RICHARDSON, HARRINGTON & FURNESS. COUNSELLORS AT LAW AUoEN C. HARRINGTON harsingtond claw. com Peres J. FURNESS peter@ thlawr.com ANDREW S, RICHARDSON September 14, 2017 1953-2044 Sent Via Email & Regular Mail Scituate Town Council clo Peter D. Ruggiero, Esq. 195 Danielson Pike PO Box 328 North Scituate, RI 02857 Dear Ladies & Gentlemen: This office represents Peter Furness, the Receiver of New England Development NED”), the owner of the Hope Mill. The property, owned by NED and under the Receiver’s control, is subject to a Court approved Purchase & Sale Agreement with BMP, LLC, which has associated itself with Paramount Development for the rehabilitation and development of the Hope Mill structure and property for affordable housing. As you know, the matter has recently been beforé the Zoning Board on two occasions and is currently scheduled later this month for consideration of additional evidence on limited issues, deliberation and a decision. Lam, and you as counsel to the Town, should be very concerned with the Independent Men, (all present Town Couneil members) posting a “proposed resolution” against the project on their Facebook page along with copies of flyers advocating against the project days prior to the scheduled Town Council meeting on Thursday, September 14, 2017. The Receiver first became aware of this posting of the proposed action through the Independent Men Facebook page on Saturday, September 9, and again, when action on the resolution was placed on the agenda published on the Town’s website on Monday, September 1!, 2017. ‘The Receiver’s rights and responsibilities with regard to this Property are set out in the Order Appointing Permanent Receiver, entered by the Superior Court on August 31, 2010. I have attached a copy of that Order, and specifically refer you to paragraph 12. The Order enjoins any parties from taking any action which would impair or diminish the value of the Receivership Estate, its assets or interfere with the Receiver’s administration of the Estate, The language in this Order has generally been interpreted by the RI Courts to be at least as broad in scope as the automatic stay that is in place upon the filing of a bankruptcy petition. See 11 USC See. 362. ‘There is no doubt that the Independent Men’s purpose of the proposed resolutions is to influence the Zoning Board in its consideration of and deliberation in granting variances and a 182 WATERMAN STREET, PROVIDENCE RHODE ISLAND 02906-4015 T: 401 273.9600 F: 401 273.9605special use permit for this project to the Receiver and Paramount. The Town Council's consideration, adoption and approval of the proposed resolution opposing the proposed Hope Mill project and advocating rejection by the Zoning Board, is intended to place additional costly hurdles for the developer and Receiver to clear before the project can be implemented. The ultimate purpose of the proposed resolution and efforts of the Independent Men appears to be to discourage the developer and Receiver from continuing with the project despite the substantial financial loss that will be incurred. The proposed Resolution substantially diminishes the value of the Receivership property and interferes with and impairs the Receiver’s implementation of the Purchase & Sale Agreement and the administration of the Receivership Estate. The plain language of the Receivership Injunction contained within Paragraph 12 requires the council to first obtain relief from this injunction before it may take any action which restricts or interferes with the Receiver’s and Developer's implementation of the Purchase & Sale Agreement, Please acknowledge receipt of this letter, and the Town Council's intention to comply with, or challenge, in the Superior Court, the Receivership Injunction. Peter J. Furness, Receiver By his Attomey, Qawe e Alden G7 nso CC: Joseph Shekarchi, Esq. Christian Capizzo, Esq. ACH/ko Encl.RICHARDSON, HARRINGTON & FURNESS. COUNSELLORS AT LAW ‘Atoey C. Hansincron hacengron@iehflawrt com Perei J. Furness pecer@ritlwr.com ANDREW S, RICHARDSON seems September 15, 2017 - Sen Via gli ~ Chair, Town of Scituate Zoning Board of Review clo Peter Ruggiero, Esq, 195 Danielson Pike, PO Box 328 North Scituate, RI 02857 RE: Hope Mill Development Application 1200 Gentlemen: ‘This office represents Peter Furness, the Receiver of New England Development, The Receiver is the owner and co-applicant with Paramount Development for a special use permit and a number of variances relating to the Paramount plans for the development of the Hope Mill This is Application No. 1200, which has had two lengthy hearings before the Board anc scheduled for deliberation and decision later this month. The Board has also requested additional expert evidence regarding the parking issue and traffic issues. Itis the Receiver’s position that the special use permit and variances granted to this, ‘project in December of 2006 in Application No. 987, as confirmed by the Zoning Board of Review on January 19, 2016 and as set out in the letter of January 20, 2016 from Gorham & Gorham, Town Solicitors, remains in full force and effect. Any action taken which diminishes, restricts or reduces in any way the development tights afforded by those decisions would be a violation of the Receivership Injunction issued by the Superior Court in the Order Appointing Permanent Receiver entered on August 31, 2010. See Paragraph 12 of the enclosed Order. The injunctive aspects of this Order have been generally interpreted to be at least as broad in scope as the automatic stay that is in place upon the filing of a Bankruptcy petition. 11 U.S.C. §362. From Spring 2007 when Hope Mill Village Associates was petitioned into receivership, the enhanced value of the property provided by the decision of the Zoning Board in 2006 has been protected by the Receivership Injunction or the automatic stay es the property traveled ‘through a receivership, Chapter 11 and a Chapter 7 (while owned by Hope Mill Village Associates), and then again protected by the Receivership Injunction when New England Development was petitioned into receivership in August 2010. 182 WATERMAN STREET, PROVIDENCE RHODE ISLAND 02906-4015 T: 401 273.9600 F: 401 273.9605From the plain language of the Receivership Injunction contained within Paragraph 12, the Zoning Board of Review must obtain relief from this injunction before it may take any actions which restricts the development authority contained within the December 2006 and January 2016 decisions of the Zoning Board of Review. Please acknowledge receipt of this letter and your intention to comply with or challenge the Receivership Injunction. Please identify the items in the current application which you believe were not decided by the Board in 2006 and 2016 and which you claim to be outside the scope of the Injunction. ‘Thank you for your consideration of these issues. Very truly yours, Oris ‘Alden C-#¥éfrington, BS Attorney for Peter J. Fumeds, Receiver for NE Developmelit RI, LLC ACH/ko CC: Joseph Shastra PH42010-4680 J nProvsnaa rate County Supt Cout item 1 @ ) ; stance ODE ISLAND sursnio counr i PROVIDENCE, SC. i esis ao | Petitioner ) ) e } ac tosa : } i = ‘New England Development RI, LEC ) - - Saas eet ‘Respondent ) eae | | ORDER. iG PEI RIVER ‘This cause came to be heard on Angest 31, 2010, after notice being given, before Tuice Siloerstein ‘upon Petition for the Appointment of Permanent Receiver of Retiance Services, LLC, and upon consideration thereof, ts hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED 1. That PETER J. FURNESS of Cranston, Rhode island, be and is hereby appointed Permanent Recelver of the Property with ful suthacty to exercise all the powers confeced ypan ‘him by te jaws ofthis Stat, by tis Onde, (getier with the adftionel powers fident! toa Permanent Receiver 2, That the Receiver has given his bond for the faithful peformance of bs dates as said Receiver inthe sum of Ten Thousand Dollar ($0,000.00) with surety of surety company vthadeed fo do business ia te State of Rhede Ilend, conditioned thet he will well and truly pevfaum the dates of ie seid fee, 3. That said Permanent Receiver hereby appointed is auhorized, empowered and rected o take possession and charge ofthe Proporty and to preserve the same, and be ishereby ‘vested withthe thle fo all asels, properly, choses fn action, and any tights of the Defendant in seid Property, that this appointment of Pecmaneat Reoéiver is made in svecesion to the fppointaat of the Temporary Receiver herslofore made by Order of this Court, and the Permanent Receiver shall ake and be vested with the title to the Propety and choses in ection which have heretofore acerved to the Temporary Receiver with power to confirm and ratify ia \wlng such arangements as ere ented into by such Temportry Receives and to cary out and pecform the sane ; } i i tTocarastait Cou Sonor Curt wind, 422016 (2657 PM se $685 : O \ 4 Thre eect Revesby xin let alts ee mipere eee the Papaya Defendant, to prosecute and defend, ut in its name ori is [Receiver a to nterens in any ation, silo proceeding relative fo the Defendant in or on the Propesty and to compromise any controversy or dsp coneeming sald Propety and geneily do any over act whch might bs dave by he Mefendent or that my Jn the judgment of the Permanent Receiver be necessny or desiible for th protection, roainenance end peservation of the Propet. 5, That mid Pezmanoot Receiver be and be berby is aukticed in his dsmetion © acy onthe busess GE to Defcbdant pending th setement of testte end wat ther Order of his Curt in such manoex as ili is judgment bet conserve the Defendeat o incor cexpsats foe goods and services and fo buy and sell merchandise, splis or ok io trade for sash ot on ordi, in bis dieretion may be desirable ox necessary fr tho conmation of foe tusines ofthe Defindaat; to employ, discharge and fx be eapensaton of sch mansses, sepwiatendens an other ages and elojes sein his judgment may be advise ot secessary in ia management, one, contol, operation or usody othe Propet ‘That said Permenent Receiver be and he bereby is mnthocied fo orrow funds from ny indviual,prtaerhip or corporation for the purpose of png the Pope peeing the setlemeat of the extale and give ax security fr soc basowing the aesounsreasivable created by vine of eid opecton ox ethers, off plod, mortage tosis sacunber the Property subjoct to existing valid encumbrances, 4. That aalé Permanent Receiver is hereby aulhaized and empowered to secure {ngorane for te Propet. 1k Viet ssid Pemansat Reselver Is authorved in his dtereton fo appolst and enyioy ich propery manage, eget, employes, accuntnts a teas a may Un iS Juguant be advsble or messy fa the management, eta, minienne, canal stody ofthe Propet and be hereby i authaied tome ch pons aud dares ney be eed oe pope in onjnction wi fhe opealion ne reseratin oft Proper 4g: ‘That std Permanent Receiver be and he hereby is erthorzed end empovtered sei ace aod convey Hs igh, ile ed interest athe igh te and nee in he Proper, for such sun ov sus of mooey ato hin apes reasonble and proper, a prvi neo sles povided however, to! approval fst giea for sl sl by hls Cot, efter Nose 0 a Cretitors,2 rovaanetanate Toe a9a016 126 cole Aly Cones __ ot thar Onder ofthis Cour @ : se. Tuten onvieey re ik eon PA cia nape mpgs sen eet ih dyes ae af Ride ant eb dn oe eran ome me, BAAS race wih th pov ay ase ls ee tucton ste condoted by the Peaneat Receiver in ater ore hal be conideced and is berehy desaredf0 B® comment vache al coasts eompanee wih te roqdsement 8 Csan# vette in Chapter 9 of Te 6A. ofthe Rhode iene Geral Laws II, «th fleet of the sepating equirnents of BC P, 65{e), the Permanent ‘Receive sal le with the Court the reports refered 2 said Rode, a8 wheo the Permanctt event, and when ily reasorabl ovver deere seessry or avnble under t creumstngss 018 any required by Orde ofthis Cou. Ta, Tht the omnia, poston, o extinunon of ht prosecution of ny setion, sit, ebitation, processing, hetng, oF any Esl reolamation or sepossesion, oth uel and non judi oF eny oer proceeding tay or in euity o onder any stable oF banal or elsewhere, ot before 887 ‘aherwise, against the Property, in any Cour, agsnoYs t corporation, partnersbip 0 m7 rbitator, otherwise by any ert, emlty secuily Males athe person, association oc enity, oF he vy of 7 attachment, exesution or other process uper x aunt tn Property, ofthe taking a tempting 0 take Into possession of any property inthe eating ot Property ox operation ote Property, b} a) of sch eamanent Receive, orth ftefoance wth the Peemancs postesion of the Defeadan partes ao aforesaid, oto than the Ps Receiver In the discharge ot his duties elghone, on, gus or any wfliy serio 0 he Property, by any public or private wii, sithout sooh pas’ Sst blaining approval thereof fom this Coutt (in regard to whic the shall be ened epi widen nace eod nonpoint © heard), are ty any of sch pss afr ore eotnation of Permanent Receiver tere resin end cojoned wil utes Orer of is Cou. “That sald Permanent Retelvr be and he hereby js authorized and empowered &S is. s avaable to pay all City, Sa ad United Sis wes of anh so0a as he has sufficient fund ad, metre ad description inci withing fe Taha si Pomanent Rosier sil ante to aches dies hereunder an tat he ght enred wo fe Bcmaneat Rese 6 f° the pares eo lo apf thle Gout foc ny oli oP nstions and at his Cont eerste iit pon uk nots fy a8 tabula POF make such fro orders pein vey be proper do ms tis Order ftom ie (ine.eam Qo of 15. ‘That all creditors of the Defendant, ia order to be eatitled to be pad from the sss of the Defendant, are equked lo fle with he Pecabent Reciver a is fe, 100 : ‘Midway Place, Suite [, Cranston, Rhode Island, on orbefore__|L-2O-1D Stervats showing the anoint of indebtedcas med by them ob dt, eam. i an es es fob elie 16, That nots of be en ofthis Orde be given (by th lek of this Cot by pebletion of copy of the mossed Resivenhip Notice in the Povieee Jul on or bfe 4~}- . and (b) by the Peamanent Receiver by mailing on or before Sp |Y copy ofthe said Receivership Notice to each exeitoe and stockholder of the Defeadant as shown on the books end resords ofthe Defendant, addressed to such creditor or stockholder at his, her or its last known adress. 17, This Order is ented by vietue of and pursuant (6 this Court's equity powers and ucsuant toils powers as authorized by the laws and statutes of the State of Rhode Island ity olen or priority, ifsny, which the ocx ENTERED this 31" day of August, 2010, — OD Lone Senta s/s 5» De Cet. | : Eafall (eaue