That, sadly, is where we appear to be in the continuing battle over property rights in Connecticut that reached its apex last year when the Supreme Court of the United States issued its hopefully soon-to-be-infamous decision in Kelo v. City of New London.
NEW LONDON, Conn. — City officials voted to evict two residents whose refusal to give up their riverfront houses helped lead to the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark ruling that governments may seize property for private development projects.
The City Council voted 5-2 in favor of eviction Monday. An attorney for the residents said they are considering continuing to fight.
“You are a disgrace to the city, the state and the nation,” one of the residents, Michael Cristofaro, told council members who voted to evict.
It would be hard to find, I think, a better example of what speaking truth to power really means. Sadly, Mr. Cristofaro’s words had little impact on most members of the New London City Council, though there was some hope:
Charles Frink, one of the two council members who voted against the plan, said supporters should admit their mistake.
“I can’t accept a possible reduction in taxes by having neighbors thrown out of their property,” he said. “This is morally abhorrent to me. I refuse to profit from my neighbor’s pain.”
If only his fellow member of the City Council, not to mention the Supreme Court of the United States, felt the same way.
