Tomorrow starts the next chapter in Halas Farm's request the Zoning Commission to allow them to use a parcel of land (aprox. marked in yellow) zoned as an RA-40 (residential) for commercial purposes...and some residents aren't happy about it. Image provided by Google Earth.
I originally posted the flyer opposing the Halas Farm proposal two weeks ago. Since then, lets just say that In my years of following Danbury politics, I've never seen such a chain of inappropriate events than what I saw at the last Zoning Commission meeting.
Over the next series of posts, I will examine what happened at the last meeting, including the OUTRAGEOUS and highly offensive actions of freshman commissioner Andrew Wettmore, which in itself should be grounds for him to recuse himself from voting on this proposal.
For now, I'm lets just start with portion of my larger interview with activist Ken Gucker on his opposition to the proposal. TAKE NOTE OF THE DATE OF THIS INTERVIEW AND THE CONDITION OF THE PARCEL OF LAND...I'll explain later.
NOTE: Below is a copy of the letter from Zoning Enforcement officer Sean Hearty to Halas Farm about the gross misuse of the parcel of land in question. This letter triggered the eventual cease and desist notification against Halas Farm that Gucker referenced in the clip. You can also click here to download a pdf version of the letter.
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.
I originally posted the flyer opposing the Halas Farm proposal two weeks ago. Since then, lets just say that In my years of following Danbury politics, I've never seen such a chain of inappropriate events than what I saw at the last Zoning Commission meeting.
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.
