I'm deeply concerned about the economic crisis we're all facing right now. This isn't something that just came about a few days ago...no, no, this downfall has been in the works since the cheer-leading of de-regulation by such people as McCain's former economic adviser Phil Gram (and we haven't seen anything yet).

There was an incredible discussion on this topic last night on HBO's Bill Maher. My good friends at Crooks and Liars did a post on the debate that took placed last night which I wanted to share with everyone.

It’s so chic of conservatives like Sullivan to blame the American people for the economic crisis, because as Sullivan stated on Real Time, millions and millions of people took out loans on homes that they couldn’t afford. Yes, the Kudlow Thesis of the market housing crisis. Don’t blame the lenders and grifters that came upon us like a biblical plague of locusts, blame the people.

Naomi Klein, God love her, told him that it was the Wall Street profiteers that preyed upon society. His ideal conservative world is completely fictional. And as she says, what comes next is the real disaster. Today was Christmas morning to the fat cats on The Street, but what happens next to all the debt we the people have just incurred? Whoever is elected president will have a major role in deciding our fate. Sorry, I can’t write the whole transcript, so watch the entire clip.

Klein: The disaster is far from over. They’ve actually just relocated. The disaster was on Wall Street and they have moved the disaster to Main Street by accepting those debts and you said they didn’t have to bomb, the bomb has yet to detonate. The bomb is the debt that has now been transferred to the taxpayers so it detonates when, if John McCain becomes president in the midst of an economic crisis and says look we’re in trouble, we have a disaster on our hands, we have to privatize social security, we can’t afford health care, we can’t afford food stamps, we need more deregulation, more privatization. The thesis of the Shock Doctrine is you need a disaster to rationalize these very unpopular policies so the real disaster has yet to come.The real disaster is the debt that is going to explode on the American taxpayers. And then they do economic shock therapy.

They had to step in, but I don’t think they had to step in in the way they did. The reason why the stock market went up on Wall Street today is because it’s Christmas morning. Imagine waking up and being told your credit card debits have been wiped out, your mortgage has been erased. There’s a fairy godmother that has taken care of you. A guardian angel. But actually that’s the tax payers.

With a smirk, Andrew gets pissed and chimes in

Sullivan: You’re favoring nationalizing the other companies.and most industries?

Klein: No, I’m just saying. This is socialism for the rich.

Maher: Why are you so hostile towards this?

Sullivan: Because I think the fundamental thesis that she is proposing is wrong. I think the reason why we’re in this situation is not demonizing a few individual companies, it’s systemic. And part of the reason we have this is the American People. The American people since the 70’s have had stagnating income, so they decided to get something for nothing. And the government never told them they couldn’t. So we have the stock bubble of the 90’s and now we have the real estate bubble in the 2000’s.

Klein: That’s not why we have this.

Sullivan: And the government never told them they couldn’t. Wall Street is to blame for giving these people these loans, but no one is ever forced to take out a bad load they cannot pay.

Klein: The reason why this bubble was allowed to inflate was not that the American people demanded it, it was spectacularly profitable for Wall Street. Just in bonuses last year, they handed out 33 billion dollars in bonuses… The problem is we have crybaby capitalism where when the times are good they are preaching deregulation and when the times are bad they want the bail-outs. The problem I have with your argument is where is this ideal capitalism of which you speak?

Andrew, the lenders told them they could get the houses for nothing and then lied about how they would pay for it and what they would pay, then bundled the cash and passed it on… And it’s not the government’s role to tell people what they cannot do. That’s why we used to have regulations and background checks and down payments and mortgage lenders to oversee the system. It weeds out the people that can and cannot afford a home. He tried to deconstruct her argument because apparently he wasn’t getting enough air time at that point (he filibustered the entire show after that) with nonsensical rationalizations on the current state of affairs. I lived through it and saw it up close and personal. Yea, he supports Obama, great, but his conservative ideology is a sham.

Andrew Sullivan has been conned by a fictitious notion of what conservatism really is. He states his Utopian vision of conservatism, but leaves out the part where conservatives want to deregulate everything and get rid of oversight and government so they can reap a magical harvest of cash like they have been doing during the entire Bush administration. Now we are seeing the results of conservatism. It’s a failure. Does Sully really believe that conservatism exists without the fat cats expanding their pie of wealth in America to 1920’s or pre-New Deal proportions? They’ve been trying to undo the New Deal ever since it was instituted and by the way which brought the country back from the brink of destruction.

Do you want Barack Obama or John McCain to make these decisions? I think the choice is easy. Conservative rule rains Armageddon down upon our heads—whether it happens in two years or twenty. It’s inevitable.

Remember, this crisis didn't just happen yesterday and it's US the average Joe citizen who will have to pick up the tab on this mess. Food for thought when you think about the alarming amounts of illogical spending that is occurring on the local level by Mayor Boughton and how that will impact your lives on top of this current world-wide crisis.

* Still think 2.5 MILLION in bonding without going to referendum was a good idea?

* Still think a 130,000+ debt payoff to the Charles Ives Center dressed up as a open space purchase was a good idea?

* Still think a SEVEN YEAR tax break to BRT (with obstruction from the mayor's office when people complained about the deal) was a good idea?

* Still think the lack of the mayor to use tax breaks to attract businesses (or keep businesses) to the area (as was done during the 90s) WHILE the city now shows a SHARP RISE in unemployment in the last year a good idea?

* Still think giving 65,000 to the Film festival (while closing the library in order to save cost) was a good idea?

* Still think increasing fines to alarming levels was a good idea?

* Still think purchasing (or bailing out) the Historical Society was a good idea?

* Still think the increase in property taxes while receiving less city services was a good idea?

* Still think the mayor's office and his administration taking a pay raise in the middle of an economic crisis was a good idea?

Food for thought

My inbox has been flooded with more information on Mayor Boughton's role in the Danbury 11 case. Instead of answering emails, re-posting this piece I did last year shoudl clear the air.

REMEMBER What's important IS NOT the case. In fact, people get somewhat confused when talking about the case as there are TWO cases...the deportation case (which is in appeal) and the MORE important CIVIL case.

In short, what is at issue (in my opinion) and Mayor Boughton's history of misleading the public and overstepping his grounds as an elected official. I stated at the beginning of this episode that I woudl keep a VERY close eye on what happens from the arrest as I knew it would expose the mindset of Boughton and his supporters at City Hall and I've been proven correct.

It's not the case that matters, it's the statements Mayor Boughton made in regards to the arrest of the day laborers that are at issue and, if the civil case goes forward, could place him into an embarrassing situation where he could be called to testify (which could be devastating). Remember, Boughton claimed in numerous interviews to the media back in December of 2006 that DANBURY HAD NO ROLE IN THE OPERATION THAT RESULTED IN THE ARREST OF THE DAY LABORERS ON KENNEDY PARK. It wasn't until the lawyers representing the day laborers won their FOI lawsuit against the city of Danbury was it shown that an UNDERCOVER DANBURY POLICE OFFICER drove the van that picked up the day laborers. This is a direct contradiction from the previous statements from the mayor and as of today, Boughton refuses to talk about the what he said back in December of '06.

Why is this important?

This is important because Boughton has a history of misleading or OUTRIGHT lying to the public in areas where criticism and/or questions of wrongdoing can be pointed to him. As we reach the beginning of the State of Connecticut illegal campaign contribution case against James Galante (where bundled donations were made to Mark Boughton, State Senator David Cappiello, and former disgraced State Senator Lou DeLuca) hopefully, we'll be able to expose another case of misleading the public from the mayor.

AGAIN: It's not the case...it's Boughton's record of misleading the public. Keep your eye on the CIVIL case...

Originally posted in 10/07



This is serious.

This is no joke.

This is not about one's view on immigration.

This is about an over-zealous mayor who has once again, used the topic of immigration for political purposes.

This is about the local media KNOWING that the mayor mislead the public YET won't challenge the mayor on his previous statements.

This is about residents having to read news accounts from other mainstream media outlets to get the real story.

This is about honesty.

This is about integrity.

This is about trust.

This is about competence.

---

FACT:

• In December, Mayor Boughton (who had no problem talking about the incident) was repeatedly quoted in the media as stating that Danbury was not involved in the raid that occurred last September.

• Documents finally released in April by a FOIA request shows that a booking report lists the arresting officer as a Danbury Police official.

• A court brief by the Department of Homeland Security states that a undercover Danbury Police officer was the individual who drove the vehicle used to pick up the day-laborers.

• Also included in the FOIA release to the Yale Law students were a series of over overtime slips from Danbury Police officers.

• Until two weeks ago, the public was under the impression that Danbury played no part in the raids. NOW, one year after the raids and ten months after Mayor Boughton made his initial statement about Danbury's non-involvement in the raids, The Fairfield Weekly quotes a News-Times article that states Chief Al Baker "explaining that the arrests were initially made because of complaints about the day laborers' effects on traffic and that Danbury police did drive the van."

• Once having no problem talking about the incident (and hurling insults at the Yale Law Students), NOW Mayor Boughton refuses to comment on the details of the raid.

• Mayor Boughton's action has placed the city in a MAJOR constitutional lawsuit, which will cost the city more money than I care to think about.

The story is Boughton misleading the public about Danbury's role in the raids.

If Boughton mislead the public about the September raid, what else did he misleading us about?

For instance, here are some quotes from the last honest man in Danbury regarding the use of local police to enforce immigration laws:

Hartford Courant, April 26 2006.

Most local police departments say they have no interest in arresting illegal immigrants who have not committed crimes. Even in Danbury, when Mayor Mark Boughton last year tried unsuccessfully to have state police enforce immigration law, he said he didn't want his police doing it because it could discourage immigrants from cooperating in criminal investigations.

New York Times 05.25.05

It will begin at Kennedy Park, where the crowds of Hispanic men who gather before dawn to find work as day laborers helped prompt Mayor Mark D. Boughton to ask that the state police be deputized to enforce federal immigration laws.

[...]

Now, while members of Danbury's Common Council continue to draft a ''repetitive outdoor activity'' ordinance to restrict volleyball by cracking down on parking and noise, among other things, the mayor says deputizing the state police may not be necessary, that the police may have enough remedies without becoming immigration agents.

Hartford Courant 05.07.05

Lost in the hubbub is the political reality that having state police enforce immigration law in Connecticut is unlikely to happen anytime soon, if ever. And even Boughton acknowledges that his plan would have little effect on the number of undocumented immigrants in town.

[...]

Blumenthal responded to Boughton's request by saying it would need the approval of Gov. M. Jodi Rell, Public Safety Commissioner Leonard Boyle and the state legislature.

Blumenthal said there is no chance of that happening this year and he has "serious reservations" about the proposal.

"Deputizing local or state police is not a long term or fundamental solution to the problem," he said.

Although Boughton wants state police to enforce immigration law, he is not interested in Danbury police having the same authority, for fear it would cripple their ability to investigate other crimes.

"The same is true, to an even greater extent, for the state police," Blumenthal said.

Something to think about when Boughton, and the shameless Republican leadership, take the first steps towards local police enforcing immigration enforcement tomorrow.

Now onto more serious matters that goes to the heart of Boughton's character...the mayor's misleading statements to the public in regards to the city's role in Danbury 11 case:

Hartford Courant 12.14.06

A group of students at Yale Law School is expected to file suit today in federal court in a bid to find out how Homeland Security put together its sting on Sept. 19. The students want to know what role Danbury played in the operation and if the policies guiding the department's Immigration and Customs Enforcement arm may be unconstitutional. Their inquiry began with a request under the federal Freedom of Information Act. "We asked nicely," said Simon Moshenberg, a second-year student from Washington, D.C. "They didn't answer. We sued."

[...]

In an interview Wednesday, Boughton insisted that immigration police acted alone. They notified Danbury police this summer that they'd be making some arrests this fall but offered no other details, he said.

Television reports on Danbury 11 case: 12.06

Channel 8: Boughton said the city played no part in the September 19th action...

Channel 30: He [Boughton] said the city was not involved in the planing of the raid...

Fairfield Weekly last week (before Boughton was slapped with a lawsuit):

A year ago, eleven Ecuadorian day laborers were sneakily apprehended in Danbury's Kennedy Park by Immigration and Customs Enforcement with help from some men pretending to be contractors. They had some hard hats, a van and, according to recently uncovered information, a few Danbury police badges.

Why were the local cops assisting in a federal sting? Well, according to remarks from Danbury mayor Mark Boughton last December, they weren't. He repeatedly said the city played no role in the ICE raid.

[...]

Simon Moshenberg, a Yale Law Student representing the "Danbury 11" in a federal court case that began Monday, received the booking report for the arrests after placing a FOIA request. Under "arresting officer," was the name "Lolli," which turns out to be the name of a Danbury police officer. The Danbury News-Times quotes Chief Al Baker explaining that the arrests were initially made because of complaints about the day laborers' effects on traffic and that Danbury police did drive the van. The department chose not to further comment on their involvement when approached by the Weekly.

Boughton elaborated in an e-mail that "the city provided logistical support to ICE," which is "common" and "does not mean that the Danbury PD planned, organized or carried out the raid." He stands by his comments from December.

Interview with Simon Moshenberg, a Yale Law Student representing the "Danbury 11" in a federal court.

1.: Information obtained from the FOI request shows Danbury police officer as the arresting officer on booking report.



2. According to defense attorney Simon Moshenberg, in brief to the court, the Department of Homeland Security states that DANBURY POLICE OFFICERS were the ones disguised as contractors and driving the van used to pick up the day laborers. This is contrary to statements Boughton made to the press in December and the city of Danbury has not issued an official response in any legal proceedings regarding DHS's statement.

Video highlights of what we knew then about Danbury's role in the raid versus what we know now.

When you think of leadership, you think of an individual with certain characteristics such as honesty, integrity, trust, and competence. As more details of this case emerge and more people are informed about the Boughoton's conflicting comments, it's going to be increasingly difficult to apply these characteristics to the mayor.

I'm very excited to announce that HatCityBLOG is now a part of the WCBS channel 2 network!

Soon, you will see content from WCBS on this site in the same way you see content from such sites as Media Matters and HuffPost. I'm very excited about this venture as it further pushes this site (and online media) forward and opens this site to a whole new audience (which is definitely already reflected in the huge increase in traffic).

I'd like to thank WCBS for picking HatCityBLOG and I hope for great things to come from this new partnership.

Western Connecticut State University opened the school year with a lecture on the rethinking of immigration on Wednesday at the Student Center at Midtown Campus.

As part of their series on diversity, Marcelo Suárez-Orozco, of the Harvard Immigration Project held an hour long lecture on the history and future of immigration in the United States to a full capacity audience. Any myths or nonsense about immigration from the xenophobes and bigots in the area were easily dispelled by Suárez-Orozco and it his presentation was well-received by all who attended.

Here's the bio of Professor Suárez-Orozco

Marcelo Suárez-Orozco, of the Harvard Immigration Project, will discuss “Rethinking Immigration” in a Diversity Lecture Series talk at 5 p.m. on Wednesday, Sept. 17, in the Student Center Theater on the WestConn Midtown campus. Suárez-Orozco, The Courtney Sale Ross University Professor of Globalization and Education at the New York University Steinhardt School of Culture, Education and Human Development, specializes in cultural psychology and psychological anthropology with a focus on the study of immigration and globalization. He is the author of numerous essays, books, and edited volumes including: “Globalization: Culture and Education in the New Millennium,” “Latinos: Remaking America,” the six-volume “Interdisciplinary Perspectives on the New Immigration,” “Children of Immigration,” “Cultures Under Siege: Collective Violence and Trauma” and the award-winning “Transformations: Immigration, Family Life, and Achievement Motivation Among Latino Adolescents.” The lecture will be free and open to the public; a reception will follow.

From Wednesday, here's video footage of Professor Suárez-Orozco's lecture. Also included in the video is a portion of the question and answer section of the forum.

TOTAL TIME: aprox. 1hr 12 mins.

It's been almost two years since the Danbury 11 round-up at Kennedy Park and during that time, Mayor Boughton has repeatedly claimed that the Danbury Police Department played NO ROLE in the ICE roundup.

It was not until the lawyers representing those arrested in the round-up won a Freedom of Information request (in which Mayor Boughton and the City of Danbury fought tooth and nail against releasing the records for months) that the public found out that the city's role in the case wasn't what the Mayor was stating (Danbury PD were driving the van used in the roundup).

Since this news came about, the mayor has refused to answer questions about his remarks and when pressed by then Democratic Mayoral candidate Helena Abrantes at a mayoral debate, Boughton had no comment.

Now, it's important to remember that there is a difference between the Danbury 11 deportation case which is currently in the court and the CIVIL case. In short, it's important to keep your eye on the CIVIL case as that's the case where there is a possibility that the mayor will be held accountable for his statements.

In honor of the anniversary of the revelation of new evidence that links the Danbury PD to the Danbury 11 case, here's my interview with the lawyers of the Danbury 11 that exposed the bombshell.

Orginally posted on 09.18.09

---

Today, I conducted an in-depth interview with Simon Moshenberg of the Jerome N. Frank Legal Services Organization at the Yale Law School legal clinic. Moshenberg is one of the attorneys for the "Danbury 11" and has been actively involved in forcing the City of Danbury to hand over all information regarding an ICE raid in September of last year.

For those who don’t know, the Danbury 11 refers to the eleven day laborers who were picked up in a raid by Immigration & Customs Enforcement agents. According to news reports, back in September at Danbury’s Kennedy Park, ICE agents posing as contractors pulled up in a truck and stated they would pay 11 dollars an hour to men who would help take down a fence. Eleven day laborers took up the offer, entered in the truck, and were taken to another location where they were arrested.

In response to the raid, a FOI was filed against the Department of Homeland Security and the City of Danbury in an attempt to seek information and determine what role the city had in the raid.

In several interviews to the press, Mayor Boughton has repeatedly stated that the City played NO ROLE in the raids.

Statements from Mayor Boughton regarding city's role in raid, December 2006:

Channel 8:
Boughton said the city played no part in the September 19th action...

Channel 30:
He [Boughton] said the city was not involved in the planing of the raid...

Once Moshenberg and the Yale law students obtained all the requested material from the city from their FOI complaint, new details surrounding the city's involvement in the raid emerged, which ultimately calls into question the claims the mayor.

With the new revelations made public at the Danbury 11 court hearing last week, I caught up with Moshenberg to learn more about the details that emerged from the FOI request, find out what role the city of Danbury played in the raid, and ultimately find out if the mayor was being dishonest to the public in statements he made to the press about Danbury's role in the raid.

Interview highlights (full interview will be posted soon):

1.: Information obtained from the FOI request shows Danbury police officer as the arresting officer on booking report.



2. According to Moshenberg, in brief to the court, the Department of Homeland Security states that DANBURY POLICE OFFICERS were the ones disguised as contractors and driving the van used to pick up the day laborers. This is contrary to statements Boughton made to the press in December
According to Moshenberg, the city of Danbury has not issued an official response in any legal proceedings regarding DHS's statement.



UPDATE: If you're with the media and are taking quotes from my interview with Simon, please make sure to cite this blog in your report.

As I stated in several emails, I understand the seriousness of this story and will have more of the interview posted as quickly as possible. Thank you.

UPDATE 2: I receiving inquires from the media on this on-going story. If you're a member of the media and having trouble locating the email address for this site, you can email me at hatcityblog@yahoo.com. During the next template update, I'll make it easier to locate my email address.

Host: John Gogliettino
Guest: State Rep. Bob Godfrey (D-110th Dist.)

In order to understand just how incompetent City Clerk Jean Natale is when it comes to her actually doing her job, lets here the laughing stock explain to the charter revision board her duties when it comes to the notification of public hearings.

NATALE:...meet with the council president, set the date, send the appropriate notices, publish the legal notice, secure a secretary to do the minutes, distribute all reports necessary for the council, post the notices with the town clerk, the IT department for the city's calendar, the information in the caucus board, check the minutes and place on the next common council agenda.

Now, let me show you just how easily it is to expose Natale for a complete lying overpaid fraud.

Here's picture of the information board from Monday night...



Here are snapshots of the notices on the board outside...






...and of course, there's this notice on the public hearing held on that night.



Now, here's a picture of the bulletin board in the caucus room (along with a pic of my phone that captured the time and date of the photo).



Here are snapshots of all the notices on the board.





Notice something missing...like the NOTICE FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING that was held on that same night?!?

Let's hear our incredibly incompetent City Clerk explain what she does in terms of giving notice regarding PUBLIC HEARINGS.

NATALE:...meet with the council president, set the date, send the appropriate notices, publish the legal notice, secure a secretary to do the minutes, distribute all reports necessary for the council, post the notices with the town clerk, the IT department for the city's calendar, the information in the caucus board, check the minutes and place on the next common council agenda.

Trust me, this isn't the first time our god-awful City Clerk has been found not doing her job...and if we know Jeanie, it won't be the last.

More on our joke of a City Clerk later...

At this point, I can't keep up with the lies flowing from the McSame/Palin camp.

While everyone is scratching their head trying to understand how someone who just a few months ago bragged that he was for deregulation, can claim today that there is a need for regulation, the friends at Firedoglake found another whopper from "The Maverick."

Is there anything the McCain campaign won’t lie about? It’s becoming pathological:

The McCain campaign has started airing a new Spanish-language television commercial in the battleground states of Colorado, Nevada and New Mexico that lays the failure of comprehensive immigration reform at the feet of Barack Obama and his Democratic colleagues -- despite the fact that Obama supported the bipartisan John McCain-Edward Kennedy efforts to enact such reforms and voted for their final proposal last year.

… "Obama and his Congressional allies say they are on the side of immigrants," the ad's announcer says in Spanish in the spot, released Friday. "But are they? The press reports that their efforts were 'poison pills' that made immigration reform fail. The result: No guest worker program. No path to citizenship. No secure borders. No reform. Is that being on our side? Obama and his Congressional allies: Ready to block immigration reform, but not ready to lead."

This is a complete reversal of the real picture: Republicans, not Democrats, killed immigration reform, and it had nothing to do with “poison pill” amendments. It had to do with right-wing Republicans who hated the “amnesty” portions of the bill that McCain himself supported.

As you can see in the above video, the nativist nutcases actually claim credit (with good reason) for killing immigration reform. And they will continue to be the largest obstacle.

Even the Washington Times is calling bullshit on McCain's ad (with its own right-wing take, of course):

It's McCain's second attempt to try to tie Obama to unpopular congressional Democrats, and this one's a stretch. The immigration bill didn't die because of poison pill amendments; it died because it was unworkable from the start — a mishmash of ideas and policies that never quite worked together, that was always skewed too far toward amnesty to truly win much conservative support, and that never quite got the buy-in such a deal needed from both sides.

Straight talk express? More like straight B.S. from the man who invented the Blackberry?!?

Here's the listing of the debates between Congressman Chris Murphy and David "buddy of James Galante" Cappiello.

October 11, 2008
Host: New Britain Area League of Women Voters
Time: 1:00PM ­ 3:00PM
Location: Torp Theater, CCSU, New Britain, CT
Contact: Marjola Nelson, 860.223.2905

October 15, 2008
Host: Waterbury Regional Chamber of Commerce
Time: TBD (pending host)
Location: TBD (pending host)
Contact: Stephen Sasala, Waterbury Chamber,
203.757.0701

October 20, 2008
Host: AARP
Time: 10:00AM ­ 11:30AM
Location: Four Points Sheraton Hotel, Meriden, CT
Contact: John Erlingheuser, AARP, 860.548.3165

October 22, 2008
Host: Litchfield County League of Women Voters,
Cablevision
Time: TBD (pending host)
Location: Litchfield Community Center, Litchfield, CT
Contact: Kathleen Kruse, Litchfield LWV, 860.482.3539

October 29, 2008
Host: Brookfield League of Women Voters,
Danbury News-Times, Danbury
Portguese Cultural Center
Time: 7:30PM
Location: Portuguese Cultural Center, Danbury, CT
Contact: Marge Davidson, 203.775.3581

Poor Chris...it seems like the Congressman in the 4th CD is having a reall bad day.

First, the DCCC released a new ad blasting Shays for his support of the President that just about every Republican is currently running away from.



Now, in light of the Congressman's recent laughable claim statement that the economy is "fundamentally strong", we find out that Chris Shays is now REFUSING to schedule debating Jim Himes.

Apparently worried that he cannot defend his recent claim that "our economy is fundamentally strong" and seven years of support for the Iraq War, Chris Shays has refused to schedule debates with Jim Himes. Shays has refused offers to debate from reputable third parties, including Bloomberg television and the League of Women Voters. The Shays campaign has also refused to respond to requests from the Himes campaign to discuss debates. The Himes campaign issued the following statement in response.

"It's no surprise Chris Shays is hiding from Jim Himes," said Dana Houle, Campaign Manager for Jim Himes. "Chris Shays is the guy who parroted George Bush's claim that 'the fundamentals of our economy are strong.' Jim Himes understands our economy and understands the challenges facing us in Iraq and Afghanistan, on education, on healthcare. Chris Shays is out of his depth in serious discussions about the economy and his time in Washington has left him out of touch with the concerns of Connecticut families."

Yesterday, the Didona Architects Associates presented their updated master plan for the renovation of Richter Park. Due to an outcry over the original plan, which included an abandonment of the Richter House, a new master plan was drafted.

The new plan was introduced to the public at City Hall yesterday during an "informal" meeting although many of the supporters of the Richter House were unable to attend due to a dinner for Barry Richter. Also curious was the presentation was the fact that the event was not publicized in any manner with many people hearing about the presentation be word of mouth.

I received several emails asking me if I could attend the meeting and videotape the presentation. For those who couldn't make it last night, here's video footage of the presentation in full (unedited). I scanned the entire Master Plan and will make the document available for viewing later today.

Why couldn't they seek money from other channels as opposed to spending 65,000 is local taxpayer's money that could be used for other priorities.

State Rep. Jason Bartlett press release

Speaker of the House James A. Amann (D-Milford) and State Representative Jason Bartlett (D-Bethel, Danbury , Redding ) today announced that they have secured a $50,000 grant for the Connecticut Film Festival, which is hosted in downtown Danbury.

The state grant was announced during a check presentation ceremony Monday at the Palace Theatre on Main Street .

Bartlett and Amann said the funding will aid in the resurgence of downtown Danbury .

“I’ve very excited to be a part of this great event that promotes Danbury as a tourist destination for the arts, entertainment and film. The film festival brings with it a positive message that Danbury is a place for people to come visit, enjoy our downtown, sample our restaurants and experience the diversity of our people,” said Bartlett. “This is why I am proud that the state will be infusing this funding along with the $65,000 already provided by the City of Danbury .”

The film festival has a combined estimated direct and indirect economic impact of over $950,000.

Amann said, “I’m very pleased to have worked with Jason Bartlett to secure funding for this event that shines our state’s spotlight onto the City of Danbury . The film festival brings to the city over one hundred filmmakers, one hundred films, various receptions, musical performances, educational panels, workshops, and thousands of visitors. The support by both the state and local governments show our commitment to downtown Danbury’s resurgence.”