Now that's a plan...you know, it's the lienholder A.E. Mitchell that will have to figure out if he's going to continue with the Baldi's AND if they do want to rebuild eventually....they will have to negotiate the grandfather's clause to rebuild on the same footprint and for the same purpose. I don't think you and I will hold our breath for that one on both parts!

We are in agreement that this whole situation is unfortunate for the Weirs and we indeed are being held "hostage" until the matter is settled. The good news is the community is agreement...take it down. There's no evidence left and the fire dept would love the practice! Thanks for your input..it is valuable. Tonight, council meeting 7:30...you know you're invited to attend.

Sometimes City Council proceedings are broadcast live on cable.
Might anyone know if it will? But sometimes it's recorded and broadcast later.

Yes, it is live on Channel 25 or 26 tonight. Yes, they do broadcast later throughout the week. Good question.

Thanks I assume John; I was able to see it.

Maybe because of the court status, appearances seemed that no City Officer volunteered to step up to the plate, and try to move the process along.

Isn't this sort of thing that the Chamber of Commerce could follow up and establish communications with Baldi family? Don't we stereotype a Chamber of Commerce to "work" with business issues?

I'm not familiar if there is a group of Weirs area businesses; if yes, one member could converse in professional manner with Baldi family.


Someone mentioned the word "arson"; I still can't understand that Busby parks vehicles & equipment so close to the building.

WAC represents the area businesses...however, this is a community issue and many signed solely as property/business owners. I have tried to contact Larry on numerous times with no results. He has no intention of working with the community being either in the Weirs or Laconia. The mayor tonight was the only one who "got it" when it came to the petition. The petition was never asking for the unilateral force of the city to tear it down.....it was strictly to have the SUPREME COURT rank it higher to ALLOW the city to tear it down and place a lien on the property. The Baldi's are being unreasonable as not only business owners but as a community property owner. Based on results, they are the real loosers in this situation all over again...loss of respect from their neighbors/community and respect for themselves not having the dignity to accept that the business is lost and move on towards rebuilding their life and business. Funny, the Weirs hasn't taken a position against their plight in 20 months. However, just recently Ms. Baldi referenced her neighbors as "the nasty's" on her Facebook (FB) page. Sad. As for arson gossip, people can say what they will...there's no proof, there's no final fire report..I say, innocent until proven otherwise. However, the building cannot give anymore evidence...it should have come down without any lawsuits filed. The Baldi's are only guilty of only one thing, bad judgement in dealing with a loss.

WELL STATED. Thank you!

Wmur
 

That won't do anything
 

"The city council recommended that area businesses talk to the building's owners about the issue."

Really?

Jetskier:cool:

LACONIA, N.H. -- Business owners in Laconia are asking the city to tear down the remnants of a restaurant that was destroyed in a fire.

The Wide Open Saloon burned down in 2010. A shell of the building is still standing as the family who owns it, the insurance company and the city fight over the future of the property.

Weirs Beach business owners said the building is an eyesore and hurts tourism.

The city council recommended that area businesses talk to the building's owners about the issue. :laugh::laugh::laugh:

REALLLLY :rolleye2:

Sorry it looks like we had the same thaught at the same time :cheers:

I think user nhy... was there and expressed it very well; I was watching it live on community TV.

Be careful what one reads on WMUR TV, as quite incomplete.

As I wrote, I think City officials are careful how they express personal opinions, because of the court situation not concluded. Their hands are tied.

They did agree that it's an eyesore too long. I'm not legal authority, but I think if they disobey a court order which is in appeal stage, they have problems. I think they agreed to encourage the courts to move on the issue.

Council DID suggest that first thing should be communications immediately.

There was a more accurate (than Chan 9) report in today's Sun Daily paper on page 11.
I speculate that that Chan 9 was not present.

If nothing else, some media activity was created! I'd say: NICE WORK, JOHN!

that is funny
 

A couple of us were just talking about how terrible WMUR is when it comes to news reporting.
I hate to admit it but Channel 7 and FOX 25 both have better more accurate coverage on NH news and even breaking new then WMUR does.

Off Subject!
 

We need to have the WOS razed/removed; Memorial Day weekend is less than 2 weeks away and again, we must live with the filth, smell and disgusting image projected by the burned out dump the Wide Open Saloon is!

This isn't about bike week or the people that ride, it's about the eyesore the WOS has become. How in God's name can the town, elected state and town officals and the especially Gov Lynch allow that embarrassment to continue to stand? Amazing that in this day and age people like the Baldis can control the system, I read all the court documents so I'm not surprised by the inaction but, enough is surely enough! Don Thurston, you are a powerful, reasonable and smart man, you along with your brother Jeff must be able to move this process along. It can't be good for business.

Well stated, SV!

It's got to be a health hazard for the neighbors AND the Busby workers.
The upper floors seem more precarious every day that I go by.
The wrecking ball would have a blast ~ toppling so easily.

maybe the BUSBY Equipment can somehow back into the structure and take it down :laugh::laugh::laugh:

Great idea!
However, when skimming the documents, I understood there exists a debt to Busby; thus only far out speculation that there is some bartering going on. Otherwise, why would any contractor park vehicles so close to a very unstable building???

Media coverage is getting out again: Today's Laconia Daily Sun has a caption under a photo of bulbs being replaced at the Weirs Sign, on front page. WOS in background! Well done, Sun!

Each summer and fall when I return to N. H. I travel to the Weirs and around the lake and other areas....Each time, I make a comment to my wife about h ow much of an eyesore this is for the area and how it must hurt business in the area.

Has anyone discussed a law suit against the city ? I have never seen anything like this to last as long as this has...Maybe a local business org. could bring a suit against the responsible party or parties for allowing this to go on...I really think a discussion with an attorney could at least get some answers...if not more...

I'll be passing again soon....Hopefully something positive will be on the books by then...

I'm not sure why this point keeps getting lost - The owners are entitled to all of the available due processes under the law before their property can be seized from them for any reason. Yes, maybe the petition will be noticed by the Court and this will be put on top of the pile. Maybe not. The property is secured with fencing and the building is not an imminent hazard. The rear of the building even looks salvageable (just sayin'!).
Could be that the owners are creeps, but that doesn't count in property law.

You sound like the people in Arlington, MA who are not allowed to use leaf blowers anymore or in Concord, MA with the no bottled water....What is wrong with people days? There is much more in life to worry about than all this sh**!!

Do not forget Cambridge already voting the no weedwacker leaf blower law in, THE PEOPLES REPUBLIC OF CAMBRIDGE.

Now they are all pissed becasue landscapers increased pricing, becuase cleanup now has to be done by hand, and they are pissed off it is costing them more

WHAT MORONS

Oh yeah Emperor Duval doe snot want the police to follow a federal law to report to ICE and the FEDS if they pull over someone that is an illegal because it is not fear, he went out publically against this

Blame Game...
 

Why stop the blame at the Governor? I think it's Obama's fault!
I'm with Heaven on this, like it or not, agree or disagree, the owners, regardless of their community standing and personal behavior, are entitled to their due process.
We'd all like to make this go away, but until the court decides, we all have to abide by and respect the process.
Like somebody said, It is what it is.

All....
 

There's a new user named weirs drive in or close to that phrase. Maybe some conversation can be established. There was a post on thread related to the domain name of drive in........

On another stupid note heard as I was gassing my car at the Citgo convenience store, on the Laconia side of the bridge. Another client said that owners of WOS are suing City because "City owns portions of building" because parts are on City property. I commented the road is State, but usually there is easement not ownership. To me, such story of suite is really just ludicrous. What more will come, but that's from only ONE now a RUMOR. He said the building is filled with asbestous!

I saw a Busby pick up truck very late today, and came close to asking driver why equipment is so near to the unstable building.

Somebody may WANT the city to own part of the building, I cannot speak specifically what the 4 suits entail (I do know that A is suing B is suing C is suing A) fits the scenerio anyway....but that's a stretch that the city has encroaching property lines, (if I understand the "rumor"); the title company would have never given a title policy with an encumbrance of that nature, wouldn't you agree?...let's chaulk that up to another wild rumor....what's not a rumor is that there IS asbestos. That is the reason for such a high cost to raze and disposed of...Glad you posted, it is important that rumors are dismissed as soon as possible. Come to think about it...if the owners would just keep neighbors abreast of "what's happening"..they might find more support than they realize. Oh well, we all conduct our business differently and they must think that this is the best course to eliminate further exposure to scrutiny but based on results not the gossip. Thanks again for posting the lastest so it could be addressed early.

So true...except about the back...! Raze it...start o-v-e-r...:patriot:

Thanks for the thoughts/observations.
Owners would also likely NOT get an occupancy permit or liquor license if the bar/lounger were infringing on another 's property, especially State highway right of way!

So right, owners communications to neighbors would create much support! Maybe the group that went to City Council last week should go to Fire Marshal's office, assuming that proceedings are stalled there; media has reported that fire remains "under investigation." My observation: if not now, soon entry to lower level will be extremely bad idea due to instability of the upper floors. I would not enter the spaces, and I would never park my construction equipment so near a disaster "about to happen."

I encourage user "weirs drive in" to post comments!

Update to your thought: Yesterday our WARD I Councilor Ava Doyle delivered in person to the NH Attorney General the petition for review and intervention as to RANKING the case higher on the docket list of the NH Supreme Court. Much thanks is given to Councilor Doyle as she did this on her own because she understood the importance of its message. Also, Paula Tracey of the Union Leader was in town yesterday doing a story on it..our friend John Ganong was thrilled at its delivery to the state and the developing story in the Union (maybe today's?)...he wants it on the Gov's desk...the man never quits (haha)...I like the wait and see...to go over the AG's head at this point would be insulting....yea WB for coming together as a community as a whole...couldn't be prouder.:cheers:

I found this kind of amusing when I read it on the Weirs Drive-in website reguarding motorcycle week vendor info.

Wide Open Salon
(property where it used to be):laugh:

One could only hope.

The court's going to do what the court's going to do. As a separate branch of government, they don't answer to the AG or even the Governor.

That is true, however, doesn't cost anything to ask for what "you" want...we did...now we'll see...sometimes that's the trouble of society they don't ask because they take "no" personally. AG was interested, asked questions, drove by the site...that's all we asked for. You write as though we imposed ourselves for nothing. ;);) Based on results, I don't feel we did.

No, it doesn't hurt to ask, and maybe you'll get a favorable result. I wouldn't hold my breath, though.

Roundabout construction
 

FYI. A little off subject, BUT... came by earlier today.
Did not think worthy of a new thread.

Sign says paving tomorrow the 21st. think I'll avoid...

haha....I know thought the same thing and decided I better hit the grocery store today....anything else...Cumberland Farms.....what if it rains???? Do they still pave? Delay? .:eek:

PS Did you know that we are trying to get the city to start referring the roundabout as "Blackstone" roundabout...or circle or rotary? There is a plaque on the bridge referencing the brothers the bridge is dedicated to...time to retire "malfunction junction"...unless of course this doesn't work.

Rumor...trying to confirm.....
 

Just received a text message that the Supreme Court is hearing the Wide Open Saloon case tomorrow.....let's hope this "rumor" source is reliable....:cheers:

Here's what I found on the Supreme Court website...looks like it's the opinion that is coming down but is it the "right" suit to raze the building ???

To be released May 22, 2012
■ 2010-679, State of New Hampshire v. Steven Forest
■2011-368, Appeal of Liberty Assembly of God & a .
■2011-381, Appeal of Town of Seabrook
■2011-502, 38 Endicott Street North, LLC v. State Fire Marshall, New Hampshire Division of Fire Safety

Supreme Court Ruling
 

See attached link for the Supreme Court Ruling:

http://www.courts.state.nh.us/suprem...57endicott.pdf

Lawyers - who needs them
 

Like I say, those lawyers are pretty ...........

A well written opinion by the NH Supreme Court.

Logical, and it reached the correct result.

This is interesting ...

"In this case, the Fire Marshal provided the affidavit from Investigator
Clark as evidence that proceedings are reasonably anticipated. In the affidavit,
Investigator Clark specifically stated that “[t]he [f]ire investigation is open and
ongoing . . . [and] I have a reasonable belief that this investigation will lead to
criminal charges.” "

Hello, arson charge?

Stay tuned ...

So, this case was all about whether or not the owners of the property could have access to documents from the Fire Marshal's investigation. The court said no. What impact, if any, does this ruling have on the timeline for getting the structure razed? Is there another case pending with the New Hampshire Supreme Court?

It will be years....
 

Again, I will say it like I did in an earlier post. My prediction and I am sorry to say it. It will probably be years before anything is done with that property. Its already been what, 2 years? You have to keep in mind the calibler of people we are dealing with here. The Baldi's would probably spend the equivalent in attroney fees that they would to raze the structure.

Remember, for every attorney that was at the top of their class, there was an attorney at the bottom of thier class. Those are the ones who represent scum like this crew.

They are all about the money. Even if they finally tear it down. Even if they rebuild it. Do you think the people in the Lakes Region are going to embrace them re opening and support their business? I would hope not. Even if they were to rebuild, I am sure at the end there will be a list of people that they didn't pay and a list of people they screwed over. They screwed the company John Carter Sprinkler Company out of $36K for their sprinkler system. Never paid him a dime for all the work they did there.

But hey, lets all hold hands and go to the Drive-In. Better yet, how about some Laconians go to some public hearings and see about getting some vendor space permits denied for Bike Week.

Remember....sometimes some people just suck!!

I'm not sure these leagal ranglings can be compared between razing costs and lawyers.If I understand whats going on here its whether or not the insurance with pay out or not based on whether the fire was arson or another cause.Much bigger dollars at stake for recovery of insurance than trying to undermind an arson finding.

Insurance
 

As I understand it the insurance comapny is not paying because the owners failed to meet the terms of the insurance companies requirements on the building. One of which was as I understand it having a fully sprinkled building. Only the 1st floor had sprinkler protection.