That's how much the 2009 Connecticut Film Festival grew over last year's inaugural run in downtown Danbury.
But even the best numbers can be misleading.
According to figures released by Mayor Mark Boughton's office, this year's Connecticut Film Festival drew an estimated 8,256 people to downtown Danbury.
A large number of those folks, however, were associated with the film industry, not necessarily movie fans from Greater Danbury snatching up tickets and signing up for volunteer duties.
For the Connecticut Film Festival to become a blockbuster, Greater Danbury residents need to support it with their time, their wallets and their civic pride.
[...]
Tom Carruthers, the festival's executive director, has done a remarkable job nurturing this project in Greater Danbury.
But it's no longer a one-man show.
With more promotion and more community involvement, the Connecticut Film Festival could really pack them in.
Eventually, I'll get around to posting my remarks on the Film Festival (I'm holding back until I see the actual figures, as opposed to the spin numbers from the mayor's office). In any event, today's editorial highlights my biggest concern regarding the festival.
(FULL DISCLOSURE: I was a member of a panel at the CT Film Festival)
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.
