No Land Grab

January 2000 The Planning and Zoning Commission, Redevelopment Agency, City Council and New London Development Corp. approve the Fort Trumbull development plan.

May 8, 2000 The NLDC votes to begin taking 11 properties by eminent domain.

Sept. 5, 2000 The City Council rescinds an earlier decision that prevented the NLDC from razing buildings in Parcel 4A where the city hopes a Coast Guard museum will be built.

Sept. 20, 2000 The Coalition to Save Fort Trumbull submits a petition with more than 400 signatures to the City Council to save Fort Trumbull homes from demolition.

Oct. 2, 2000 The city's law director rules that a petition asking for a referendum on Fort Trumbull demolition is invalid.

October 2000 The NLDC votes to use eminent domain to acquire the last 22 properties it needs to transform the Fort Trumbull peninsula into a maritime village.

November 2000 The NLDC offers 11 property owners, including Susette Kelo and Matthew Dery, more than $2.7 million for their properties. They reject the offers.

Dec. 19, 2000 The Institute for Justice agrees to represent more than a half dozen Fort Trumbull residents in a lawsuit against the city and NLDC.

Feb. 21, 2001 The city, NLDC and property owners reach an agreement under which the Fort Trumbull residents will be able to stay in their homes while the eminent domain case is heard in court.

March 13, 2002Connecticut Superior Court Judge Thomas J. Corradino rules on the eminent domain lawsuit.

March 18, 2002 Fort Trumbull property owners announce they will file an appeal with the state Supreme Court.

August 2002 The city and NLDC file appeal briefs asking the state Supreme Court to overturn the lower court ruling.

October 2002 City Council grants the NLDC a two-year extension of its eminent domain powers in Fort Trumbull area.

December 2002 State Supreme Court hears arguments in the eminent domain case.

March 3, 2004 The state Supreme Court affirms NLDC's right to take property at Fort Trumbull by eminent domain.

Sept. 28, 2000 The U.S. Supreme Court agrees to hear Kelo et al v. City of New London, essentially deciding when governments may seize people's property for economic development projects.