Starting tomorrow, I'll FINALLY be able to release all the research I did on the performance of our lovely incompetent City Clerk Jean Natale.
I'd like to thank all those who helped me in the research as you're input was amazing. It's rare when both sides of the political aisle come to an agreement when it comes to an elected official...but in this case, the opinion is overwhelming that Natale is by far, the worse City Clerk in the history of the city and if there was a recall provision in the city charter (which is not allowed due to state law), Natale would be removed from office.
It's truly unfortunate that it took this site to expose the gross incompetence of a person who is making 50,000 per year in taxpayer's dollars. Most people don't know the inner workings of the City Clerk's office which is probably why Natale hasn't received any level of criticism outside of City Hall.
...that is going to change.
There is no way we can remove the current City Clerk from office right now BUT we can sure as well inform the public about the way Natale conducts her business and make the case when it comes to why Natale should NEVER EVER be elected to ANY elected position EVER again.
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.
