I can't believe I'm actually have to write a post to draw attention to this nonsense...
If you travel up and down on White Street/Newtown Road, then you've seen the new traffic signal on at the intersection on Byron Street.
This signal was was installed recently to accommodate Winters Brothers Waste Systems LLC.
For reasons unknown, the geniuses at City Hall decided to set the turn signal to flash red in all directions at late night. The problem with this scenario is that no one who travels on White Street are stopping at the intersection...because the signal on White should be set to yellow and NOT red.
To illustrate my point, recently I went down to the intersection to videotape the traffic in action...take a look.
Here's the state law on traffic signals (Connecticut Code - Sec. 14-299 (c 1-2)).
(c) When an illuminated flashing red or yellow signal is used in a traffic sign or signal, it shall require obedience by vehicular traffic as follows:
(1) Flashing red: When a red lens is illuminated by rapid intermittent flashes, drivers of vehicles shall stop before entering the nearest crosswalk at an intersection, or at a limit line when marked or, if none, then before entering the intersection, and the right to proceed shall be subject to the rules applicable after making a stop at a stop sign.
(2) When a yellow lens is illuminated with rapid intermittent flashes, drivers of vehicles facing such signal may proceed through the intersection or past such signal only with caution.
It's fairly obvious that the simple solution to this situation is to set the signal on White Street from flashing red (which makes no sense) to flashing yellow (which makes sense). Unfortunately the genius at City Hall have allowed this snafu to go on for far too long and it's only a matter of time until someone pulls out of Byron onto White and gets involved in an accident.
The question remains...will it take an accident for city officials to do the right thing on the corner of White and Byron?
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.
