Last week, I sat down with City Councilman and popular African-American entrepreneur Dennis Perkins to discuss his first ward primary campaign to keep his seat on the Democratic Town Committee.
Recently, Perkins and his primary slate members, Andrea Ramos and NAACP member Charlotte Abraham, have vigorously pushed back against toxic allegations against the freshman City Councilman by party loyalists who have accused Perkins and some Democrats of disloyalty to Mayor Alves and his initiatives.
Perkins was the town committee's only abstention vote against the town committee's resolution in support of Mayor Alves' unconventional approach to modifying the city's charter; critics of DDTC leadership believe the town committee's resolution was a means of placing pressure on Democrats on the City Council who are skeptical of the mayor's approach to revising the charter.
Perkins believed that any member of the City Council who also sits on the town committee acted inappropriately by taking a position on the charter while the matter was in front of the City Council.
The primary has caught the attention of area and state Democrats who are weary of the divisiveness and toxicity that has plagued the party for years, and gained significant attention as the party gained a foothold at City Hall.
My interview with Councilman Perkins and the DDTC's first ward slate is here.
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.
