To help these businesses, Mayor Mark Boughton said Thursday the city is investigating whether the road can be declared a disaster area. That way, he said, the businesses could recoup their losses through the Federal Emergency Management Agency or the Small Business Administration.
Yeah, and the mayor has a bridge in Brooklyn he'd like to sell you.
This man will say and/or do anything to:
1. Give the impression that he's actually doing something, and
2. Get re-elected.
Like I said before, this isn't 2005 and not all the residents in the area are buying Boughton's "Rovian-flavored" Kool-Aid. In fact many are getting a bit pissed off.
"Do you think that's going to happen?" Jabara said. "I'm not holding my breath. This whole thing is a waste of time."
I couldn't agree more. Closing down the street DURING the day makes absolutely no common sense when you could effect less people (and businesses) by closing the road during the night.
Learn more about Cutaneous Anthrax, watch the FOX-61 report, and maybe you'll become just as pissed as some of those who are living through this nightmare in the 2nd ward.
Brian Farrell, manager of the Halas Farm Stand, said the stand's business was hurting badly.
[...]
Farrell said rather than opening the road at night and closing it during the day, the crews should be working at night and letting people pass during business hours.
"I'm all for a cleanup," he said. "But there's got to be a better way than this."
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.
