Transportation bills, including one seeking a study of electronic tolls at state borders, face difficult passage this session as key legislative committees rule out most new spending in the budget crisis.
"Generally anything that has a large fiscal note that isn't in the budget now doesn't have much of a chance of getting out of our committee," said state Rep. John Geragosian, D-New Britain, chairman of the Appropriations Committee.
The Transportation Committee asked for a study of how tolls would affect towns on the state border, but the Department of Transportation would need $500,000 to complete it, said state Sen. Donald DeFronzo, D-New Britain, chairman of the Transportation Committee. Money for the study was not included in a budget approved by the Appropriations Committee last week.
Honestly, with the state facing a budget crisis, this proposal (which included the state forking over 500,000 dollars for "study" from the DOT, didn't stand a chance in seeing the light of day and people at the State Capitol knew this from moment one.
The prospect of tolls on the borders gave me the inspiration to do a larger post on the history of roads in the greater Danbury area...which would shed light on why installing tolls on the CT/NY border is beyond idiotic. I'll probably have that report ready sometime in May...
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.
