Now, Mayor Boughton and city offiicials are claiming that part of Miguel Valverde's property on Casper Street is actually city property. To understand this, you need to go back 60 years to the flood of 1955 when the Still River was rerouted and part of that River is on Valverde's property.
First, you know what's going on here and it very obvious. Boughton and the city officials are trying to pull out off the tricks to close the volleyball game down because the games on Valverde's property is one of the biggest in the city. Second, this will prolong the immigration issue for months because unless Valverde just wants the heat off of him, he's going to take this case to court. Personally, I'd like to see Danbury prove that this is their land as property line cases are not always clear cut and using documentation from the mid-fifites is shaky.
Lastly, again this is simply a case where politicians want to look like their doing something and gain a few political points because immigration is the talk of the day. You didn't hear anything from Boughton last year or the year before that and wasn't Boughton that earlier this year proposed building a area where day workers can gather for work? The mayor doesn't really care about immigrants, he cares about his political life and when his political base complained, he pulled that building proposal off the table and started he crusade against the so-called "illigeal aliens," volleyball games, ads on the windows of stores on Main Street, and whatever else he can find that points to the immigrants.
If you look at the complaints from the neighbors, it's not that they don't like the games, it's that they are played at late hours and they might have a point but that's not how the Mayor and the Common Council want you to believe. They want you to think that "volleyball game " is the problem because all the games bring in alcohol, noise, and traffic problems. Although I said this in a eariler post also, I did not intend to paint the entire scene in this way. I meant it as a few bad apples ruin the whole bunch and the actions of the mayor proves my point
This is a smoke screen and the people in this town are drinking the kool-aid. You never heard of this problem is years past and immigrants from Central America have been here for at least ten years. When will we be able to hear about other issues that are harder to address or problems that are Boughton's creation and should be held accountable for creating such as the increase in condos in the area, the lack of a police contract which is causing policemen to leave the area, an increase in the traffic in the area, the deplorable conditions of our parks although we pay outrageous property taxes, and can't forget that silly Danbury Airport situation that happened under Boughton's watch (and thats no longer taked about).
When will the local media stop writing these stories and change the issue to things that really matter to people in the city. If they keep putting the spotlight on this issue, people will think it's the only issue.
04.25.22 (RADIO): WSHU Latino group call on Connecticut lawmakers to open a Danbury charter school
06.03.22 (OP-ED): KUSHNER: "Career Academy ‘a great deal for Danbury"
On September 26, 2007, ten plaintiffs filed suit in response to an arrest of aday laborers at a public park in Danbury, Connecticut. Plaintiffs amended their complaint on November 26, 2007.
The amended complaint states that plaintiffs sought to remedy the continued discriminatory and unauthorized enforcement of federal immigration laws against the Latino residents of the City of Danbury by Danbury's mayor and its police department.
Plaintiffs allege that the arrests violated their Fourth Amendment rights and the Connecticut Constitution because defendants conducted the arrests without valid warrants, in the absence of exigent circumstances, and without probable cause to believe that plaintiffs were engaged in unlawful activity. In addition, plaintiffs allege that defendants improperly stopped, detained, investigated, searched and arrested plaintiffs. Plaintiffs also allege that defendants violated their Fourteenth Amendment rights when they intentionally targeted plaintiffs, and arrested and detained them on the basis of their race, ethnicity and perceived national origin. Plaintiffs raise First Amendment, Due Process and tort claims.
Plaintiffs request declaratory relief, damages and attorneys fees.
On September 26, 2007, ten plaintiffs filed suit in response to an arrest of aday laborers at a public park in Danbury, Connecticut. Plaintiffs amended their complaint on November 26, 2007.
