Posted on 08/20/2005 4:01:48 AM PDT by bad company
This is a WorldNetDaily printer-friendly version of the article which follows. To view this item online, visit http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=45851
Saturday, August 20, 2005
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- THIS LAND WAS YOUR LAND City wants back rent from Kelo residents Expects homeowners who lost case to pay hundreds of thousands
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Posted: August 20, 2005 1:00 a.m. Eastern
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- © 2005 WorldNetDaily.com In the adding insult to injury category, the city officials that triumphed over a group of Connecticut homeowners in a landmark Supreme Court property-rights case are expecting those residents to pay the local government rent dating back to the year 2000.
The June 23 Supreme Court ruling in Kelo v. City of New London gave the town the approval to seize the residents' homes and transfer them to a private party for development of an office complex. In the highly controversial decision, the justices ruled 5-4 that the economic development resulting from the eminent domain action qualified as "public use" under the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution.
The city now says that since it won the case, the homeowners actually have been living on city property since 2000 when it first began condemnation procedures against them, so they must pay back rent – to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars.
"It's a new definition of chutzpah: Confiscate land and charge back rent for the years the owners fought confiscation," wrote Jonathan O'Connell in the Fairfield County Weekly.
Not only is the city demanding rent, but the buyout offers on the table are based on the market rate as it was in 2000, before most of the growth in the current real-estate bubble.
The New London Development Corporation, the semi-public organization hired by the city to facilitate the deal, first addressed the rent issue in a June 2004 letter to residents, calling the alleged debt retroactive "use and occupancy" payments.
"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," the agency said. It 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.
The Kelo case is named after Susette Kelo, who owns a single-family house in New London with her husband. Kelo was told she would owe around $57,000 in rent.
"I'd leave here broke," Kelo told the weekly. "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."
Matt Dery owns four houses on the building site, including the home his 87-year-old mother was born in and still lives in. Dery's past-due rent, according to the city, exceeds $300,000.
It remains to be seen if a suit will be filed against the residents.
"From a political standpoint, the city might be better off trying to reach some settlement with the homeowners," Jeremy Paul, an associate UConn law dean who teaches property law, told the paper.
Related stories:
Souter-home seizer to meet with residents
Effort to take Breyer's home moving ahead
Justice Breyer: 'Not all our decisions are right'
Eminent domania comes to the movies
Eminent domania!
Souter-home campaign targets pols
Movement builds to seize Souter home
Souter suitor wants a real hotel company
Supreme Court justice faces boot from home?
Property battle heads to states
High court's property decision stirs anger
Court rules cities can seize homes
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
That's my thought too.
Not that either one of us endorse it, of course.
But Mother of God! What they are doing is obscene.
Makes you glad your fathers aren't alive to see this, and makes you think about your forebears.
If I said anything else, my account would be banned.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1467141/posts
Link to article on land confiscated by Cuba posted just today.
I am surprised this situation didn't happen on the side opposite of the Old North Church on the James River.
The root cause of the problem here is the MORONS who ELECTED the flea brained officials in the first place. The officials cant help it, since they are just puss filled infections on society, they are just doing what comes natural.
If people are not to be held responsible for their vote, then why vote?
Huh?!?!?! I must have missed that one? Do you have a link?
On the east coast, the supreme court take the house of a taxpayer and gives it to a developer.
In Kansas City, there was this guy (Clay Chastain) who I think is well meaning, but something of a crack-pot, who was trying for years and years to get "Light Rail" on the ballot in KC. The city and the local press fought him tooth and nail, going so far as to break the law to keep it off the ballot (the court ruled that KC had to have a special election because of the illegal acts of the city!) Well, after a few failed attempts, all of a suddon, the city (led by Emmanual Cleaver, former mayor, and current congress-critter) decided that a "New and Improved Light Rail" would actually be a good thing. So they started really pushing it... Eventually some facts about the "New and Improved Light Rail" began to come out... Things like how it wouldn't even begin to cover important areas on KC that really needed it, like going to the airport. In fact, it was only going to traverse areas where there would be good money to be made for developers... And buried deep in the bill was a little gem... That the city could use eminent domain to condemn any property 100 yards on either side of the proposed tracks to give to developers.
As vocal a champion for Light Rail as Chastain had been over the years, he fought this new version, and helped defeat it.
This used to happen only in third worls countries.
Robert Mugabbe would be proud!
Mark This used to happen only in third worls countries.
Um,what are they thinking?
First they take their homes and then they want rent for something the people owned until the court decided they had to give up their homes.
How are those people supposed to live?
I don't get it, if they paid property taxes during that period, either the rent or the property taxes are fraudulent charges.
This case clearly proves that it is all about money.
I wonder how many of those city employees will still own their homes in 10 - 15 years. Once the prices go up in one area or neighborhood they will eventually go up in others. I hope they enjoy a 40 mile drive each way in bad weather on crowded roads with gas costing 3 times what it does today (see sections of Florida for the validity of those statements).
The other group of (many many bad words deleted many times over) criminals in this farce is the development councle. Non-paid “volunteers” that really pushed this issue. Those are the names and photos that need to distributed nation wide since they are a major tap root of this evil plant with the city councile and various courts the visible top.
Instead of the “shot heard around the word” this might be the “stamp seen around the world.”
More like....grand theft larceny
NO LONGER A JOKE .....
One man says to a second man: "Do you believe in the First Amendment freedom of speech?"
The second man says: "Of course I do."
The first man then asks: "Do you believe in the Second Amendment freedom to bear arms?"
The second man replies: "No, I don't."
The first man insists: "Then shut up!"
The moral of the story is: you can have your rights, but you have to protect and defend them, too.
This is a maneuver by the thieves and their crafty lawyers.
Leni
They still have elections there don't they???
Sorry I don't have a link; I just heard it in passing.
It seems a farmer pistol whipped some illegals while traspassing on his land, they sued and he got 5 yrs. While in jail they brought up a civil suit against him, but because he was in jail, did not testify, the judge found him guilt by defaul and granted the illegals $875K, then gave them the farm in lieu of cash
If mexico has it's way, we will be under mexican rule, and they will be handing our homes away. That is the main reason why I keep harping on the Illegal Immigration thing.
See post 24.
The people who put the plunderers in, are the ones responsible. This is one of the reasons the secret ballot is dangerous. If citizens are afraid to stand up and publicly declare their decisions, it provides cover for the sleaze bags. Think of it this way, they have roll call votes in legislative bodies, for accountability. If the power of the legislatures is derived from the people, then people should be held to the highest standard, to set the example for those elected.
When the legislatures act in behalf of a vaguely defined "people", crap like Kelo happens.
Migrants awarded vigilante's Ariz. ranch
and..
No Black Helicopters Needed - Just Black Robes
Outrageous Beyond Words...
The riot scenes from "Gangs of New York" come to mind when I read this.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.