Parents should be concerned about the COVID social distancing nightmare at DHS
Wednesday, September 08, 2021 Time: 9:40 AM
This is what happens when you add a grossly overcrowded high school with COVID.
This is what the Danbury Board of Education approved opening plan for DHS looks like.
Local school districts reported around 60 positive COVID-19 cases of students or staff members within the first week back in the classroom.
Danbury — the largest school district in the area — and Newtown have reported the most cases of any local district.
Danbury has reported 13 cases since the first day of school, with 19 close contacts identified and 24 students or staff members quarantined, according to the district’s dashboard.
This is why parents should be concerned...and should be asking questions out of school officals and members of the BOE who signed off on a daily super-spreader event.
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.
