The response from my coverage on the parade ordinance has been overwhelming. I've received praise from people on both sides of the political aisle who are outraged over the alarming amount of misinformation being spread from the Mayor's office regarding the effectiveness of the ordinance on spontaneous parades.
As I stated since the beginning of this blog, the main problem with Danbury is the lack of attention from the media on what's happening at City Hall and the political dishonesty surrounding this particular ordinance is a the last straw for many in Danbury. From what I can estimate, based on the feedback I've received, the video footage I provided has given people a new look at how Mayor Boughton runs the city. CLEAR MAJORITY of the criticism Mayor Boughton has received is based on the notion that HE knows what best for Danbury versus the Common Council that did not feel that it was an appropriate time to vote on the mayor's parade ordinance.
...again, this is why ALL LOCAL GOVERNMENT MEETINGS SHOULD BE BROADCASTED ON THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CABLE CHANNEL.
As requested I'll provide a quick link to this video as quick access to all the coverage on this on-going political fiasco shortly. I'll also provide a poll where you can express your opinions on the ordinance.
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.
The response from my coverage on the parade ordinance has been overwhelming. I've received praise from people on both sides of the political aisle who are outraged over the alarming amount of misinformation being spread from the Mayor's office regarding the effectiveness of the ordinance on spontaneous parades. 
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.
