Voting on a town referendum is no different from voting for public office, however along with registered voters, Bethel property owners may also vote for the Road Renewal Plan. Below are simple guidelines to vote on the referendum:
- Voters will vote "yes" or "no" on the following question: "Shall the Town of Bethel appropriate the sum of Two Million ($2,000,000.00) Dollars to fund and approve the Road Renewal Plan Project and to finance the same through borrowing, the issuance of bonds and/or notes, including those of a temporary nature."
[...]
Polls will be open today from 6 a.m to 8 p.m.
[...]
For each district, there is a specific polling location:
District 1: Clifford J. Hurgin Municipal Center, 1 School Street District 2: Stony Hill Fire House, 59 Stony Hill Road District 3: Frank A. Berry School, 200 Whittlesey Drive District 4: Clifford J. Hurgin Municipal Center, 1 School Street District 5: Frank A. Berry School, 200 Whittlesey Drive
After months of political theater and grandstanding by the usual suspects, the residents of Bethel will finally have their say on the matter of fixing the roads. The only bad part is that residents will have to go through this nightmare next year as this proposal over covers Phase I of the overall plan.
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.
