Attorney Barry Knott, the court-appointed manager of troubled Success Village split between Bridgeport and Stratford, provided the Stratford Town Council fresh information how the nearly 1,000-unit co-op will be salvaged, including a $6 million loan from the Connecticut Department of Housing.
See video above.
0
Thank you to Receiver Knott for updating information on where things stand at Success Village today.
After a report on heat and hot water issues temporarily under control with rolling outages for hot water carried through 85 year old pipes and two boilers installed, he informed the Stratford Council that this was not the major problem faced by the 900 units.
He did not specify how long his inquiring mind and steady hand at coming to practical solutions will be available, but indicated it might be 12 months. He referenced establishing long term relationships with legal and professional management companies before talking about the $7.5Million or $8 Million debt with taxes due Bridgeport and Stratford incurring 18% interest charges monthly as well as utility payments due of another $2 Million and finally other accounts outstanding facing litigation. But finding $6Million from the State of CT that likely will be available, and setting up a budget that likely will produce $750,000 of monthly revenue shows some potential for moving forward, though the numbers may shock unit owners.
Receiver Knott comments above, “People do things they should not do” with reference to the situation referred to him by Judge Radcliffe, but he was talking perhaps about temptations when large sums of money are in play. He has said nothing about reporting revenues that were paid, held in abeyance, or withheld by unit owners, or the distribution/disappearance of funds under previous “less than professional management” and residence unit elected members who were acting as a governance Board. If self-governance is the situation of a CO-OP or CONDO in Connecticut, what does Bridgeport offer in terms of self-governance training, skills development, or just a place to ask questions and raise issues like a Fair Housing Commission??
Moreover, is there a forensic investigation ongoing? When will the community become more informed about how this particular self-governance body ran off the tracks? Were there one or more persons who personally benefited at the expense of the ‘common good’? How did past ‘management’ review agree to such increases in property insurance premiums, that were reduced by the Receiver’s inquiry? Will Judge Radcliffe and Receiver Knott comment with a forward view to how such ‘self governance’ instruction and application will occur on their watch, rather than ignore that absence of responsibility, duty, and obligation to recur? Time will tell.