(Is Pollina on firm ground because Governor Douglas vetoed the $1,000 campaign limit bill and nothing is in place, or as Secretary of State Deb Markowitz “pointed out that because Pollina made his switch on the day of the candidate filing deadline, he never actually participated in the Progressive Party primary”?  

There may be way too many legal loopholes for anyone to unravel…   – promoted by Margaret Gundersen)

I think Pollina’s approach to how he is handling his current campaign donation issue is solid, honest and is the only way to answer some questions.

First is the obvious point that courts will not issue an opinion (with exceptions for legislative inquiries) unless an active controversy exists. In other words, there is no way for Pollina’s campaign to get a substantive answer as to what law will apply on this issue without going against the Attorney General’s opinion.

And we know Sorrell’s record regarding campaign finance laws when facing a court battle, such struck down opinions being shared by Vermont’s SoC Markowitz.

Second is a less obvious, but still substantial point, that Pollina was doing nothing more nor less than any other candidate who intended to be in the primary … receiving donations on the assumption he/she would be participating in the state funded party primary system.

The above is a subtle but substantive issue, because according to  Markowitz one doesn’t actually participate in a primary until one files to be on the primary ballot (see AG investigating Pollina campaign, Times Argus, 08/21/08, “That comment resulted in a quick rebuttal from Secretary of State Deb Markowitz, a Democrat, who pointed out that because Pollina made his switch on the day of the candidate filing deadline, he never actually participated in the Progressive Party primary.”)

In another place I’ve spoken to what I believe are serious constitutional issues on how independents are treated regards financing as opposed to the generous treatment afforded party line candidates. Just to recap: independent is limited to $1,000 per donor, no state funding via the primary election and no unlimited party funding. On the other hand a party line candidate who receives the nomination can receive up to $2,000 per donor, state funding via the primary and unlimited party support … despite being out pursuing votes for the same length of time and covering the same geographical area as an independent and appearing on the exact same general election ballot.

I think Pollina is on firmer ground than recognized.

why is the statement used so often? I’m referring specifically to various claims of being a multi-generational Vermonter.

In another thread (here) the use of this phrase occurred twice in succession, and I pointed out a simple fallacy: in order to be 7th generation Vermonter, one would have to be 140 to 175 years old depending on how many years you want to go with for generation.

In today’s Times Argus (story not posted online yet) this same claim to multi-generational Vermonterism is repeated. “Matthew is an eight-gneration Vermonter who grew up on Scragg Mountain …” (Man pleads not guilty in pie-throwing, Times Argus, 08/15/08).

My whole discussion about this stems from an interest in what people are trying to say, how they say and what they mean to infer in their words. It’s obvious that many people believe a claim to long family ties to Vermont has special meaning, but it’s not so obvious what they are trying to say is so special.

Apparently even bringing this subject up is enough to have opprobrium upon the questioner in the form of troll ratings and attempts to be dismissive (ironically while responding to the questioner’s posts).

I think laying claim to being a multi-generational Vermonter and that having any import in issues of discussion is meaningless, trite even.

What do you think?

threatens to hold hearings on next AG nominee.

U.S. Sen. Patrick Leahy, the former Vermont prosecutor who is now the head of the Senate’s Judiciary Committee, is not at all pleased with the decision by U.S. Attorney General Michael Mukasey to not prosecute officials who politicized hiring at the Department of Justice.

“I think it is outrageous,” Leahy said on Tuesday. “What it says is if you go ahead and violate the law, if you go ahead and try and politicize prosecutions … if you keep it hidden long enough and you get away with it, good for you, nobody is going to touch you.”

. . .

Leahy said he will continue hearings in his committee into the matter – and warned he will still be in the Senate when the next attorney general is nominated by the next president, whether Democrat Barack Obama or Republican John McCain.

“After this administration leaves, I am going to still be chairman of Judiciary,” Leahy said. “I will be the one chairing the hearings on the nominee.”

(Leahy angered by AG decision, Times Argus, 08/13/08)

Hey tough guy, way to stand up for the American people.

From the True Majority email list:

I wanted to invite you to a concert with Mike Gordon (formerly of Phish) that our friends at the Progressive Voters of America are sponsoring on Burlington’s beautiful Waterfront Park.

It’s a free show and our ally on so many issues, Senator Bernie Sanders, will be there to talk about the importance of the November elections.

What: Free Concert with Mike Gordon (with special guest Bernie Sanders)

When: Friday, August 15th, 7:00 PM

Where: Waterfront Park (Downtown Burlington)

Hope to see you there!

( – promoted by odum)

ECFiber Update, August 2008

It’s been a couple of months since our last update about ECFiber’s project to bring a high-speed fiber-optic network to provide television, telephone, and broadband internet service to its member towns. We’ve been busy – a lot has happened. Here’s a summary:

• 23 Towns Participating
• Three Funding Proposals received, Oppenheimer Chosen
• Fixed-Price Commitment from Atlantic Engineering Group

Full story below the fold ….

23 Towns Participating

The last town presented its signed agreement from its select board at ECF’s Governing Board meeting on May 13th in Quechee, bringing the total number of towns participating in the project to 23. Representatives from these 23 towns will be moving forward over the next few months to continue the pre-registration process, approve  documents governing the financing and implementation of the Project, and begin to review proposals to finance the design, construction and  operation of the network.

Over 15% of the households in the ECFiber service area have already pre-registered for service, with Barnard currently leading the way at over 75%. You can see a list of participating towns, and their current number of pre-registrations, on the ECFiber homepage at www.ecfiber.net. There is also a list of each town’s ECFiber representatives at www.ecfiber.net/townlist.

Three Funding Proposals Received, Oppenheimer Selected

While the Governing Board has been working on the details of creating the organization, two sub-committees have been doing important work to secure funding for the Project and to finalize contracts for its operation. The Finance Committee received several proposals for the financing of the capital lease from potential underwriters, reviewed those proposals, and recommended an underwriting firm. At the June 10th meeting, the Governing Board authorized the Executive Committee to engage the chosen institution, Oppenheimer & Co., Inc., of New York City.

According to Kim Mooers of Sovereign Securities, who is acting as ECFiber’s financial advisor in the deal, Oppenheimer is essentially breaking the lease into pieces and bringing them to market in a public offering. Each “piece” is called a “certificate of participation” (in the Lease) and the entire mechanism is called a “COPs” (or certificates of participation) financing.

Loredo Sola, chair of ECFiber’s Executive Committee said Oppenheimer was selected from three qualified bidders because of their experience with COPs for fiber-to-the-home projects, their understanding of the project and the deal, their proven track record of succeeding with the sale of similar certificates, and their reputation in the market. Apart from a nominal initial signing fee, Oppenheimer has agreed to make all fees and out-of-pocket costs contingent on the success of the financing.

Now begins the important task for the ECFiber towns: disclosure of the Project and the financing structure to potential purchasers of the certificates and “due diligence”. Oppenheimer needs to be sure that the Project is on a solid financial and legal footing. To ensure that this information is thorough and complete, and that it complies with all legal requirements, ECFiber has retained Greenberg Traurig, LLP, a national law firm with an office in Boston, that is well-respected by the financial community, to help the 23 towns provide Oppenheimer with the information it requires.

The “working target date” for closing is currently mid-November, but Tim Nulty, Project Director, is cautious. “I’ve done a lot of complex financings and I know that there are always bumps in the road. Realistically, I will be delighted if the money is in the bank by the end of the year.”

Fixed-Price Commitment From Atlantic Engineering Group

ValleyNet, who will be contracting with ECFiber to provide the Project design and construction services, has entered into a letter of intent (the “LOI”) with Atlantic Engineering Group (AEG) for a fixed price construction contract  (at $29.3 million plus contingency) covering the Project’s core network infrastructure, including the design, construction and installation of the actual fiber-optic cable network throughout the towns but excluding the hub building and the access equipment. AEG ‘s  experience includes building 65 Fiber-to-the-Premises networks,  including 16 that are municipally-owned.  AEG’s proposal was based upon the financial model prepared by ValleyNet. The LOI states that  “AEG considers the ECFiber network design to be sound and has tested the ValleyNet cost figures using its own proprietary pricing models.  Our models are based upon our extensive experience building similar networks and have concluded that ValleyNet’s figures for the elements included [in the LOI proposal] are reasonable and achievable.”  The LOI also states that  “AEG believes that the execution schedule  contained in the ECFiber model is reasonable and will commit to meet that schedule, subject to provisions allowing for events beyond AEG’s control.”

Benefits of Fiber to Vermont

At a recent conference in Burlington sponsored by the Snelling Center for Government, Lewis Feldstein, in his keynote address, pointed out the many advantages to communities when they increase the value of their social capital, the connections that their members have with one another. Being connected technologically is more and more a way to do that, and the all-day conference, entitled “Fulfilling Our E-State Potential: Building Community in a Connected Age,” included presentations and discussions on how Vermont can move forward as an E-State without losing the sense of community that is such an important part of its history and character.

ECFiber is working to bring high-speed networks to its member towns to benefit residents, small businesses, schools, organizations, and government, and we expect that this will become a model for other projects throughout the state of Vermont. The Snelling Center has created a website at snellingcenter.wikispaces.com/Symposium with information on the discussions that took place at the conference, and will continue to offer discussions and opportunities for input on these important questions.

ECFiber Timeline

Once ECFiber obtains funding for the Project, work is expected to proceed at a fairly rapid pace. Engineers will determine the exact layout for the network itself, and will survey each utility pole in the entire region to create detailed plans for attaching the fiber. Once the layout of the network is in hand, the location of the remote fiber hubs can be determined. All of the network lines will run to the main hub expected to be located in White River Junction, which will be built and fitted out with a redundant power supply, networking devices, telephone switching servers, and television controls.

At the same time, other aspects of the Project will get underway — implementation of a customer service operation center and software for a billing and collections system, hiring and training of customer service technicians, and connection of the fiber lines on the utility poles to boxes on the side of houses, shops, schools, and town offices to make the final connection to computers, telephones and televisions.

ECFiber currently expects the first connections to be made in the Fall of 2009, consistent with the Governor’s goals for Vermont as an E-State.  It is expected that the ECFiber service area will eventually cover one-sixth of the area of the state itself.

Pre-Registrations

As we have indicated, the more pre-registrations that we can process before we actually begin wiring houses, the more efficient our work will be and the less the delay will be in getting everyone connected once the fiber is on your street. Please let your neighbors know that they can pre-register on the ECFiber website at www.ecfiber.net/preregister; there’s no obligation if their needs change before the service becomes available, but we assume that those pre-registering are serious about using our services as we work to make them available. There is also a pre-registration form that you can download and print at www.ecfiber.net/documents/ECFiber-pre-registration.pdf.

Sincerely,

Loredo Sola

Chair, ECFiber Executive Committee

ECFiber is a grassroots initiative to build a high-speed state-of-the- art fiber-optic network in over twenty Vermont towns, bringing cable television service, reliable telephone service, and high-speed Internet service directly to homes, schools, and businesses.

To find out more visit www.ECFiber.Net, e-mail to info@ecfiber.net, or write to

ECFiber,  PO Box 8,  White River Junction VT 05001

To read more about how the economy looks to people in places other than Wall Street and Washington, go to:

(Across America, economic woes are mounting, McClatchy Washington Bureau)

Yes, the list is of McClatchy news service stories, but it is also what is being printed around the nation.

Sen. Ted Stevens, the longest-serving Republican senator and a figure in Alaska politics since before statehood, has been indicted on seven counts of falsely reporting hundreds of thousands of dollars in services he received from a company that helped renovate his home.

. . .

From May 1999 to August 2007, prosecutors said Stevens concealed “his continuing receipt of hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of things of value from a private corporation.” The indictment released Tuesday said the items included: home improvements to his vacation him in Alaska, including a new first floor, garage, wraparound deck, plumbing, electrical wiring; as well as car exchanges, a Viking gas grill, furniture and tools.

(Sen. Stevens indicted: 7 false statements counts, RawStory, 07/29/08)

The Democrats may have corruption issues, but the Republican Party IS a corruption issue.

The Environmental Protection Agency advised employees last month not to answer questions from journalists, the Government Accountability Office or the agency’s inspector general, according to an EPA e-mail made public Monday.

“Please do not respond to questions or make any statements,” the June 16 e-mail said, advising staff to direct questioners to senior staff members cleared to answer questions from outside the agency.

Robbi Farrell, chief of staff of the EPA’s compliance assurance division, sent the e-mail to 11 managers in the department.

( EPA e-mail to workers: Don’t answer inspector’s questions, CNN, 07/28/08)

Hush now, little one, don’t talk to the strange man.

And saving the worst for last …

Overall violence in Iraq is declining to almost “normal” levels, General David Petraeus told USA Today in an interview published Tuesday, following a string of attacks the day before.

The commander of US forces in Iraq warned however that the trend could be reversed by “sensational attacks” like those Monday in Baghdad and Kirkuk that killed some 56 Iraqis.

“If you could reduce these sensational attacks further, I think you are almost approaching a level of normal or latent violence,” he told the newspaper in a phone interview from Baghdad.

“The fact that the levels of violence have come down so significantly and stayed down now for some two-and-a-half months … indicates there is a degree of durability,” Petraeus said.

Daily attacks have averaged 25 to 30 over the past two months, compared with 160 to 170 a little more than a year ago, Petraeus told the paper.

(Violence in Iraq nearing ‘normal’ levels: Petraeus, RawStory, 07/29/08)

I would really really really hate to see what abnormal looks like to Petraeus.

Back page of section ‘B’ in today’s (07/29/08) Barre/Montpelier Times Argus carries a full page ad from our buddies at Entergy/Vermont Yankee. The ad begins with the words “Vemonter to Vermonter” in huge bold print.

So I decided to look around at just how “Vermonter” Entergy is. Cut to the chase … it ain’t.

Let’s start with Entergy Nuclear, and in particular their website’s legal info page:

This Web site and the Agreement are governed by the laws of the State of Arkansas, excluding its conflicts of laws principles, and, where and to the extent applicable, by federal law.

Okay, no mention of Vermont there. For that matter there is no mention of an “Entergy Nuclear”! It turns out it’s really about Entergy Corporation which is only “a holding company for individual public utility companies, among other affiliates.”

So now back to the Entergy Nuclear (pronounced NEW KLEE ER by the way) home page, mouse over “Plant Information”, and click on “Vermont Yankee”.

At this point we find the purported owner’s name: Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee, LLC, a “foreign” (ie out of state) corporation. Well, at least that name is registered with an instate corporate address with Vermont’s Sec of State (link here) … but wait …

ENVY, LLC is a managed corporation. Some company named “CT CORPORATION SYSTEM” is handling the corporate business in Vermont.

No problem, I’m sure an instate corporate management business will be a good thing to have, and after all there is nothing illegitimate about hiring a pro to run one’s business affairs. But there is a problem … there is no “CT CORPORATION SYSTEM” registered as a trademark or corporation with the SoC’s office.

Somewhere in Entergy’s Vermont holdings or affiliations there has to be a Vermont connection. Here’s the list as I could find it on the SoC’s website:

• ENTERGY NUCLEAR OPERATIONS, INC. (active & foreign) 1340 Echelon Pkwy, Jackson MS 39213
• ENTERGY NUCLEAR VERMONT INVESTMENT COMPANY (inactive & foreign) 1340 Echelon Pkwy, Jackson MS 39213
• ENTERGY NUCLEAR VERMONT INVESTMENT COMPANY, LLC (active & foreign) 1340 Echelon Pkwy, Jackson MS 39213
• ENTERGY NUCLEAR VERMONT YANKEE, LLC (active & foreign) 320 Governor Hunt Rd, Vernon, VT 05302
• ENTERGY OPERATIONS SERVICES, INC. (inactive & foreign) 120 MALLARD ST, STE 300, Saint Rose, LA 70087
• ENTERGY SERVICES, INC (active & foreign) 639 Loyola Ave, New Orleans LA 70113

There is another common thread other than the name “Entergy”. These  all have a common agent: CT CORPORATION SYSTEM, 400 Cornerstone DR ST240, Williston VT 05495 … nothing registered with SoC under that name.

Follow the internet bread crumbs and one finds CT Corporation System is a part of CT Corporation (link here). Maybe this CT is at least close to Vermont?

CT, a Wolters Kluwer business, provides intelligent software and service solutions that empower legal professionals to more effectively manage dynamic information, speed workflows and make critical decisions. Its parent company, Wolters Kluwer, is a leading multinational publisher and information services company based in Amsterdam with operations across North America, Europe, and Asia Pacific. CT is part of Wolters Kluwer Corporate Legal Services.

(source)

Damnit … nothing Vermonter there for sure.

No, “Vermonter to Vermonter” falls under the heading of a lie plain and simple. But we shouldn’t be surprised by lies from Entergy any more.

( – promoted by Jack McCullough)

Imagine for a moment (and maybe you don’t have to imagine it): your young children and you don’t live within 1000 feet of Barre City’s schools, parks, registered day care centers or other restricted location. Thanks to fearful reaction to a crime that wasn’t related to the ordinance passed, your children will now have a greater chance of being surrounded by individuals the Barre City council and apparently a great majority of city residents don’t think should be near children.

But so what? As Barre goes, apparently goes Rutland.

Cities such as Barre and Rutland are responding to the murder of 12-year-old Brooke Bennett and the arrest for kidnapping of her uncle, a convicted sex offender, by considering curbs on where sex offenders can live.

Rutland Mayor Christopher Louras said in an interview earlier this week that his proposal to restrict sex offenders might have the effect of driving them from his city into the surrounding communities. Louras said it was not the law’s intent, but a “byproduct.”

The city’s proposal would mirror curbs on convicted sex offenders just approved in Barre, forbidding them from living within 1,000 feet of a school, park or day-care center, a category that leaves little of the city uncovered. The law would not affect the 125 sex offenders already living in Rutland.

Said Rutland’s mayor, “Our concern is to protect the residents here,” noting he was not concerned with whether sex offenders would be pushed into the surrounding community.

(Rural officials wonder whether ordinances will drive sex offenders into their towns, Times Argus, 07/26/08)

Hell, you don’t have to be living outside of Barre or Rutland to feel the effects of this one.

But will it have the hoped for effect? No. A response to the TA article quoted above (same web page) says it better than I could ever have:

Laws such as this are rather useless. Restrictions on where sex offenders could live wouldn’t have protected the latest victims in the Randolph case for instance, as they were family members; only proactive family could have possibly prevented what occured. Within a short distance from my home have resided at least three sexual predators of the pedophile variety- only one was “registered” and he has subsequently been arrested for more offenses. The others were not known previously as offenders and preyed on their own family. None of these are/were living within a proscribed distance from a school, park or day-care facility, and none of their actions involved such entities. Proposed regulations such as these will not protect children but will in fact likely drive more offenders into rural locales without such laws. Instead of passing meaningless laws such as Barre and Rutland are considering, we need to confront how we as a society wish to deal with this matter and how best to protect our children. Laws such as this are just “window-dressing”.

Personally I would feel much more comfortable if we were dealing with: a) the reality of intra-family abuse sexual and otherwise; and b) violence as a way of life … after all “the uncle” had already been in prison for a violent kidnapping and rape. Why was he not either still in prison or very closely supervised?

And then there is the downstream demon making that occurs. Today it is this despicable group. Who knows who will be tomorrow’s despised?

Our governments have a truly nasty habit of taking extreme measures and applying them broadly. Take, for example, civil forfeiture. This was originally intended to make sure high level mobsters couldn’t make use of their unlawfully obtained millions to defend themselves in court. It worked so well by the end of the ’80s people were literally losing autos and boats over marijuana joints and seeds.

Now civil forfeiture has become a major funding source for police around our nation.

“The first thing I think about – is it constitutional to tell people they can’t live there?” said Bill Bonsignore, who lives in a Pittsford apartment complex. “I’m not condoning what they’ve done. You just start thinking, so they do that to that group, what individuals might be the next group who can’t be there.”

(ibid)

“Homecoming Days” are here again!

The bands are tuning up, the fireworks are bought and paid for and organizers say the latest edition of an annual mid-summer celebration that has become an institution in Barre is set to start on Thursday.

(It’s time for Barre’s summer celebration: Homecoming Days are coming, Times Argus, 07/22/08)

Now … where can we rent a bunch of Santa Claus suits?