Surrounded by friends, family members, and supporters, Danbury Board of Education chairperson Rachel Chaleski kicked off her campaign for a State Representative seat that has historically been in control of the Republican Party for decades.
With Donald Trump no longer a factor that led to the high Democratic turnout in 2018 and 2020, area Republicans believe that Chaleski is the right fit to challenge incumbent Kenneth Gucker, whom conservatives characterize as hyper-partisan and out of step with the views of constituents in the historically conservative district.
With education being a top issue in last year's municipal elections, school concern was a focal point of Chaleski's stump speech. Throughout the event, the Republican challenger did not hesitate in making a stark contrast to her approach to education versus the incumbent, who recently made headlines for suggesting that one of the city's most contaminated properties could be remediated and used for an elementary school.
The current message from our state delegation is that they are more concerned for the other over-funded towns who may endure a funding cut, rather than be concerned for properly funding the city they are supposed to represent! [...] In response to our school overcrowding issue, our current representation can only offer feeling sorry and suggests placing a school on a brownfield! A contaminated waste site is not the solution!
Other issues raised by Cheleski include addressing increases in state taxation, support for public safety, and misrepresentation by the incumbent state lawmaker. Here's video of Cheleski remarks in full.
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.
