Image 1 of 1
To the Editor:

According to the Assessors Map #79 Parcel #56, Sky Hookah Lounge is located in a Designed Commercial District.

In regards to the (eviction), Tom Brennan (landlord and owner of Nannerb LLC), and son Michael Brennan have made the mistake of performing a (self help eviction) by changing the locks and trespassing on to my property.

Ann. 47a-43, 47a-46, 53a-214: “Connecticut tenants may sue for double actual damages; the landlord may also be prosecuted for a misdemeanor”.

Courts frown upon (self-help evictions), and may readily award a tenant damages for an illegal removal. The tenant may sue the landlord for trespass, wrongful eviction, assault, battery, slander, libel and intentional infliction of emotional distress.

In regards to the accusation of the person overdosing on heroin inside the business, this is 100 percent false and has been looked into by an attorney at law.

Furthermore, the accusation that 500 complaint calls were made due to only Sky Hookah Lounge in the past two years is completely false. According to the article posted on Sept. 21, 2017 on www.fairfieldcitizenonline.com, “There have been six noise complaints from June until now (Sept. 21, 2017), and some of those times, Kalamaras said, officers would arrive to find no violation.”

Town of Fairfield public records show:

— 2015 had approximately 325 noise complaints. (Entire town of Fairfield).

— 2016 had approximately 239 noise complaints. (Entire town of Fairfield).

— 2017 had approximately 150 noise complaints till March. (Entire town of Fairfield).

This does not add up. It is far from the truth, and was used as a weapon to defamation of character.

In regards to the three court cases for disorderly conduct: the first summons was issued to me post the public hearing that was held at the Fairfield police station between town officials and neighbors on (March 9, 2017). I was not informed of this meeting. I was immediately issued a summons instead of receiving a verbal warning and infractions for (noise complaints). Therefore, Fairfield town regulations (78-6 and 78-7) were not implemented.

78-7 Penalties for offenses (noise ordinance): A verbal warning must be given out first, which is under 78-6 (Administration and enforcement).

— Any person found in violation of the provisions of this chapter (78-7) shall be given an infraction notice which incorporates a fine of $50 for the first offense and $90 for each additional offense within a twenty-four-hour period. Failure to pay the fine in the time prescribed in the infraction notice will result in the issuance of a summons to appear in Superior Court.

In regards to the zoning citations on Feb. 3, 2017: I was told to remove (window lighting). More than five other businesses in the Town of Fairfield have

the same lighting, which are still being operated till present day. We will post all the proof and evidence in future articles showing the abuse of power (names disclosed for now) that have been made against Sky Hookah Lounge.

Anwar Malas

Fairfield

To the Editor:

Just days ago, in Fairfield, a fifth-grader walked up to a Stratfield Road house and entered a gated yard hoping he could sell items for a school fundraiser.

Instead, he was viciously attacked by two dogs and suffered injuries so severe that he had to undergo an emergency surgery that lasted several hours.

Five days after the attack, at school dismissal time, the dogs were spotted freely roaming their front yard. They were not wearing muzzles.

With Halloween fast approaching and with so many children expected to take part in the tradition of trick-or-treating, it’s of great concern that other unsuspecting children may approach the house as well. The neighborhood often attracts hundreds of trick or treaters. many of whom don’t live in the immediate area and so are not familiar with the inhabitants.

Oddly, it took the Fairfield Police a week to issue a statement alerting the neighborhood of the grievous attack and cautioning those outside of the area of the dangers animals may pose to trick-or-treaters.

It seems like the community at large should know. Especially parents, since remarkably, Connecticut Law does not protect all of our children.

As it stands now, Connecticut law presumes that children younger than 7 cannot trespass. So, if you are over 7 and you wander into a neighbor’s yard, you are on your own?

Trespassing nullifies any claim a victim may wish to make. As the mother of two children under the age of 13, I can tell you that they and many of their friends think nothing of running into a neighbor’s yard to fetch a ball so the game can continue. Certainly, lawmakers need to amend this statute.

And, while we’re at it, how about enacting legislation requiring dog owners to post a sign saying “Keep Out” if their pets’ actions warrant a police report.

Revising state/town laws will certainly take time so here’s what parents can do immediately: Take a few moments to review with your children what they should do if they encounter a threatening dog. The ASPCA recommends that if a child is attacked, he should curl up in a ball with his knees tucked into his stomach, and fingers interlocked behind his neck to protect his neck and ears. Children are by far the most common victims of dog bites and are much more likely to be severely injured. They need to know.

In the days following this disturbing attack, we should come together as a community and be vocal about the change we want to see. It really does take a village. Halloween should be a time when children face imaginary threats not real ones.

Lisa Quirindongo

Fairfield

To the Editor:

Many residents experienced great financial loss as their homes were flooded. The town spent $5,000,000 in tax dollars to clean up after that storm and residents spent untold amounts rebuilding and raising their homes.

Five years and the town has done nothing to minimize coastal storm waters from topping our town beaches! Scientists tell us that sea level is raising and the frequency of storms is expected to increase.

In 2014 the town received a $300,000 grant to fortify Penfield Beach in an effort to minimize storm waters from washing through that property. Now more than 3 years later nothing has been done to utilize that grant.

The Penfield Rebuilding Committee did nothing to prevent future beach topping yet they spent 7.5 million to rebuild an almost new pavilion that only cost 3.5 million to build.

It is time for all concerned residents to speak up and urge the selectman and the Flood & Erosion Control Board to utilize the $300,000 Community Development Block Grant that was requested and granted for the Penfield property. This weekend, the 5th anniversary of Sandy, we experience near hurricane force winds but fortunately at low tide or we could have experienced flooding again.

I urge all residents to email the BOS at BOS@FAIRFIELDCT.ORG and the FECB at FECB@FAIRFIELDCT.ORG and request that the $300,000 grant be utilized at the Penfield property to minimize the topping of that beach by future coastal storms. It is only a matter of time till the next big storm hits Fairfield. The town needs to lead the way toward mitigating coastal storms from topping our town beaches. We elected our BOS, BOF, & RTM members to lead and that is best done by example. To date they have done nothing to protect us from coastal storms topping our town owned beaches. Now is the time to tell them to act.

Rick Grauer

Fairfield

Outbrain