Community Heroes Day Sept 30, 2017

Feeling Safe?

Audit: 1,700 unaccounted for; Baker says SJC rulings a factor

 Bob McGovern, Matt Stout Thursday, September 28, 2017

Hundreds of convicted sex offenders have either gone unaccounted for or haven’t yet been classified, according to a blockbuster audit that caused the state’s public safety office — and Gov. Charlie Baker — to point at high court decisions as a possible reason for the issues.

A report from state Auditor Suzanne M. Bump found that the Massachusetts Sex Offender Registry lost track of more than 1,700 sex offenders and has yet to classify the threat level of 936 individuals.
“SORB does not have adequate internal controls, such as policies and procedures, in place to ensure that all sex offenders are classified in a timely manner (i.e., while they are still in custody),” the audit, released publicly yesterday, states. “This allows some offenders with a high risk of reoffense to remain unclassified.”

Sugar, Fluoride, & Lowered I.Q.

 

 

A new article published in the peer-reviewed journal PLOS Medicine reveals that recently uncovered internal documents from 1959 to 1971 show that the sugar industry successfully manipulated the research on dental decay conducted by the U.S. National Institute of Dental Research (NIDR), a branch of the National Institutes of Health (NIH).

The industry documents show that the NIH was directly influenced to focus on approaches to prevent tooth decay in American children without reducing sugar intake.  This is probably a major reason why fluoridation propaganda replaced honest information on dental decay in US regulatory agencies.  According to the study, the 319 documents included internal memos, correspondence, reports, and meeting minutes, and were from a time period when the NIDR was the primary source of federal funding for dental research and initiatives, including the promotion of fluoride and fluoridation.

Authors found that “Seventy-eight percent of the sugar industry submissions were incorporated into the NIDR’s call for research applications. Research that could have been harmful to sugar industry interests was omitted.”

The article, entitled “Sugar Industry Influence on the Scientific Agenda of the National Institute of Dental Research’s 1971 National Caries Program: A Historical Analysis of Internal Documents,” was authored by a team of researchers from the University of California San Francisco.  One of the authors, Stanton Glantz, PhD, is famous for his work revealing the lies of the tobacco industry regarding health effects, and said of this study:

“These tactics are strikingly similar to what we saw in the tobacco industry in the same era.  Our findings are a wake-up call for government officials charged with protecting the public health, as well as public health advocates, to understand that the sugar industry, like the tobacco industry, seeks to protect profits over public health.  The sugar companies, in criticizing what we did, haven’t said we’ve said anything wrong or that we’ve misunderstood and misrepresented anything.  They’re saying ‘Oh, this is a long time ago, what difference does it make,’ — and that’s exactly what the tobacco industry said.”

Glantz and his co-authors made the following conclusion in their article:

“This historical example illustrates how industry protects itself from potentially damaging research, which can inform policy makers today. While it may be valuable in theory for the industry to contribute data about their products to the research community, industry should not have the opportunity to influence public health research priorities [94]. Regulatory science to support sensible and defensible policies to limit added sugar consumption was not pursued in the 1970s because of the alignment of the NIDR’s research priorities with those of the sugar

Report: More money won't solve Massachusetts' transportation problems

Posted September 26, 2017 at 12:57 PM | 

Updated September 26, 2017 at 03:19 PM 

 

 

By Shira Schoenberg / The Republican 

 

More money alone will not solve Massachusetts’ transportation woes, according to a study released Tuesday by the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation.

The report found that it is not only a lack of adequate funding creating problems but inadequate data, inefficient spending, inconsistent project management, added costs due to the impacts of climate change and lost revenue due to technological advances.

The report argues that a full review of the state's transportation system is necessary.
“What is clear is that the state lacks the requisite information to make profoundly difficult choices,” the report writes. “Questions such as which projects to fund and when, and how revenue sources should be allocated must be included as part of a long-term sustainable transportation finance plan to address our transportation needs. Unfortunately, the state has not yet adopted such a plan.”

Among the report’s key findings:

 

Roads and bridges

Massachusetts spent $4.3 billion more than state officials had projected having available on road and bridge projects between 2007 and 2016, but roads and bridges are still in poor condition. This is because poor data management meant the state had inaccurate projections of how much it would cost to keep the roads in good repair, according to the report.

The Massachusetts Department of Transportation has since updated its databases to ensure better cost projections going forward.

The MBTA

Although lawmakers made some changes to employee pensions and benefits to reduce costs at the MBTA, the report states, they did not do as much as they could have to save money with management or privatization.

The MBTA then delayed making debt payments and pushed off making repairs in order to save money — which will hurt the system going forward.

“Reduced capital spending over an extended period caused a further degradation of the MBTA’s infrastructure which will ultimately force the state to spend billions more than what the MBTA projected was needed to bring the system up to a state of good repair,” the report found.

Tight state finances

The state is reaching its debt limit, which affects how much money it can borrow for capital projects like transportation improvements.

There's A Spy Ring in Congress

Awan Funneling ‘Massive’ Data Off Congressional Server, Dems Claim It’s Child’s HOMEWORK

 

Luke Rosiak

Investigative Reporter

 

Democratic congressional aides made unauthorized access to a House server 5,400 times and funneled “massive” amounts of data off of it. But there’s nothing to see here, Democrats told The Washington Post: They were just storing and then re-downloading homework assignments for Imran Awan’s elementary-school aged kids and family pictures.

A congressional source with direct knowledge of the incident contradicted the Post’s account, saying that now-indicted IT aide Imran Awan and his associates “were moving terabytes off-site so they could quote ‘work on the files'” and that they desperately tried to hide what was on the server when caught, providing police with what law enforcement immediately recognized as falsified evidence and an indication of criminal intent.

The Post described the amount of data improperly flowing out of the congressional network as “massive.” One congressional source told Circa it was “terabits.”

A terabyte is a million megabytes; a terabit is about one-tenth of that. Awan’s three children are in elementary school or younger. A book report in Word document format could clock in at under a megabyte, even if it were 100 pages long. To fill a terabyte with family photos, a person would need 250,000 photos.

Rules aside, there would be little reason for a staffer to upload his children’s homework and family photos to a congressman’s server. For one, cloud services such as Google Drive and Google Photos readily provide that functionality, with a web interface. The congressional computer was a server with no monitor, so you couldn’t view the photos on it, and they had to have been uploaded onto it by another computer. It makes little sense that Awan would upload personal data from a home computer onto a House server only to re-download it.

Awan’s wife, Hina Alvi, was the sole person that was supposed to be authorizing the Caucus server, and she could have uploaded pictures of her children without attracting attention.

Yet she accessed it only 300 times as part of her job, while other people — including Awan’s two brothers and his friend Rao Abbas — accessed it 5,400 times. It’s unclear why extended family and friends would be uploading Awan’s kids’ homework and pictures more than their own mother would.

The Post did not note the “massive” outgoing data and unauthorized access until the 40th and 42nd paragraphs of its story, after it had quoted multiple defense attorneys and ventured into a lengthy and seemingly irrelevant but humanizing backstory on Awan’s childhood.

Its print headline was “Evidence Far Exceeds Intrigue” in the probe, yet it quoted only a congressional staffer who, TheDCNF’s congressional source said, would not have been able to make assurances that there was nothing to the criminal investigation, because Congress has been fire walled from the criminal probe since it was turned over. 

 

The Post also did not specify that data was also being backed up online via unofficial Dropbox accounts. Wasserman Schultz has acknowledged that the accounts were used for congressional data, and that she has used the service in violation of House rules “for years.”

The server was under the auspices of Xavier Becerra, who left Congress Jan. 24 to become California attorney general and asked for the server to be wiped at that time. Police first asked for a copy and received what they identified as an elaborately falsified image, leading police to ban them from the network immediately because they viewed it as an attempt to tamper with a criminal investigation and an indication of clear criminal intent, TheDCNF reported before the Post story ran. The Awans were banned from the House network Feb. 2.

The Post reported:

 The invocation of “speech and debate” suggests that Democrats barred law enforcement from looking at the apparent data breach. The Post — which has highlighted the importance of cybersecurity and the intolerability of hacks on government — suggested finding any of this odd would be “unfounded conspiracy theories and intrigue.”

 There are indications that Awan is less than a doting family man, and that he would use his congressional position for ill. Three women have called police on him in the last three years. One is his stepmother, Samina Gilani, who said she was kept “in captivity.” In court documents, she alleged: “Imran Awan threatened that he is very powerful and if I ever call the police [he] will do harm to me and my family members back in Pakistan and one of my cousins here in Baltimore … Imran Awan did admit to me that my phone is tapped and there are devices installed in my house to listen my all conversations … Imran Awan introduces himself as someone from U.S. Congress or someone from federal agencies.”

A second told police she felt “like a slave,” and a third said she “just wanted to leave.” The latter two were apparently in romantic relationships with Awan, who lived in small apartments in Alexandria, Va. that he paid for while he lived with his wife.

The Boston Police Department Has Drones

BPD reportedly bought three of them this year.

By Spencer Buell | Boston Daily | September 26, 2017, 10:13 a.m.

 Pretty soon, that drone buzzing over your head might not be piloted by a hobbyist leaf-peeping from the sky, or a videographer capturing a wedding day (for better or worse). It might be the Boston Police.

That’s because the BPD quietly bought three of the camera-equipped flying devices this year—for a reported $17,500—that it plans to deploy at some point in the future, according to the Boston Globe.
It hadn’t been publicly announced before the Globe‘s reporting, after the paper was sent a photo by the ACLU of what appeared to be a pair of Boston Police officers testing out a drone in Jamaica Plain. BPD says the three drones in its possession have not been used, and that they won’t be until after a there has been time for public input.

Sponsored Content

Suggested: Meet the Best of Boston Winner: Polkadog Bakery

Police drones, naturally, have caused some alarm among privacy advocates, particularly the American Civil Liberties Union, which says on its website their use should be tightly controlled to prevent abuse of the technology:

Drones have many beneficial uses, including in search-and-rescue missions, scientific research, mapping, and more. But deployed without proper regulation, drones equipped with facial recognition software, infrared technology, and speakers capable of monitoring personal conversations would cause unprecedented invasions of our privacy rights. Interconnected drones could enable mass tracking of vehi­cles and people in wide areas. Tiny drones could go completely unnoticed while peering into the window of a home or place of worship.

Surveillance drones have been the subject of fierce debate among both legislators and the public, giving rise to an impressive amount of state legislation—proposed and enacted—to protect individuals’ privacy. Uniform rules should be enacted to ensure that we can enjoy the benefits of this new technology without bringing us closer to a “surveillance society” in which our every move is monitored, tracked, recorded, and scrutinized by the government.

The ACLU recommends the following safeguards:

• Usage Limits: A drone should be deployed by law enforcement only with a warrant, in an emergency, or when there are specific and articulable grounds to believe that the drone will collect evidence relating to a specific criminal act.
• Data Retention: Images should be retained only when there is reasonable suspicion that they contain evidence of a crime or are relevant to an ongoing investigation or trial.
• Policy: Usage policy on drones should be decided by the public’s representatives, not by police departments, and the policies should be clear, written, and open to the public.
• Abuse Prevention and Accountability: Use of domestic drones should be subject to open audits and proper oversight to prevent misuse.
• Weapons: Domestic drones should not be equipped with lethal or non-lethal weapons.

The ACLU of Massachusetts has raised similar concerns here, urging police to be open with residents about how they will be used. “If the Boston Police Department wants to earn the community’s trust, they should be more than willing to discuss in advance their plans to use this technology and if they are deploying them in communities,” Kade Crockford, director of the Technology for Liberty Program at the ACLU of Massachusetts, tells the Globe.

 

Bid Openings for the Templeton Elementary School - TODAY!

Bid Openings for the Templeton Elementary School - TODAY!

Wednesday 9/27/17

Elem. School           Kiva                      3:00 pm

Kiva
464 Baldwinville Rd., Baldwinville, MA

Templeton Elementary School Building Committee
Bid Opening for Filed Sub-Bidders for the Templeton Elementary School Project at Narragansett Regional High School~ KIVA, 464 Baldwinville Road, Templeton, MA 01468 

Wednesday, September 27, 2017, at 3:00 p.m. 
Agenda
Open Bids
Adjourn 

The listing of Agenda items is those reasonably anticipated by the Chair which may be discussed at the meeting. Not all items listed may in fact be discussed and other items not listed may also be brought up for discussion to the extent it is permitted by law. 

***************************************

Why no mention of this historical event at the Selectmen's Meeting Monday night?

See how well spending more money than you take in has worked out for Hartford CT.

At least Hartford still has a bond rating!

 

 

5 Ways Political Correctness Has Gone Too Far

5 Ways Political Correctness Has Gone Too Far

George Carlin - Political correctness posing as manners

Have a great day! 

Connecticut Capital Hartford Downgraded To Deep Junk, S&P Says "Default Virtual Certainty"

by Tyler Durden

Sep 26, 2017 4:54 PM

 

Two months after S&P downgraded the state capital of Connecticut, Hartford, to junk, when it cuts its bond rating from BB+ to BB- citing growing liquidity pressures and weaker market access, the city which has been rumored is preparing to file for bankruptcy protection and which has seen an exodus of corporations and businesses in recent months, just got more bad news when S&P downgraded it by a whopping 4 notches deeper into junk territory, from BB- to CC, stating that "a default, a distressed exchange, or redemption appears to be a virtual certainty."

"The downgrade to 'CC' reflects our opinion that a default, a distressed exchange, or redemption appears to be a virtual certainty," said S&P Global Ratings credit analyst Victor Medeiros.
The rating agency also warned that it could take additional action to lower the rating to 'Default' if the city executes a bond restructuring or distressed exchange, or files for bankruptcy.

In our view, the potential for a bond restructuring or distressed exchange offering has solidified with the news that both bond insurers are open to supporting such a measure in an effort to head off a bankruptcy filing. Under our criteria, we would consider any distressed offer where the investor receives less value than the promise of the original securities to be tantamount to a default.

In short: while Chicago has so far dodged the bullet, the capital of America's richest state (on a per capita basis), will - according to S&P - be also the first to default in the coming months.
Full S&P note below:

Hartford, CT GO Debt Rating Lowered Four Notches To 'CC' On Likely Default

S&P Global Ratings has lowered its rating four notches to 'CC' from 'B-' on Hartford, Conn.'s general obligation (GO) bonds and Hartford Stadium Authority's lease revenue bonds. The ratings remain on CreditWatch with negative implications, where they were placed on May 15, 2017. At this rating level and due to the characteristics of the city's appropriation-supported debt, we believe its appropriation and GO debt share similar risk and have therefore made no notching distinction. We could differentiate the GO and appropriation ratings again in the future based on our view of their relative vulnerability to nonpayment.

"The downgrade to 'CC' reflects our opinion that a default, a distressed exchange, or redemption appears to be a virtual certainty," said S&P Global Ratings credit analyst Victor Medeiros.

S&P Global Ratings could take additional action to lower the rating to 'D' if the city executes a bond restructuring or distressed exchange, or files for bankruptcy. In our view, the potential for a bond restructuring or distressed exchange offering has solidified with the news that both bond insurers are open to supporting such a measure in an effort to head off a bankruptcy filing. Under our criteria, we would consider any distressed offer where the investor receives less value than the promise of the original securities to be tantamount to a default. The mayor's public statement citing the need to restructure even if the state budget provides necessary short-term funds further supports our view that a restructuring is a virtual certainty. In our view, the city is vulnerable to payment interruptions due to its near-term liquidity crisis. The downgrade also considers the ongoing state impasse in adopting a budget and providing the necessary liquidity support for the city in a timely manner to avoid a payment disruption. The downgrade reflects the likelihood that there will not be any agreement on a bipartisan budget before Oct. 1, when planned municipal cuts are scheduled to take effect.  

The state of Connecticut is facing its own fiscal challenges, entering the fiscal year without an enacted budget. With no budget resolution in place, the governor recently revised an executive order designed to keep the government operating in balance for the fiscal year. To eliminate the state's 2018 projected deficit, the governor reduced total aid to municipalities by a significant amount; Hartford would stand to lose about $49 million in payments in lieu of taxes and municipal revenue sharing grant payments it otherwise would receive in October. The city's is scheduled to repay short-term tax anticipation notes (TANs) on Oct. 31, and has the next debt service payment scheduled for Nov. 15.

Although we do not see a bankruptcy filing by the city as likely, should a debt exchange proceed, given the state budgetary impasse, and the uncertainty surrounding any exchange offer, the risk of a bankruptcy filing remains as city officials have publicly indicated they are actively considering bankruptcy. The fact that the city hired a bankruptcy attorney in July 2017 lends credence to the idea that bankruptcy is potentially on the table. On Sept. 25, the city met with bondholders to discuss future repayment options. Such a meeting, regardless of the outcome, indicates a public desire to adjust debts and to have met with creditors; both of which are elements of eligibility to file for Chapter 9 bankruptcy. Although state law still requires approval from the governor, and consent from the treasurer and general assembly, this action heightens the likelihood that Hartford will formally begin that process.

Brookfield man suing town over order to remove sign

 

 

By Craig S. Semon
Telegram & Gazette Staff

Posted Sep 23, 2017 at 6:00 AM  

Updated Sep 23, 2017 at 11:27 PM

BROOKFIELD – A local resident is suing the town and the Zoning Board of Appeals seeking to overturn a ruling ordering him to, among other things, take down a sign that has been at the center of controversy for years.

John D. Holdcraft this week filed the lawsuit in Worcester Superior Court. It was also signed by Mr. Holdcraft’s counsel, James P. Ehrhard of Ehrhard & Associates in Worcester.

For years, various selectmen, municipal employees and regular citizens have butted heads with Mr. Holdcraft for derogatorily mentioning them by name on the 8-by-4-foot double-sided sign on his property facing Route 9.

The Zoning Board of Appeals sometime around July 16, 2003, granted the special permit to Mr. Holdcraft for his property located at 6 South Maple St.

Included among the conditions were: building a shed (8 feet high, 8 feet wide and 27 feet long) to operate a “Retail Service for Charitable Reasons” business; having a sign stating “Retail Service for Charitable Reasons” to conform to the town’s zoning bylaws; and being granted a two-year special permit subject to renewal for another two years, if Mr. Holdcraft fully complied with the permit.

The special permit and subsequent extension expired Dec. 31, 2005.

According to the lawsuit, Mr. Holdcraft was able to use the shed and the property surrounding it in “quiet enjoyment” until March 21, approximately 12 years after the extension was granted.

But all of that changed when one of Mr. Holdcraft’s main targets on his sign, Selectman Clarence R. Snyder III, made a written request for Zoning Enforcement Officer Nicholas Thomo to issue a cease-and-desist order against Mr. Holdcraft for conducting “an illegal business with illegal signage” and order the removal of the business, shed and signage from the premises.

On April 3, Mr. Thomo sided with Mr. Snyder and issued a cease-and-desist order.

According to Mr. Thomo’s letter, Mr. Holdcraft violated conditions of the permit by failing to provide appropriate landscaping and signage on the property and to ensure no items were to be left outside.

Mr. Holdcraft was ordered to bring the property into compliance with the conditions of the original special permit, including appropriate landscaping and signage.

In his “administrative appeal” to ZBA Chairman Charles Wilson, Mr. Snyder further pointed out that the cease-and-desist order did not address the primary issue of whether the special permit had expired on Dec. 31, 2005.

The suit expounds on Mr. Snyder writing in his administrative appeal that he was “aggrieved” by the decision, while never stating how he was aggrieved. The suit alleges that Mr. Snyder is not aggrieved in any way.

“It is truly only about taking down Holdcraft’s sign so that elected Selectman Snyder cannot be criticized under the First Amendment,” the suit states. “The ZBA members were obviously happy to do their Selectmen’s bidding.”

Another point the suit makes is the ZBA “never sent any notice whatsoever,” via U.S. mail or constable, to Mr. Holdcraft, abutters or interested parties about the hearing on July 19 and the continuation of the hearing on Aug. 1 and 2.

However, the suit mentions that Mr. Holdcraft was handed by a constable prior to the Aug. 2 meeting a notice that the Aug. 2 meeting was going to be continued to Aug. 16.

On Aug. 16, the ZBA ruled 4 to 1 in favor of Mr. Snyder’s complaint.

The suit’s final argument alleges that the statute of limitations, regarding the building permits and special permits under Mass. General Law, had long ended.

The suit claims that the ZBA had no basis to overturn the decision of the zoning enforcement officer and grant Snyder’s complaint, and the ZBA ruled incorrectly and without foundation that Mr. Holdcraft must take down his building and no longer use the property as he has for more than 12 years.

“What we have here is a sitting selectman (Mr. Snyder) attempting to use the authority of the Zoning Board of Appeals to take away Mr. Holdcraft’s property and livelihood for no other reason than to silence a town resident who speaks out against him,” Mr. Ehrhard said. “Snyder and his friends on the ZBA left Mr. Holdcraft no other option but to go to court. And the ZBA is spending Brookfield taxpayer dollars to fight Snyder’s battle for him. The whole thing is a clown show.”

Why the NFL Suddenly Wants to Pay Taxes

Sean Gregory

Apr 28, 2015

 The NFL announced Tuesday that it's voluntarily relinquishing its tax-exempt status. Here's what you need to know about the move.

Why in the world would the NFL volunteer to pay taxes?

Basically, the economic value of the exemption wasn’t worth the political and PR headaches that it created. In a memo to the league’s teams and members of Congress, NFL commissioner Roger Goodell called the tax-exemption a “distraction,” and said it has “been mischaracterized repeatedly in recent years.”

Is there truth to this?

Yes. Political threats to revoke the tax-exemption of pro sports organizations hold populist appeal. After all, how can commercial outfits that sell expensive tickets and generate millions of dollars for owners and players be considered non-profit organizations – and thus exempt from paying taxes? The NFL is no charity.

In 2013, Sen. Tom Coburn (R) of Oklahoma introduced legislation that would prohibit the NFL and other pro sports organizations with over $10 million in revenue from filing as non-profits. In the wake of the Ray Rice scandal last fall, New Jersey Senator Cory Booker, a Democrat, proposed similar legislation – and argued that taxes on these leagues could fund domestic violence programs. Last month, Republican Congressman Jason Chaffetz, House Oversight Committee Chairman, told Reuters that “the National Football League should have to pay taxes like everybody else.”

Politicians, however, largely fail to explain the scope of these tax-exemptions – which are much more limited than they may appear. The NFL's teams, who see a bulk of the league’s $11 billion in revenue, are taxable entities. So the NFL does pay taxes. The league office is tax-exempt, but it generated just $9 million in income during the 2012 tax year.

So repealing the NFL's tax exemption wouldn’t create the windfall politicians want you to expect. If it saved the NFL a ton of money, today’s voluntary relinquishing never would have happened. Recent political posturing exaggerated its value.

Why was the NFL office tax-exempt in the first place?

The NFL has historically filed as a 501 (c)(6) non-profit, which provides tax-exemptions for “business leagues, chambers of commerce, real estate boards, boards of trade, and professional football leagues.” Er, how did football get written into the tax code?

This legislative quirk dates back to the 1966 NFL-AFL merger. “Professional football leagues” were added to the code that year to ensure that the merger could go forward “without fear of an anti-trust challenge under either the Clayton Antitrust Act or the Federal Trade Commissions Act,” and to ensure that “a professional football league’s exemption would not be jeopardized because it administered a players’ pension fund,” according to the Internal Revenue Service. In return for this favorable treatment of the merger by two Democratic lawmakers -- Louisiana Senator Russell Long, chairman of the Finance Committee, and Louisiana representative Hale Boggs, House majority whip -- New Orleans was awarded the NFL’s next expansion franchise.

Who’s the big winner here?

NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell. Remember him calling the exemption a distraction? Well, the largest distraction has been the required public disclosure of his enormous compensation -- $44 million in 2012, and $35 million in 2013. When Goodell mishandles an issue like Ray Rice, his paycheck is inevitably thrown in his face. How can a guy making that much money screw up so badly? The commissioner’s pay is also a sore point during collective bargaining negotiations.

GO AHEAD TAKE THE KNEE

Commentary on the NFL

Take a little trip to Valley Forge in January. If you don't know where that is, just Google it from the sidelines. Hold a musket ball in your fingers and imagine it piercing your flesh and breaking a bone or two. There won't be a doctor or trainer to assist you until after the battle, so just wait your turn.Take your cleats and socks off to get a real experience. Then take a knee.

Then, take one at the beach in Normandy where man after American man stormed the beach, even as the one in front of him was shot to pieces...the very sea stained with American blood. The only blockers most had were the dead bodies in front of them, riddled with bullets from enemy fire.

Take a knee in the sweat soaked jungles of Vietnam. from Khe San to Saigon...Anywhere will do. Americans died in all those jungles.There was no playbook that told them what was next, but they knew what flag they represented When they came home, they were protested as well..and spit on for reasons only cowards know.

Take another knee in the blood drenched sands of Fallujah in 110 degree heat..Wear your Kevlar helmet and battle dress...Your number won't be printed on it unless your number is up! You'll need to stay hydrated but there won't be anyone to squirt Gatorade into your mouth. You're on your own.

There's a lot of places to take a knee. Americans have given their lives all over the world. When you use the banner under which they fought as a source for your displeasure, you dishonor the memories of those who bled for the very freedoms you have. That's what the red stripes mean. They represent the blood of those who spilled a sea of it defending your liberty.

While you're on your knee, pray for those that came before you, not on a manicured lawn striped and printed with numbers to announce every inch of ground taken...but on nameless hills and bloodied beaches and sweltering forests and bitter cold mountains...every inch marked by an American life lost serving that flag you protest.

No cheerleaders, no announcers, no coaches, no fans...just American men and women...delivering the real fight against those who chose to harm us...blazing a path so you would have the right to "take a knee."

You haven't an inkling what it took to get you where you are...but your "protest" is duly noted. Not only is it disgraceful to a nation of real heroes, it serves the purpose of pointing to your ingratitude for those who chose to defend you under that banner that will still wave long after your jersey is retired...

If you really feel the need to take a knee, come with me to church on Sunday and we'll both kneel before Almighty God. We'll thank him for preserving this country for as long as He has. We'll beg forgiveness for our ingratitude for all He has provided us. We'll appeal to Him for understanding and wisdom. We'll pray for liberty and justice for all...because He is the one who provides those things.

But there will be no protest. There will only be gratitude for His provision and a plea for His continued grace and mercy on the land of the free and the home of the brave. It goes like this...

GOD BLESS AMERICA!

Many with chronic illness denied prescriptions in fight against opioids

By Susan Spencer
Telegram & Gazette Staff

Posted Sep 23, 2017 at 8:00 PM  

Updated Sep 24, 2017 at 12:36 PM

 

The symptoms came out of the blue, cropping up two years ago with agonizing abdominal pain that flared up and then, after a time, briefly subsided. The pain became worse after eating, causing nausea and vomiting as well.

Lauren Deluca, 36, of Worcester grew frantic as the flare-ups and pain persisted. She lost 20 pounds in three weeks, on an already trim frame, and missed work as an insurance specialist because of her symptoms.

“The pain level is a 10,” she said in an interview. She described the attacks as “blinding pain,” preventing her from carrying on everyday activities such as leaving her apartment, going to work and eating normal meals.

Ms. Deluca just wants the pain to stop, to be able to manage her condition and go on with her life.

But the opioid epidemic, which led to more than 2,000 overdose deaths last year in Massachusetts, has had another consequence: Patients with severe or chronic pain often can’t get the prescription painkillers they need to cope.

More than half the nearly 3,000 doctors nationwide who responded to a survey last year commissioned by The Boston Globe reported that they had cut back on prescribing opioids. Some, nearly one in 10, have stopped prescribing altogether.

“That’s a constant battle for physicians to make sure we’re finding the right balance” between relieving pain and reducing risk of addiction, said Dr. Dennis Dimitri, vice chairman of the Department of Family Medicine and Community Health at UMass Memorial Medical Center and a clinical associate professor at University of Massachusetts Medical School. Dr. Dimitri is also the chairman of the Massachusetts Medical Society’s Task Force on Opioid Therapy and Physician Communication.

Dr. Dimitri said for acute pain, usually a short course of opioids, no more than three to five days, is all that’s necessary. But for chronic pain, such as headaches, nonspecific abdominal or back pain, or fibromyalgia, the effectiveness of opioids isn’t so clear.

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention issued guidelines on prescribing opioids for chronic pain last year, and most physicians proceed cautiously because of the risks, according to Dr. Dimitri. They are urged to try nonopioid solutions first, prescribe in small amounts and look for measurable improvement before going further down that path. But it’s “ultimately up to the physician’s judgment,” he said.

He added, “This is a little bit of the pendulum swinging too far back to one side,” about blanket refusals to prescribe.

“My constant worry is, if I go into an attack, are they going to believe me or think that I’m a junkie?” said Ms. Deluca, who has faced repeated obstacles from physicians to get even small doses of opioids. “I feel like I’m fighting for my life right now because taking my medication away takes away my ability to live.”

Doctors initially prescribed a bland diet and antacids, including Zantac and proton pump inhibitors, to reduce the symptoms, which Ms. Deluca said quickly stopped working. They put her on a very-low-fat diet, which she monitors carefully, forcing herself to eat a small meal every two to three hours to keep the acid in her stomach low.

She was hospitalized for a week in late 2015 for an attack. Medical tests and referrals to local specialists led doctors to suspect Ms. Deluca suffered from chronic pancreatitis, an inflammation of the pancreas that does not heal and gets worse over time, leading to irreversible organ damage. During an acute attack, the enzymes created by the pancreas to digest food stay inside the pancreas, causing the organ to digest itself and resulting in debilitating pain.

Ms. Deluca wasn’t given opioids for the pain until a particularly excruciating flare-up led her to the emergency room in May, nearly two years after her painful episodes started. She received a small dose of Dilaudid (hydromorphone), a Schedule II narcotic.

But health care providers have been extremely reluctant, or refused, to provide any more. Ms. Deluca said a local gastroenterologist scolded her for going to the emergency room for her pain. Another physician she was referred to, in Boston, dismissed her complaint. “He saw me as a pill seeker,” she said.

“It’s not if I’m going to have an attack; it’s when,” Ms. Deluca said. “You want to know if you go into an attack, someone will help me.”

Meetings the Week of September 25, 2017

Meetings the Week of September 25, 2017

Monday  9/25/17

Clown College                   PCS Town Hall*              6:30 pm

Adv Com                           PCS Town Hall*              6:30 pm

       

Tuesday  9/26/17

Planning                             PCS Town Hall*             6:30 pm

Wednesday 9/27/17

Elem. School           Kiva                      3:00 pm

Thursday 9/28/17

Economic                            PCS Town Hall*            9:00 am

 

* Pauly Cosentino Sr. Town Hall

Woman indicted for stealing $30K from South Royalston water district

Updated on September 23, 2017 at 11:58 AM  

Posted on September 23, 2017 at 11:55 AM

 

 

By Mary C. Serreze

Special to The Republican 

A Wayland woman is accused of stealing $30,000 from a non-profit that runs a tiny public water district in Central Massachusetts.

Vickie Paine, 55, of Wayland, is former treasurer of the South Royalston Improvement Corp. On Thursday, a Worcester County grand jury indicted her on charges of larceny and false entry in corporate books.

According to the office of Attorney General Maura Healey, Paine wrote checks to cash, which she signed and endorsed. She allegedly withdrew from corporate accounts and transferred money to her personal accounts.

The alleged thefts took place between 2009 and 2014, and were discovered after she left the organization.

"Employees who abuse their positions for personal gain by stealing money will be held accountable by our office," Healey said in a statement.

The South Royalston Improvement Corp. was established in 1959 and dissolved in 1964 for failure to file annual reports with the Secretary of the Commonwealth, state records show. However, the water district kept operating.

Paine in 1999 petitioned the state for corporate reinstatement, saying she had been secretary/treasurer of the corporation for 12 years, and did not know about the annual filing requirement. The reinstatement was granted, and annual reports were filed through 2013.

"I devote my time to make sure the people on our system have good quality water," Paine wrote in her application. "This is my baby, I would hate to see it dissolve."

***************************************

So how do these financial messes happen to community after community?

Records show Barre officials were warned of problems with tax collector

 

Former Hubbardston tax collector sentenced to jail, restitution for thefts

 

 Stolen Public Funds

 

What safeguards can be out into place to ensure the findings from the FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT LETTER are corrected?

What safeguards can be put into place to ensure the LAW is followed?

"Illegal interfund borrowings were used to fund annual operations in at least two  years." 

Management Letter p.4, Tony Roselli, CPA April 25, 2017.

Could feds pave way for new Mass. gas project?

Buzz builds on FERC priorities under Trump

Bruce Mohl Sep 21, 2017

 Environmental activists who oppose the construction of new natural gas pipeline capacity in New England are watching what’s going on at the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission in Washington with growing concern. 

 

The federal agency last week overruled a decision by the New York Department of Environmental Conservation denying a water quality permit for the construction of a connection between an existing pipeline and a natural gas plant currently in development. 


FERC’s decision was based on a technicality – that the New York agency had failed to act within an allotted one-year time frame and thus had waived its authority. Two other pipeline companies have indicated they will go to FERC seeking similar rulings for their projects. 

While the FERC decision seems fairly narrow in scope, industry officials and environmental activists both say the ruling is a strong signal that the federal agency under President Trump is willing to take a more activist role in state pipeline battles. That could become important in New England as the region debates whether more pipeline capacity is needed to keep the lights on during the winter months. 

New England’s dependence on natural gas is growing. A report released last week by the regional grid operator, ISO-New England, said natural gas-fired power plants represented 44.5 percent of the region’s electricity-generating capacity in 2016, a percentage expected to grow to 56 percent over the next decade. The report also said inadequate pipeline capacity in the region raises reliability concerns that are “particularly critical” during peak winter demand conditions when prices rise and some natural gas plants find it difficult to obtain fuel. 
 
For several years now, the region has been debating what to do about the pipeline situation, which has been subsumed to some degree within the broader debate about climate change. Nowhere has the debate been more intense than in Massachusetts, the largest consumer of electricity in the six-state region.