Two decades after the city gave over development rights to a company whose sprawling project never materialized, those who remain in the Poppleton neighborhood decry what they were left with – demolition and displacement.

Yesterday lawyers for the city and the developer, hit with a citizens’ lawsuit, tried to convince a federal judge to throw out the case, arguing that the six residents who filed the action had not themselves been displaced and therefore did not have legal standing.

“They seem to be stepping into the shoes of third parties who are not actually here,” said Thomas Webb of the city law department.

Speaking on behalf of the Poppleton Now Community Association and the individual plaintiffs, attorney Jordan Rosenfeld disagreed, saying his clients are now living in “a hollowed-out neighborhood.”

“They’ve each been harmed dramatically,” Rosenfeld told U.S. District Judge Adam B. Abelson, arguing the impact of the failed development can be seen every day outside plaintiff Sonia Eaddy’s home.

“When Ms. Eaddy steps out onto her doorstep and sees vacant lots, overgrown lots, rats and trash, that is the responsibility of these defendants,” Rosenfeld asserted. “The defendants made that happen.”

Rosenfeld and co-counsel Thomas K. Prevas said the 2006 Land Development and Disposition Agreement (LDDA) that gave New York developer La Cité exclusive rights over more than 13 acres in Poppleton is unconstitutional.

As a result of that agreement, more than 500 homes in one of Baltimore’s oldest Black communities were targeted for acquisition by the city housing department through eminent domain.

While the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that government “takings” for a project that benefits the public are permissible, the Poppleton LDDA was “just a pretext to deliver private benefit,” Rosenfeld said.

The project was supposed to bring 1,800 units of affordable and upscale housing as well as a hotel, retail stores, a park and a charter school. But despite HUD construction loans and city tax increment (TIF) subsidies, all that’s been built is a 262-unit apartment complex that owes hundreds of thousands of dollars in unpaid water bills.

Dixon’s Magazine Spread

The arguments were the first to be heard by Abelson in a case filed last October, which names as defendants Mayor Brandon Scott, Housing Commissioner Alice Kennedy, the Housing Authority of Baltimore City and its president, Janet Abrahams.

It also names former Mayor Sheila Dixon, who was city council president when the original deal was struck.

The lawsuit points to a 2005 feature story on Dixon that ran in Essence, noting that the magazine’s editorial director, Susan Taylor, was an investor and partner in La Cité.

Dixon’s trip to New York for a photo shoot and flattering publicity by the magazine, the lawsuit alleges, were behind the city’s decision to choose the untested firm La Cité, reversing an earlier decision by an impartial review panel that ranked the developer near the bottom of applicants.

“Ms. Dixon is the genesis of the unconstitutional LDDA,” Rosenfeld said, a claim that Dixon’s lawyer, Zoe Rydzewski, said was unproven.

“Ms. Dixon is the genesis of the unconstitutional LDDA”  – Plaintiff Attorney Jordan Rosenfeld.

Anthony Phillips, representing La Cité, told the judge he found it “frustrating” to hear the plaintiffs’ claim that the Dixon magazine article and LDDA decision “are somehow connected because they were close together in time.”

“Within a week,” the judge noted from the bench, prompting laughter in the courtroom.

La Cité’s political connections were described in detail in 2015 by Baltimore City Paper and more recently by the Baltimore Banner. Yesterday, La Cité’s president, Dan Bythewood Jr., sat silently as the quid pro quo allegations played out in court.

“He’s been sued by everyone for everything,” Prevas said of Bythewood.

La Cité currently faces two lawsuits by the city for nearly $800,000 in delinquent water bills at its only completed apartment buildings. In August, a private equity firm sued over missed deadlines for a proposed senior apartment complex.

Addressing Judge Abelson, Prevas accused Bythewood of holding Poppleton “hostage.”

“He’s saying. ‘We’re not going to develop it, and you can’t develop it either,’” Prevas  exclaimed. “The developer is sitting on the property and has never done anything and never will do anything. He’s saying. ‘I own this land. Pay me what I want for it.’”

La Cité’s attorney, meanwhile, challenged the assertion that the developer’s inaction has hurt residential property values.

“It’s impossible to say the timing of the LDDA is in any way the cause of a diminution in value,” Phillips said. In its motion to dismiss the case, La Cité blames the city and the 2007-09 Great Recession for the years of delays.

Judge Abelson did not immediately rule on the defendants’ motion.

Taking Action on Their Own

Outside the courtroom, residents said they filed the lawsuit because they had run out of patience.

After the housing department announced last year it was canceling the agreement with La Cité, community members thought they were rid of the developer.

City officials appeared to be supportive of the residents’ own planning process, which identified banks and developers to help them rebuild the neighborhood. But a promised community walk-though with city officials never happened, Eaddy said.

 “We were tired of being disrespected and disregarded”  – Sonia Eaddy.

Then it emerged that La Cité was being allowed to partner with a homebuilder to do a project on city-owned land, and residents realized the city was working with Bythewood behind their back.

“We were tired of being disrespected and disregarded,” said Eaddy on the courthouse steps. “When time kept going and nothing was happening for us, we were going to have to take action of our own.”

Eaddy and her husband, Curtis Eaddy Sr., are two of the six residents named as plaintiffs. The others are Sterling Walker, Francina Walker, Yvonne Gunn and William H. Gunn Jr., all Poppleton residents and homeowners.

Among the lawsuit’s arguments is a claim that the project violated equal protection and due process clauses under the U.S. Constitution.

“Poppleton was targeted by this developer for private interests because it was an underprivileged and minority community, yet had potential future market value due to its proximity to the University of Maryland Medical Center,” the lawsuit says, adding:

“In no possible universe could this project or transaction ever have occurred in Guilford, Homeland, Roland Park or Ruxton.”

The 63-page complaint asks the judge to find the land use agreement void, and to order La Cité to return any improper payments it made to the city, with the proceeds used to invest in Poppleton.

The lawsuit also seeks the return of the value taken from Poppleton through eminent domain. The residents’ lawyers place this value at a minimum of $15 million.