City resident John Ross, who lives uphill from the property on Elm Street, said while most neighbors are surprised something hasn't happened sooner on the property, he's willing to be patient.
"Miracles don't happen overnight," he said, adding that he moved to the city in 1963. "The city has improved 110 percent since I first moved here. It's the best I've every seen it."
1. When Mayor Boughton gives BRT a seven year multi-million tax deferral (the first time the city of Danbury has given a tax deferral to a RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPER in the history of the city) AND BRT goes back on their word, and spit in the face of the Common Council, you better believe miracles can happen...a miracle in the form of BRT cleaning up the mess they creates in demolishing the Amphenol building!
2. If the current Danbury is the best John Ross has seen since he's moved here in 1963, then this guy drank so much of the mayor's Kool-Aid that he's overdosed. I mean really, this guy lives a stone throw away from an abandoned downtown area with streets that are overflowed with traffic, irresponsible development, increase in the nmumber of homeless and umemployed people (several of whom are veterans).
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.
