Lawyers for Interstate Business Center, LLC answer questions regarding a special exception for proposed development on Prindle Lane Planning Commission Public Hearing 07.02.08
Tonight, the continuation of the public hearing for the application of Interstate Business Center, LLC – Special Exception/Revised Site Plan for the Prindle Lane Centre at Prindle La continues.
The plan, which critics claim will increase the amount of traffic on Mill Plain Road, has been met with overwhelming amount of opposition and tonight hearing should be VERY interesting with the applicant presenting their traffic report for the proposed development.
The hearing is listed as item three under continuation of public hearings and the Planning Commission meeting starts tonight at 7:30 P.M. in the Common Council chambers. I currently processing the video from the last meeting (7.2.08) and will post the footage later tonight.
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.
