Danbury School Superintendent Sal Pascarella and Finance Director Elio Longo explain their revised budget proposal to members of the city council.
Due to the the large number of requests for the following footage, here's the video from this week's city council education ad-hoc committee.
Due to the fact that the council didn't use their microphones, the sound quality isn't the best. I better copy of the audio will be available on Sunday but since so many of you wanted to see this video, I decided to post the video now.
NOTE: YouTube is still processing this file and the quality of the video should improve by later tonight.
NOTE 2: This post will be updated throughout the day/night with smaller video highlights from the meeting.
VIDEO Complete meeting: (Runtime 1 hour 56 mins)
VIDEO HIGHLIGHTS
1. Opening remarks: (Runtime 29 mins)
2. Proposed cuts to the education system based on Mayor Boughton's recommended budget allocation.
3. Gregg Seabury raises the question regarding raises to school cabinet positions.
4. Councilman Joe Cavo questions the cost savings to the Board of Education if the board would suspend a step in teacher's salaries.
5. Teachers comments regarding city council's proposed budget allocation
Related documents used during the meeting (REQUIRED READING MATERIAL)
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.
