A castle or a hassle?

• Article
• Comments ()
• Click-2-Listen
• Videos

By

One year ago yesterday, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled my home could be taken by the government and handed over to another private party for their private use. The only requirements are that the city must have some plan in place that says another owner could create more jobs and pay more taxes than I do. There went my property rights, and yours too.

Hardly a day goes by as I work in my garden or have a cup of coffee in my kitchen, both of which overlook the Thames River and the Long Island Sound, that I don't ask myself this question: "If I had to do it all over again, would I?" Even on my worst days, and there have been many, my answer is always the same: absolutely yes.

In February 1998 I first heard Pfizer was coming to town. I remember thinking this would be trouble for us in the Fort Trumbull neighborhood located right next door. Little did I know how prophetic that thought was.

I immediately phoned then-Mayor Lloyd Beachy, who shared my concern and would take the side of homeowners. He suggested I call a local activist to see what I could do to defend my home. Since that day, Lloyd and thousands of others have become my sounding boards, my comrades in arms, and my best friends. More than 500 came to New London from as far away as Kentucky and Texas for a rally last July 5 to protest the notorious Supreme Court decision that carries my name. Without their help and support and that of the Institute for Justice, my fight would have been over years ago.

Where do I stand at this point and what do I think should happen now? Since I am still in my home and still battling to keep it, I think what I have thought from the beginning: This is my home, and no one has the right to take it from me, especially for the vague concept of "economic development." I tell you honestly and from my heart that nothing will cause me to change my goals or my values.

Mark Twain once wrote: "Don?t part with your illusions. When they are gone, you may still exist, but you have ceased to live." My illusion has been, and will continue to be, that my home is mine. Had the City of New London needed our homes for a school or a fire station, we would have understood it was truly a "public use" and we would have complied. But there is no public use here. Building a hotel or upscale condominiums so someone else can live there is not a public use or even a public purpose. The sad truth is there are no specific plans for the land where our homes stand.

Where do I stand at this point? Exactly where I stood almost eight years ago: uncertain of the outcome and unsure of my future.

What do I think should happen now? What I thought should happen eight years ago. I and the Cristofaro family should be allowed to keep our homes and live our lives in peace. We should be able to pass these homes on to our children and grandchildren. This is America, isn't it? Doesn't that simple desire define the safety and security of the American Dream? That is the dream Justices Antony Kennedy and John Paul Stevens and David Souter and Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer gave away.

In September 2005, when we again received eviction notices, Connecticut Gov. Jodi Rell intervened on our behalf asking the New London Development Corp. to rescind those notices and declare a moratorium on eminent domain until the legislature had time to consider a bill that would Connecticut protect property owners. An informal moratorium is in place to protect those whose homes were condemned after mine, but it was not retroactive. The legislature failed to act and now Connecticut property owners are right back in the same boat I find myself in.

These has been eight stressful years. More often than not, I wake up exhausted, discouraged and wonder if this is all worth it. But even though I?ve lost my rights, and I've lost my property, I cannot quit. I want to keep my home.

The threat of eminent domain continues even though the governor has asked that our homes be incorporated into the redevelopment project. The city council rejected that suggestion and chose to evict us. We now face the very real prospect that when the wrecking crew is trundling down the road that the city councilors . . . my own city officials who are supposed to protect my rights... will have us dragged from our homes.

I and others who remain, outraged by this gross violation of our basic civil rights, still plan to keep our homes. That's how much they mean to us. We plan to keep fighting.

A day of reckoning will come to all. We will all answer for things we've done or failed to do. On that day, I would much rather be me than the people trying to take my home.

Susette Kelo was the lead plaintiff in Kelo v. City of New London, in which the U.S. Supreme Court ruled last year that private property could be taken for private economic development.