More Metro Misleading

It seems clear that every time any official connected with the Metro Center project makes a statement that’s supposed to clarify the state of the project, it only amounts to misleading the public once again. There’s a reason for their inability to make sense and this is it:

The project has been so mishandled since day one that it has become a mess of entanglements that is beyond the competence of these officials to fix without wasting taxpayer money.

What is needed is to turn the project over to an independent body or professional that has the competence to unravel all the entanglements. Until that is done, we can only expect the current administration to create more confusion.

If any one of these officials had a serious intention to learn and divulge the true facts that were totally absent from the Connecticut Post article of Friday, March 6th, it wouldn’t have been that difficult to avoid misleading the public once more.

Consider the following:

As to Mr.Kurt Wittek, a principal of Blackrock Realty {BRR}, the developer of the Metro Center project:

In the Post article, Wittek states that “he’s been unable to secure financing for his share . . .of the. . . project.”

However, a search of the Fairfield Land Records reveals the following:

1. On January 17, 2006, BRR received an increase in its line of credit from Banknorth for up to an additional $10 million over and above the balance of $10 million then due on its original mortgage.
2. The Banknorth foreclosure action reveals that the total principal advanced to BRR since January 17, 2006 was $9.925 million.
3. On July 25, 2006, BRR conveyed the Parking Land to the Town of Fairfield for a consideration of $3.750 million.
4. The Agreement provided that BRR was to demolish the building on the Parking Land before the conveyance took place and that the Town would pay BRR up to $650,000 for the demolition. However, it appears that the Town accommodated BRR by closing the purchase of the land before the building was demolished. Despite inquiry, the exact amount of the Town’s payment for the demolition has not been forthcoming but, in any event, it was not an expense that BRR was obliged to pay.


It would appear, therefore, that BRR received at least $13.675 million in funds that could have been used to advance the Public Project, (which was a priority required by the Agreement), between July 25, 2006 and the present. Nevertheless, there has been no completed remediation of the land under the roads, no construction of the roads, no furnishing of the $500,000 letter of credit to assure construction of the train depot and no remediation of the commuter waiting land, all as required by the Agreement. At the very least, Mr. Wittek should be asked to explain why none of this work has been done given the amount of funds that were available to him during this period.

Mr. Wittek should also be asked to explain how, as recently as late February, 2009, he could be promoting a new project in Hayward, California, reportedly costing an estimated $350 million, while he claims “it [BRR} doesn’t have the funding to fulfill its part of a three party agreement with the state and town to build infrastructure for the public portion of the project.”

Ironically, in the very same Post article, our First Selectman, Mr.Flatto, said that “Black Rock Realty ‘said that they do still have some resources and would like to sit down with the state and discuss these things.’”

What’s to discuss, Mr. Flatto?. If they have resources, why aren’t they being required to use them to perform their obligations? But, again in the same article, Wittek says they don’t have the funds. Who’s on first here? Can’t we get a straight story?

Wittek also states “We need to get over this infrastructure hurdle first. That’s the portion of the project we’re hoping will be a part of the stimulus package.”

Waaaaait a minute! That use of “We” seems to imply that BRR/Wittek will have something to do with how any stimulus money received by the Town will be used. Now that would really be something! If true, that would mean that the Town would be asking for $28 million in stimulus money to pay BRR to perform obligations it was supposed to pay for by itself under the Agreement. And, would that mean that BRR would be given a free pass on paying the Town back?

Given what has gone on, and assuming the Town could acquire the necessary land, wouldn’t it be more prudent for the Town to get a new contractor for the public project who would operate under Town supervision? Why continue with BRR/Wittek?

As to our First Selectman, Mr. Flatto:

Flatto has said that the Town has applied for the $28 million in stimulus money on the basis that the public project is a “shovel ready” project, apparently a requirement to be eligible for such funds.

Since all of the land that will be required for the remediation of the land needed for the roads, the construction of the roads, the construction of the train depot and the remediation of the commuter waiting area, happens to be on land not only not owned by the Town, but also subject to a foreclosure action, how the public project can be said to be “shovel ready” needs a lot of explaining.

Banknorth is certainly not going to give away its lien interest in the land. Even if a deal could be worked out with BRR/Wittek and the Bank for the Town to purchase the land necessary for the public project, the net effect of such a deal would be that the Town would be paying down BRR/Wittek’s mortgage for nothing in return.

Under the Agreement BRR was supposed to donate the roads to the Town and lease the commuter waiting area to it and the depot to the state for 99 years at $1.00 per year.

Mr. Flatto also states “What the state will not do is make any improvements to the private property.” Obviously, the state can’t make them as long as it doesn’t own the land. As was pointed out recently, the state was warned before it began its work in earnest about the possibility that BRR might not have the funds to complete the project, but it nevertheless went ahead with the bridge. So, if the state won’t build the roads and if the Town fails to get the $28 million, then we’d just have our own “bridge to nowhere.”

This scenario has placed the state in a difficult situation. It cannot connect the bridge to any roads on the other side until and unless the roads are built on the land now under foreclosure. At the same time, it will be faced with passing on the request made by Mr. Flatto for $28 million in stimulus funds to be used on a project that is not “shovel ready.”
Whoever will have the responsibility to decide on allocating stimulus money for towns in the state will be faced with a dilemma not easily solved.

Finally, Mr. Mark Barnhart, Fairfield’s Economic Development Director, who has often been the administration’s spokesman promising progress on the project, states in the Post article that “he is not aware whether the $500,000 letter of credit was ever posted. Not everything comes through this office.”

Well, Mr. Barnhardt, we were able to get written confirmation from the Assistant Town Attorney that the letter of credit was never filed and we don’t even have an office in the Town Hall.

At the risk of being repetitive, this whole fiasco involving the third train station has been the biggest self-inflicted financial disaster in the history of our Town. If the stimulus funds are obtained and used to complete BRR’s obligations, it will cost us $28 million that might have been used for other Town needs and that would have lightened the tax burdens on all of us in these hard times. That fact can never be glossed over.

This mess that has been created by this administration’s failure to enforce the Agreement which required BRR’s timely performance of its obligations. Had that been done, there would have been no need to use $28 million of taxpayer money to do what BRR should have done. Mr. Flatto, as usual, has simply glossed over that failure as if it didn’t exist. But, it does exist and it can’t be covered up. The public should now demand that any further work on this project be closely scrutinized to avoid repeating past failures.