Tammy Bruce
Washington Times
Monday, December 21, 2015
Online-only Edition
Experts and amateurs are endlessly telling us what we ought to be doing in our war against Islamic jihadism. But we know what needs to be done: eliminate the threat. The trouble is finding a president who is interested in defending this country.
Some
people continue to insist that Obama is stupid, incompetent or weak, as
a way to explain his otherwise inexplicable actions. None of which
explains everything. The only thing that explains everything is:
malevolence.
RELATED
Hagel: The White House Tried to ‘Destroy’ Me
In an exclusive interview, Chuck Hagel said the Obama administration micromanaged the Pentagon, stabbed him in the back on the way out -- and still has no strategy for fixing Syria.
Administration nixed probe into Southern California jihadists
There are terrorists in our midst and they arrived here using legal means right under the noses of the federal law enforcement agencies whose mission is to stop them. That is not due to malfeasance or lack of effort on the part of these officers; it is due to the restrictions placed on them by the Obama administration.
Whistleblower Says He Could Have Prevented CA Attack If Gov't Didn't Cut Funding
Monday, December 21, 2015
Saturday, December 19, 2015
Confusion at City Hall
Don't these people talk to each other?
ON THE DIFFICULTY OF A WATER SYSTEM TRANSFER
Jade Dundas, Water Resources Director, City of Asheville:"Issues that would need to be resolved include:
-Transferring the contracts of the department’s 148 employees.
-Nontransferrable federal and state health-and-safety certifications.
-Transferring the financial, accounting and information technology systems.
-Training new employees.
-The city’s water-related bond debt, which is financed by system revenues."
http://mountainx.com/news/under-pressure-amid-legal-maneuvering-dundas-sets-water-departments-course/
ON THE DIFFICULTY OF A BREWERY TRANSFER
Esther Manheimer, Mayor, City of Asheville: “To me a corporate transfer doesn’t necessarily mean anything about the experience our city will have with this company. It may just mean a change in ownership. It may not mean a change in the employees or the number of employees they plan to hire or their agreements. It may have no implications in terms of their agreements with the city.”
http://www.citizen-times.com/story/news/2015/12/18/reports-new-belgium-explores-sale-asheville/77569628/
RELATED
Blogpost: Asheville's Continued Misinformation Campaign
ON THE DIFFICULTY OF A WATER SYSTEM TRANSFER
Jade Dundas, Water Resources Director, City of Asheville:"Issues that would need to be resolved include:
-Transferring the contracts of the department’s 148 employees.
-Nontransferrable federal and state health-and-safety certifications.
-Transferring the financial, accounting and information technology systems.
-Training new employees.
-The city’s water-related bond debt, which is financed by system revenues."
http://mountainx.com/news/under-pressure-amid-legal-maneuvering-dundas-sets-water-departments-course/
ON THE DIFFICULTY OF A BREWERY TRANSFER
Esther Manheimer, Mayor, City of Asheville: “To me a corporate transfer doesn’t necessarily mean anything about the experience our city will have with this company. It may just mean a change in ownership. It may not mean a change in the employees or the number of employees they plan to hire or their agreements. It may have no implications in terms of their agreements with the city.”
http://www.citizen-times.com/story/news/2015/12/18/reports-new-belgium-explores-sale-asheville/77569628/
RELATED
Blogpost: Asheville's Continued Misinformation Campaign
Wednesday, December 16, 2015
Who Owns WNC's Water
Carolina Public Press
October 22, 2015
Town Hall, Fletcher, NC
At its Newsmakers forum held on Oct. 22, 2015, Carolina Public Press held a panel discussion on the ownership and management of public and private drinking water systems in Western North Carolina. Panelists were Kim Colson, director, N.C. Division of Water Infrastructure; Katie Hicks, assistant director, Clean Water for North Carolina; Rep. Chuck McGrady, R-Henderson; and Lee Smith, utilities director, Hendersonville Water and Sewer. The event was moderated by Carolina Public Press’s Investigations and Open Government Editor Jon Elliston and its lead environmental contributing reporter, Jack Igelman.
Subtopic: The Asheville Water System
Speaker: Chuck McGrady
Full Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AobC85Aa64U
October 22, 2015
Town Hall, Fletcher, NC
At its Newsmakers forum held on Oct. 22, 2015, Carolina Public Press held a panel discussion on the ownership and management of public and private drinking water systems in Western North Carolina. Panelists were Kim Colson, director, N.C. Division of Water Infrastructure; Katie Hicks, assistant director, Clean Water for North Carolina; Rep. Chuck McGrady, R-Henderson; and Lee Smith, utilities director, Hendersonville Water and Sewer. The event was moderated by Carolina Public Press’s Investigations and Open Government Editor Jon Elliston and its lead environmental contributing reporter, Jack Igelman.
Subtopic: The Asheville Water System
Speaker: Chuck McGrady
Full Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AobC85Aa64U
Saturday, December 12, 2015
Friends of WPVM
Controversy at WPVM
Saturday, December 12, 3:00 p.m.
Pack Library, Lord Auditorium, Asheville
Before you attend the meeting today, here's a little background on WPVM:
Participants in the drama, and the author of the Mountain Xpress article (“Lost in Transmission: Amid Heated Controversy, WPVM Charts a New Course,” Nov. 4), choose to remain uncomprehending of parliamentary procedure or laws governing non-profits in North Carolina.
Chris Lawing thought he had a position on the official Friends of WPVM Board of Directors, but Lawing simply did not, and when informed of that reality, chose (with others) to take the route of fueling a smear campaign.
When Friends of WPVM was in the planning and start up phase in September 2014, an interim Board of Directors formed just to get the process rolling and Lawing, Byron Ballard, and others were placed on a interim Board. This was done to satisfy MAIN's requirement that the group demonstrate a commitment to doing the necessary steps to acquire the FCC license.
Once MAIN voted to transfer the license, the group began the formal proceedings of filing Articles of Incorporation with NC Secretary of State, and then the group was instructed to hold a formal organization meeting. An official Board was formed on Oct 8th to comply with NC State Incorporation law. (Signed documents verifying who was voted on to the official Board of Directors in October 8, 2014, for Friends of WPVM are below.)
MAIN Director Pat Battle inserted himself into Friends of WPVM, in a highly inappropriate manner, since he was in blatant conflict of interest at demanding to be on both Boards, and was against the FCC license transfer and had voted on MAIN as being opposed to the transfer ((A Director must act in the best interest of the organization of which are Director, as a first priority, and cannot be opposed to the business at hand, which was the transfer of the FCC license. One cannot be loyal to two different negotiating entities).
When it became obvious he had a clear conflict of interest (being both boards and opposed to the transfer) he was required to remove himself from Friends of WPVM dealings in any way, and thereafter he began an aggressive campaign to sabotage the license transfer process.
Sitting elected officials Gordon Smith and Cecil Bothwell have also participated in fueling the flames of controversy or have made attempts at sabotaging the license transfer. Smith commented on the Asheville Politics Facebook page and councilmember Bothwell used his bully pulpit to discredit the new management with some of the show hosts. Bothwell and his associate Barry Summers have engaged in fear-mongering and have suggested that people send letters to the FCC opposing the license transfer.
Also fueling the controversy are show host's from Asheville FM, Barry Sanders, Shad Marsh, Steve Shields, Adam Strange, John Spears, TJ Amos. Sadly, Carmon Ramos Kennedy of WRES has also participated. Wally Bowen's son Connar Elliott has participated. Some have collected screen shots of all the comments made in regards to this ongoing smear campaign so there is a paper trail to back up points made here, and those screenshots are available for anyone to view at the station.
Rusty Silvis, who is calling for the meeting is a member of a group that had a show on WPVM (Vets for Peace). When the show Vets for Peace lost their main point person Ellie Halsey due to internal conflict in the group (composed of Ellie Halsey, Rusty Silvis and Don McCeachan), untrained show hosts McCheachan and Silvis took over and clearly did not know, or chose to ignore, basic rules such as using the dump button when guests used profanities, or not having food over the broadcast mixer, endangering a major piece of equipment that runs the station.
Vets for Peace were informed that when a show loses it's main point person, the replacements must go through the complete orientation procedure to insure that they know how to operate the equipment to do their show. Additionally they must be computer savvy enough to receive emails and know how to archive their shows.
The programming committee reviewed the shows and sent suggestions on improving the show delivery. The improvements have not been attained (because they have not come in to do any more shows), nor have Rusty or Don done the required show orientation follow up. Meetings were held with Rusty, Don and the VETS for Peace President and where it was discussed what they needed to do to be in compliance. They were unhappy at needing to go through the orientation and that all participants needed to know how to operate the equipment.
Wednesday, December 09, 2015
Asheville's Continued Misinformation Campaign
The Mountain Xpress weekly newspaper has finally broken the extended news black-out of the failing Asheville water lawsuit. But there is a lot of misinformation and a lot is missing, like quotes from MSD.
The article entitled "Under Pressure" states that the water system has an uncertain future. The future of the water system is far from uncertain. No matter what happens in court, the city is certain to lose the water system. (http://timpeck.blogspot.com/2015/11/city-councils-malfeasance.html)
The article cites Water Department head Jade Dundas saying that the transfer would take "at least a year."That is not true. The transfer would take approximately 24 hours, give or take a few minutes. The inevitability of the system transfer has made it incumbent on MSD to plan for the transfer and those plans are in place and will be activated immediately upon the Supreme Court's dismissal of the City's appeal.
State's Motion to Dismiss & Response to PDR: https://www.scribd.com/doc/292783971/State-s-Motion-to-Dismiss-Response-to-PDR
Jade continues misinforming the public saying that the issues that need to be resolved include:
-- "Transferring the contracts of the department's 148 employees."
There are no contracts to transfer. Water department staff are not contractors, they are employees. The only difference will be a different logo on their paychecks, and a different signature.
-- "Non-tranferrable federal and state health-and-safety certifications."
Certifications are for people and they are not void in the event of a transfer of the employee.
-- "Transferring the financial, accounting and information technology systems."
MSD is ready to take over these systems as is on day one, to be operated in parallel with the current sewerage operational systems. Data migration will take place over time and under MSD's purview.
-- "Training new employees."
What new employees? Water department employees will do the same job in the same capacity, only under new management. If anything, there will be staff reductions due to consolidation.
-- "The City's water-related bond debt, which is financed by system revenues."
Here we have an admission that Asheville does not own the water system. If it did, the bonds would have been financed by the taxpayers, not water customers. Instead, the are Revenue Bonds. Also note that there is no explanation why this would be an issue. Perhaps that is because it is NOT an issue. The state has an office dedicated to resolving bond transfer issues and this has already been addressed well in advance of the coming transfer. In fact, the bonds themselves anticipate this eventuality and provides for a smooth transference to another political subdivision of the state.
The trial court raised the matter of the issuance of revenue bonds and states that the bonds are “secured by the net revenues of the Water System” and that there is “no provision made anywhere in the Act for obtaining the consent of the bondholder” for any transfer to an “unrated successor.”
The new Metropolitan Water and Sewerage District (MWSD), created by the Act, extends the existing Metropolitan Sewerage District (MSD) by merging the Metropolitan Water District with the currently operating MSD. MSD has as sturdy a bond rating as the City, and the rating would not suffer a loss of strength as a consequence of the Act. Note that MSD possesses the authority to operate a water utility, granted to it by the state in Session Law 2012-103. (See Article 5 - Metropolitan Sewerage Districts. § 162A-69. (13c) “To exercise any power of a Metropolitan Water District under Article 4 of this Chapter not set forth in this section.”)
Debt service on the Revenue Bonds is guaranteed with the continued operation of the water system, which the Water Act ensures. Debt service is further guaranteed by the State in the event of default by the obligor (See State's Motion to Dismiss).
There is no provision in the Act for transfer of debt precisely due to the existence of a longstanding process for handling the inter-governmental transfer of debt obligations as established by the state Department of Treasury’s Division of State and Local Government.
Furthermore, the City's lackluster defense of its claims of the risk to bondholders demonstrates a lack of genuine concern.
The NC Appeals Court, Page 25-26, states in its ruling: "We do not reach any conclusion regarding Asheville’s fourth and fifth claims for relief, in which Asheville contends that the enforcement of the Transfer Provision would impermissibly impair obligations of contract in violation of our state and federal constitutions and in violation of N.C. Gen. Stat. § 159-93. The trial court made no rulings on these claims, and Asheville did not take advantage of Rule 10(c) of our Rules of Appellate Procedure, which allows an appellee to propose issues which form 'an alternate basis in law for supporting the order[.]' Therefore, any argument by Asheville based on these claims for relief are waived."
In other words, the City neglected to raise the issue in Appeals and thus forfeited its right to appeal the ruling on that point. As stated in the State's whip-smart Motion to Dismiss, Page 15, note 3:
Indeed, so great is the City's error, the court's can no longer respond to its late-coming complaint. Citing a controlling precedent going back to 1968, the State's Motion to Dismiss (Page 21) courteously reminds the Supreme Court that it may not consider any matter extraneous to the Appeals Court ruling; to wit, the bond issue.
The article entitled "Under Pressure" states that the water system has an uncertain future. The future of the water system is far from uncertain. No matter what happens in court, the city is certain to lose the water system. (http://timpeck.blogspot.com/2015/11/city-councils-malfeasance.html)
The article cites Water Department head Jade Dundas saying that the transfer would take "at least a year."That is not true. The transfer would take approximately 24 hours, give or take a few minutes. The inevitability of the system transfer has made it incumbent on MSD to plan for the transfer and those plans are in place and will be activated immediately upon the Supreme Court's dismissal of the City's appeal.
State's Motion to Dismiss & Response to PDR: https://www.scribd.com/doc/292783971/State-s-Motion-to-Dismiss-Response-to-PDR
Jade continues misinforming the public saying that the issues that need to be resolved include:
-- "Transferring the contracts of the department's 148 employees."
There are no contracts to transfer. Water department staff are not contractors, they are employees. The only difference will be a different logo on their paychecks, and a different signature.
-- "Non-tranferrable federal and state health-and-safety certifications."
Certifications are for people and they are not void in the event of a transfer of the employee.
-- "Transferring the financial, accounting and information technology systems."
MSD is ready to take over these systems as is on day one, to be operated in parallel with the current sewerage operational systems. Data migration will take place over time and under MSD's purview.
-- "Training new employees."
What new employees? Water department employees will do the same job in the same capacity, only under new management. If anything, there will be staff reductions due to consolidation.
-- "The City's water-related bond debt, which is financed by system revenues."
Here we have an admission that Asheville does not own the water system. If it did, the bonds would have been financed by the taxpayers, not water customers. Instead, the are Revenue Bonds. Also note that there is no explanation why this would be an issue. Perhaps that is because it is NOT an issue. The state has an office dedicated to resolving bond transfer issues and this has already been addressed well in advance of the coming transfer. In fact, the bonds themselves anticipate this eventuality and provides for a smooth transference to another political subdivision of the state.
The trial court raised the matter of the issuance of revenue bonds and states that the bonds are “secured by the net revenues of the Water System” and that there is “no provision made anywhere in the Act for obtaining the consent of the bondholder” for any transfer to an “unrated successor.”
The new Metropolitan Water and Sewerage District (MWSD), created by the Act, extends the existing Metropolitan Sewerage District (MSD) by merging the Metropolitan Water District with the currently operating MSD. MSD has as sturdy a bond rating as the City, and the rating would not suffer a loss of strength as a consequence of the Act. Note that MSD possesses the authority to operate a water utility, granted to it by the state in Session Law 2012-103. (See Article 5 - Metropolitan Sewerage Districts. § 162A-69. (13c) “To exercise any power of a Metropolitan Water District under Article 4 of this Chapter not set forth in this section.”)
Debt service on the Revenue Bonds is guaranteed with the continued operation of the water system, which the Water Act ensures. Debt service is further guaranteed by the State in the event of default by the obligor (See State's Motion to Dismiss).
There is no provision in the Act for transfer of debt precisely due to the existence of a longstanding process for handling the inter-governmental transfer of debt obligations as established by the state Department of Treasury’s Division of State and Local Government.
Furthermore, the City's lackluster defense of its claims of the risk to bondholders demonstrates a lack of genuine concern.
The NC Appeals Court, Page 25-26, states in its ruling: "We do not reach any conclusion regarding Asheville’s fourth and fifth claims for relief, in which Asheville contends that the enforcement of the Transfer Provision would impermissibly impair obligations of contract in violation of our state and federal constitutions and in violation of N.C. Gen. Stat. § 159-93. The trial court made no rulings on these claims, and Asheville did not take advantage of Rule 10(c) of our Rules of Appellate Procedure, which allows an appellee to propose issues which form 'an alternate basis in law for supporting the order[.]' Therefore, any argument by Asheville based on these claims for relief are waived."
In other words, the City neglected to raise the issue in Appeals and thus forfeited its right to appeal the ruling on that point. As stated in the State's whip-smart Motion to Dismiss, Page 15, note 3:
Indeed, so great is the City's error, the court's can no longer respond to its late-coming complaint. Citing a controlling precedent going back to 1968, the State's Motion to Dismiss (Page 21) courteously reminds the Supreme Court that it may not consider any matter extraneous to the Appeals Court ruling; to wit, the bond issue.
Saturday, December 05, 2015
Friday, December 04, 2015
Wednesday, December 02, 2015
Dissecting Holly Jones
The balls out hypocrisy of leftist politician Holly Jones
Background by Pete Kaliner: "Jones wrote a post that appears at the Politics NC blog (more on that in a bit) regarding the Syrian refugee issue. Specifically, whether NC should accept more of them. In keeping with her newfound moderate approach to politics, Jones offers a reasonable opening salvo. She says that while she disagrees with the opposition to accepting more refugees, she understands the concerns.."
Background by Pete Kaliner: "Jones wrote a post that appears at the Politics NC blog (more on that in a bit) regarding the Syrian refugee issue. Specifically, whether NC should accept more of them. In keeping with her newfound moderate approach to politics, Jones offers a reasonable opening salvo. She says that while she disagrees with the opposition to accepting more refugees, she understands the concerns.."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)