’s decision, Buell had originally been informed that the bounty hunters would be on Yahara Avenue that night and subsequently received the 911 call from the Santana home. According to the decision, he assigned Esposito and Hein to investigate the call, but no follow-up was pursued after that assignment of officers.

As per the agreement, he pleaded guilty to incompetency, inefficiency or failure to perform duties and neglect to duties under state statute. He also pleaded guilty to neglect of duty and incompetency or inefficiency under department rules and regulations’ disciplinary actions and violation of duties and responsibilities of a sergeant under department code.

Buell, according to the agreement, will receive mitigated patrolman back pay retroactive to that date minus any earned income he made during that time. He will also receive all entitled vacation pay, personal days and sick days that he would have been entitled to as a patrolman.

"He’s glad to be back on the job and I think it’s finally time he’s prepared to put this all behind him," said Buell’s attorney, Paul Kleinbaum. "There’s a time to fight and a time to settle things and for the last year or so, it was the time to fight. It took a couple new faces to come in for it to be a time to settle."

As for Hein and Esposito, they both have agreed to a retroactive suspension and a capped reimbursement of salary of $35,000 each. Hein accepted a retroactive suspension without pay from Nov. 21, 2006 to March 1, 2007 and is eligible for 50 percent of his sick, vacation and personal time from the end of that suspension. Esposito’s agreement calls for the same except his suspension was slightly shorter, from Nov. 21, 2006 to Feb. 19, 2007.

Esposito pleaded guilty to the charges Moscowitz found him guilty of in his February decision: incompetency, inefficiency or failure to perform duties, neglect of duty and other sufficient cause. Hein pleaded guilty to neglect of duty and incompetency, inefficiency or failure to perform duties as well.

"I can tell you, Andy has been anxious for the last two years to get back to work," said James Patuto, Hein’s attorney. "As far as the agreement goes, we thought it was a practical resolution for something that had gone on for way too long."

All three have agreed that they are not permitted to apply for a promotion or sit for a promotion exam for one year from the time they began work last week. The agreement also protects the borough from any litigation the officers planned to pursue retroactive to the signing of the agreement, including wrongful termination suits, which according to Hipp could have cost the borough millions.

Claudia’s husband Juan Carlos, who followed the bounty hunters to Dover that night said the re-hiring of the officers makes his family feel as if nothing had even happened that night. He said that although they had settled with the borough for an undisclosed monetary amount, they have still not received an apology. He said no training policies for bounty hunters have been put in place and now, three of the four officers that he said have jaded his outlook on law enforcement in town are back with a minimal punishment.

"What has changed, it’s a no-win situation for us," he said. "We’re the victims, but it’s as if we called the bounty hunters and said come do this to us. What if this were to happen again? How would it be handled?"