Part 1 (1/2)
Little Pink House_ A True Story of Defiance and Courage.
by Jeff Benedict.
To Josephine, my grandmother.
I wrote much of this book in the attic of her home. Many afternoons she trudged up the attic steps and quietly placed a grilled-cheese sandwich on my desk before saying, ”You keep writing, kid.” She knew I didn't have time to stop for lunch. My grandmother loved this story and couldn't wait to read the finished product. Sadly, she never will. On January 15, 2008, Josephine died suddenly, shortly before I finished writing. If only I could have written faster.
AUTHOR'S NOTE
Eminent domain is the government's power to take private property for public use. n.o.body particularly likes it. But occasionally it's essential to make way for roads, schools, hospitals, and the like. And Americans accept this practice as long as deprived property owners receive due process and just compensation. Under the Fifth Amendment, that's been the American way since the Framers drafted our Const.i.tution.
But the Supreme Court changed the rules in 2005 when it decided Kelo v. City of New London. Kelo v. City of New London. Now local and state governments can take private property from an individual and transfer it to a private developer in hopes of generating more tax revenue or creating jobs. The Now local and state governments can take private property from an individual and transfer it to a private developer in hopes of generating more tax revenue or creating jobs. The Kelo Kelo decision equated these public decision equated these public benefits benefits with public with public uses uses.
Under this interpretation, there's no telling where the government's power to take private property ends. ”The specter of condemnation hangs over all property,” Justice Sandra Day O'Connor wrote in a blistering dissent in Kelo Kelo. ”Nothing is to prevent the State from replacing any Motel 6 with a Ritz-Carlton, any home with a shopping mall, or any farm with a factory.”
The Kelo Kelo case is infamous. But the stirring story behind what drove Susette Kelo-a divorced nurse-to take on a powerful governor, a billion-dollar corporation, and a hard-charging development agency to save her pink cottage is a hidden drama that begs to be exposed. On one level, it's a uniquely American saga about power and defiance that makes the Supreme Court decision even harder to swallow. But at its core, this story is about pride, a virtue that breeds self-respect and a condition that is first among the seven cardinal sins. case is infamous. But the stirring story behind what drove Susette Kelo-a divorced nurse-to take on a powerful governor, a billion-dollar corporation, and a hard-charging development agency to save her pink cottage is a hidden drama that begs to be exposed. On one level, it's a uniquely American saga about power and defiance that makes the Supreme Court decision even harder to swallow. But at its core, this story is about pride, a virtue that breeds self-respect and a condition that is first among the seven cardinal sins.
Little Pink House is an inside account of how a political street fight over a neighborhood escalated into a high-stakes federal case. It's the unsanitized version that the Supreme Court never heard. And it's told by the people who lived it-the residents whose homes were taken; the local officials who authorized the takings; the development agency that designed the plan; the state officials who supplied the money; a is an inside account of how a political street fight over a neighborhood escalated into a high-stakes federal case. It's the unsanitized version that the Supreme Court never heard. And it's told by the people who lived it-the residents whose homes were taken; the local officials who authorized the takings; the development agency that designed the plan; the state officials who supplied the money; a Fortune Fortune 500 company that stood to benefit; and lawyers who fought ferociously over whether this was right or wrong. All of these parties cooperated for this book. 500 company that stood to benefit; and lawyers who fought ferociously over whether this was right or wrong. All of these parties cooperated for this book.
Between November 2005 and March 2008, I conducted close to three hundred on-the-record interviews. I also received via e-mail well over one hundred written responses to factual queries I posed to partic.i.p.ants. Most of these queries involved detailed follow-up questions to prior interviews.
I also had access to deposition transcripts, video and audio recordings of meetings and events, and many doc.u.ments (internal corporate correspondence, internal government memos, and lawyers' private notes), as well as private papers and correspondence, such as journals, diaries, and e-mails. In all, I obtained enough doc.u.ments-including voluminous records obtained under the freedom-of-information laws, court papers, press reports, and photographs and maps-to fill more than a dozen large, plastic storage containers.
My primary objective in this is to tell a compelling story that is true to the characters who shaped this historic case. I am deeply grateful to individuals on all sides who afforded me their time and helped me understand this complex story about people whose struggle ultimately s.h.i.+fted one of the most enduring principles of our democracy.
Perhaps no writer had more influence on English common law and American jurisprudence than seventeenth-century English jurist Sir Edward c.o.ke. He penned one of the most famous lines of all time: ”A man's house is his castle-et domus sua cuique est tutissimum refugium.” The Latin portion of the sentence is less well known. The loose translation is: ”and where shall a man be safe if it be not in his own house?”
Amazingly, after Kelo v. City of New London Kelo v. City of New London, c.o.ke's comment may be more relevant now than when the American colonists rebelled against the king.
Jeff BenedictApril 8, 2008Buena Vista, Virginia
ON CAPITOL HILL.
September 20, 2005 U.S. Senate Chambers Was.h.i.+ngton, D.C.
Clutching her notes and wearing heels, a gray skirt, and a white blouse, Susette Kelo approached the witness table, hoping the senators noticed her salmon-pink sweater. It matched the color of her house and had sneaker prints across the front, signifying ”They walked all over me.”
”Are you nervous?” her attorney, Scott Bullock, asked.
”Not too bad.”
”You'll be fine,” he said, patting her on the shoulder.
Facing a panel of senators, she sat down, grabbed a pitcher of water, and poured herself a drink. Bullock took a seat in the first row behind her.
Senator Arlen Specter pounded the gavel.
”Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. The Senate Judiciary Committee will now proceed with a hearing on the issue of the right to take private property under what is called the doctrine of eminent domain for public use. Our hearing is prompted by the recent decision just a few months ago, in June, by the Supreme Court of the United States in a case captioned Kelo v. City of New London Kelo v. City of New London, where private property was taken for the use of a private company, Pfizer.”
Specter indicated that he and Senator Patrick Leahy had just been across the street in a conference with Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens. They had been discussing the harsh criticism generated against the Court by the Kelo Kelo decision. As the author of the majority opinion, Justice Stevens didn't particularly appreciate all the fire the decision had been under. But Specter insisted the matter required congressional review. decision. As the author of the majority opinion, Justice Stevens didn't particularly appreciate all the fire the decision had been under. But Specter insisted the matter required congressional review.
”The Fifth Amendment,” Specter continued, ”prohibits the government from taking private property unless it does so for a public use and with just compensation ... But the Kelo Kelo case goes a significant step further and takes it for economic development, where there are jobs, increased taxes, and other revenues. The issue, which the Congress has authority to act on-this is not a const.i.tutional issue where the Supreme Court is the last word-is to determine as a matter of public policy whether this is a wise, appropriate taking of private property.” case goes a significant step further and takes it for economic development, where there are jobs, increased taxes, and other revenues. The issue, which the Congress has authority to act on-this is not a const.i.tutional issue where the Supreme Court is the last word-is to determine as a matter of public policy whether this is a wise, appropriate taking of private property.”
Specter yielded to Senator Leahy, who declared his respect for private-property rights. Leahy looked Susette in the eye and continued, ”Ms. Kelo, I am probably one of millions of Americans who were distressed when we learned your story. We are concerned about what happened to you ... It has been said that tough cases make bad laws. It can also be said that bad law can lead to bad remedies, and so we are going to have to figure out the best way to do this.”
When the senators' preliminary remarks concluded, Specter introduced Susette as the first witness. ”Despite her loss before the Supreme Court,” Specter said, ”she continues to inspire and advocate for a return to sensible eminent-domain policy. Thank you for what you are doing, Ms. Kelo, and we look forward to your testimony.”
She took a deep breath.
”I want to thank Chairman Specter and the rest of the Senate Judiciary Committee for the opportunity to testify,” she began. ”My name is Susette Kelo, and I live in New London, Connecticut. I am the Kelo in Kelo v. City of New London Kelo v. City of New London, the now infamous U.S. Supreme Court case.”
She cleared her throat and went on, ”The battle against eminent-domain abuse may have started as a way for me to save my little pink cottage. But it has rightfully grown into something much larger-the fight to restore the American Dream and the sacredness and security of each one of our homes.”
1.
GIMME SHELTER.
Spring 1997 Medic Eleven, come in.”
Forty-year-old EMT Susette Kelo grabbed the paramedic truck's radio receiver. ”This is Medic Eleven.”
”Respond to a man down at First Avenue and Niantic River Road.”
Susette's partner, Jeff Douchette, whipped the wheel around and headed toward Niantic Bay, an inlet off Long Island Sound in southeastern Connecticut.
”Medic Eleven en route,” Susette said.
Married with five sons, Susette Kelo had become an EMT a few years earlier, after a drunk driver crashed head-on into her seventeen-year-old son's vehicle, nearly killing him. Paramedics had helped save her boy's life. Susette had begun volunteering on ambulance runs as a way of giving back.
The experience ultimately convinced her to become a medic. Emergency response offered Susette an escape from her unfulfilling home life in Preston, a small farming community twenty miles from the Connecticut coast. Susette and her husband, John Jorsz, had a ranch house, a barn, and farm animals on four acres. It had been a great place to raise boys. But now all of them except her youngest lived on their own. And with high school graduation approaching, he would soon be gone as well.
She was thinking about moving on, too. Her marriage had soured, the relations.h.i.+p reduced to constant bickering. She felt like her husband showed more affection for the bottle than for her. He felt like she didn't appreciate how hard he worked to provide for them. But it didn't matter who was right; the romance was drained. And with the kids gone and the animals sold, the ranch felt empty and cold.
Susette knew she needed a change in scenery when the highlight of her week had become weekend EMT s.h.i.+fts. Most calls took her to waterfront communities on Long Island Sound. The water had a way of brightening her day.
”There he is,” Douchette said, pulling up beside an elderly man sitting on a sidewalk curb, his feet resting on the street. Sweat saturated his s.h.i.+rt. An elderly woman and some pedestrians huddled around him.
”Grab the monitor,” Douchette said.