Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

City wants back rent from Kelo residents
world net daily ^ | August 20, 2005

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

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; US: Connecticut
KEYWORDS: civilwarii; dictatorship; eminentdomain; getarope; kelo; nukethebastards; propertyrights
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-103 next last
To: bad company

Holy Christ! This is just horrid.


61 posted on 08/20/2005 1:34:43 PM PDT by Types_with_Fist (I'm on FReep so often that when I read an article at another site I scroll down for the comments.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bad company

I'm not sure you can demand rent from someone who has not signed and agreed to a lease.

Meanwhile, can someone remind me which corporations are being rewarded for their compassion for the public interest with the titles to these peoples homes? I think those corporations have an opportunity to speak now.


62 posted on 08/20/2005 1:36:17 PM PDT by Sam Cree (Democrats are herd animals)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sam Cree
Meanwhile, can someone remind me which corporations are being rewarded for their compassion for the public interest with the titles to these peoples homes?

pfizer is the corp that is t aking these homes for thier new corprate offices

63 posted on 08/20/2005 1:42:06 PM PDT by freepatriot32 (Deep within every dilemma is a solution that involves explosives)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: OldFriend

Grind the poor to powder. So that is the plan. You need to fight this or we all go down.


64 posted on 08/20/2005 2:07:07 PM PDT by carumba
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: freepatriot32

Thanks. If WorldNetDaily has this right, Pfizer needs to come forward now.


65 posted on 08/20/2005 2:09:16 PM PDT by Sam Cree (Democrats are herd animals)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: bad company
I've come to hate all things authoritative.
66 posted on 08/20/2005 2:11:55 PM PDT by Porterville (Liberal Babyboomers will by anything that stinks of hippy.... So crap on a stick and sell baby sell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: carumba
NJ has something called the Highlands Act. Supposedly to protect ground water.

Essentially it forbids people from developing their land in a certain part of the state, while allowing all the development in the parts of the state where the majority of the elected officials live.

This is no different than TAKING or EMINENT DOMAIN.

The pols decided who shall be able to develop their land and who may not. AFTER the land was bought and paid for under entirely different laws.

67 posted on 08/20/2005 2:41:10 PM PDT by OldFriend (MERCY TO THE GUILTY IS CRUELTY TO THE INNOCENT ~ Adam Smith)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: bikepacker67

"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.

The only 'settlement' should be under the Second Amendment.

It confirms, that "all politics is local -- and they are the worst."


68 posted on 08/20/2005 2:44:21 PM PDT by Gaffer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: bad company

These Kelo city officials really have no clue just how dispicable they are do they?


69 posted on 08/20/2005 2:45:49 PM PDT by trubluolyguy (If you think you're having a bad day, try crucifixtion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gardener

The only way I can see if the 'city' can charge rent is IF they 'paid' them for the fair market value at the time of the condemnation, and paid the homeowners interest on the money if they never actually gave it to them.


70 posted on 08/20/2005 2:46:26 PM PDT by Gaffer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Tennessee_Bob

"I can't say what I'm thinking, not on here at least"


I am in total agreement.


Bastards.


71 posted on 08/20/2005 2:46:38 PM PDT by trubluolyguy (If you think you're having a bad day, try crucifixtion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Rifleman

"Carl Drega"


Who?


72 posted on 08/20/2005 2:47:41 PM PDT by trubluolyguy (If you think you're having a bad day, try crucifixtion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

Comment #73 Removed by Moderator

To: combat_boots

My father would go down shooting before some beaurocrat took his house.


74 posted on 08/20/2005 2:49:44 PM PDT by trubluolyguy (If you think you're having a bad day, try crucifixtion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: fella

Can't wait to hear what the Israeli's say when Hamas sends them a bill"


How DOES one say F$*K off in hebrew?


75 posted on 08/20/2005 2:57:08 PM PDT by trubluolyguy (If you think you're having a bad day, try crucifixtion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: bad company

tar & feathers.


76 posted on 08/20/2005 2:59:18 PM PDT by adam_az (It's the border, stupid!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Smile-n-Win

Ping

Commentary, articles on the kelo case:
http://www.neoperspectives.com/scotuspropertythieving.htm


77 posted on 08/20/2005 3:07:33 PM PDT by traviskicks (http://www.neoperspectives.com/janicerogersbrown.htm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: trubluolyguy
My father would go down shooting before some beaurocrat took his house.

When I heard about the Kelo decision, I said to a friend that eventually, someone's going to die because of this decision... Hasn't happened yet, but I have no doubt that it will.

Mark

78 posted on 08/20/2005 6:38:11 PM PDT by MarkL (It was a shocking cock-up. The mice were furious!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: bad company

I suggest that the city owes back interest in at least the same amounts due for back rent. Unless the owners have already received the money from the city for their property. Then they might be screwed.


79 posted on 08/20/2005 6:47:36 PM PDT by RGSpincich
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bad company

Rotten b*st*rds. Is it still too early to shoot them?


80 posted on 08/20/2005 6:51:55 PM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks (Hey, Cindy Sheehan, grow up!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-103 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson