Planning commission public hearing on transfer station, 01.30.08 Photo by ctblogger.
If the last planning commission meeting is any indication of things to come, then Joe Putnam's dream of a transfer station is about to be crushed.
Sorry that I couldn't attend the meeting (maybe Danbury Live recorded it) but the News-Times reported on the latest meeting of the planning commission and it wasn't pretty.
If comments from a planning commission meeting are any indication, an application to build a transfer station on Plumtrees Road will be rejected.
"There wasn't one positive thing said in there. How can they pass it?" said Dick Mann, one of just three members of the public who attended a planning commission meeting Wednesday about the transfer station.
[...]
Planning commission members Helen Hoffstaetter, Kenneth Keller and Edward Manuel all said the transfer station does not fit into the character of the surrounding neighborhood and they were concerned about odors, noise and truck traffic the transfer station could generate.
Only planning commission member Fil Cerminara had something remotely positive to say about the application.
Cerminara said that while the transfer station could increase traffic, the area had once been home to a city dump and an emmissions testing center. He also said odors are already a problem in the area, due to the city's wastewater treatment plant. However, his fellow planning commission members said they weren't obligated to add to the problems.
"We don't want to make a bad situation worse," said Keller, referring to existing traffic problems on Plumtrees Road.
Common sense and opposition from the public prevails over irresponsible development.
The issue is O-V-E-R-D-E-V-E-L-O-P-M-E-N-T. The answer is to F-I-G-H-T B-A-C-K and that's exactly what the person in the following video clip did when she stood up to Putnam.
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.
