Lowell Sun reporter Rita has been a notable “Friend of Eliopoulos” for years, appearing with Phil on talk shows, blasting his opponents in print, and downplaying or refusing entirely to report his multiple ethics violations. To this point, for instance, we can’t find any reference in any of her articles to the actual documented ethics violations of Eliopoulos. Nor will she print the agenda of the Better Not Bigger project, even though she has asked me several times and I have provided the same. Instead, she lets government officials who have never even spoken with us define the agenda as being whatever they feel like saying on that particular day.

The agenda is good and honest government, and an enhanced quality of life for all residents. This is not acceptable to certain officials, because it means accountability for malfeasance and a commitment to tell the truth, neither of which our top officials will support. Not a single selectman has articulated any support of accountability for malfeasance, and not a single selectman will testify under oath that they have been telling the truth about the “9 North Road” scandal and other acts of malfeasance.

On Wednesday, Ms. Savard penned yet another article devoid of fact checking and full of false statements from town officials. Ms. Savard makes no effort to check the facts and educate readers on the falsities being presented as quotes from officials and FOEs (Friends of Eliopoulos) opposed to good and honest government for our community.

The article contains much misinformation and disinformation from the usual suspects including Paul Cohen and some new ones including Pat Maloney, Cohen’s new excuse for not briefing his bosses about the Eliopoulos land deal for “9 North Road” until it was too late to effectively act to obtain the land for the town. Below are corrections, colored yellow.

The editors at the Lowell Sun have been presented numerous times with complaints about Ms. Savard’s refusal to print hard facts central to the 9 North Road scandal, accompanied by her willingness to print false statements from town officials without rebuttal or even later correction. Ms. Savard has printed such false statements without rebuttal even when told beforehand that they are false. The editors have not responded, but Ms. Savard has clearly been given the green light to continue biasing her coverage toward the fabric of fanciful stories by Phil Eliopoulos, Paul Cohen, and Jon Kurland. Her article Wednesday in the Lowell Sun, titled “No Backroom Deals” lacks any sort of fact checking and is so chock full of errors that we could spend much more time correcting them but we have stuck with the glaring ones. Below are some of the more egregious examples.

'No backroom deals' on Chelmsford fire-station site, ex-committee chairman says

By Rita Savard, rsavard@lowellsun.com

Updated: 06/22/2011 03:04:23 PM EDT

CHELMSFORD – A former committee chairman charged with finding the best location for a new center fire station now says North Road was "never off the table."

After an independent study group recommended the corner of Wilson and Chelmsford streets for a new fire station in August 2007, the town Fire Station/DPW Committee chaired by Pat Maloney threw its support behind it.

This is not the case. Subsequent published studies, reports and votes by the FS/DPW Committee as late as March of 20099 indicate ongoing interest in North Road as a potential, even preferred, alternative for keeping the Center Fire Station open. The FS/DPW Committee presented multiple proposals to the BOS in March of 2009; the majority of them involved some part of the parcel behind the fire station (“9 North Road”). But the Selectmen, including Phil Eliopoulos, are the ones who voted to throw their weight behind the Wilson Street “ball field boondoggle” proposal in late March of 2009.

But with an Aug. 2 election to recall four selectmen fast approaching, Maloney said voters need to know what was really happening behind closed doors.

"There were no backroom deals," he said. "Roland Van Liew keeps trying to say deals were being made to benefit the Eliopouloses. But (Town Manager) Paul Cohen and I were pursuing a part of that property for a plan B for a fire station or for future use."

If the FS/DPW Committee was pursuing part of the property for a Plan B, why did they wait until April of 2009, after the Eliopoulos’ had signed a Purchase and Sale with the bank? Especially since the vote by the selectmen to favor the Wilson Street ball field boondoggle didn’t come until late March?

After pouring $90,000 into an effort that included hiring signature gatherers, Van Liew, a Chelmsford businessman, was able to push the first recall election in Chelmsford's history. The election seeks to remove Selectmen George Dixon, Matt Hanson, Jon Kurland and Pat Wojtas from office.

Van Liew, who could not be reached for comment for this story, alleges the selectmen failed to uphold the law when dealing with a 9 North Road building project owned by a former selectman's father.

I “could not be reached for comment?” I am easy to reach. But Rita Savard’s editors know that Savard is a biased, unethical, and unprofessional writer and has lied about my statements to her, and so I will only talk to someone else at this point. They apparently are not willing to assign a more professional asset to the unimportant story in Chelmsford, and so Ms. Savard simply states that I am “unreachable.” Heh-heh. Good one. She’ll be writing that, or “no comment” until the end of summer for sure. I can’t, with selectively edited comments, substitute for the horrendous lack of fact checking by the Lowell Sun in general and Ms. Savard in particular. They’ve decided to pursue yellow journalism such as this article rather than professional journalism and fact checking. It’s their decision, not mine.

In a previous meeting with Sun editors, Van Liew said the recall isn't about 9 North Road.

"It's about good government," Van Liew said. "I want them to uphold the law."

Opponents of the recall say Van Liew is a man with an agenda – to get rid of the town manager.

The North Road controversy "just gave Van Liew the latest fodder to fuel his agenda," said Stephanie Bush, co-chair of Choose Chelmsford, an anti-recall group.

Who is Stephanie Bush? She’s never even talked with me. How does she know what I’m thinking? My agenda has been articulated over and over, and in particular to Rita Savard of Sun many times, but she refuses to print it. Simply stated, the agenda good and honest government, and an enhanced quality of life for all residents. Stephanie Bush is correct in that the “9 North Road” scandal is indeed fodder fueling that agenda. The recall, as everyone who signed the petition knows, is about the fact that the selectmen are not trustworthy and have failed to act in the best interests of their constituents. The wording on the recall petition, available to all including Ms. Bush, is very clear.

It’s worth noting, though, that one of the ways the selectmen have failed us is their complete lack of oversight of the Town Manager’s abuse of authority and other malfeasance, including his failure to timely report Phil Eliopoulos’ conflict of interest to state authorities, his lying and cover up which continues to this day, and the selectmen’s refusal to initiate or even allow independent formal inquiry into Mr. Cohen’s involvement in the “9 North Road” scandal.

By creating a timeline dating back to Cohen and Van Liew's first disagreement in 2007, Choose Chelmsford said it's trying to present facts and show Van Liew was looking for a way to oust Cohen years ago.

The fact that I warned the selectmen before the “9 North Road” debacle occurred that Mr. Cohen was a disaster waiting to happen, having committed multiple acts of malfeasance and breach of fiduciary duty, only puts an exclamation point on the fact that the evidence shows that Chelmsford will never have good and honest government as long as Mr. Cohen is the Town Manager. Cohen has been and continues to be a major factor in preventing rectification or investigation of the scandal, and continues to advise the BOS to act counterproductively, fight depositions, etc.

Van Liew, who funded the former Chelmsford Slow Growth Initiative, began mass mailings in 2008 and 2009, blasting town officials and Cohen of bringing mass 40B affordable-housing projects into Chelmsford.

Van Liew has told The Sun his involvement sparked interest in the 2009 election, resulting in a six-man race for two open seats.

"That's a good thing," Van Liew said.

Cohen has said the only 40B approved in his 4 1/2 years as manager was a 48-unit affordable-housing project on Riverneck Road, which was tied up in court for six years before a judge finally approved it.

It’s odd that Rita Savard brings 40B into this discussion, but she has to rely on old quotes because she’s not willing to report on the current issue: Why it is OK for Phil Eliopoulos to break the town’s ethics bylaw and escape without formal investigation and without having to rectify the fraudulent land deal that has resulted in the loss of our “Center Park,” now become a “9 North Road” Eliopoulos Edifice.

The fact is that Paul Cohen is unapologetically pro-growth, stating recently that “Chelmsford is not getting enough development proposals.” He and his staff just sponsored a “Smart Growth Forum” pushing the illusory benefits of still yet more growth for Chelmsford. The notion of growth rather than sustainable stability as a path to prosperity is refuted by all major studies over the past decade. It is quite possible that this irrational support of any and all growth is a reason that Mr. Cohen just can’t resist supporting boondoggles like the Eliopoulos Edifice or the Fire Station Ball Field Boondoggle proposal.

Bush said throughout the years, Van Liew has taken bits and pieces of information and twisted them to fit his goal to get rid of Cohen and other officials who disagree with him. Her anti-recall efforts seeks to prove that.

A detailed rebuttal of the major points of the Choose Chelmsford fanciful “history” would take many pages. Recall proponents have never twisted the reality of the graft and insider influence trading that has been going on too long and has resulted in what is truly a disaster for the quality of life in our community – both in terms of open space but also in terms of good and honest government moving forward. The FOEs opposing good government in Chelmsford present their fanciful stories as “fact” but aren’t willing to defend them under oath – only in “forums” and “information sessions” where there are no legal constraints on the lies they can promulgate as “facts” never to be checked by unprofessional correspondents like Ms. Savard.

The timeline, she says, highlights Maloney and Cohen's attempt to purchase the land behind the North Road fire station.

Malone and Cohen never attempted to purchase the land behind Center Fire Station. Not ever. The Tom Dunn deposition proves that. Dunn testified that the most they ever asked for was a 40-foot strip to extend the parking area behind the station.

In February 2009, the Fire Station/DPW Committee recommended a new fire-station headquarters for the corner of Chelmsford and Wilson streets. Chairman Maloney remained in favor of renovating and expanding the existing facility.

"I thought Chelmsford and Wilson Street was too big," Maloney said.

During the same month, Cohen heard from Fire Capt. Frank Houle that Michael Eliopoulos, father of then Selectman Philip Eliopoulos, was trying to purchase a two-acre parcel behind the fire station along with the historic Emerson House, owned by Eastern Bank.

Cohen called Eastern Bank Vice President Tom Dunn to see if he was interested in selling a piece of the parcel to the town.

Dunn said he'd get back to him.

Tom Dunn’s deposition directly contradicts this! Tom Dunn states clearly, over and over again, that he initiated contact with Paul Cohen in February of 2009, preferring the town over other buyers for the land, and contacted Cohen “two or three times” but Cohen NEVER returned his calls or initiated a call.

Maloney said they weren't interested in purchasing the Emerson House. The town already had three historic buildings – the Dutton House and two old town halls – that it was trying to figure out what to do with.

"All we wanted was the land behind the fire station," Maloney said. "We had a very small window of time to work with and we didn't want to make a big deal publicizing it until we were sure it could happen. We were trying to work with the bank to buy a piece of the land that Michael Eliopoulos wanted. Of course we didn't want him (Michael Eliopoulos) to know right away."

This is misleading at best. No one from the town ever indicated to Eastern Bank or to any town board that there would be an attempt to obtain “the land behind the fire station.” All that was ever proposed to the bank was to further subdivide the land behind the fire station and make available to the town a tiny slice just to expand the parking area a bit. We are talking 40 feet. Of course the bank wasn’t interested in jumping through all the hoops to subdivide a tiny piece like that, and in any case the Eliopoulos’ were so intent on building the largest edifice possible that, once their purchase and sale was signed in April the Dunn deposition shows they refused to consider even that small of a piece of land being sliced off their prize.

According to the timeline, Maloney informed the Permanent Building Committee that there was a possibility of acquiring land behind Center Station.

In late February 2009, Cohen informed Maloney that the bank's appraisal of the land was $430,000, and an offer was on the table from Michael Eliopoulos for $480,000

Maloney and Cohen both felt is was still possible to purchase a piece of the land. Cohen received approval from the Board of Selectmen during a work session to explore the issue further.

This is very strange. The Dunn deposition shows that the bank did not apprise Paul Cohen in February or March of the value of the deal with the Eliopoulos’, or even that the Eliopoulos’ were the other interested buyers. Hmm. How could Mr. Cohen know this without a back room conversation or two?

The meeting minutes of March 16, 2009, do not reflect any such conversation. Cohen said that's because the meeting occurred before the state's Open Meeting Law became more stringent.

"It wasn't abnormal to bring up items that weren't on the agenda," Cohen said. "It was a quick discussion, for the purpose of getting the board's approval to look deeper into it."

According to the minutes, Philip Eliopoulos left the meeting early. Cohen said he was not there during talks about the land.

"We chased it until the end," Maloney said of 9 North Road.

Again, this is refuted by Tom Dunn, who verified in his deposition that Paul Cohen never returned his calls.

But ultimately, Eastern Bank did not want to break it up.

The Eliopouloses finalized a purchase-and-sale agreement in April. Maloney met with the Eliopoulos family after to see if they could purchase a strip of land behind the fire station.

After reviewing the site plan for an office building the family wanted to build, Maloney learned it would not be possible.

When asked why town officials didn't make a point to highlight their efforts before now, Cohen said, "it was private land and it was up to the owners, Eastern Bank, to sell it to whomever they wanted."

"In the end, they made a deal with Michael Eliopoulos," he said. "There was nothing we could do about that."

There was a lot they could do about it. Tom Dunn has testified that, all things being equal (such as the price), the bank would certainly have preferred to sell the land to the town. Not to mention eminent domain, but the town didn’t even need to go there. There were funds in the land acquisition account sufficient to close a deal with the bank. Those funds are still sitting there, by the way. That account can only be used to acquire land, and it is unrelated to the operating budget or state aid, which Paul Cohen and Jon Kurland have both falsely stated were reasons that the town wasn’t interested in buying the land.

Choose Chelmsford will hold a public forum at 7 p.m. tomorrow at the Chelmsford Radisson to discuss the recall and answer voters' questions.

Via email, Van Liew declined an invitation to serve on the panel, calling it a group strategy to attack him personally when Choose Chelmsford said no one else could serve on the panel on Van Liew's behalf.

Bush said the intention wasn't to attack or even debate Van Liew.

"He initiated the recall," she said. "It's his effort and we thought voters should be able to direct any questions they have for him, directly to him."

The “Choose Graft” panel has five anti-recall officials on it, so in the interest of “fairness” and “equal time” they will be given five times the opportunity to present the fanciful stories supporting the anti-recall FOEs. There’s no way that one person can rebut that. Even so, they were careful in their “invitation” to specify that no one more knowledgeable than I, such as Cheating Chelmsford spokesman Spencer Kimball or attorney Dick McClure, could serve on the panel. FOEs are afraid of the facts; but no amount of staged propaganda and biased reporting like this outrageously slanted article can keep the facts from coming out. The cat is out of the bag; the courts allowed one deposition and that is one deposition too many for these officials to hide their malfeasance.

If you are troubled by the fanciful stories that attempt to cover up malfeasance and graft, then please remember to vote on August 2 to remove the principals who are blocking formal inquiry and tolerating abuse of authority and dishonesty by a town manager who should have been fired for cause a long time ago.

Yours with best wishes and hope for the future of our town,

Roland Van Liew