
Nobody identified where I snapped the muskoxen picture.
Here's a really easy one. Where is this?
If you've been asleep all week, here's the recap:Both these reporters work hard and the ADN has them working both as straight news guys on the print version and bloggers online. And I'm sure it's hard to keep those two roles straight. But what about the editor? Or have they decided that chatty is ok on the front page?
Federal attorneys have been manipulated into a partisan political attack on Stevens.
The Hatch Act forbids federal employees, specifically those from the Department of Justice, from playing campaign politics. The U. S. attorney, FBI and Justice Department are playing campaign politics. Dirty campaign politics. Huey Long, Louisiana-style, hardball, campaign politics. They violate the Hatch Act they are charged to enforce.Well, not exactly. The original Hatch Act forbade federal employees from taking part in partisan political campaigns. It was passed by Republicans who wanted to stop Franklin D Roosevelt from using federal employees to work on his reelection. Not only can't they work during working hours, but they weren't allowed to be involved in federal elections on their own time either. The Hatch Act was significantly amended in 1993 to allow many federal employees to take part in campaigns. But I haven't seen any Begich signs up yet on the sides of the FBI or Federal Buildings.
Assessments, by Alaska statutes, must be at full market value and Mayor Mark Begich has done a good job at making certain that properties are at full value. Municipal tax revenue depends upon it.Oh Jim, you sell real estate. That must have been really hard to write with a straight face. Oh, and there's one, teeny weeny problem here. Crawford cites the assessments for the years 2001 and 2003. Mark Begich didn't take office until April 2003. I don't know for sure if the 2003 assessment comes out in 2003 or 2004, but clearly the 2001 assessment was before Begich and he probably didn't have time yet to affect the 2003 assessment. But if he did make changes, then the increase in the property assessment would have at least partially reflected the more accurate assessment that Crawford implies that the Begich administration implemented, not just the increase in value due to the remodeling.
partisan (n.)From yourdictionary.com
1555, "one who takes part with another, zealous supporter," from M.Fr. partisan (15c.), from dial. upper It. partezan (Tuscan partigiano) "member of a faction, partner," from parte "part, party," from L. partem (nom. pars), see part (n.). Sense of "guerilla fighter" is first recorded 1692. The adj. is 1708 for warfare, 1842 for politics
noun
- a person who takes the part of or strongly supports one side, party, or person; often, specif., an unreasoning, emotional adherent
- any of a group of guerrilla fighters; esp., a member of an organized civilian force fighting covertly to drive out occupying enemy troops
Etymology: MFr <>partigiano < parte <>pars, part
adjective
- of, like, or characteristic of a partisan
- blindly or unreasonably devoted
- of or having to do with military partisans
a firm adherent to a party, faction, cause, or person; especially : one exhibiting blind, prejudiced, and unreasoning allegiance
Onpedia's dictionary gives us a definition for the adjective, the way Crawford uses it.
. partisan - devoted to a cause or party nonpartisan, - free from party affiliation or bias
These investigations often take years to complete and many result in no adverse action.
I'm guessing at the translation into English: "We worked out a deal where we paid $2million to various community groups to escape from being prosecuted."
The DPA relates to an investigation of a Clean Water Act (CWA) violation at two wastewater treatment facilities in Connecticut. Pursuant to the DPA, the subsidiary contributed $2.0 million to community projects and took other agreed upon steps to enhance CH2M HILL's CWA compliance procedures at the two wastewater treatment facilities in Connecticut
Although we were satisfied with the results of the due diligence review, no assurances can be given that the ongoing investigations will not result in civil or criminal charges against VECO, now a subsidiary of ours. Any such charges and related publicity could have an adverse effect on our reputation in the business community or future business operations.
On July 27, 2007, our subsidiary, CH2M HILL Hanford Group ("CH2M Hanford") caused a spill of approximately 85 gallons of radioactive waste, during routine maintenance operations on the Hanford Reservation owned by the United States Department of Energy ("DOE").It looks like they face a possible $.5 million fine from the State of Washington on that one. (Is the "." a typo? If I were writing it I would have written Half-million rather than have it look like five million. Maybe it was intended to be confusing. Who knows?
Item 3. Legal Proceedings
We are a party to various contractual guarantees and legal actions arising in the normal course of our business. From time to time, agencies of the U.S. government investigate whether we conduct our operations in accordance with applicable regulatory requirements. Because a large portion of our
20
business comes from federal, state, and municipal sources, our procurement practices at times also are subject to review and occasional investigations by U.S. and state attorneys offices. Such state and U.S. government investigations, whether relating to government contracts or conducted for other reasons, could result in administrative, civil or criminal liabilities, including repayments, fines or penalties. These investigations often take years to complete and many result in no adverse action. Damages assessed in connection with and the cost of defending any such actions could be substantial. While the outcomes of pending proceedings are often difficult to predict, as of the date of this filing, our management believes that no ongoing litigation or investigation is likely to result in a material adverse impact on our consolidated financial statements.
In January 2006, a subsidiary entered into a Deferred Prosecution Agreement (DPA) with the office of the United States Attorney for the District of Connecticut. The DPA relates to an investigation of a Clean Water Act (CWA) violation at two wastewater treatment facilities in Connecticut. Pursuant to the DPA, the subsidiary contributed $2.0 million to community projects and took other agreed upon steps to enhance CH2M HILL's CWA compliance procedures at the two wastewater treatment facilities in Connecticut. Provided CH2M HILL complies with its obligations under the DPA through January 2008, the U.S. District Attorney for the District of Connecticut will recommend dismissal of all actions against the subsidiary in connection with this matter. The violation is related to failure to comply with sampling and reporting requirements of the CWA and there is no evidence the violation resulted in harm to human health or the environment. Although the term of the DPA ended in January 2008 and we believe we have fully complied with the DPA, the DPA will not be released and the criminal charge will not be removed until the U.S. District Attorney for the District of Connecticut is satisfied all conditions have been met. We are currently in discussions with the U.S. District Attorney for the District of Connecticut to achieve this resolution.
In September 7, 2007, we acquired VECO and substantially all of its operating businesses. Prior to the acquisition, on May 2, 2007, the founder, then chief executive officer and principal shareholder of VECO, Bill Allen, entered into a plea agreement with the United States Department of Justice pursuant to which he agreed to plead guilty to certain criminal charges involving bribery of public officials, violation of campaign contribution laws, and tax fraud. In connection with the investigation of the allegations against Mr. Allen, the United States Department of Justice, the Internal Revenue Service and certain State of Alaska government agencies commenced investigations of VECO and certain of its other employees. In the process of reviewing VECO's business and operations prior to the acquisition, we engaged in special due diligence designed to address concerns related to the conduct of VECO's past operations and various investigations underway by the Department of Justice, the Internal Revenue Service and certain State of Alaska government agencies. Although we were satisfied with the results of the due diligence review, no assurances can be given that the ongoing investigations will not result in civil or criminal charges against VECO, now a subsidiary of ours. Any such charges and related publicity could have an adverse effect on our reputation in the business community or future business operations.
On July 27, 2007, our subsidiary, CH2M HILL Hanford Group ("CH2M Hanford") caused a spill of approximately 85 gallons of radioactive waste, during routine maintenance operations on the Hanford Reservation owned by the United States Department of Energy ("DOE"). No one was injured, and the DOE's accident investigation concluded that "[because] of low concentrations and short duration of the exposure, it is not likely that the spill event caused an overexposure or chronic health impacts". CH2M Hanford took all prompt and appropriate steps to formulate and implement a corrective action plan that has been accepted by the DOE. In connection with the event, the DOE's Office of Health, Safety and Security has conducted an investigation under its Price Anderson Act nuclear safety authority. The DOE has not yet taken any formal action against CH2M Hanford as a result of this investigation. The DOE has broad discretion in setting fines, but it takes into account a contractor's prompt acceptance of responsibility and the formulation of an appropriate corrective action
21
plan, which is what CH2M HILL has done to what we believe to be the DOE's satisfaction. The Washington Department of Ecology has proposed to fine the DOE $.5 million in connection with the spill and, if the fine is levied, CH2M HILL will be financially liable for it under our contract with the DOE. CH2M Hanford is in discussions with the the Washington Department of Ecology about a possible reduction of the proposed fine. Finally, the Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA") proposed to fine both the DOE and CH2M HILL in connection with the spill. CH2M HILL settled that fine for $6,800 and $24,000 in in-kind services to support the local Tri-County emergency response team. CH2M HILL's management does not believe that this event will materially impact CH2M HILL's business or results of operations.