Did I understand correctly ?
You go to the Char Steak and Lounge, with a wood fired "char" grill,
order the namesake steak,
receive what was advertised ,
then call the char ( "carbonizing") on the said steak a "downside "?
Isn't that exactly what is wanted at "Char House" . A "charred goodie" ?
Give me a break !
Maybe the greatest victory for the anti-fracking activists in New York State is to switch the burden of proof from the victims to the producers. A hallmark of European environmentalism is to place the burden of proof on the industries producing products—making them prove their products will do no harm to the public or to the environment before they are allowed on the markets. The reverse has been true on this side of the Atlantic.
Decades of environmental and public health abuses by polluting industries have been allowed to continue business as usual until enough time and energy and research brought the polluters to court.
This statement by acting New York State Health Commissioner Howard Zucker could have profound implications on how we address environmental concerns in our hemisphere: "Until the science provides sufficient information to determine the level of risk to public health from HVHF to all New Yorkers and whether the risks can be adequately managed, DOH recommends that HVHF should not proceed in NYS," Zucker wrote in a letter to Martens that accompanies the public health report.
Justin Gurnsey .....a class act
How about compensation for losing the peaceful and quiet enjoyment of your property, worries about health, water contamination, air pollution, truck convoys blocking roadways...um, let me count the ways #fracking will destroy the way of life for those of us who live in the southern tier. (Who lied to these landowners, telling them they will get rich from shale?) How are those losses calculated?
Before the ACA the poor and uninsured could easily get health insurance for free in Arizona. It is called ahcccs or Mercy Care for the poor. GOP don't need a new healtcare plan to replace the ACA since the old system was very effective.
OK! Good job ladies!
We know that our elected school board has failed miserably to improve Rochester's public schools. Our public schools are the worst in the state, and our school district one of the worst in the nation.
We also know that those school commissioners keep getting re-elected, which suggests the voters aren't much smarter than the students in our public schools.
While Mayor Warren did state that she would not seek mayoral control of the schools during her campaign, she promptly resurrected the Office of Special Projects after her election, and made Allen Williams commissioner of that office.
Allen Williams is known among "education circles" as favoring and promoting mayoral control of the schools, and this was long before Lovely Warren was elected mayor.
That might have seemed a bit, well, suspicious.
Now Mayor Warren states that mayoral control is up to the governor and the state assembly.
It IS different from her campaign statements.
The only problem is that Mayor Warren's administration, so far, has been nothing but a series of gaffes, half-truths and untruths. The mayor ( and her staff ) spends way too much time pulling her foot out of her mouth to be entrusted with controlling Rochester's schools.
We see that the school board has been failing unashamedly for decades. Getting rid of them, either as individuals to be voted out of office or by eliminating the board altogether is only part of the solution to the problem.
Mayoral control of the schools might be a viable option if a more intelligent, less power-mad mayor were in office.
We haven't got one.
This is the voice of sheer desperation. Mr. Reed has argued loudly for state's rights in this matter--until the state banned fracking. This to me rhymes with the logic of trade agreements like TPP that are now being negotiated in secret and would give corporations rights equal to sovereign nations, including the right to sue for potential lost profits caused by democratic laws, especially environmental laws. Corporations are very close to insisting that we owe them a living--and juicy profit margins. Mr. Reed's posturing reduces that argument to absurdity. But just because they're absurd doesn't mean that these ideas aren't powerful and in motion as we speak.
Many thanks Ron and Shared Genes would also like you to know that we will be performing on December 31, New Years Eve, and on Saturday January 3 at Jasmines Asian Fusion, 657 Ridge Rd Webster, NY (216-1290) at 7 PM as well The Pultneyville Grill, 4135 Mill St, Williamson, NY (315) 589-4512 (7 PM) on Friday January 9 ~ Sam and Ted
Nothing has been "taken"; the methane is still there in the shale. Mineral rights owners can still drill into other formations, such as the Trenton Black River, or even into the Marcellus or Utica using vertical low volume fracking. With methane prices so low, it is probably not economical to do so, but , as Commissioner Martens pointed out, it's highly questionable if high volume fracking is economical in NY state either. There just isn't that much recoverable methane in the thinner, shallower shale layers of NY.
Besides being dangerous and unhealthy, fracking was just another instrument of income inequality. The gas companies become ultra rich and there was potential for landowners to become rich. Others would have benefitted from jobs. But as we learned from Pennsylvania, the boom turned to bust quite rapidly.
Now that NY has banned fracking, activists must push for solar and wind and as yet unknown alternatives. Imagine spreading the wealth by helping everyone with a roof to install solar panels. If activists play their cards right, no one will even think about revisiting fracking in the future...because NY will be far ahead of other states on development of future energy sources.
By banning fracking, NY is finally allowing the future to start now.
Should non-property owners be compensated for the inability to lease any land for fracking?
Instead of Reed's money wasting idea, let's spread the wealth by helping everyone put solar panels on every roof.
Property ownership is a myth. When someone can't pay the taxes anymore, then they have to leave. The property is immovable, so no one can "take" it. The gas underneath, by law, must not be removed.
Compensation? For what?
Just when you think this train wreck of an administration cannot possibly get any worse, Lovely creates more madness and confusion out of thin air. Back when she was first elected, the fear was that she would be David Gantt's puppet. Actually, that would be an improvement over what we have now. It just seems to be one unforced error after another with her. She's not up to the job.
This Facebook page has Lovely's name on it. She is responsible for what is posted there, in her name, no matter how many people she allows to access the page. The claim, "I was hacked," if made, is implausible and particularly unbelievable from a person who has done nothing but give us reasons to question her judgment - and ours in electing her in the first place.
It is hard to know whether to believe Warren's claim that she knew nothing about the posting, as she has so often made dubious claims this past year, going back to her uncle's reckless driving episodes. But assuming it is true, it brings up another question. How can anyone with basic intelligence provide their business passwords to several people (same question applies to personal ones). Most companies train their employees to keep the codes confidential and to change them at regular intervals. Does Rochester not have basic IT security standards, or does Warren simply ignore them as only applying to the little people? Perhaps she can explain that to everyone tomorrow.
"You should compensate individuals for taking their property," Reed said. Who is you, one wonders? What property was taken? Would NYS take ownership of the gas in exchange for compensation? How would the amount of compensation be determined? I doubt that Tom Reed has thought this through.
Wow. That's some hasty and ungraceful backpedaling. Sorry Mayor Warren, if it's possible that someone else used your account, then you suck at security, which begs the question how seriously you take the security of ROCity. The more likely scenario is that Mayor Warren did post that, but really, really, really wishes she hadn't and believes that the citizenry of ROCity is stupid enough to believe that mysteriously someone else posted that. This is why our "leaders" are so afraid of transperancy; they're afraid that if we actually see them for who they are and see what they actually do, we'll hold them accountable.
I doubt that the mayor wrote that comment, as she rarely uses Facebook. She has her paid staff to do that. While that is the way many of her staffers might feel about the city's reaction to the tent city underneath the 490 overpass, it's doubtful that any of them would be stupid enough to post it as being from the mayor and still hope to keep their cushy jobs.
On the other hand, many of my friends and acquaintances on Facebook have had their accounts hacked. This might be one such instance.
Rochester, New York
So should the state compensate me for disallowing a swine farm in my residential neighborhood?
Website powered by Foundation