The superintendent's proposed $187. 6 million spending plan for 2011-2012 has no surprises. It maintains services without adding new programs, school board members said. The plan serves the needs of the city's 10,100 students and the board doesn't expect to make major reductions until the city makes its allocation. But Danbury Mayor Mark Boughton said Friday he was sure there would not be money for the $4.7 million or 4.1 percent increase over current spending.
If you recall, last year the board recommended a 3.81 percent increase which was dead on arrival by the time it was presented to the mayor and city council. Instead, the council gave the board of ed a 1.79 percent increase, which resulted in some rather drastic cuts in school services, which included the accelerated closing of Mill Ridge Intermediate School, the elimination of paraprofessionals in elementary school, and well other cuts in services.
Needless to say that last year's budget allocation from the city council resulted in hardships at the schools, which are reflected in the number of teachers and parents expressing their concerns towards the board of education about the state of school system over the past year.
One board member sums up the attempt to decrease school's budget proposal...
"If we have to cut more, we'll have to cut into the classroom," she said, "and I don't know how the teachers will be able to do what they have to do."
I have the feeling that this year's wrangling over the education budget is going to make last year's battle look like child's play.
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.
...wait till you get a load of the coming attractions.
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.
