New London falls to a new low...

[Aziraphale]

Well, I don't usually make run-off threads, but the Kelo v. New London thread was like a month and a half old and this is a new issue. There is a new fiasco surrounding Kelo, this mostly being how the petitioners are being screwed even further by the city of New London.

Those who believe in the adage "when it rains, it pours" might take the tale of the plaintiffs in Kelo v. New London as a cue to buy two of every animal and a load of wood from Home Depot. The U.S. Supreme Court recently found that the city's original seizure of private property was constitutional under the principal of eminent domain, and now New London is claiming that the affected homeowners were living on city land for the duration of the lawsuit and owe back rent. It's a new definition of chutzpah: Confiscate land and charge back rent for the years the owners fought confiscation.

In some cases, their debt could amount to hundreds of thousands of dollars. Moreover, the homeowners are being offered buyouts based on the market rate as it was in 2000 .

The hard rains started falling that year, when Matt Dery and his neighbors in Fort Trumbull learned that the city planned to replace their homes with a hotel, a conference center, offices and upscale housing that would complement the adjoining Pfizer Inc. research facility.

The city, citing eminent domain, condemned their homes, told them to move and began leveling surrounding houses. Dery and six of his neighbors fought the takeover, but five years later, on June 23, the downpour of misfortune continued as the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that the city could claim the property for economic development.

Dery owns four buildings on the project site, including his home and the birthplace and lifelong home of his 87-year-old mother, Wilhelmina. Dery plans to make every remaining effort to keep his land, but with few legal options remaining, he's planning for the worst.

And for good reason. It's reasonable to think that people who purchased property years ago (in some cases, decades ago) would be in a position to cash in, especially since they're being forced from their homes. But that's not the case.

The New London Development Corp., the semi-public organization hired by the city to facilitate the deal, is offering residents the market rate as it was in 2000, as state law requires. That rate pales in comparison to what the units are now worth, owing largely to the relentless housing bubble that has yet to burst.

"I can't replace what I have in this market for three times [the 2000 assessment]," says Dery, 48, who works as a home delivery sales manager for the New London Day . He soothes himself with humor: "It's a lot like what I like to do in the stock market: buy high and sell low."

And there are more storms on the horizon. In June 2004, NLDC sent the seven affected residents a letter indicating that after the completion of the case, the city would expect to receive retroactive "use and occupancy" payments (also known as "rent") from the residents.

In the letter, lawyers argued that because the takeover took place in 2000, the residents had been living on city property for nearly five years, and would therefore owe rent for the duration of their stay at the close of the trial. Any money made from tenantssome residents' only form of incomewould also have to be paid to the city.

With language seemingly lifted straight from The Goonies , NLDC's lawyers wrote, "We know your clients did not expect to live in city-owned property for free, or rent out that property and pocket the profits, if they ultimately lost the case." They warned that "this problem will only get worse with the passage of time," and that the city was prepared to sue for the money if need be.

A lawyer for the residents, Scott Bullock, responded to the letter on July 8, 2004, asserting that the NLDC had agreed to forgo rents as part of a pretrial agreement in which the residents in turn agreed to a hastened trial schedule. Bullock called the NLDC's effort at obtaining back rent "a new low."

"It seems like it is simply a desperate attempt by a nearly broke organization to try to come up with more funds to perpetuate its own existence," Bullock wrote. He vowed to respond to any lawsuit with another.

With the case nearly closed, the NLDC may soon make good on its promise to sue. Jeremy Paul, an associate UConn law dean who teaches property law, says it's not clear who might prevail in a legal battle over rent. "From a political standpoint, the city might be better off trying to reach some settlement with the homeowners," he says.

An NLDC estimate assessed Dery for $6,100 per month since the takeover, a debt of more than $300K. One of his neighbors, case namesake Susette Kelo, who owns a single-family house with her husband, learned she would owe in the ballpark of 57 grand. "I'd leave here broke," says Kelo. "I wouldn't have a home or any money to get one. I could probably get a large-size refrigerator box and live under the bridge."

That's one way to get out of the rain.

http://fairfieldweekly.com/gbase/New...oid=oid:119000

A number of blogs have had some interest in this, but I just caught it today off of Fark.
Not only are they only being market rates as of 2000, which were remarkably lower than they are now (in 2000, there were rumblings that the nereby Groton Navy Sub-base would be closing, and the areas surrounding--New London, Norwich, etc, had falling real estate prices), but they are being charged 'rent' by the state... Effectively being left with ABSOLUTELY NOTHING.

Just compensation?

[Dyno]

Heartless and evil. Those poor people.

[Sanchi]

Talk to the liberals who want to see expanded government powers.

[Morris]

Originally Posted by Sanchi

Talk to the liberals who want to see expanded government powers.

What the fuck does that have anything to do with this? This is an outrage and an invasion of civil liberties, and you're a fucking idiot.

In our current system as it stands this is ridiculous - this is taking land from people and handing it over to big money holding corporations and is just sad.



I wish everyone would stop the fucking liberal/conservative shit, it drives me up a damned wall. Can't you just think for your fucking self and look at something and say "I disagree with that", or "I agree with this" as opposed to "Liberals believe in x and conservatives believe in y".

Besides, even if 'liberals' believe in 'expanded government powers', that doesn't mean liberals agree with the use of eminent domain to profit a drug company that wants to build another factory.

Or you know, you could just keep your head lodged up your ass like usual.

[greyt_autumn]

Eminnent domain is OK for appropirate "public Good" projects (new roads etc) that the public as a whole benefit from. Not private enterprises only. NL is trying to kill a neighborhood to build a new one in somebodies master plan.

Complicating this is that after Pfizer, the Navy is the economy outide of Foxwoods and Mohegan Sun. there is nothing in Eastern CT.

Sub Base New London is on the BRAC list for closure. I think it likely that it will survive just based on economic impact aone.

[Valve1138]

Did you guys see the article about the developer who wants Justice Sutor's home and land siezed in the same manner so he can develop it?

I hope his plan goes through. This is by far the most bone headed ruling by the supreme court ever.

[Aziraphale]

Originally Posted by valve1138

Did you guys see the article about the developer who wants Justice Sutor's home and land siezed in the same manner so he can develop it?

I hope his plan goes through. This is by the the most bone headed ruling by the supreme court ever.

Lost Liberty Hotel, search epledge for it.
I fully plan on staying there and pouring thousands of dollars into Weare, NH (I think that's where it is).

[Aziraphale]

Originally Posted by greyt_autumn

Eminnent domain is OK for appropirate "public Good" projects (new roads etc) that the public as a whole benefit from. Not private enterprises only. NL is trying to kill a neighborhood to build a new one in somebodies master plan.

Complicating this is that after Pfizer, the Navy is the economy outide of Foxwoods and Mohegan Sun. there is nothing in Eastern CT.

Sub Base New London is on the BRAC list for closure. I think it likely that it will survive just based on economic impact aone.

I think that the Sub Base in New London was closed some years ago, which mostly led to the hardships of that area of New London that was condemned. The one that is still there is Groton Navy Sub Base, which is one of the largest on the East Coast (from what I've heard, I've never seen any others to compare it to). And though I think you meant how I think, I'd just like to clarify that Foxwoods and Mohegan Sun do nothing for Eastern Connecticut economy... they hurt it substantially, because the roads are kept by the state government, and the people (and money) are kept entirely inside the casinos. I think you meant that anyway, but I'd just like to clarify it for those not around the area.

I'm not entirely opposed to eminant domain, in as much as there is just compensation and it is for a public service, but there is neither for this... and it is a shame. It's also a surprisigly large lot ... I think some 350 properties?

[Dyno]

Originally Posted by Morris

I wish everyone would stop the fucking liberal/conservative shit, it drives me up a damned wall. Can't you just think for your fucking self and look at something and say "I disagree with that", or "I agree with this" as opposed to "Liberals believe in x and conservatives believe in y".

It's so true. Americans have lost the ability to reasonably discuss an issue because every issue is wrapped up in Red/Blue redirect. Any and all conversations devolve into partisan hackery.

[brouski]

I don't understand how the city officials think they will survive the next election cycle. Is everyone else in New London hunky-dory with all this?

[Valve1138]

Originally Posted by brouski

I don't understand how the city officials think they will survive the next election cycle. Is everyone else in New London hunky-dory with all this?

I was just thinking this as well. Do they not like there jobs?

[Ray Charles]

Originally Posted by brouski

I don't understand how the city officials think they will survive the next election cycle. Is everyone else in New London hunky-dory with all this?

Scapegoat maybe?

[Loote]

I LIVE two minutes drive from New London in Waterford. First off, New London apart from Pequot Ave and some nieghboring roads is falling apart. Most of the areas are falling apart or are subcoming to "ghetto". If the sub base in Groton closes, I can't imagine what will still be in Groton besides some tumbleweed blowing around. Its honestly terrible. Besides Pfizer and the subbase, Millstone (nuclear power plant) is all that is left, and is on the end of its lifecycle. The casinos dont benefit CT much more than providing lots of low paying jobs, with not much room for climbing the ladder if your not indian. And due to the fact that its a reservation the state does not get taxes from the casinos. South Eastern CT is in for a world of hurt if the sub base closes and things keep going the way they are.

[Aziraphale]

Originally Posted by brouski

I don't understand how the city officials think they will survive the next election cycle. Is everyone else in New London hunky-dory with all this?

Well ... it's sort of sad. Most people don't even know what I'm talking about when I ask them about it ... and I'm not kidding. Now, I live in Massachusetts, but over the last two years, I've worked for a real estate firm doing gruntish work (I was a 'runner', getting documents to be signed at closings and then getting them recorded at court houses, city halls, etc), but I would spend several hours a day in various towns and so on in CT, NH, MA, and RI. This was rarely even a discussed issue in some of the Eastern CT towns (Norwich, Groton, East Lyme, Putnam, Woodstock... those are the only ones I actually spent any time in at their various recording places [some are as small as like ... my garage])... more people would be talking about the weather, Route 6, and the Red Sox / Yankees than a Supreme Court case deciding the civil liberties of people in their own back yard. It was troubling.

I go to a private, Catholic college in central Massachusetts that has a lot of people from Connecticut enrolled. The same applies to them. If I said the name "Susette Kelo" ... less than 1% of the people, even people from CT, would know who I was talking about... even Political Science majors. It is rather ridiculous.

Now, I know that Morris and some of the others are getting upset that people are degrading this into an issue between Liberals and Conservatives, or Blues and Reds, or whatever they're saying ... but part of this ignorance, I have to believe, is because the majority of people (especially lawyers and College students, the two demographics that I've been in contact with the most) are liberal in Massachusetts and Connecticut, and this is an issue of shame for many liberals... so it's just not getting any attention. A Conservative can't take a shit around here without somebody saying that its racist against Brown skinned people, but there is a lot of leeway given. Furthermore, David Souter is from the North East (Weare, NH I believe) and currently resides there on a small farm. Much of Eastern Connecticut, if anybody has been there, are ... small farms (I know that there's cities too, but over the 75 miles between Worcester and Norwich, the only noteable establishment is Zips Diner)... and so I think that there is a compassion for the man who many conservatives feel betrayed them--ESPECIALLY wit this decision.

Anyway, take this for what you will. It's not a doctoral thesis or anything that I can pull statistics out and say "these people approve, these people don't." There is a general disinterest in the whole ruling around here... the only liberal people whom I know know about it are my liberal friends ... and that's only because I continue to harp on it trying to use it as a stake to drive into them. Even my conservative friends don't really know that much about it. There's a sort of apathetic silence to the issue... even the 'watchdog' groups have barely covered it. HEre you have a person who is $50,000 indebted to the town of New London, who's house was taken away, and who has ABSOLUTELY nothing ... close to a million dollars of assets are gone. SHe's been the lead petitioner in a five year old scotus trial ... and not a word has been said about her... she's not even in the news papers. You have a woman whose son died and she petitions the president for 10 days or so, and it's front and center of every local and national newspaper in the country.

[Aziraphale]

Originally Posted by Loote

I LIVE two minutes drive from New London in Waterford. First off, New London apart from Pequot Ave and some nieghboring roads is falling apart. Most of the areas are falling apart or are subcoming to "ghetto". If the sub base in Groton closes, I can't imagine what will still be in Groton besides some tumbleweed blowing around. Its honestly terrible. Besides Pfizer and the subbase, Millstone (nuclear power plant) is all that is left, and is on the end of its lifecycle. The casinos dont benefit CT much more than providing lots of low paying jobs, with not much room for climbing the ladder if your not indian. And due to the fact that its a reservation the state does not get taxes from the casinos. South Eastern CT is in for a world of hurt if the sub base closes and things keep going the way they are.

All QFT.

Just a question--
I don't live in CT, but in Massachusetts, so my only contact with Connecticutians on <i>Kelo</i> are from whom I've worked with and people from CT who go to my school (Assumption College in Woostah). My girlfriend lives in Norwich, as do some friends of mine (of course, they all are NAvy families whose fathers now work at Millstone), and all of them have agreed that they have heard nothing. When I asked them about it, they told me that the issue must be in New Britain, not New London, because they haven't heard a peep ... and that I must be mixing up the two.