United States District Court, D. Connecticut
RULING AND ORDER ON CROSS-MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY
A. BOLDEN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Community Services, Inc. (“Gilead”), Rainbow
Housing Corp. (“Rainbow Housing”), and the
Connecticut Fair Housing Center, Inc. (collectively
“Plaintiffs”) sued the Town of Cromwell
(“Town”), and Vincent “Enzo” Faienza,
Anthony Salvatore, and Jillian Massey, individually and in
their official capacities as town officials. Compl., ECF No.
1 (Apr. 17, 2017).
allege that the Town of Cromwell and the named officials
(collectively “Defendants”) violated the Fair
Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. § 3601 et seq.
(“FHA”) and its implementing regulations at 24
C.F.R. Part 100; the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42
U.S.C. § 12131 et seq. (“ADA”), and
its implementing regulations, 28 C.F.R. § Part 35; and
the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C. § 794
(“Section 504”), and its implementing
regulations, 24 C.F.R. Part 8, “by denying housing to
Gilead’s clients, who are people with
disabilities.” Id. ¶ 1. Plaintiffs later
moved, and the Court granted them leave, to amend their
Complaint to add retaliation claims under 42 U.S.C.
§§ 3617 and 3604(f)(2).
before the Court are Defendants’ initial and
supplemental motions for summary judgment, Mot. for Summ. J.
(“Defs. Mot.”), ECF No. 75 (Dec. 7, 2018); Supp.
Mot. for Summ. J. (“Defs. Supp. Mot.”) ECF No.
110 (July 8, 2019); and Plaintiffs’ motion for partial
summary judgment, Pls.’ Partial Mot. for Summ. J.
(“Pls.’ Mot, ”), ECF No. 76 (Dec. 7, 2018).
reasons discussed below, Defendants’ motion for summary
judgment, ECF No. 75, is DENIED,
Defendant’s supplemental motion for summary judgment,
ECF No. 110, is DENIED, and
Plaintiffs’ motion for partial summary judgment, ECF
No. 76, is DENIED.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
a not-for-profit organization, seeks to provide housing and
community-based services to individuals with disabilities in
the state of Connecticut. Pls. Statement of Material Facts
(“Pls. SOMF”), ECF No. 77 ¶ 1 (Dec. 7,
2018). “Since 1968, Gilead has offered residential
housing services to thousands of individuals with mental
illnesses and other disabilities in Middlesex County,
Connecticut.” Id. ¶ 9. Rainbow Housing
Corporation is a “sister not-for-profit corporation
that owns and manages Gilead’s real estate
assets.” Id. ¶ 2. Connecticut Fair
Housing Center is a “statewide not-for-profit
corporation whose mission is to ensure that all people have
access to the housing of their choice throughout the state of
Connecticut free from discrimination.” Id.
“Enzo” Faienza is Mayor of the Town of Cromwell.
Id. ¶ 6. Anthony Salvatore is Town Manager for
the Town of Cromwell. Pls. SOMF Ex. 8, ECF No. 77-8
(Deposition of Anthony Salvatore at 20:1-4 (June 28, 2018)).
Before becoming Town Manager, Mr. Salvatore served as the
Town of Cromwell’s Chief of Police. Id. at
41:7-14. From February until August 2015, Mr. Salvatore was
both the Cromwell Chief of Police and Acting Town Manager.
Id. He became Town Manager in August 2015.
Id. Until July 31, 2015, Jillian Massey served as
the Zoning Enforcement Officer for the Town of Cromwell. Pls.
SOMF in Opp. to Defs. SOMF (“Pls. Opp. SOMF”),
Ex. 27, ECF No. 86-27 (Deposition of Jillian Massey at
139:6-15 (May 30, 2018)).
Reiman Drive Residence over the Spring and Summer of
around December 10, 2014, the Connecticut Department of
Mental Health and Addiction Services (“DMHAS”)
approved an application from Gilead to operate a new
community residence for men with disabilities. Pls. SOMF
March 25, 2015, Gilead, through Rainbow Housing, closed the
purchase of a single-family house located at 5 Reiman Drive
in Cromwell, Connecticut (“Reiman Drive
residence”) to use for the new home. Id.
¶ 11. Gilead purchased the house for $352, 047.30. Pls.
SOMF Ex. 14, ECF No. 77-14 (Closing Documents, 5 Reiman Drive
(Mar. 25, 2015)). Gilead intended to use the Reiman Drive
residence as a community residence under Connecticut General
Statutes § 8-3, “to serve six or fewer men who
would receive mental health services from Gilead staff,
” and under the DMHAS contract, Gilead would provide
these services. Defs. Statement of Material Facts
(“Defs. SOMF”), ECF No. 75-2 ¶ 2 (Dec. 7,
2018). “After purchasing the home, Gilead initiated
renovations to prepare the home for occupancy by six of its
clients, with initial occupancy to begin in May 2015.”
Id. ¶ 4, 10.
March 30, 2015, Gilead’s Chief Executive Officer
(“CEO”), Daniel Osborne, reached out to the Town
of Cromwell’s Acting Town Manager, Anthony Salvatore,
to inform him that Gilead had purchased the property and
planned to operate a community residence there. Pls. SOMF
¶ 12. Cromwell residents had also begun reaching out to
Town officials about Gilead’s purchase of the Reiman
Drive residence by March 30, 2015. Id.
March 31, 2015, Mayor Faienza stated in an e-mail to
Superintendent of Schools Paula Talty, “There really is
nothing we can do to stop this group home from coming to town
. . . [T]hey are protected by state statute. All we can do is
try to ease any concerns the residents may have.” Defs.
SOMF Ex. I-3, ECF No. 75-28 (emails between Enzo
Faienza/Paula Talty re: “meeting” (Mar. 31,
on March 31, 2015, a meeting took place that included Gilead,
state elected officials, and Acting Town Manager Salvatore
and Mayor Faienza, to discuss Cromwell residents’
concerns about Gilead’s plans to open the Reiman Drive
residence. Defs. SOMF ¶ 11. It is disputed whether this
meeting also involved discussion of Town officials’
concerns. Pls. SOMF in Opp. to Defs. SOMF (“Pls. Opp.
SOMF”), ECF No. 86 at 52, response to ¶ 11 (Jan.
meeting, it was decided that a public forum for Town
residents to have an opportunity to learn about Gilead and
the planned community residence on Reiman Drive would be held
on April 20, 2015. Defs. SOMF ¶ 12. It is disputed
whether Gilead or Town and state officials proposed this
forum, but both Gilead and Town officials ultimately agreed
to hold it. Pls. Opp. SOMF at 8 ¶ 31, 54 ¶ 12;
Defs. SOMF in Opp. to Pls. SOMF (“Defs. Opp.
SOMF”), ECF No. 84-2 at 10, response to ¶ 23 (Jan.
Town publicized the April 20 forum, including through an
official press release “stat[ing] that representatives
from Gilead and DMHAS would provide a presentation regarding
the group home on Reiman.” Pls. SOMF ¶ 24. A local
newspaper, the Middletown Press, published statements by
Mayor Faienza that “[i]t’s important that all
concerned residents come to the forum with their questions
and concerns for Gilead and DMHAS. The goal of Monday
night’s forum is for Gilead to answer all the concerns
of our residents.” Id. ¶ 25 (quoting
Mayor Faienza from Cromwell to Hear Views on Group Home
Proposed Near High School, Middletown Press News (Apr.
20, 2015), ECF No. 77-23).
April 20, 2015, the planned forum was held. Defs. SOMF ¶
15; Pls. Opp. SOMF at 9, response to ¶ 35. The forum was
moderated by Ed Wenners, who at that time “was
beginning his campaign to earn a seat on the Town
Council.” Pls. Opp. SOMF at 8 ¶ 32; see
also Pls. Opp. SOMF Ex. 41, ECF No. 86-41 (E-mails
between Ed Wenners/Enzo Faienza re: “FW: Cromwell Town
Council” (Sept. 19, 2015)). Mayor Faienza asked Mr.
Wenners to moderate it. Pls. Opp. SOMF at 8 ¶ 32;
see also Pls. Opp. SOMF Ex. 34, ECF No. 86-34
(Deposition of Edward B. Wenners at 32:2-33:25 (Aug. 3,
2018)); Pls. Opp. SOMF Ex. 7, ECF No. 86-7 (Deposition of
Vincent “Enzo” Faienza at 111:2-112:9 (June 27,
forum, which was held at the Town Hall gym, Pls. Opp. SOMF
Ex. 28, ECF No. 86-28 (Press Release: “Gilead Group
Home, ” Town of Cromwell (Apr. 20, 2015)),
“lasted almost four hours. The gymnasium was at full
capacity; the chairs and bleachers were all full, and people
were standing on both sides of the room.” Pls. SOMF
Town officials were present, including Mayor Faienza, Mr.
Salvatore, and other state and local officials. Pls. SOMF
¶ 33-38; Pls. Opp. SOMF at 8 ¶ 35 (citing Ex. 36,
ECF No. 86-36 (Press Release, Town of Cromwell (Apr. 21,
2015))). “Representatives from Gilead and DMHAS
provided some information about the group home and a general
overview of the types of services it intended to offer to its
residents.” Pls. SOMF ¶ 28. “Over sixty
audience members . . . spoke in opposition of the group home
being located at” the Reiman drive address.
Id. ¶ 29. “Two people spoke in support of
the group home, but they were shouted over by the
crowd.” Id. ¶ 30.
Faienza spoke at the forum, stating that “the proposal
is unfortunate and unfair, and we were caught totally off
guard by it, ” Id. ¶ 33; that the idea of
restricting group homes in a town by census population, akin
to the way package stores are regulated, might be
“something that should be looked into, ” Pls.
SOMF Ex. 7, E. Faienza Tr., ECF No. 77-7 at 156:14-24 (June
27, 2018); and “Where does it end?, ” Pls. SOMF
¶ 33. Mr. Salvatore also spoke at the forum, saying that
“in my opinion, this is not the right location.”
Pls. SOMF ¶ 38. It is disputed whether any other Town
officials spoke. The day after the forum, the Town issued a
press release that read as follows:
As a result of a Public Forum held on the evening of April
20th at the Cromwell Town Hall, regarding the placement of a
group home at 5 Reiman Drive, Cromwell residents . . . were
able to listen to a presentation by Gilead and [DMHAS]
followed by a question and answer period that lasted from 7
p.m. until nearly 11 p.m.
During [the forum] State and Local Officials as well as
residents were also given the opportunity to express their
concerns. The majority of the concerns centered around the
close proximity of this residence to Cromwell Schools and the
makeup of the neighborhood, which contains a number of
children and teenagers.
Because of the lack of information provided by Gilead and
DEHMAS [sic] based on the concerns by those in attendance,
Mayor Enzo Faienza is officially and publically [sic]
requesting, on behalf of the citizens of the Town of
Cromwell, that Gilead consider relocating to a more suitable
Pls. SOMF Ex. 28, ECF No. 77-28 (Press Release, Town of
Cromwell (Apr. 21, 2015)).
days following the forum, the Middletown Press published two
articles about the forum and the Reiman Drive residence
plans. One article quoted statements by Mayor Faienza at the
April 20 forum, Pls. SOMF Ex. 30, ECF No. 77-30 (Jeff Mill,
Cromwell Citizens, Officials Adamantly Object to
Group Home, Middletown Press (Apr. 21, 2015) (“The
proposal ‘is unfortunate and unfair, and we were caught
totally off guard by it, ’ Faienza said”)); and
another quoted Mayor Faienza saying that “I feel I owe
the residents of Reiman Drive that I stand up and ask Gilead
to consider another alternative site, ” Pls. SOMF Ex.
34, ECF No. 77-34 (Jeff Mill, Officials Fear Men’s
Transitional Home Will Affect Cromwell Families,
Middletown Press (Apr. 22, 2015)).
Faienza communicated with residents by e-mail about the forum
and the Reiman Drive residence. The day after the forum,
April 21, 2015, the Mayor wrote:
I wanted to have this forum so the members of Gilead and
DMHAS could see the outrage and concern first hand from our
residents. Everyone did a fantastic job . . . I’m
hoping they reconsider completely and choose not to move
forward with anything. . . Ideally I don’t want
anything in that neighborhood or in town at all[.]
Pls. SOMF Ex. 35, ECF No. 77-35 (E-mails between Tina
Mendes/Enzo Faienza re: “FW: Gilead Group Home”).
the forum, either Mayor Faienza or Mr. Salvatore (it is
disputed which) “contacted Town Attorney Kari Olson and
requested that [she] research whether Gilead’s plans
for 5 Reiman Drive constituted a community residence and
whether 5 Reiman Drive would be subject to zoning
regulations.” Defs. SOMF ¶ 22. Ms. Olson sent an
e-mail to Gilead Attorney Timothy Hollister to ask for
information regarding whether the Reiman Drive residence was
exempt from zoning regulations. Defs. SOMF Ex. L-1, ECF No.
75-34 (E-mails between Kari Olson/Timothy Hollister re:
“Fw: Gilead” (May 1, 2015)).
5, 2015, a special executive session of the Town Council took
place. In a May 4, 2015 e-mail responding to a resident who
had sent a news article about an incident that had occurred
at another group home in Connecticut, Mayor Faienza said that
he had called the session himself, stating that “[t]he
Salem issue really highlights all our concerns regarding this
group home. I have called a special executive session meeting
of the Council for tomorrow night. I’m also trying to
get our town attorney there.” Pls. SOMF Ex. 37, ECF No.
77-37 (E-mails between Rob Latulippe/Enzo Faienza re:
“Fwd: Safeguards” (May 4, 2015)). Ms. Olson did
attend that meeting. Defs. SOMF ¶ 23. The Town Council
also approved filing a petition with the Connecticut
Department of Public Health (“DPH”) at that
May 6, 2015, Attorney Olson, on behalf of the Town,
petitioned the Commissioner of the DPH to deny Gilead
authority to install a community residence at 5 Reiman Drive
on the basis that pursuant to General Statutes §
19a-507b(c), Gilead was required to apply for a license to
operate a community residence.” Defs. SOMF ¶ 24;
Defs. SOMF Ex. L-3, ECF No. 75-36 (Anthony Salvatore and Kari
Olson, Town of Cromwell, Petition to Deny Proposed
Community Residence (May 6, 2015)). The Town
also issued a press release that read as follows:
As a result of Gilead Community Services attempting to
install another community residence in the Town of Cromwell,
Acting Town Manager Anthony Salvatore, with the support of
Mayor Enzo Faienza and the Town Council, petitioned the
Commissioner of Public Health to deny Gilead Community
Services authority to install another community residence in
the Town of Cromwell.
Pls. SOMF Ex. 39, ECF No. 77-39 (Press Release, Town of
Cromwell (May 13, 2015). Mayor Faienza also was quoted,
stating, “What we are against is the idea of having
this group home in this particular neighborhood.” Pls.
SOMF Ex. 40, ECF No. 77-40 (Cromwell Petitions State
about Gilead Group Home Location, Middletown Press
(May 14, 2015)).
15, 2015, Mayor Faienza wrote in an e-mail to a Town resident
that “[w]e are pounding Gilead and DPH is spinning
right now. We will keep [the] pressure on, let’s keep
our fingers crossed.” Pls. SOMF Ex. 41, ECF No. 77-41
(E-mails between Rob Latulippe/Enzo Faienza re: “Fwd:
Group Home Update” (May 15, 2015)). The individual
responded, “Not to sound like an ass. But –
15, 2015, the Connecticut Department of Public Health issued
a letter to the Town stating that it was not taking any
action against Gilead in response to the Town’s
petition because Gilead did not require a license under
Connecticut General Statutes § 19a-507b(c) to operate
the Reiman Drive residence. Pls. SOMF Ex. 42, ECF No. 77-42
(Antony Casagrande, General Counsel, Conn. Dep’t of
Health, Letter to Kari Olson Regarding Petition to Deny
Proposed Community Residence (June 15, 2015) (“June 15,
2015 Casagrande Letter”)).
25, 2015, at 8:22 p.m., Ms. Olson sent an e-mail to Mayor
Faienza, Mr. Salvatore, and Michael Zizka, attaching a
memorandum dated June 22, 2015, and addressed to the Town
Council. Pls. Opp. SOMF Ex. 61, ECF No. 86-61 (Mem. from Kari
Olson to Town of Cromwell Town Council Regarding
Gilead’s Proposed Community Residence (June 22, 2015)
(“June 22, 2015 Olson Memo”)).
memo, marked “CONFIDENTIAL, ” stated that
“[t]he forgoing memorandum reflects that any success in
litigating over Gilead’s new group home is far from
certain, ” and that by pursuing the petition further
“the Town may be criticized for attempting to shut out
those in need of rehabilitation.” June 22, 2015 Olson
Memo at 8. Ms. Olson also stated that “Notwithstanding
all of these hurdles, it is my understanding that you wish to
pursue this challenge vigorously and despite the knowledge
that the challenge may fail.” Id.
Olson also exchanged e-mails with Mayor Faienza and Mr.
Salvatore on June 25, 2015, stating that she “would
like to send a warning letter to Tim Hollister
(Gilead’s Attorney) regarding the anticipated zoning
violations.” Pls. Opp. SOMF Ex. 76, ECF No. 86-76
(Emails between Kari Olson/Enzo Faienza/Anthony Salvatore/Re
Matus re: “RE: Remain [sic] Dr.” (June 25, 2015,
Attorney Olson sent a letter to Gilead’s attorney
Hollister, attaching the June 15, 2015 Casagrande Letter and
stating that the Town of Cromwell understood the Connecticut
Department of Public Health’s decision to mean that the
Reiman Drive residence was not a community residence entitled
to zoning exemptions under Connecticut General Statutes 8-3e.
Pls. Opp. SOMF Ex. 78, ECF No. 86-78 (Letter from Kari Olson
to Tim Hollister, Re: “Gilead Community Services”
(June 25, 2015)). Ms. Olson’s letter stated that, as a
result, the Town of Cromwell would be issuing a Cease and
Desist Order to Gilead for operating a group facility at 5
Reiman Drive in violation of town zoning laws. Id.
29, 2015, the Town filed a motion with the Connecticut
Department of Public Health to reconsider their decision that
Gilead did not require a license to operate the Reiman Drive
residence. Pls. SOMF Ex. 43, ECF No. 77-43 (Anthony
Salvatore, Town of Cromwell, Mot. for Reconsideration of
Decision on Petition to Deny Proposed Comm. Residence (June
29, 2015) (“June 29, 2015 Town Mot. to Reconsider
1, 2015, the Town issued a “Notice of Violation/Cease
& Desist Order” regarding 5 Reiman Drive
(“Reiman Drive Cease & Desist Order”) to
Steve Bull, President of Rainbow. Pls. SOMF Ex. 44, ECF No.
77-44 (Reiman Drive Cease & Desist Order (July 1, 2015)).
Jillian Massey, the Town Zoning Enforcement Officer, signed
the Cease & Desist Order and copied Mr. Salvatore on the
Order. Pls. SOMF ¶ 60.
Order stated that Rainbow Housing “appear[ed] to be
operating or allowing the operation of a rooming house /
halfway house or similar venture at 5 Reiman Drive without
first obtaining proper zoning permits, ” and that
failure to comply would result in penalties including the
accrual of fines of $150 per day. Pls. SOMF ¶ 61; Reiman
Drive Cease & Desist Order.
next day, on Gilead’s behalf, Mr. Hollister sent Town
Attorney Olson a letter in response to receipt of the Cease
& Desist Order. Pls. SOMF Ex. 46; ECF No. 77-46 (Letter
from Timothy Hollister to Kari Olson (July 2, 2015)). Mr.
Hollister’s letter stated that Gilead’s intended
disabled residents and staff were protected under state and
federal Fair Housing Acts and requested rescission of the
Cease & Desist Order. Id. at 3.
7, 2015, Ms. Olson, Mr. Hollister, Mr. Osborne, Mr.
Salvatore, and one other Town representative met at Town Hall
to discuss issues regarding the Reiman Drive residence. Defs.
SOMF ¶ 40.
same day, July 7, 2015, Gilead placed its first client at the
Reiman Drive residence. Id. ¶ 41.
8, 2015, Ms. Massey advised Mr. Bull that the Reiman Drive
Cease & Desist Order was being rescinded, with the
understanding that no more than two residents would be placed
in the home. Defs. SOMF ¶ 42; Pls. SOMF Ex. 49, ECF No
77-49 (Letter from Jillian Massey to Steve Bull re: Notice of
Violation/Cease and Desist Order for 5 Reiman Drive, Cromwell
(July 8, 2015)). Ms. Olson also sent an e-mail to Mr.
Hollister on July 8, stating that, “as you know, we are
not waiving the right to issue a new cease and desist upon
your notification that more than 2 persons have moved in or
if the Town otherwise deems it is justified based upon the
facts, the law and the Town’s regulations.” Pls.
SOMF Ex. 48, ECF No. 77-48 (E-mails between Timothy Hollister
and Kari Olson, re: “Checking in on the cease and
desist” (July 8, 2015)). It is disputed whether the
two-resident limit was Gilead’s idea or a Town demand.
Defs. Opp. SOMF at 27, response to ¶ 64; Pls. Opp. SOMF
at 31-33 ¶123-126, at 72, response to ¶ 39, at 73,
response to ¶ 42. The Reiman Drive Cease & Desist
Order was the second Cease & Desist order the Town had
issued from January 1, 2012, to present, the first being to
another community residence for people with disabilities.
Pls. SOMF ¶ 65; Pls. SOMF Ex. 50, ECF No. 77-50 (Cease
& Desist Order for 9 Elm Street (Feb. 10, 2014)).
14, 2015, Town Assessor Shawna Baron informed Town Manager
Salvatore that she had “just received an exemption
application from the Group Home, ” and asking,
“We should meet to discuss this?” Pls. Supp. SOMF
Ex. 38, ECF No. 114-38 (E-mails between Shawna Baron/Anthony
Salvatore re: “Group home” (July 14, 2015)). Mr.
Salvatore requested that Ms. Baron send him a list of other
group homes in Cromwell and whether they were tax exempt and
15, 2015, Gilead placed a second resident at the Reiman Drive
residence. Defs. SOMF ¶ 49.
16, 2015, the Connecticut Department of Public Health wrote a
letter to Mr. Osborne advising him that DPH had found
violations of Connecticut regulations and/or statutes at
another Gilead property, informing Mr. Osborne that he could
dispute the violations until July 21, 2015, and asking Mr.
Osborne to “[p]lease address each violation with a
prospective plan of correction . . .” Defs. SOMF Ex.
D-1, ECF No. 75-15 (letter from DPH to Dan Osborne (July 16,
on July 16, 2015, the Town of Cromwell issued a letter to
Rainbow Houisng, informing it that the Town needed additional
documents, including the “estimated average length of
stay of residents, ” before it could consider its
exemption request. Defs. SOMF Ex. Q-1, ECF No. 75-52 (Letter
from Shawna Baron to Rainbow Housing Requesting Additional
Documentation for Tax Exemption (July 16, 2015)).
19, 2015, one of the two residents of the Reiman Drive
residents walked away from 5 Reiman Drive around 6:45 p.m.
Defs. SOMF ¶ 51. The man was located at around 10:30
p.m. in Hartford. Id. Gilead prepared an internal
review report on the incident, identifying action steps to
ensure that [the] areas [of weakness in responding to the
incident were] addressed fully and effectively going
forward.” Defs. SOMF Ex. C-1, ECF No. 75-12 (Phoenix
Home Elopement Incident – ACTION PLAN (July 19, 2015)).
21, 2015, the Middletown Press published an article in which
the police were quoted as stating that the client had
“a history of substance abuse and . . . assaultive
behaviors in the past, ” and disclosing the
individual’s medical diagnoses. Pls. Opp. SOMF Ex. 86,
ECF No. 86-86 (Jeff Mill, Gilead Client Who Walked Away
Prompts New Interest in Cromwell Group Home, Middletown
Press (July 21, 2015)). Acting Town Manager Salvatore was
also quoted as saying that “[t]he town has been and
continues to be opposed to that residence being at that
location as we did not feel that is an appropriate site. . .
This incident only serves to underscore those
July 2015, Town residents exchanged e-mails about the Reiman
Drive residence and engaged in conversation on a Facebook
group page entitled “Reiman Strong.” Pls. Opp.
SOMF Exs. 97, 98, 99, 100, ECF Nos. 86-97, 86-98, 86-99,
86-100 (E-mails discussing Gilead and discussing the content
of planned posts on the “Reiman Strong” Facebook
page about Gilead (July 21-28, 2015)). One resident forwarded
these e-mails to Mayor Faienza immediately after they were
sent. See, e.g., Pls. Opp. SOMF Ex. 97, ECF No.
86-97 (E-mail from Rob Latulippe to Enzo Faienza, re:
“Fwd: Re: Just for the nieghbors [sic] . . .”
(July 27, 2015) (forwarding an email to Mayor Faienza four
minutes after Diane Uccello had originally sent it to
multiple individuals)). In one e-mail, the same resident
states that he had “spoken with the Town” and
“the [T]own agrees. It’s time to make some
noise… It’s time to *not* remain quiet.”
Pls. Opp. SOMF Ex. 100, ECF No. 86-100 (E-mails forwarded to
Mayor Faienza from Rob Latulippe re: “RE: Time to make
some phone calls and send some emails” (July 20,
21, 2015, DMHAS sent a letter to “5 Reiman Drive
Neighbors, ” in response to the emails from Cromwell
residents living in proximity to 5 Reiman Drive, DMHAS is
aware of the situation described in the correspondence
received and is reviewing it with Gilead staff. Gilead
adherence to established policies and protocols related to
client safety will be included in the review. No new
residents will be admitted to this housing until the review
is complete and any potential issues are addressed. Defs.
SOMF Ex. R-1, ECF No. 75-55 (letter from Miriam
Delphin-Rittmon, Commissioner, DMHAS, to 5 Reiman Drive
Neighbors, re: “Cromwell Supported Housing
Concerns” (July 21, 2015)).
July 24, 2015, Mr. Osborne emailed the Gilead Board of
Directors, indicating an intent to ‘move forward with
the implementation of [the program at 5 Reiman Drive] but
advising the Board that DMHAS was conducting a “special
review” of all Gilead programs and would be making
unannounced visits.’” Defs. SOMF ¶ 62.
25, 2015, Gilead Board Member Frances Ludwig sent an e-mail
to Mr. Osborne, stating:
I think we will want to take a hard look at whether or not
[the walkaway] incident has made things so toxic that to
persist with [the residence program] on Reiman Drive will
just keep the entity alive and make it difficult to ever
recover with lots of potential collateral damage to the brand
Defs. SOMF ¶ 63.
31, 2015, Gilead Director of Finance Kathy Townsend responded
to an e-mail from Town Assessor Baron, regarding the
Town’s request for additional documentation for
Gilead’s tax exemption application, stating that the
“estimated average length of resident stay is
unknown.” Pls. Supp. SOMF Ex. 27, ECF No. 114-27
(Letter from Kathy Townsend to Shawna Baron (July 31, 2015)).
August 3, 2015, a Cromwell police incident report was filed
stating that a “for sale” real estate yard sign
had been placed in front of 5 Reiman Drive by an unknown
person around 1:25 a.m. Defs. Opp. SOMF Ex. J, ECF No. 77-62
(Police Report (Aug. 3, 2015, 9:31 a.m.)). “By 9:31 AM,
approximately one hour after being called to the incident,
the officer had determined that he was unable to obtain any
other investigatory leads, returned to the police station,
and closed the case.” Pls. SOMF ¶ 81.
August 7, 2015, Town Assessor Baron sent a letter to Gilead
Director of Finance Townsend denying Gilead’s tax
exemption application. Pls. SOMF Ex. 52, ECF No. 77-52
(Letter from Shawna Baron to Kathy Townsend, re:
“Property Tax Exemption Application” (Aug. 7,
2015) (“Based on the information you provided, it does
not appear that you meet the criteria for tax exemption under
[Connecticut General Statutes] § 12-81(7)”).
August 25, 2015, Mr. Osborne and Gilead Board President Ms.
Ludwig wrote a letter to DMHAS Commissioner Miriam
Delphin-Rittmon that read:
After a significant amount of thoughtful consideration,
Gilead and its Board of Directors have decided that it is in
the best interest of the individuals we serve that we
discontinue [the program at 5 Reiman Drive.]
As a result, we are formally requesting that the specific
portion of the contract between Gilead and DMHAS relating to
the provision of services through the ‘Phoenix Home