Pubdate: Sun, 24 Mar 2002 Source: Bristol Press (CT) Copyright: 2002, The Bristol Press Contact: http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?brd=1643 Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/569 Author: Amy L. Zitka NEIGHBOR FIGHTS DRUG HOUSE MIDDLETOWN -- Donna Salonia didn't like where her Grand Street neighborhood was heading a year and a half ago. She even sought legal means to clean it up -- but change is difficult. Late night parties, disturbances and drug-related activity were occurring across the street from the 54 Grand St. home she has owned for 15 years. The Middletown Police Street Crime Unit raided the 61 and 63 Grand St. residence three times last year -- busting up an "after-hours dance club" and making several arrests. But the nuisances, which Salonia said started in October 2000, continued. Earlier this month a fourth drug raid took place on the building. "The police did everything they could do," she said. Residents around the area were reluctant, Salonia's attorney Sebastian Giuliano said, adding, "Everybody knew about it, and nobody did anything about it." "Nobody wanted to get involved," Salonia added. In June Salonia and Giuliano took up a lonely fight in an effort to clean up the neighborhood by filing a court injunction against the 61 and 63 Grand St. property owner Sebastian Rizzo. Claiming the four-apartment dwelling was a nuisance, Giuliano was seeking for Rizzo to desist and refrain from maintaining or permitting an "after-hours dance club." "There was garbage on my porch and broken bottles in my yard," Salonia said. She claimed people visiting 61 and 63 Grand St. knew she had a dog, and "they would throw bones on my porch." For eight months until the court action was filed, Salonia was subjected to among other things noise, garbage, verbal abuse and a loss of business. Waste paper; empty beer, wine and liquor bottles; discarded drug paraphernalia; and partially-consumed food was thrown on her property, and her driveway had been blocked, according to court documents. "It was a zoo. Thursdays, Fridays and Saturdays were the worst," Salonia said. The noise would start around 2 a.m., and not quiet down until 5 a.m., she added. "My windows were closed, and they were still waking me up." One of Salonia's tenants was compelled to move away because of the incidents, according to court documents. In the injunction Salonia also claimed her home-based candle business was impaired because her business associates were accosted, and they refused to return. She suffered medical problems including elevated blood pressure and insomnia because of the incidents. Even with the numerous police actions, the activities continued and in August, Salonia moved out and relocated to Westbrook. Following a trial In Middlesex Superior Court, Attorney Trial Referee Gregory Harris determined on March 12 there was not enough evidence to consider Rizzo's building a nuisance. It wasn't proven that Rizzo operated or permitted the after-hours dance club, according to the legal memorandum of decision. Despite all the evidence and claims mounted against Rizzo, Harris' decision favored Rizzo because "(Salonia) did not prove by a preponderance of credible evidence that it was (Rizzo) or his rental premises and not other causes that brought about the harms." A fight broke out on New Years Eve in 2000 in the street between 54 and 63 Grand St., and about 50 people were involved, according to the decision. "Someone flashed a gun ..within 10 minutes the police arrived and broke up the melee," Harris wrote. When Rizzo made inquiries, he was assured by his tenants it was "not a recurring problem," according to Harris' decision. "He saw the 63 Grand St. tenants as good tenants." Attorney Robert Curzan, who according to court files and the Office of the Chief State's Attorney represents Rizzo, said Friday night he did not try the case and was not involved with the matter. Curzan said attorney Joseph Borkowski, from the same law firm, tried the case. Borkowski could not be reached for comment. In January, prosecutors with the Chief State's Attorney's Nuisance Abatement Unit sent Rizzo and his attorney a letter requesting they assist in abating the nuisance, according to court documents. Prosecutors met with them to discuss taking necessary steps to remedy the problem of illegal activity. According to court documents, Rizzo began with eviction notices, which are still pending. "We have had some contact with (Rizzo)," said Assistant State's Attorney Brian Austin, of the Nuisance Abatement Unit. "We've asked him to do certain things to clean up, and they have begun some evictions." "We're currently monitoring the situation," Austin said Friday. "It's just one step to clean up the property." If it is determined the property owner is not involved in the criminal activity they begin the Landlord Intervention Program, Austin said. This program allows prosecutors to enter agreements with landlords willing to take corrective action with problems on their property. These improvements may include evicting certain tenants, officials said. If the property owner does not live up to the agreement, the person could be subject to prosecution. Even though it appears the 61 and 63 Grand St. property is on the way of being cleaned up, Giuliano said he has not made a decision to object the trial referee's decision. "We're still looking at that," he said. "We're in the process of poring over (the decision) now." - --- MAP posted-by: Beth