As I stated since for some time, the major issue in this year's municipal election will be development.
When you look at local concerns such as traffic congestion, education, zoning issues, open space, and the balance residential and commercial area, and increases in property tax and sewer rates while developers receive tax breaks, everything comes back to one topic....development.
The latest issue on the radar is the ongoing battle between residents and a developer named Cotswold of Danbury. While I'll go into great detail into this major land battle, which will have a direct impact in the upcoming 1st and 2nd ward Common Council race, here's a very small sneak peek video clip that highlights the passion of the residents' disapproval of the development.
The following footage is from the last public hearing on the Cotswold development during last night's EIC meeting.
If you want to learn more about the Cotswold project, and the battle between the residents of the 1st and 2nd ward and developers, make sure to tune into the local access show "Ideas at Work and Beyond" tonight at 9:00 P.M. as 2nd ward candidate Ken Gucker will talk his community's ongoing battle against the project as well as other insane development issues in the 1st and 2nd ward.
UPDATE: HatCityBLOG TV will make another appearance on tonight's Ideas at Work and Beyond and lets just say that I don't think the mayor is going to be happy about what I have in store for tonight's show. Make sure to tune in...channel 23 @ 9 P.M.
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.
