I say do nothing, at this time, with the land. There is no pressing need for a sports complex, another hockey arena, a baseball stadium, a convention center, or any other proposed use that Mr. Haddad has in mind.
He precludes any other ideas, stating that he doesn't think "anyone can come up with an idea WE (sic) haven't thought about".. Well Mr. Haddad, here's one. How about YOU just leave one little bit of land unbuilt in this overbuilt city for a few decades or more, and see what the value of it becomes for future generations of Danburians.
This "deal" smacks of insider collusion between Boughton and the "investors".
This is a developer driven proposal that will forever remove valuable city land for any other possible use.
No public hearing? Outrageous!
No Common Council or referendum vote? Incredible!
Boughton's statement, "We are not using any tax dollars", is an outright lie. The value of the land, at market rate is "our tax dollars". What benefit the city may possibly receive will be far outweighed by the increased traffic, increased pollution, increased crime, increased police costs, and no real return to the city in tax revenue for ratable property.
The westside development, cloaked in the fear of a casino coming to town and shoved down our throats by Boughton and some of these same "investors" has robbed Danbury of a real tax base, hundreds of acres formerly zoned for corporate and industrial use, now to be crammed with houses and condos that cost the rest of the taxpayers more in services than they ever produce.
And now the last 13 acres are to be virtually "given" to the same insiders to build a complex that the voters are not even going to have a say in because it's purportedly not using tax dollars?
That's just pure B.S.
When is Danbury going to wake up to what's going on here?
Where are the Democrats who are opposed to what's going on here?
Where's the Attorney General,
Where's the F.B.I.??
Where's a good investigative reporter when you need one?
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.
