United States District Court District of Connecticut

Anthony McKnight Sr. Plaintiff, v. State of Connecticut et. al., Defendants,

Date: September 10, 2012

File No: 3:10cv1471(MRK)

Plaintiffs September 10, 2012 Motion For Injunctive Relief 1.) The plaintiff, Anthony McKnight Sr., respectfully requests injunctive relief from the State of Connecticut through the Department of Community and Economic Development and the City of New Haven as it relates to the property known as 152 Lamberton Street, New Haven, Connecticut. 2.) The Defendant, State of Connecticut assumed control of the property through fraudulent means involving the unfunded pension liabilities owed plaintiff pursuant to Connecticut General Statutes 5-142(a) and 5-169(i) as enacted in 1993. 3.) As punishment imposed upon the plaintiff for discovery and reporting the SEBAC unfunded liabilities and fraud scheme initiated between the State of Connecticut, SEBAC and other parties, the defendant caused the destruction of the plaintiffs home at 152 Lamberton Street to be set ablaze. 4.) The Defendant, State of Connecticut conveyed the property through DCED by way of deed to the City of New Haven for the eventual demolition of the Plaintiffs home by the City of New Haven. 5.) The City of New Haven, conveyed the property to the Hill Development Corporation , which further destruction occurred in the attempt to cover up the fire damages done to the property, caused by the defendants. 6.) Although day to day management of the property rests with the City of New Haven, ownership rights and procurement rests with the State of Connecticut Department of Community Economic Development, of which Mark Ojakian is the Chief of State for the Administration and is the public official directly responsible for the frauds committed

which allowed the property to be conveyed to the defendant State of Connecticut in 1995 when the SEBAC/State of Connecticut unfunded liability and artificial reductions arrangements were made in violation of CGS 31-290 relating to benefits established pursuant to CGS 5-142(a) and 5-169(i) benefits for similarly situated injured Caucasian corrections officers. 7.) The property at 152 Lamberton Street in New Haven, is the only real estate property that the plaintiff has owned, and is the only property where plaintiff was born. 8.) The plaintiff, was born Anthony McKnight at this address of 152 Lamberton Street, October 29, 1964. 9.) The State of Connecticut did not defraud Caucasian officer Michael Cozzolino of his property rights, nor did they burn his home down in retaliation for becoming injured on the job and seeking the proper statutory required benefits. 10.) The property was owned by the plaintiffs parents Nathan and Mary McKnight and conveyed to the plaintiff with the intent on plaintiff raising his family at that same residence. 11.) The plaintiff contends that the further sale or destruction of the property by the defendants and the City of New Haven will cause further irreparable harm and damages. 12.) Due to the lack of diligence in managing the property, the plaintiff has suffered damages of property that cannot be replaced and of which there is no equitable replacement value. 13.) The plaintiff therefore requests that the property at 152 Lamberton Street be conveyed to the plaintiff Anthony McKnight Sr. 14.) The plaintiff requests that the court orders payment of $500,000.00 thousand dollars for the cost of repairs needed to the property in an attempt to restore the property to its original condition. 15.) The demolition or sale of the property will cause further undue hardships and irreparable damages to the plaintiff. 16.) The cost to reconstruct the same house, using the original building materials would far exceed $1,200,000.00 dollars.

17.) At minimum, the plaintiff requests the physical land property at 152 Lamberton

be returned to his ownership in the event the DCED and the City of New Haven demolition the home. 18.) The denial of this injunction along with the failure to return the property to the plaintiff is a severance of the African male from the family unit by the defendants which was described in plaintiffs July 3, 2012 filings with the court, as slavery, as a matter of fact. 19.) Therefore, plaintiff respectfully requests that this court review plaintiffs Motion For Injunctive Relief/ Memorandum in Support and issue a ruling in favor of the plaintiff.

Respectfully submitted this _____ Day of September, 2012.

By:_______________________________ Anthony McKnight Sr..

CERTIFICATION This is to certify that a copy of the foregoing has been sent this ___nd day of September via U.S. Mail and email to the Defendant, State of Connecticut, Office of the Attorney General, 55 Elm Street, Hartford, Connecticut 06460, and to City of New Haven, Corporate Counsel Victor Bolden at 165 Church Street, New Haven, Connecticut 06510

United States District Court District of Connecticut

Anthony McKnight Sr. Plaintiff, v. State of Connecticut et. al., Defendants,

Date: September 10, 2012

File No: 3:10cv1471(MRK)

Memorandum in Support of Plaintiff September 10, 2012 Motion For Injunctive Relief with Attachments

(1). Although the State of Connecticut Office of the Comptroller is responsible for the payment of salary and deductions involving injured Corrections Officers pursuant to Connecticut General Statutes 5-142(a) and 5-169(i), they only did so for injured Caucasian Officers such as Michael Cozzolino. The public officials neglected the equal protections established by law and intentionally neglected the mandatory requirements of the law. The State of Connecticut/SEBAC IV agreement unfunded liabilities, artificially reducing the benefits of African American injured workers through a process involving SEBAC, The Workers Compensation Commission, Department of Corrections, Department of Administration, Office of Policy Management, and Alexsis Corporation; a third party administrator. (2). This fraudulent process, undertaken and created by the Office of the Comptroller, Workers Compensation Commission, Department of Administrative Services, Department of Corrections, and Alexsis Insurance Corporation, Office of Policy and Management, Department of Community and Economic Development, SEBAC representative Attorney Livingston, the Connecticut General Assembly, and others, was exposed by the plaintiff and presented to the United States District Court, State Appellate Court, and the Workers Compensation Commission in 1995. (3). Although through several documents filed with both the federal and state judicial systems concerning the loss of plaintiff property and other subversive punishment tactics deployed by the defendant, the malicious acts which lead to the

plaintiffs property being stolen through an administrative process, these acts of the defendant also extends the seizure property being set on fire, unlike the property of injured Caucasian officers similarly situated to the plaintiff. (4). This position of the defendant state of Connecticut is qualified by both Workers Compensation Commissioners Miles, and Delaney along with Commissioners Waller and Waldron whom issued the fraudulent checks in replacement of plaintiff full salary benefits required in Connecticut General Statutes 5-142(a) and 5-169(i), enacted 1993. (5). As public officials Mark Ojakian, Michael Lawlor, Linda Yelmini, Helen Kemp, Commissioners Waller, Waldron, Frankl, Mastropietro, Miles, Delaney, Attorney General Richard Blumenthal, Asst. Attorney Generals William. Hypolite, Donna Hixon Smith, Deborah Nemeth, Attorney Livingston of SEBAC along with Brenda Sisco, Nancy Wyman, Michael Cicchetti, Brian K Murphy and others involved in this fraud scheme, most were practicing lawyers. They knew of the design and implementation of this discrimination and fraud. Although appealed to the State Appellate Court were it was remanded for their correction, the State of Connecticut, through its agency Department of Community and Economic Development decided to set the plaintiff home, which was fraudulently taken away, on fire. (6). Although they probably didnt appear in hooded masks and burning torches as the Klu Klux Klan, nonetheless, they still managed to burn down the African American home and destroy the family unit as their ancestors have done since the inception of this country. The actions of the defendants are consistent with the ancient roman law policies presented to the court in plaintiff July 3, 2012 filings to this court. The 1995 Federal Complaint was dismissed without prejudice, as the damages stated within the complaint had not been yet realized. However, at the present time, the plaintiff respectfully requests that punitive damages be levied against the defendants as through various admissions in SEBAC 2011, their actions were in fact malicious, wanton, and reckless, purposely disregarding the rights of the plaintiff as an African American as opposed to fulfilling the statutory mandatory requirements of the law for similarly situated injured Caucasian corrections officers. (7). The construct of the gay rights policy through SEBAC Agreements IV, and V,

violated salary benefits established in CGS 5-142,. These violations of the rights of injured African Americans, and as the descendants of the people listed above destroyed and subjugated the role of the African descendants as slaves or cattle, so to does the policies of the state of Connecticut during this modern era create a slave environment and promotes institutionalized racism. The plaintiff home was destroyed and burned down in the same manner as past malicious acts conducted by White slave oppressors. When sacrifices were made during times of legalized slavery, it was the African that suffered the lost of life and property to the benefit of Caucasians. As the same sex agenda was hatched in Connecticut, it was the same descendants of the slave masters of the past that sacrificed and sacrifices the livelihood of the African descendants of today. The evidence of such can be seen in the physical destruction of the plaintiff home at 152 Lamberton Street, New Haven, Connecticut., as cruel and unusual punishment after the passing of the fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.. (8). The filing of this memorandum in conjunction with the injunction, using the language contained in the document, is in no way intended to offend the defendants nor the court. However, the plaintiff requests that the court considers that it was the plaintiff who suffered extreme losses at the hands of the defendants negligence, and is suffering through the trauma of synthesizing the exact nature of what America, the home of the brave, land of the free; Pledge of Allegiance, Star Spangled Banner, etc., and what it means in relation to the experiences of the almost two past decades for African descendants such as myself during what appears to be a modern era of slavery. To that extent, it is difficult for plaintiff to pare down the statements contained in this document as they are accurate depictions of the events that took place. Therefore, this motion for injunctive relief is in essence a request by the plaintiff to have the defendants pare down their actions of destruction against plaintiff and not further destroy the home of the plaintiff, and return the property along with proper construction costs, and punitive damages. (9). Similar to the corruption conspiracy being prosecuted by the U. S. Attorney General in the matter involving State Representative Donovan which involves a level of plausible deniability by the participants, is the very same tactics used in this case, as Representative Donovan was involved in the SEBAC aspects of the artificial

reductions and unfunded liabilities. Likewise, the defendants attempt to deny their criminal participations in this matter.

Respectfully submitted this _____ Day of September, 2012.

By:_______________________________ Anthony McKnight Sr.

CERTIFICATION This is to certify that a copy of the foregoing has been sent this ___ nd day of September U.S. Mail and email to the Defendant, State of Connecticut, Office of the Attorney General, 55 Elm Street, Hartford, Connecticut 06460, and to City of New Haven, Corporate Counsel Victor Bolden at 165 Church Street, New Haven, Connecticut 06510

APPENDIX A

This picture reveals the original colonial structure of the house. The peak is approximately five and a half feet higher, than the reconstructed features shown in pictures two through six. The fire damage on the left side of the roof is evident, and the chimneys are clearly visible. This is before the demolition and thefts by Hill Community Development. Also, the front porch is apparent in this picture.

This picture shows the porch having been removed. The large boarded up entrance is the front door, below it you can see the original brick structure which was patched over with a stucco compound. The windows on the second floor were windows that I bought for the house in 1993-4.

In this picture please notice the height of the single Attic window and its relation to the original window that was in that area before the fire and reconstruction effort. The five or so feet to the peak of the house and window is missing. Notice that there is no chimney structures coming through the roof. The reconstructed wood used by Hill Development Corp. does not meet the standard of wood of the original structure, as the original is 2 by 4 Cypress. The replacement particle boards are inch less and made of an inferior quality wood product.

This picture details the extent of the burning to the back of the house. This picture also shows the poor reconstruction from the roof and the second floor.. This picture shows the insertion of a door to the right, where there was a window. Also absent is the back porch and stairwell. The stairwell was totally removed, as there is no rear stairwell either inside or outside of the house. This picture also reveals the absence of the 12 by 12 by 30 ft Cypress that held that portion of the roof, and now replaced by substandard particle woods. The rear attic window should have a space of approximately five feet higher than in the reconstruction attempt.

The electric box was also replaced. To the right of the window in this picture, it is visible to see the craftsmanship in the woodwork from that carved pole running vertical to the wind, this detail in woodwork matched the craftsmanship throughout the interior of the house. The only reminisce is apparent in the stairwell leading from the first to the second floor.

The stucco as seen in this picture extends around the house and is falling off in places. The original siding of the house was replaced with particle plywood. The house was open, there was no signs posted on the front or back doors. The basement hatchway along with all metal materials on the house, including the nineteenth century bathtubs were taken. Notice the irregular patterns in the third floor attic construction.

APPENDIX B

Gmail - 152 Lamberton street

https://mail.google.com/mail/?ui=2&ik=5e8e009d85&view=pt&search=i...

Anthony McKnight <[email protected]>

152 Lamberton street

9 messages Anthony McKnight <[email protected]> Fri, Aug 24, 2012 at 2:13 PM To: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] To: State of Connecticut, Office of the Governor, Office of the Comptroller, Office of the Treasurer, Office of Policy and Management, Office of the Attorney General, Department of Economic and Community Development, City of New Haven Legal Council, City of New Haven Board of Alderman/Alderwoman From: Anthony McKnight Sr. Re: My home at 152 Lamberton Street, New Haven, City of New Haven-Livable Cities Initiative Date: August 24, 2012 Dear People, This correspondence specifically relates to my home at 152 Lamberton in New Haven. I would like to first thank the director of the Livable Cities Initiative for making the property available for my inspection. This has been a long process. But, I think we are making progress with the situation at hand. I have secured competitive renovation and reconstruction bids on the property. These bids involves both the carpentry and masonry needs of the property. Although it was recommended by Livable Cities, to demolition the property, the cost of reconstructing a new home with the original building materials would far exceed the home as it was prior to the 500 thousand dollars requested from the court in the equity statement submitted. The original structure of the home is made of Louisiana Cypress. The contractors all agreed that it would be less expensive to continue from the point from which the property is, rather than build it over with those same materials from the ground. The masonry workers also agreed that it would be less expensive to do the same in regards to the brick work required on the project. Each contractor viewing the property stated that the Hill Community Development Cooperation, who were responsible for the renovations done to the property in my absence from the home, was beyond negligence, and that there was no way the workmanship could pass inspection. However, they all agree that it is salvageable. After interviewing several of the neighbors in the community, they all were horrified by the tactics and antics used by the Hill Community Development Corporation in renovating the house. Statements consisted of the workers on the house having sex with prostitutes and smoking crack in my home. They were the individuals actually responsible for the fire in the house. These people were so high on drugs that they chained the roof from a beam in the attack to a dump truck, which rapped around the tree in the backyard and attempted to yank the roof off the house, only to cause the tree to snap and fall back onto the house. This is an actually account of what was allowed to be done to my home. They also stole the original 19th century cast iron, lion paw bath tubs, valued at more than three thousand dollars each(there were two). They disassembled both chimneys and sold the bricks, apparently all for drugs. The Chimneys in the attic had my growth marks with my height, and how high I could jump etched into the brick with pencil and chalk, all gone. The secret compartments and hatchway in the attic are gone as well. I know the people that worked for and owned the Hill Community Development Corporation, most of whom were-are addicts in the Hill Neighborhood to this day. In tearing up the floors in the attack, they found and sold my original Willie Mays, Hank Aaron, Frank Gifford, Johnny

1 of 5

9/9/2012 2:20 PM

Gmail - 152 Lamberton street

https://mail.google.com/mail/?ui=2&ik=5e8e009d85&view=pt&search=i...

U, Ed Too Tall Jones among other baseball and football cards. My basketball trophies, and 1,000 pt. basketball, Greater New Haven foul line Contest, and Scholar-Athlete Awards and other items such as my Army Men, Jax and Marble collection, diplomas and other valuables hidden in the crawl space behind the first attic bedroom. I am still in shock over the items that I lost as a result. I could not get any rest over this. What they did to my home is worst than what they did to Sonny in the Godfather. I mean, who disassembles and takes apart two fully exposed chimneys in a house, brick by brick, and sells them? Do you know how beautiful they were, and now I have to try to replace that. I have also contacted reclaimed lumber companies and they can replace the stolen materials relating to the house, and the lumber yards in both North Carolina and Louisiana have the Kiln Cypress that matches the original framing on the house, which is a relief. I have also found the cedar shingles in their original dimensions for the home. However, in my doing so, I located an individual with the necessary amount of siding in Douglas Fir at a wholesale price at 12 units or cords. With all said, the loses I have sustained in the physical property along with the suffering I had to endure, I still wish to have my property returned to me at the earliest possible time. This will allow me to continue on with my life and raise my children as was my intention before all of this occurred. I would like to say that, it was only my desire to get a good education. I never wanted to move out of the neighborhood I grew up in. This is why I attended a local college rather than escape New Haven. I would appreciate your offices expediting the matter. I would like to thank those of you that are at least attempting to understand this situation. After all, this did not happen to you in your homes. My mother and father raised eleven of their children, including other relatives in this home. I was born in 1964, they bought this house in 1964, and it was conveyed to me by my parents, and I want to do the same for my children. I hope you all understand this. I hope you also understand that legitimate fraud, and legitimate discrimination and racism, goes right along with the concept of legitimate rape, if you get my meaning. There is no such thing as legitimately violating someone, as there is no such thing as legitimate slavery no matter what language the constitution uses. So, the policies set forth in SEBAC and the actions committed by the state, in 1995, and its agencies are wrong, no matter how they are codified into the law. They created a real hardship in my life. I am only trying to put that what was destroyed back together. Once again, thank you to those helping to resolve this matter. To those that are causing this issue to persist, I hope you end up as the people working with the Donovan campaign. I hope they hold you in jail until hell has an opening for you. May God bless continuously those attempting to resolve this issue and curse those that continue to allow my pains and discomforts.

Bids and Livable Cities.wps 20K Ward5 <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Hi Mr. McKnight, Thank you for your e-mail. I will contact Mr. Eric Johnson, Executive Director of LCI to bring me up to date and to expedite the process to have this house renovated and back to occupancy as soon as possible. >>> Anthony McKnight <[email protected]> 08/24/12 2:13 PM >>>
[Quoted text hidden]

Fri, Aug 24, 2012 at 11:49 PM

bedroom. I am still in shock over the items thawhat they did to Sonny in the Godfather. I mean, who disassembles and
[Quoted text hidden]

2 of 5

9/9/2012 2:20 PM

Gmail - 152 Lamberton street

https://mail.google.com/mail/?ui=2&ik=5e8e009d85&view=pt&search=i...

Anthony McKnight <[email protected]> To: Ward5 <[email protected]> Hi Mr. Perez,

Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 4:50 PM

I have already had estimates and bids on the work needing to be done on my home. I have confidence in the people that I had interviewed. Their names are Mr. Lopez, and Mr. Reyes. I feel comfortable with them, and they do not do drugs of any kind, which is important given what happened with the Hill Community Development Corp. I am awaiting the answer from the State of Connecticut, Office of Attorney General, DECD, Sen. Harp, and Rep. Walker along with others involved in this case. Hopefully, the judge will sign an order mandating them to do what they should have done years ago. Thanks for looking into this for me, and please have the city people involved, not to do any work on the property without my consent and approval. I appreciate everything.
[Quoted text hidden]

Anthony McKnight <[email protected]> To: Devanna Thomas-Cardona <[email protected]>

[Quoted text hidden]

Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 1:37 PM

Bids and Livable Cities.wps 20K Anthony McKnight <[email protected]> To: Devanna Thomas-Cardona <[email protected]>
[Quoted text hidden]

Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 1:38 PM

Anthony McKnight <[email protected]> To: Devanna Thomas-Cardona <[email protected]>

Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 1:38 PM

---------- Forwarded message ---------From: Anthony McKnight <[email protected]> Date: Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 4:50 PM Subject: Re: 152 Lamberton street
[Quoted text hidden]

Anthony McKnight <[email protected]> To: Ward5 <[email protected]>, [email protected] Hello Mr. D'Amore,

Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 3:10 PM

Please let me know if the Court Electronic Filing made it to you The major issue in the complaint is the home at the above address. The other issues will be handled by the Office of Policy Management, Office of Comptroller, and Treasurer, along with DOC.

3 of 5

9/9/2012 2:20 PM

Gmail - 152 Lamberton street

https://mail.google.com/mail/?ui=2&ik=5e8e009d85&view=pt&search=i...

The complaint will not be amended again unless necessary as a result of my home being sold or torn down. At which time I will be asking for punitive damages. The contractor stated that he would have no problem with building me a home from the ground up, using the same building materials in the original structure. However, I prefer to have that very same home renovated to its former condition prior to the house being set on fire. I don't know the plans that the city have for it. However, I would not be in this position had the public officials with the state performed their statutory duties. As I told your associate last week, I have no intentions on pursuing the other issues with the city once this particular issue regarding my home is resolved. I can entirely resolve the issues with the state until I come to a conclusion on my home. Once again thank you for your time and consideration in dealing with this matter. I hope that it comes to a resolution. Thank you also for allowing me to view the property with the contractors and I hope that your department will board up the residence until the issues are resolved so that no more incidents will occur which may cause farther damages to the property and its' structure. If necessary, you may inform the state that I wish to have my home back as is and they will hopefully be inclined to pay for the restorations necessary. Peace and Blessings. Frank D'Amore <[email protected]> Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 3:37 PM To: Anthony McKnight <[email protected]> Cc: Alison Lanoue <[email protected]>, Evan Trachten <[email protected]> Anthony, I was unable to open any attachment .Furthermore, I have not given you or anyone else permission to enter the property for any reason. The police have been notified to check on the property and pursue anyone trespassing. Until I have sufficient notice from the Court or the State telling me otherwise the city is the title owner of the property and will do what is in the city's best interest with it Once again, feel free to send me documentation (that I can open) confirming your previous claims. Until then Please do not trespass on the property or you may run the risk of getting arrested. Frank >>> Anthony McKnight <[email protected]> 8/29/2012 3:10 PM >>>
[Quoted text hidden]

Anthony McKnight <[email protected]> To: Frank D'Amore <[email protected]> Frank, the property is open in the back.

Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 7:27 PM

I didn't open the property. People were in the back of the property. Your staff said that they were taking bids on the property and also stated that they did not accept any bids on the property. I notified your office, and the individual knew I was upon the property. He did not object. I actually asked people in the neighborhood to call the police if they saw people in the backyard or any lighters flickering from any of the windows at night. If there is "No trespassing", Can your office please board the house up. the actions or non actions caused a fire to the property, which destroyed the property. Further, I am sure that if you wish to tear it down, that may as well be your perrogative.

4 of 5

9/9/2012 2:20 PM

Gmail - 152 Lamberton street

https://mail.google.com/mail/?ui=2&ik=5e8e009d85&view=pt&search=i...

I went on the property because I was told that people were on the property.. They, the neighbors said that it was your department on the property. I notified liveable cities approximately ten days ago. They have not come out to fix the boarding up around back, which is the entrance point were unsavory individuals are hanging around. It is not necessary for me to go onto the property. Thank you for your prior message. I will continue on with my original course with the courts as you have mentioned. With that being said, I will request the funds it will take to replace the structure as it stood prior to the foreclosure, and if the city wishes to keep or sell the property I guess that is also your business. Since I grew up in the house and know the materials It was built with, the contractors only supported the expenses it would cost to rebuild the same structure somewhere else out of the same materials even if it is in some place other than New Haven. As confirmed by my parents, the house was built out of Louisiana Cypress, and that's all the concern with me, that confirmation. Evan from your office had plenty of opportunity to call the police. When he contacted me, I was actually on the property giving him updates, while the house was being estimated. Once again, thanks for everything, good luck with everything, and I will be certain on my end to notify the Attorney General's Office that we will be able to settle the matter of the property with a cash settlement rather than the possible conveying of the property, my home, back to my possession. I will ask for the amendment of the complaint to request punitive damages because of the actual loss of my property will be added to my complaint, as it cannot be replaced, as I will have to relocate to another house. That issue will not concern your office. It will only be a concern for the Dept of Corrections and the Office of the Comptroller as they failed to continue my payroll deductions which caused this problem of foreclosure in the first place. Please inform Evan, the person in your office I was speaking to, that any misunderstandings, I am sure was mutually.unintentional. I can now put this matter of regaining my home behind me and focus on what's forward. Closure reduces stress. Also thanks as well for your intent to keep the property, It will also save me money on architect plans I almost spent two thousand dollars to have drafted.
[Quoted text hidden]

5 of 5

9/9/2012 2:20 PM

Gmail - 152 Lamberton Street - New Haven Corporation Council Review

https://mail.google.com/mail/?ui=2&ik=5e8e009d85&view=pt&search=i...

Anthony McKnight <[email protected]>

152 Lamberton Street - New Haven Corporation Council Review

1 message Erik Johnson <[email protected]> Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 11:04 AM To: [email protected], [email protected], Maura MurphyOsborne <[email protected]>, "<Anthony McKnight" <[email protected]>, Frank D'Amore <[email protected]>, Ward5 <[email protected]>, [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] Cc: Michael Piscitelli <[email protected]> Erik, I have reviewed the correspondence from Mr. McKnight regarding his former property located at 152 Lamberton Street and I agree with the position of LCI in that Mr. McKnight has no legal right to enter the premises for any reason and any such entry would be considered trespass. The property is currently owned by the City of New Haven via a deed recorded in the City of New Haven Land Records in volume 8537 at page 324 on or about May 07, 2010. A foreclosure action was commenced against Mr. McKnight in October 2000 for the foreclosure of tax liens due on the above property. On or about January 11, 2001, as evidenced in a Certificate of Foreclosure, title to the premises known as 152 Lamberton Street became absolute in the City of New Haven. Any and all equitable or legal interest Mr. McKnight had to the premises had been successfully foreclosed out and the time limit for redemption passed. Presently Mr. McKnight has an action against the State of Connecticut, et al in the US District Court, District of CT (File No. 3:10cv1471) to which the City of New Haven is not a party.

Alison Lanoue Assistant Corporate Counsel City of New Haven 165 Church Street New Haven, CT 06510 (203)946-7962 [email protected]

Erik Johnson Executive Director Livable City Initiative City of New Haven 165 Church Street New Haven, CT 06510 (203) 946-8436

Erik Johnson Executive Director Livable City Initiative City of New Haven 165 Church Street New Haven, CT 06510

1 of 3

9/9/2012 2:21 PM

Gmail - 152 Lamberton Street - New Haven Corporation Council Review

https://mail.google.com/mail/?ui=2&ik=5e8e009d85&view=pt&search=i...

(203) 946-8436

Erik Johnson Executive Director Livable City Initiative City of New Haven 165 Church Street New Haven, CT 06510 (203) 946-8436

---------- Forwarded message ---------From: Anthony McKnight <[email protected]> To: "MurphyOsborne, Maura" <[email protected]>, "Frank D'Amore" <[email protected]>, [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], Devanna Thomas-Cardona <[email protected]>, [email protected] Cc: Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2012 08:59:17 -0400 Subject: my home To: State of Connecticut, Office of the Governor, Office of the Attorney General, Office of the Comptroller, Office of the State Treasurer, Office of Policy Management, Department of Community and Economic Development, Department of Corrections, Chairman of the Workers Compensation Commission, City of New Haven- Mayor John DeStefano, Board of Aldermen/Alderwomen, Livable Cities Initiative From: Anthony McKnight Sr. Date: August 30, 2012 Re: My Home at 152 Lamberton Street New Haven, CT Dear Public Officials, Yesterday, I received a correspondence from the City of New Haven Livable Cities in regards to my home at 152 Lamberton Street. I was informed that I was not to trespass on the property or I would be subject to arrest. The office was aware through one of its employees that I was on the premises for more than a week, allowing general contractors and stone masons the opportunity to give quotes on the cost of work needing to be done at the location.{I have included my response to Frank DAmore and other correspondences along with this email fax to you} With that said, the current cost to bring the property back to its past conditions is expensive by all those that viewed the property. Livable Cities stated that they were inclined to demolish the house, and subsequently sell the land. I am writing this correspondence to inform your offices that in the event of a total demolition of the physical structure, that I would still wish to have the property so I can reestablish my home at the premises. I have secured an estimate on the cost of rebuilding the foundation, which is not necessary at the present. However, upon a total destruction of the physical structure, to have the master stone mason rebuild the foundation would cost in excess of 150 thousand dollars. The foundation is not block or poured concrete, it was built in the 19th century and is of fine quality granite, and would require intense labor. But, I have found someone that is willing to do the work. It is skirted with red brick. The entire structure upon the granite consists of Kinl Louisiana Cypress. This not only consists of the beams which

2 of 3

9/9/2012 2:21 PM

Gmail - 152 Lamberton Street - New Haven Corporation Council Review

https://mail.google.com/mail/?ui=2&ik=5e8e009d85&view=pt&search=i...

are original two by fours, four by eights, twelve by twelve etc., The structure is also insulated with this material and layered with both sheet wood and treated cedar clap boards on the most exterior. I did have the opportunity to contact companies that have the original materials to allow for the total replacement of building supplies if it is necessary to do so. However, the costs to do so are far more than the cost to rehabilitate my home as it presently stands. The total rebuilding of the property ranges from 700 thousand to 1.5 million dollars from the ground up. As I have stated earlier it is far less expensive for me to have the work done as it now stands. While in the care of the City of New Haven, and through the Hill Development Corporation, the structure was set on fire, damaging the entire structure. The attempt to repair the damage was at best described by contractors as incompetent, and by a certain employee of the city as idiots, having worked on the house. Neighbors and witnesses to the fiasco support the tragedy of the attempted remodeling with frightening accounts of incompetence demonstrated by this company, not to mention the prostitution and drug use and sales on the property. As DCED finances the City Initiative, the City Initiative is in ownership of the property. I will therefore have to amend my complaint to include the City upon there demolition of the property, as referenced in their correspondence, the State is a participant in these sufferings that I am experiencing because of this home, at which I was born, and wish to have returned to me. The Board of Aldermen/Alderwomen have no problem with my having my home back. As Institutional Racism extends from the State to the City, I will continue to be affected by the violations of the constitutional and civil rights regarding property. The transferring back and forth of the deed to the property by DCED and Livable Cities has proven to be reckless as the house was left not only abandoned but also not sealed, allowing for it to be set on fire. The re-plastering of walls, and replacement of the moldings and trimmings are also of concern, and will cause the final project to be extended from the necessary six months quoted by contractors. Of course the damage from the fire also will require the architect and engineer to certify the various stress levels on the property and alike. This examination within itself is upwards of five thousand dollars conservatively. I did forward to the City of New Haven correspondences involving the actions of the state and my responses along with various op-eds from Scribd and my website. The confidential materials sent in regards to settlement of the claim will remain so until my birth date or the proposed demolition of the property by the City of New Haven. Once again, I have been unable to sleep the previous night after receiving the correspondence from the City, and someone from the State please inform the Mayor and his staff of the situation, as I am the one being violated and my opinions are in response to those violations. Once again, the issues surrounding the settlement of this complaint includes my home being returned to me in whatever condition the property is. The costs associated with such, is the result of the actions of the State of Connecticut, and the City of New Haven. If possible, I ask that the responsible administrators come together and solve the issue as it stands to reduce the costs to the State and City. I can only try and help you with harming me less. It is up to you to be more malicious than in the past or not. That home was the first step forward in the struggle of my parents whom migrated north from the fields of South Carolina, and I was born then in 1964 as the property was purchased in 1964. It obviously means little or nothing to many of you, but I have been homeless since it was taken from me. White people enjoy those rights to pass down from generation to generation who they are to their children, so should Black and Latino people. We are in fact people, and not mere animals as perceived by those that discriminate against us. Thank you all for your time. It was surely a moving experience to enter into my home once again, although it was painful, it was just one threshold in life I had to cross. So please save me anymore pains, and the state and city any more unnecessary expenses. I apologize for the errors in grammar, sleep eludes me even more so now, as I have been overcome with more nightmares as of late. However, I am sure you all can pretty much understand my position.

3 of 3

9/9/2012 2:21 PM

APPENDIX C