Just learned that earlier today, developers of a proposed septic treatment plant on Beaver Brook Road withdrew their petition to the Planning Commission.
With nonchalance belying the importance of the announcement, the Planning Commission simply stated that a letter had been received from Collins, Hannafin and Garamella, attorneys for Coffey Environmental Solutions, dated August 17, that said, “On behalf of the applicant in the above referenced matter, please be advised that the application is hereby formally withdrawn.”
Beaver Brook residents were beside themselves with excitement and joy. “I feel exhilaration and relief,” exclaimed Patty Taylor, Beaver Brook resident who had attended every meeting with her husband Bob.
Santo Straino, another resident, was also thrilled, “At least they knew everybody was against it. I was worried that they might do okay in the beginning, but once they were in there, it's all over. They could do anything they want.”
Most of the residents felt a sense of empowerment and amazement that they had actually made a difference. “If nobody went to these meetings, this never would have happened,” said Straino. “The neighborhood took control.”
As I always said, when it comes to development that you don't approve, people can make a difference by simply voicing their displeasure when the proposal is presented to the land-use boards.
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.
