In light of the outrageousness that occurred at the recent library drop box ad-hoc committee meeting, this week, I had the opportunity to chat with Danbury City Councilman Paul Rotello about the on-going fiasco. For those who don't know, it was Rotello who requested an ad-hoc committee be formed to find a solution to the drop box controversy that continues to cause a great deal of irritation to many residents who use the service.
Not holding back in his frustration on the matter, Rotello gave his thoughts regarding the dismissive tone among local lawmakers who are against placing the boxes back on West Street. He also reiterated his simple solution to the matter that would resolve the matter and have the boxes placed back at their original location.
In part one of my three part interview with the councilman, Rotello provided a history lesson regarding the rationale behind the placement of the boxes on West Street and why the boxes were re-located to behind the library.
Be sure to catch part 2 and 3 of my interview with Councilman Rotello in the upcoming days.
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.
