John Brooks, executive director of the New London Development Corp
Katie Nelson ,an Associated Press writer catches up with me and Newsbusters
in a new AP piece circulating this week about Kelo V. New London.
She writes......"Weeds, glass, bricks, pieces of pipe and shingle splinters have replaced the knot of aging homes at the site of the nation's most notorious eminent domain project.
There are a few signs of life: Feral cats glare at visitors from a miniature jungle of Queen Anne's lace, thistle and goldenrod. Gulls swoop between the lot's towering trees and the adjacent sewage treatment plant." Read her story here
New London Connecticut didn't get what they wanted from Kelo Vs. New London. They got a national reputation for being a city that didn't care about their residents.
On a positive note
On January 25, 2006, BB&T announced through a press release that it would not lend money to developers to build commercial projects on land purchased from private citizens by the government through the power of eminent domain. This was a reaction to the United States Supreme Court's decision in Kelo v. New London in 2005 that such transfers are permissible.
What BB&T said may be nice, but I am afraid it is not a solution. Six months from now they will most likely quietly forget they ever said anything. Corporations are inherently amoral, particularly when government policies encourage them to focus on short term profits.
ReplyDeleteThe only real solution is a Conservative Supreme Court. We need to get nonsense like Kelo Vs. New London reversed. So thanks for keeping a focus on this issue.