The city has saved more than $100,000 in energy costs since moving to a four-day work week last fall, officials said Monday.
[...]
Finance director David St. Hilaire said the final figures aren't available, but conservative estimates show the city has saved about $54,000 to date on its electricity bills as a result of the condensed work week.
An additional $24,000 added to the utility budget in anticipation of higher costs, which wasn't used, brings the total savings to about $78,000, he said.
"There's no doubt that there is a definite savings," he said. "This frees up money that we can use in other areas where savings weren't available."
Yeah...I'll place this right up there with the other famous whoppers we've heard from Boughton and Co (parade ordinance needed to address World Cup celebrations, the de-funding of the Hispanic Center was not racially motivated, 287g needed to fight crime, tax break to BRT was necessary, etc).
Minority Leader Tom Saadi isn't drinking the kool-aid.
"This is not just about dollars and cents but about the public's access," he said. "We will have to balance the savings with the feedback we receive from residents about how this has impacted them."
For a city that spends money like there is no tomorrow, I find it incredibly hard to believe that the closing of the library (a.k.a. taking away one of the most important services to the taxpayers of Danbury) contributed to the type of savings we're hearing from City Hall. In fact, I'll bet the house that this has more to do with complaints from pissed off residents who are outraged that the library was closed on Fridays in the first place (and as someone who uses that facility on an almost daily basis, I know I'm one of them).
One only needs to go down to the library AT ANY TIME DURING THE DAY to see how many people use that facility. Hell, right after I'm done with this post, I'm taking a trip down there to do some work. The closing was boneheaded from the start and made no sense seeing that the place is open on Saturday and Sunday...in other words, how does one save energy if you have to heat the place up the next day (unlike City Hall which is closed on Saturday and Sunday)?
As for the 4-day work week nonsense in order to save cash, lets see how things worked out in Brookfield.
The Board of Selectmen on Monday unanimously agreed to end the town's four-day work week.
The town moved to a four-day schedule in October, hoping to realize savings of 20 percent on energy costs, according to First Selectman Robert Silvaggi, who said actual savings were nowhere near that level.
At Monday's regular selectmen's meeting, the board received two letters opposed to the four-day week.
"This is a disservice to the town and more importantly, there is no justification for doing this," said a letter from Board of Finance chairman Ernesto Nepomuceno. "For one thing, the timing is so wrong because it hampers the town's ability to address and resolve a number of issues, particularly at a time when the audit activities in progress."
"I believe all this four-day week schedule does is to appease some town employees at the expense of the taxpayers," the letter went on.
A letter from residents John and Christa Van Devender said a couple of Fridays ago Brookfield Town Hall "was as quiet as Pearl Harbor on a Sunday morning -- nobody around."
"Interesting experiment, but it failed," their letter added. "Back to basics."
Selectmen Joni Park and Jerry Murphy also voiced wishes to end the practice.
"I would like to move that we go back to a regular five-day week and serve the citizens of this community in a way that I think they deserve," Park said.
Murphy seconded the motion.
"It just didn't work," he said. "We're not providing the services to our people."
Maybe Danbury can learn a thing or two from Brookfield and stop screwing the people out of services which WE PAID FOR!
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.
