...it just takes a simple FOIA request as you already know what the "controversy" with Halas is all about.
As for Halas' infamous Zoning Commission meeting (which has been referenced several times on this site as well as noted in the PUBLIC RECORD OF THE ZONING COMMISSION LAST YEAR) not only did I videotape the ENTIRE MEETING, Zoning Commsion Pat Johnston's remarks of Halas' behavior IS NOTED ON THE CITY'S WEBSITE!
He [Johnston] added that he was upset by the behavior of the speakers during and after the meeting and there may have been more people in the audience who would have spoken in opposition but they were intimidated by the applicant [Halas] and his team.
AGAIN, here's the VIDEO FOOTAGE of Johnston's remarks from the May Zoning Commission meeting! Listen to the tone of Johnston as he offers his opinion of Halas and his "supporters"...
Given this FACT, the mayor spews this nonsense:
Resident Ken Gucker spoke against the appointment during the public portion of the meeting. He said Halas' run-ins with the Zoning Commission over the years prove he can't live by the rules.
Gucker said he's been the subject of threats and harassment when he's spoken out against Halas in the past.
Boughton quickly cut off Gucker's comments, saying they were "unsubstantiated allegations and borderline insulting."
What's insulting is a mayor who would turn his back on THE FACTS about one of his appointees...FACTS which were at least in one instance NOTED IN THE RECORD LAST YEAR BY A FELLOW REPUBLICAN).
I'll have Halas and his goon squad's "remarks" on YouTube for everyone in Danbury to witness, as well (as comments from others who attended the meeting and were disgusted by what they saw) REAL soon.
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.
