The extortion continues in New London


If there is anyone out there who still believes that the Eminent Domain fight in New London was about principles, this morning's Day should disabuse them.

First, we read about Michael Cristafaro, who has already been handsomely paid for his former property, moaning about some bushes that can't be transplanted, for which he is about to pick up an extra $10,000.00. Then we learn that one of the former homeowners has filed a discrimination complaint against the city, claiming age discrimination because she feels the settlement she extorted last summer wasn't quite as good as those that other homeowners extorted. But wait, it's not really her, it's her son, who also inked the deal, who actually filed the complaint:

Byron Athenian is alleging that his mother was “discriminated against and taken advantage of” in her settlement with the city last year over possession of her former Fort Trumbull property.

New London Development Corp. President Michael Joplin said Friday that the complaint, made to the state Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities, was “specious” and could delay work on roads and development that require timely completion.

...

“I've been informed that this complaint will go away, they will settle this, for an additional $25,000 to $30,000. This is extortion. It really shows that from day one this has been about money,” Joplin said. “We're not going to be blackmailed. We're not going to be extorted.”

The article does not say so specifically, but it appears they had legal counsel when they settled. So they are attempting to re-litigate a deal they (or should I say he, there's no indication she's aware of what's being done in her name) made on the advice of counsel, because they think other people did better. I'd say specious is a good word for it.

The on-line version of the article doesn't mention one fact that's in the article in the paper (why does the Day butcher it's on-line articles?) includes. Poor oppressed Mr. Athenian, has not bothered to fulfill his commitment to vacate the property. which he promised to do by September 1st. No, not September 1, 2007. He was supposed to leave by September 1, 2006, though we're now closer to the former than the latter. The city has been trying to help him find a house, which they have now done, but he apparently prefers to interfere with that process by filing a complaint that is, besides being baseless, untimely. It's past time that the City stopped giving in to blackmail. These folks got twice what their property was worth, some icing on the cake above that, free rent for years with no property tax during the free rent period. As Al Gore said in quite another context, "It's time for them to go".
Posted: Saturday - March 03, 2007 at 09:34 PM          

©