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.
" When then Henrietta Supervisor Mike Yudelson announced last year that he was switching from Republican to Democrat, it was a big deal. As the town's top elected leader and, before that, a longtime Town Board member, Yudelson was an important "get" for the Dems ".
I like Mike too and I believe him to have good intentions. Yet the HDC is not telling the entire story in Henrietta and about the HDC. 2015 will be an interesting election in local, Henrietta Govt' indeed. SO with that said...if the new Town Leader, Simone and the new Chairman do not choose to tell readers the entire story that is their choice. However , I thought that open, transparent Govt' would be part of the upcoming campaign ? Already the HDC is misleading folks by not telling the entire story.
Craig Robert Moffitt...you will see, in Henrietta, more of my name and my ideas for Henrietta, NY after Jan., 1st, 2015.
Why not just require an exterior inspection? If a tenant doesn't want an inspector to enter, then that's his or her right. As an alternative, the tenant should be allowed to use a smartphone to take and email photos. Carla Palumbo, needs to understand that tenants are better served when they freely participate in the process and when their rights aren't being stripped away from them.
The inspections occur every six years. So, fortunately city dwellers don't have to get their rights trampled on very often.
I live in a very nice apartment that is well maintained, for the most part, by my landlord. We recently had a city inspector come through and he found a few code violations with smoke detectors (not in the proper locations), lack of carbon monoxide detectors (which I didn't know was required), and a broken porch step (which I had been nagging my landlord for months to fix). I'm happy the inspector caught the violations and that my landlord quickly addressed them.
As for the argument as to why renters are subject to inspections when homeowners are not, it's simple. As a homeowner, you are responsible for the maintenance of your property. If you want to let it fall into disrepair and squalor, that's your business and you are the one who will suffer the financial consequences. As a renter, my landlord is responsible for the maintenance of the property. If the landlord lets the property fall into disrepair, it is the tenant who suffers, often with little support to get the landlord to take action. I see inspections as protection for the tenant. Waivers are a bad idea.
charlotte project has hazardous materials and the city officals are sweeping it under the rug.. we are having a meeting at the robach center thursday dec 4 at 7pm .. about the materials found and why no local developer will touch it.. who is gettng paid off here.. wait till these condos sink.
As an NP who cares for hundreds of HIV + and negative gay and bisexual men, I would say that the biggest reason that the HIV epidemic is not under better control in the US is that the health care system has dealt with prevention as a behavioral issue and change is very difficult to apply to something like sexual behaviors. Those strategies will work for disciplined people who do not have sex under the influence of alcohol or drugs.
Now there is finally a medical way for people to prevent acquiring HIV, by taking one pill a day (which still requires some disciplined behavior) but the number of health care providers telling their patients about it is miniscule. "Chemical prevention" works for measles, mumps, polio, hepatitis, HPV....even pregnancy. We in health care should treat HIV prevention as we do many other conditions.
During the depression. People came here llegaly. I repeat llegaly. An had a hard time. Being called not so nice names. And now people come here from god knows.where.and they demand citizenship. Do it llegaly end of story.
So Sean Murphy thinks one reason the problem of rising HIV rates in men who have sex with men is because "disease prevention that requires a fifth-grade level of communication is going to be challenging." Seriously? Rising rates of HIV transmission can be halted by materials written at a second-grade level: "Men--stop putting your penis in another man's rectum!" Oh, and BTW--stop hooking up with dozens and hundreds of strangers for anonymous, promiscuous sex on Grindr, Scruff, Adam4Adam, ManHunt, Craigslist, et.al."
Website powered by Foundation