AP’s Kelo-New London June 5 Coverage, Part 2: They ‘Forgot’ to Show Us the Money Council Wants

While the Associated Press, as shown in Part 1, has been FALSELY telling us how the homes of the Kelo holdouts are “riverfront” and “waterfront” properties, they managed to miss this “teeny tiny” point in their reports on Council’s vote to evict Susette Kelo and Mike/Pasquale Cristofaro, reported by Elaine Stoll at The New London Day (Day link will require registration after one day, and a paid subscription after one week):

New London votes to proceed with property seizures

….. The motion, which instructed city Law Director Thomas Londregan “to proceed with the process to obtain possession of the properties,” also instructed him to “obtain past due taxes and rents collected from third parties and/or reasonable use and occupancy fees.”

This means, as far as New London’s Council and the New London Development Corporation (NLDC) are concerned, Kelo and the Cristofaros are liable for whatever the Lords of New London believe is their applicable portion of the $946,000 in taxes, rents, and fees that were demanded from the then-six holdouts in mid-May when the Council reiterated its May 31 deadline.

Hey, AP — Doncha think the rest of the nation deserves to know that the Council and the NLDC are for all practical purposes in the same place they were last summer, when their outrageous financial demands and eviction notices (issued, then as now, in defiance of the Governor’s efforts at mediation) brought on a torrent of national outrage?

Most of the nation does not and will not, as long as it depends on AP for original news reporting of the situation, know the entire truth — that Council’s majority, armed with an unsconscionable Supreme Court decision, and apparently not burdened by a conscience, has moved to evict Kelo and the Cristofaros:

• Despite their willingness to have their houses moved.
• Despite their willingness to accept less than squeaky clean titles to their properties (transferable but only to immediate family members; the City has would have right of first refusal on any other attempts to transfer).
• Despite the hypocrisy of allowing the high-powered and politically-connected Italian Dramatic Club to stay right where it is.
• Despite the fact that the current land-use plan for the area where the homes are to be moved is for ….. mixed-use residential development.
• Despite their state governor’s recommendation of a solution that would have worked out fine for everyone.

At least there’s no reason to wonder why blogs have to exist.