Louie Burke Does it Again

18May08

It was funny when Lucy did it.

This game never stops.

“However, in order for Burke’s plan to work, he said the town would have to engage in a long-term lease with his company, something which again was met with a lot of resistance from the council.”

What this means is to give Louie free collateral so he can take loans and get investors to write more checks to Louie that he never has to repay.

Advertisements


25 Responses to “Louie Burke Does it Again”

  1. 1 1george1

    What are the 3 biggest LIES?

    Are they now topped?

    Nice ARTWORK & too appropriate!

  2. 2 sudds

    Umm… what happens if he defaults on the loans?

    Our Council really can NOT be dumb enough to allow this can they? I mean seriously, WTF people? Even Booth (LOL… love ya buddy) would be smart enough to realize that this is a stupid move!

    Heck, if they are thinking about approving it… I’d like to get in too!!!

    I’ll offer $1million to the town if I can get a $10 million loan with the property as collateral. So what if my salary next year will be $6 million… it’ll all be done in the name of art!!!

  3. 3 starlooker

    Just when I thought I saw it all now this happens….GEEZE, they gave him a chance once before and looked at what happened. Plus do we really need to hear Christopher Plummer talk about how special the Shakesphere Theater is? Ummmm he has the BIG $$$$$$$$ where is his donation of a million if it is so special.

  4. If this even gets discussed – the town is in a very “sad” state!

  5. 5 freedomofspeach

    A lease is an interest in real estate, and it can be used as collateral for a loan, you cannot mortgage property on a lease, although he may be able to hypothecate the lease terms, unless there is a restrictive covenant on the deed or in the lease that does not allow it. Hey remember the IRS and all the mechanic liens that were placed on the property that dragged the town into court the last time this scam artist was involved? Does the TC never learn? I have a bridge or two if the town wants to bond a few million.

    http://civilinquiry.jud.ct.gov/DispDetail.asp?DocNum=FBT-CV-05-4006907-S

    http://civilinquiry.jud.ct.gov/DispDetail.asp?DocNum=FBT-CV-01-0384052-S

    Get a surety bond before anyone can bid or operate the thing. Have the town file a notice on the land records restricting the ability to lien the property.

    However, I don’t think the restrictive deed from the state to the town allows them to sell or mortgage the property without reversion. But remember, Miron was not allowed to run for Mayor since he was on the original CRC. How’s that working for ya?

    I do know that if the TC ever lets him, or any of his ilk do that, then they, the TC, should sign a note to the town for the full value.

    Burke is just looking to grab investors’ money like he grabbed the $10,000 per month. He’s an actor and has no other skills other than scamming. He has been a failure in this process and only gets by on the patrons that he has scammed, and I have to say, whoever he is paying off on the TC.

    WAKE UP TC, WHY YOU ARE EVEN ALLOWING HIM TO BE INVOLVED OR ARE DOING ANY OF THIS WITHOUT A SURETY REQUIREMENT MAKES ME WONDER WHO’S GETTING PAID OFF THIS TIME.

    Gavin, what say you? How does the TC not have any control over this? Why are you doing nothing? Still nothing on B & L, the possibly unlicensed unregistered firm doing engineering consulting, no idea who they are, you still have no report, and yet the TC is moving forward either like lemmings over the cliff, or as co-conspirators to the scam. What one is it? Who’s sponsoring this fiasco on the TC?

  6. 6 gforrester

    Freedom take a valium please…………..

    No one is getting “paid off” and I am really sad to see that so many times when someone disagrees with how the TC is handling an issue the 1st things that come out of their mouth is that we are either paid off or political shills.

    Plain and simple Mr. Burke is one of 9 groups to submit a proposal to operate/consult on Shakespeare. From that 9 we are down to 5. We have heard 3/5 give a one hour follow up presentation to their proposal and we have 2 more scheduled for this Wednesday. Mr. Burke and his group are “allowed” to participate as a part of the open RFP process that does not exclude any group from participating. You are way ahead of yourself when you start demanding surety bonds and the like until we get down to a finalist and develope terms to any agreement. Trust me, despite what you may think, the council is not stupid and is not going to sign a long term lease without performance clauses, reverter clauses, and financial guarantees i.e bonding. The council has already said that the property can not be “liened” as a part of any agreement so that’s off the table.

    In addition you blasted the council saying that we never challanged Burke on the website issue and again your wrong, it’s a shame you don’t live in Stratford and don’t seem to be getting accurate reports but he was challenged on it at the 2nd presentation, in part because this blog discovered the link, and he indicated that he was not a part of the Area51 group, which was also confirmed by Mr. Allen Christopher here on this blog. Mr. Burke is not getting any “free pass” and neither are any of the other applicants.

    Finally on the B & L issue I have not seen any report from them and since I’m not the contact with the contractor it’s not like I can, as a single councilmember, get on the phone and ‘demand” the report since it was the Mayor that brought them in as a consultant. As such I can’t say if your claim that they are registered or unregistered is accurate until I get a copy of the report and see who’s name appears on the report to determine license status. The Shakespeare issue is not one that will be decided within the next week or so but rather after extensive additional review and investigation. The Town Council will continue to move forward with this issue, which I totally agree with, until such time as a final determination is made on the project. If we are wasting anyone’s time it’s our own in pursuing the project which, if successful, couold have a long term positive impact on the quality of life here in Stratford. If after all is said and done the Shakespeare project is determined to be unrealistic we then have limited options, based upon the terms of the agreement between the State and STFD on what we can do with the property, but what is clear is that the property can not be developed into anything but a theather or a park – open space.

    It’s amazing that after reading the quote and clearly stating the council’s lack of support for a long term lease with no guarantees that we still get off on this path blasting the council.

    “However, in order for Burke’s plan to work, he said the town would have to engage in a long-term lease with his company, something which again was met with a lot of resistance from the council.”

  7. 7 freedomofspeach

    Thank you for your reply.

    Mr. Forrester, as a public official you should have the acumen to be able to take the comments from the public at large. Since I still own property in CT, I am a state taxpayer and as such used to own the theater that Stratford has been entrusted with. I feel I have the right to comment.

    “No one is getting “paid off” and I am really sad to see that so many times when someone disagrees with how the TC is handling an issue the 1st things that come out of their mouth is that we are either paid off or political shills.”

    Like Ben Proto on the CRC who you I believe stated on this blog, and correct me if I am wrong, was a shill for Best?

    What I am saying is that after someone drags the town into legal actions, does not pay contractors, cannot by your own admission get financial surety, this person is allowed to attempt to rape the taxpayers of the town again, and you wonder why I, as well as others think that way and wonder what the TC is doing to protect their interest?

    Why, as most all towns and all state agencies requiring a bond or surety to weed out the unscrupulous (just look at what the govt required the bidders for the Avco property to post) scam artists, yet Stratford, through their TC have not? By saying that no one is getting paid off just means that the TC either does not have the testis to do what’s right for the taxpayers, someone is getting paid off, or they as a group are clueless?

    What other reason is there if they are sitting listening to people who most likely cannot fund this project and are looking to the town to do it?

    Mr. Forrester lets think about this. The TC is going to select someone to run a operation in a town building with $2.5 million of town funding, they have short listed someone who has a proven track record of screwing the town, his employees, contractors, and the IRS, and in none of the RFP specifications (although a standard in government and industry) does it require any sort of surety to protect the town and its taxpayers. You, as a member of the TC, are relying on a report on the soundness of the building, that’s going to be somewhat of a warrantee to the person you select on the estimated cost of the work, and the town uses an unlicensed (so it seems) firm that does not appear to be even registered with the Secretary of State, and you say you cant get the TC as a group to ask the questions or get the report? Ok then you the sole one speaking out about this travesty, am I correct?

    “Mr. Burke and his group are “allowed” to participate as a part of the open RFP process that does not exclude any group from participating.”

    Why? Doesn’t past performance have anything to do with it? Ask him where the $10,000 per month went. By incorporating the bonding requirements in the RFP (and requiring a bonding letter, your in insurance you know how that works) don’t you think that would eliminate the incompetents and the ones who are selling the town a bill of goods? Or do you feel the time that the TC spends chatting with these groups in a public building taking everyone’s time (heat, lights, cooling, recording secretary, town attorney) is free?

    “Trust me, despite what you may think, the council is not stupid and is not going to sign a long term lease without performance clauses, reverter clauses, and financial guarantees i.e bonding. The council has already said that the property can not be “liened” as a part of any agreement so that’s off the table.”

    How did that work for Team Stratford? What was the agreement like 4 pages for an $11 million dollar deal? There was no reverter clause or guarantee. That worked well. So if you ask if I would trust the TC, or think that they are capable of doing stupid things, let me think about that one.

    So it’s not stupid to waste everyone’s time listening to presentations from people who got the town into litigation before and as far as anyone can see have no real means to get the required security or funding? To me that sounds dumb. What is there free food at the TC meetings?

    Now you said the TC has told everyone the property cant have a lien. Was this in the request for RFP? If so, then yesterday would have been a good time to see who has the ability to bond and finance the project, don’t you think? Cash talks BS walks. Could cut the time to get to contract and the thing going in half.

    “In addition you blasted the council saying that we never challenged Burke on the website issue and again your wrong, it’s a shame you don’t live in Stratford and don’t seem to be getting accurate reports but he was challenged on it at the 2nd presentation, in part because this blog discovered the link, and he indicated that he was not a part of the Area51 group, which was also confirmed by Mr. Allen Christopher here on this blog. Mr. Burke is not getting any “free pass” and neither are any of the other applicants.”

    What was his reply to the question? So since the web site is still up, and the possibility is that he is fraudulently representing himself to investors, doesn’t that scare you as a taxpayer and an elected member of the TC? After the TC asked him, did anyone on the TC follow up, or did they just leave that up to the taxpayers and people like Jez? Also this begs to ask what sort of due diligence was done on the respondents to the RFP. I as “any idiot”, and others here, were able to find this, other negative things, as well as other interesting things. The TC seems not to be able to Google. Again if you wait for after the presentations for the due diligence and the financial review, you have wasted a lot of expensive time that the TC could use in finding out what’s going on in the town, solving the problems on fuel costs and electricity, the out of control town attorney bills, audit of the registrars office, runaway taxes and spending, employment issues, and school funding.

    “Finally on the B & L issue I have not seen any report from them and since I’m not the contact with the contractor it’s not like I can, as a single councilmember, get on the phone and ‘demand” the report since it was the Mayor that brought them in as a consultant.”

    WTF as PCS would say. Then stop the process cold. Are you saying as an elected official you can’t call anyone and ask for a copy of an important report from a possibly unlicensed firm doing work for the town? And yet the TC is taking this report as a matter of record and working on picking a company to operate the theater? That has got to be the most incredible and bordering on insane thing I have ever heard.

    Damm right you should demand. Its called leadership.

    Maybe you need to go to TC meetings in other towns to see how this is supposed to work. Is it because you’re a Dem and don’t want to fight the Mayor? And don’t say “The Charter” I have read it and think I might even understand it. What your saying that you and the TC do not have the desire, testis, or are so far out of whack that you cant find out who the persons are who were hired to do engineering consulting on a matter your working on when it has been brought to your attention that a violation of state law may have occurred? Wow

    “If we are wasting anyone’s time it’s our own in pursuing the project which, if successful, couold have a long term positive impact on the quality of life here in Stratford.”

    Your right, but you’re wasting the taxpayers’ time, and money too. I agree that if the project gets to a positive stage, then it might have a positive effect on the town and its taxpayers. But I guess the thought of getting the information on the candidates upfront and not dragging this out for some unknown (elections?) reason doesn’t make sense to those involved.

    My thoughts, and correct me if I am wrong. Would it be good to know if the company that the town hired could legally do the work, has the right qualifications, or if they have the licenses necessary, and if not why they were hired? How about knowing the limitations and scope of the report as that will affect the outcome of the data? How about what firm is going to have redo the work and who is going to pay for that? Is this like the Haddad background investigation, going to cost the town a lot of money in the end?

    How can the TC rely on the information if it comes from an unvetted and potentially unlicensed source?

    How about knowing in advance if the people responding to the RFP have the financial ability to move forward or will they have to pull out and leave the town and taxpayers holding the bag yet again? Is it a waste of time if you get to the end and find that none of them can come up with the money?

    Don’t you think its kind of stupid to move forward without knowing these things? Is this just a show to keep everyone occupied?

    “It’s amazing that after reading the quote and clearly stating the council’s lack of support for a long term lease with no guarantees that we still get off on this path blasting the council.”

    It seems that all you need is music and some monkeys and you have a circus.

    I am sure there is some political reason that will never be presented on why this is going this way. Fellow blogmates, am I asking unreasonable questions? Is it worth all the work and find that either the report should not be used as it was done by an unqualified and/or unlicensed firm picked by the Mayor? Is it wrong to ask if the people responding to the RFP can really do the job and have the money to move forward, or just looking again to grab bonded money and not perform?

    Is it wrong to ask the TC to verify that there has not been a violation of state law?

    Is it wrong to ask the TC to do its job and represent the taxpayers of the town and not continue to suck the life out of the town?

    Am I wrong here?

  8. 8 jezebel282

    Freedom,

    “Like Ben Proto on the CRC who you I believe stated on this blog, and correct me if I am wrong, was a shill for Best?”

    I was the one who said that. The term I used was “sock puppet” for Jon Best. GBCheddarheader had some other things to say about Ben Proto.

    “did anyone on the TC follow up, or did they just leave that up to the taxpayers and people like Jez?”

    It only took seconds of research. You can go to Google, Yahoo or any search engine and type “Louis Burke”. It’s usually the first or second link that comes up.

    Mr. Forrester,

    “I am really sad to see that so many times when someone disagrees with how the TC is handling an issue the 1st things that come out of their mouth is that we are either paid off or political shills.”

    Me too. Why do you think that is? Maybe Norm Aldrich knows? Or Dick Miron? We’ve got Councilmen that pay no taxes in Stratford yet vote on our taxes. The Town political committees are closed shops. The Town Council has serious credibility problems. And to be frank, if it weren’t for Mike Henrick, Tom Moore and yourself it would have no credibility at all.

    “You are way ahead of yourself when you start demanding surety bonds and the like until we get down to a finalist and develope terms to any agreement.”

    At a minimum, the Council should have required a credible business plan with the RFP. You know, Balance sheet, P&L, Cash Flow, Funding? Non-profit does NOT necessarily mean you have to lose money.

    “but he was challenged on it at the 2nd presentation, in part because this blog discovered the link, and he indicated that he was not a part of the Area51 group, which was also confirmed by Mr. Allen Christopher here on this blog. Mr. Burke is not getting any “free pass” and neither are any of the other applicants.”

    It remains that Louie Burke has posted webpage after webpage of fraudulent information which, on it’s face, appears to be an attempt to defraud potential investors. Unless it’s true.

    “but what is clear is that the property can not be developed into anything but a theather or a park – open space.”

    I choose the latter.

    “However, in order for Burke’s plan to work, he said the town would have to engage in a long-term lease with his company, something which again was met with a lot of resistance from the council.”

    By posting this, I am SUPPORTING the Council should it decide to reject Louie Burke. He should not have made it into this second round.

  9. 9 gforrester

    Freedom

    “I feel I have the right to comment”

    I never said you didn;t have the right to comment but you are making accusations of “pay offs” and to jump to that conclusion without all of the facts is, in my opinion, inappropriate.

    I never called Ben Proto a “shill” for Mr. Best but was pointing out that when John Fahan was singled out as my “campaign manager” for my local council seat election in 07 that Mr. Proto played an active role similar to campaign director of Mr. Best’s campaign. I don’t call people names but I will speak up when I think that one individual is being singled out when others have a paralled or similar campaign staff position in anothers campaign.

    “what the TC is doing to protect their interest? ”

    As I have previously written the council has placed strick performance clauses on the previously selected KKP group and when those timeframes were not met the contract was terminated and the Town was not tied up in lengthly litigation or further delays in the project. I will insist that any operators provides the council with a performance bond in the event that they are awarded the bid.

    I remind you that no one has been selected and listening to different groups and their presentation gives the council different prespectives to approch the final slection process with. I’m not to indicate who I am voting for so that any unsuccessful bidder can claim that the process was tainted with pre-judgment.

    “How did that work for Team Stratford? ” – That contract was written way prior to my involvement with the the Town Council. To use that same senario are we to blame all Republican’s today for the fact that Calvin Cooledge and Hervert Hoover were in the white house when it happened? Judge these 10 individuals on this present council based upon our actions, not based upon what history has proved was a bad contract by 5 or 6 councils ago. Heck the Town’s is suffering from some bad labor contracts that were agreed to in the late 80″ and early 90″s so under your suggestion is because those councils might have signed poor contract that all councils will sign poor contracts.

    “TC spends chatting with these groups in a public building taking everyone’s time (heat, lights, cooling, recording secretary, town attorney) is free?”

    Oh you have got to be kidding me – the building is open almost every night M-Th for other committee meetings so please don’t start with the operating expenses. If it makes you happy we can set up some lawn chairs on the Shakepeare grounds to make the final selection. Mr. Burkes Group made two presentations as a part of two meetings so the Recording Sec portion is less than $50 and the Town Attorney is $150 for 2 hrs so that’s $300.00.

    “Could cut the time to get to contract and the thing going in half.” – And this coming from a lawyer lol – it took 5 months for the KKP group and the Town to agree on the terms of a contract. No timeframe is going to be cut in half because this council is going to do the due diligence on any agreement, to include financial and structural issues, relating to any operator or the building itself.

  10. 10 gforrester

    Jez

    “At a minimum, the Council should have required a credible business plan with the RFP. You know, Balance sheet, P&L, Cash Flow, Funding? Non-profit does NOT necessarily mean you have to lose money.”

    We did and many of the presentations include a business plan – time frame to accomplish – budget for any performance season ect. ect. ect. The same way as we asked the Arts Commisison to present a budget and plan for their proposal for an upcoming summer performance season.

    Again I am not going to indicate who I supported or rejected for the 2nd round other that to say that I am listening and reviewing all applicants and will make the final selection based upon due diligence and study.

    Freedom – I will ask at the Mayor to provide me with the credentials for B & L and when the report will be made available to the council. In addition getting back to another of your comments regarding “elections” the next municipal election is 2009 and at least 3 of the 7 councilmembers can’t run for re-election due to term limits (Forrester – Henrick – O’Neill) so I don’t think delaying the process will help anyone politically.

  11. 11 1george1

    Freedom,
    While asking the blogger to go to other Town Council Meetings,
    they do not even go to Stratford’s Town Council Meetings.

    Saturday only the Star’s Linda Goodwin and I were the only
    non council / non employee people to attend the Budget
    Work shop. And she did not come back in the afternoon?

    (Since I sit in the front row, I may have missed some one?)

    Predicated on Burke’s History, which Jim Feehan blasted,
    I am stunned Burke’s crew was found to be credible enough
    to be among the top 5 of 9 applicants to be short listed?

    Jeze
    Mentioned Norm & J. M. as potential questionable people
    as far as payola, if I read it correctly?

    I have always placed Norm and Dick Burturla in the potential
    for “questionable” practices concerning payola, in my opinion.
    Jim & Dick Miron seem to be more interested in power, position,
    and influence, from what I can figure out.

    Gavin,
    Some very interesting things came out of the Budget Work Shops.
    Why do they not see the PUBLIC LIGHT of DAY?
    Since the Town Council can not interfer with Day to Day operations
    of the Town, yet are charged with oversight and protections of the
    Charter enumberated mandates, why have the Town Council as a
    whole NOT blasted in the PRESS:
    > Questionable Management Practices?
    > Pension overpayment via questionable computations?
    > Unfunded Mandates
    > ECS shorting unpaid
    > Past Town Councils decisions
    > Federal impact on politics & economics
    > State impact on politics & economics
    > DOT non/mis/mal feasance
    > EPA / DEP same

    Why has NO ONE on the Town Council address the Town Attorney
    opinion that the existing Town Charter has lost grandfathered rights
    and IF, IF, IF, “partially illegal,” could be contrued as “wholly illegal?”

    How would the Town council feel, if a JUDGE RULED the last two
    Town Councils and Administrations and ALL DECISIONS were ILLEGAL?

    Freedom, PCS, and Jeze >
    Are any of the above POSSIBLE / appropriate for redress or addressing?

  12. 12 sudds

    Looks good to me… anyone see any changes they’d like to see…

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    +++ From the Office of Mayor Sperling, Stratford, CT +++

    January 1, 2010

    Richard C. Levin
    President, Yale University

    Dear President Levin,

    Enclosed please find a key. This key will open the door at a certain theater in our town. Please feel free to use it as you wish! (although, please note that there ARE certain State requirements that you’ll need to follow)

    Granted this theater is going to cost a few dollars to fix up, but I have no doubts that your prestigeous institute will be able to do what our town’s leadership has not been able to accomplish in the last umpteen years!

    Enjoy the theatre, I am certain that once restored properly that you will absolutely fall in love with it!

    Sincerely,

    CAO Sudds

    PS… if you choose not to use the property please just forward the key to Jodie Rell because we OBVIOUSLY cannot make this thing work properly!!!

  13. 13 jezebel282

    Sudds,

    Did you take that piece of wood from the theater and put it under your pillow like I told you?

  14. 14 sudds

    I would like to invoke my fifth amendment privileges at this time your honor!

    But seriously… what better option do we have right now? Do you HONESTLY think that one of these “developers” is really going to pull this off???

  15. 15 jezebel282

    Sudds,

    Unfortunately the Town never should have gotten involved in this. We can’t even put a canopy on a train station or keep a beach clean.

    If you asked me, I’d call Jodi Rell and give her her dollar back. And the keys.

  16. 16 starlooker

    Jez:

    Lets not forget the thousands of pot holes that my car has gone into GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR

  17. 17 jezebel282

    Star,

    What? You think you live in Hartford?

    Just remember, the big potholes are the ones with “No Fishing” signs.

  18. 18 gforrester

    We can’t even put a canopy on a train station

    Jez take the dollar and use it to call Jodi Rell because the reason there is no canopy at the train station is because the Town of Stratford was denied permission by the DOT/Metro North to install one. The Railroad fund has the money but what we lack is the permission from the State to do the work.

  19. 19 sudds

    As much as this pains me to say (being a mass commuter)…

    ROUND ONE TO GAVIN!!! 😛

    Although I do notice that he kept the whole “keep a beach” thing alone… so I can only give him a 10-9 for the round!

  20. 20 jezebel282

    Looks like Freedom got his wish.

    All Mayor Moron has to do now is find some “factual accuracies” somewhere in that B& L report. Good luck with that, Jimmy.

    You read it in the Bard:

    Council demanding Shakespeare Theater engineers’ report
    By: Tristram DeRoma, Bard Editor
    06/20/2008

    According to some members of Town Council, a company council contracted to tell it just how much it’s going to cost taxpayers to get the Shakespeare Theatre fixed up and ready for operation has some explaining to do. Actually, make that the council leadership that’s overlooking the said company’s progress.

    Mayor James Miron, Council Minority Leader Alvin O’Neal, D-2 Councilman Michael Julian, R-1 and Town Attorney Richard Buturla came under a bit of fire from the rest of the council Monday over the three’s perceived failure to keep the rest of council up to date on the project and track what the company is doing.

    “Did we sign a contract with BL where there were performance clauses in the contract where they had to do certain things within a set timeframe, or was this an open-ended agreement?,” Councilman Gavin Forrester III asked irritably.

    Though it’s been months since the company, B L Systems, has conducted it’s investigation, no one has seen the company’s report accept Miron, Julian and O’Neal and Town Attorney Richard Buturla.

    According to some council members, it’s a topic of concern because before Council lined up a series of would-be candidates to operate the theater, it went ahead and took care of the renovation part itself, bonding $2.5 million towards the project, based on another company’s appraisal. But since then, the current council decided to hire BL Systems to do a more thorough assessment, and rumors are the company has quotes in its report that it’s going to take anywhere from $1 million to $30 million to fix up the theater.

    According to some Council members, what’s in the report and what option they choose is going to be deciding factor as to who finally gets awarded the contract to run and and operate the theater.

    The wrapped up the last of the presentations a month ago.

    Companies on the council’s “shortlist” include Frank Tobin Enterprises, Theater By The Sea, Paige Newmark Koerner Kronenfled Partners and Stratford Festival Theater LLC.

    Buturla told Forrested that “other alternatives are being added to there report for your consideration.”

    But Forrester, as well as Town Council Michael Henrick, R-1, exclaimed they haven’t seen any report or result since the process began.

    “We had this same problem with BL in the past over the heating systems at Bunnell and Stratford High School,” said Henrick. “That turned into another long, drawn out, aggravating process where they made promises and did not deliver… I was told these reports were done two or three months ago, but we still haven’t seen anything.”

    When Miron repeated Burturla’s answer, Henrick went further.

    “But can’t we see the report’s original scope?” he said. “…is the number within what we wanted, is it outside what we wanted, or are just going to get something that’s accustomed to the liking of just a few individuals? We are a body of 10, and any decision to move in any direction should come from that body,” he said.

    Henrick added further that project leadership’s alleged failure to keep the rest of Council apprised of the situation could jeopardize the whole project before it even got off the ground.

    “What is going to happen is that people are just going to say no, because they didn’t have any say or direction as to what went into it,” he said. “I’m not pointing any fingers, but everyone on this body should be fully apprised of what’s going on. It’s a town asset, and we have always worked on this as a team, and we need to continue doing so.”

    Councilman Joe Kubic put forth a resolution that before June 23, everyone on the council recieve “any and all correspondence concerning the report, so everyone on the council is at the same level of knowledge as the administration.”

    Julian, as well as O’Neal were a little taken aback by their fellow councilmen’ reaction.

    “Never was there an attempt to do anything that required the entire council’s permission,” he said. “We were there to help expedite things along, given our knowled on building and construction techniques.”

    O’Neal was a little more blunt. He thought council was making too big a deal out of the issue.

    At the meeting, he said, “we thought we were doing the council a favor, given our expertise, and then we would be given a chance to present the report in its entirety. But forget about everything, I’m done with it,” he said.

    Earlier, Councilman Gavin Forrester III said it wasn’t about missing a deadline, but more about being fiscally responsible. He noted that part of that $2.5 million of bonded taxpayer money allocated to fixing the theater up for whoever runs it was also being spent on BL’s appraisal as well.

    “My issue is that based on the original three options presented, is that as a councilman, I may have decided that I did not want to go any further with the project, and I was not given that opportunity to look at that information as other members of the council leadership were. And to make that judgement (without me) as to whether or not I supported spending additional funding from the bonding to go forward and ask for additional options… that’s my philosphical problem with this whole process.”

  21. 21 1george1

    I agree with Gavin’s position in the last 2 paragraphs and the position of Mike
    Henrick, who has construction background.

    It appears that Councilors Julian and O’Neal had a different perspective.

    However, time and again Miron / Burturla with hold documents for their own
    political ends (not that the Town Council is lily innocent in gamesmanship.)

    Whereas the Town Council has the power of the purse …
    Whereas there is a very wide range of potential cost …
    Whereas the Town Council has multiple Charter purviews … which the report
    appears to have information about issues under their jurisdiction …

    even if I was a supporter of Dick and Jane, (Ooops Jim) I agree with Gavin and
    (this doesn’t happen often) Henrick.

    (I believe Jim is correct in his response to Henrick’s nepotism resolution.)

  22. 22 freedomofspeach

    “Did we sign a contract with BL where there were performance clauses in the contract where they had to do certain things within a set timeframe, or was this an open-ended agreement?,” Councilman Gavin Forrester III asked irritably.”

    Nice work Gavin. New game, better then where is Jimmy, how aboout who is BL?

    B & L, or BL Systems, either I am missing something, or the Secretary of the State has never heard of them. Maybe they are so small (only contract with towns they get no bid work from) they are a D/B/A, but then again, still no registration that I can find at the Board of Registration for Architects and Engineers, or SOS office

    Anyone know a name or address of the owner?

    CT Sec of State Listings
    Business Name: Business ID: Status: Address:
    BLS ASSOCIATES OF BRIDGEPORT, INC.
    0184847 Forfeited NONE
    BLS ENTERPRISES, INC.
    0221694 Forfeited NONE
    BLS MEDIA, INC.
    0284730 Active NONE
    BLS STRATEGIC CAPITAL, INC.
    0303859 Active 130 EDGEHILL ROAD, NEW HAVEN, CT, 06511
    BLS ASSOCIATES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
    0501879 Active 345 NORTH MAIN STREET, WEST HARTFORD, CT, 06117
    B & L SWISS SCREW MACHINE, INC.
    0511928 Active 1417 WATERBURY ROAD, THOMASTON, CT, 06787
    BLS ADVISORY SERVICES CORP.
    0546829 Dissolved 22 PEACH HILL RD., DARIEN, CT, 06820
    B.L.S. DEVELOPMENT, L.L.C.
    0572168 Active 40 KINGSBURY AVENUE, TOLLAND, CT, 06084
    BLS CONNECTICUT CORP.
    0578333 Dissolved 125 JERICHO TURNPIKE, JERICHO, NY, 11753
    B. L. SPILLE CONSTRUCTION INC.
    0639766 Withdrawn NONE
    BLS RENTAL, LLC
    0646957 Active 41 HIGH STREET, MERIDEN, CT, 06450
    B & L SPECIALTY CLEANING SERVICES LLC
    0708287 Active 150 PLAINFIELD ST., HARTFORD, CT, 06112
    BLS SPORTS INC
    0741050 Active 1063 HOPE ST, STAMFORD, CT, 06907
    BLS, LLC
    0805217 Active 12A PASCO DRIVE, EAST WINDSOR, CT, 06088
    BLS STRATEGIC INVESTMENTS LLC
    0843961 Active 8 CHURCH LANE, SUITE 200, WESTPORT, CT, 06880
    BLS&S ASSOCIATES, LLC
    0859387 Active 249 MAIN STREET, STAMFORD, CT, 06901
    BLS BEST LIMOUSINE SERVICE, LLC
    0905283 Active 24 COACH LAMP LANE, STAMFORD, CT, 06902
    BLS LANDSCAPING, LLC
    0941769 Active 128 LUDLOW ST UNIT C, STAMFORD, CT, 06902

  23. 23 freedomofspeach

    “We had this same problem with BL in the past over the heating systems at Bunnell and Stratford High School,” said Henrick. “That turned into another long, drawn out, aggravating process where they made promises and did not deliver… I was told these reports were done two or three months ago, but we still haven’t seen anything.”

    I just again checked the professional and occupational trade reservations and licenses in the State of Connecticut. No BL Systems shows up, just like B & L did not show up the last time.

    And yet, we can’t seem to get a name or type of business this “engineer” is. Monday I guess I will have to call the state and file a formal complaint. I see that’s what it takes to get some answers.

    Taxpayers should really worry, you seem to have had an unlicensed or registered company doing things for heating systems at one of your schools, as well as doing structural and consulting on multi-million dollar projects. Both have high liability to the town.

    All I am asking for is a name of someone who is licensed to perform the work that is being done for the town, and it seems that there is no real answer.

  24. 24 freedomofspeach

    So let’s see if I understand this….

    First these ‘Engineers” who don’t seem to be registered or licensed in the state performed mechanical engineering services to at least two schools, and now are performing structural engineering or architectural consulting services, again, without any license or registrations. Interesting, the B must stand for Burturla. Was this the contested bid at the schools for the replacement of the heating systems, where other more qualified bidders lost out? If not someone needs to look into this, as it’s not only a problem with consumer protection, but they have committed public contract fraud.

    They have to be licensed, I can’t believe Miron would be so blatant in his disregard of the law. Wonder why they seem to have an unregistered name?

    All I can say TC is WTF. What are these people’s professional qualifications, names, and license numbers? Gavin, do you have a clue on this information? Who did they donate to that they are using a name that cant be traced? They are not listed in the phone book that I can find, nor with the SOS, anyof the professional boards, and only seem to work for Miron and Stratford.

  25. 25 1george1

    Maybe Freedom can create an anonymous e-mail address and send information to:
    Gavin, Town councilor
    Henrick, Town councilor
    Jim Miron, mayor
    Blue menthol, State attorney general
    CT. POST
    BARD
    STAR
    WTNH
    WICC
    forget # 79, # 12, and I have doubt about # 8
    maybe # 55 or 59, I forget which, near hartlessford


Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

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


%d bloggers like this: