Eminent Domain Plaintiff Will Keep Her House
BOSTON — Susette Kelo, who lent her name to a lawsuit that ignited a firestorm around the practice of eminent domain, will not lose her Connecticut home to a wrecking ball, as she had feared when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the city of New London could build homes, offices and hotels in her neighborhood.
Under an agreement announced Friday, Kelo's quaint, peach-colored house will be moved to another location. Kelo, 49, can remain in the 19th-century cottage at its present waterfront location for as long as a year, until a new site is selected.
No financial details were released on the transaction that was weeks in the making.
"I am not happy about giving up my property, but I am very glad that my home, which means so much to me, will not be demolished and I will remain living in it," Kelo said Friday.
In the waterfront district of Fort Trumbull, Kelo and fellow homeowner Pasquale Cristofaro were the last plaintiffs in the landmark case of Kelo vs. City of New London to reach an accord with the city. The Cristofaro home will be razed, but the family will be able to buy a new home in the area at an undisclosed fixed price.
The case pitted seven property owners in a working-class area close to where the Thames River flows into Long Island Sound against state and local officials who wanted to revitalize the area with a commercial project. The goals were to generate more tax revenue and expand employment opportunities in the tired old city.
In a 5-4 decision last June, the Supreme Court gave governments the right to seize private property and transfer it to another private owner in the interest of economic development.
Specifically, the court held that the use of eminent domain for economic development was not in conflict with the public-use clauses of the state and federal constitutions.
The expanded interpretation of the ancient practice known as eminent domain prompted legislators in nearly every state to draft measures to protect owners of private property. Eminent domain usually had been employed when governments wanted to build highways, bridges or public buildings -- not office parks, restaurants, town houses, shops and hotels, as have been proposed for the site.
The court's action also produced a flood of new commercial proposals around the country, as developers sought to turn the decision to their benefit.
- Officials Seek to Block Airport Settlement Jul 15, 1999
- Property rights measures offer 2 degrees of limits Oct 24, 2006
- Use of Eminent Domain Will Be on June 6 Ballot Mar 01, 2006
