News-Times Dirk Perrefort did a write-up on the fiasco...here's some highlights:
City officials have asked Danbury Police to investigate the recent clear-cutting of trees on city-owned property.
The neighboring property owner, who ordered the clear-cutting on the hillside overlooking Kennedy Avenue, has asked to buy the land from the city.
"I am really not happy with what happened here, and that's why I've asked the Police Department to investigate the matter," Public Works Director Antonio Iadarola said Monday. "This is a complete decimation of city property."
Iadarola said property owner Michael Aiello had a permit to clear some trees surrounding nearby Bells Lane, but the city did not give him permission to clear-cut the entire hillside.
"This is an abuse of the permit that was issued to him," Iadarola said.
According to the property owner, this is a misunderstanding...
He undertook the project, he said, because the hillside had become a dumping ground for trash.
The clear-cutting also provides a better line of sight for police to monitor activity on the property, he said.
"There is a lot of criminal activity that has occurred there, and we want to clean up the neighborhood," Aiello said. "We never meant to step on anyone's toes."
The article goes on talking about the developer's desire to purchase the land from the city as well as built a condo complex on Bells Lane.
Dirk left out some key pieces on info in his article which I'll provide in future posts.
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.
