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."