The town of Ridgefield is facing tough times with a $1.1 million deficit and layoffs looming, First Selectman Rudy Marconi told a crowd of 25 attending his State of the Town address Thursday morning.
While only seven foreclosures have been recorded in the town in 2008-09 so far, there was still was a $2.2 million hit to the town employees pension fund, of which $1 million was recovered.
With layoffs coming at IBM and more layoffs anticipated in the second quarter from General Electric, Marconi is concerned that Ridgefield residents may be affected by job loss.
Conveyance taxes are down to $15 million from the usual $45 million seen in a healthy economy. And it looks like Fairfield County make take a harder hit from state cuts in ECS (Education Cost Sharing) reimbursements than the rest of the state, Marconi said.
Okay, lets recap what's happening in the Danbury area...
4. There are still many questions surrounding the mayor's unilateral decision to ram 2.5 million dollars in questionable bonding proposals down the throats of the taxpayer's of the city without their approval.
5. The New London Day notes that the relentless winter weather costs is requiring towns and cities to spend more than expected.
Just use logic here. Faced with these factors, shouldn't politicians and the press ask more questions about the city's financial shape? Why the silence? Where is the fact checking against what the mayor and director of finance stated so far about the shape of the city?
Are we to believe that the seventh largest city is simply doing "okay" or is there more to the city's financial story than meets the eye?
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.
