Wisconsin ready to pursue 2nd consecutive title

first_imgWisconsin women’s hockey head coach Mark Johnson doesn’t like distractions.But regardless of that disdain, Friday night’s season opener is full of them.Between getting a new season under way, unveiling its 2011 national championship banner and missing a portion of its team, Wisconsin knows it has to stay focused.“I think the biggest thing is just refocusing everybody,” senior captain Hilary Knight said. “We worked really hard this summer, and now we just have to put that into play during the game.”Ranked No. 1 in the country, the Badgers face against the Lindenwood Lady Lions – a team they’ve seen play before – with a depleted roster.Defensemen Brittany Haverstock, Stef Mckeough, Saige Pacholock and forward Carolyne Prevost will miss the season opener due to a fall evaluation camp with Team Canada.“It’s the nature of the women’s game,” Johnson said. “That’s part of the recruiting process when you talk to these kids. One of the questions that they ask you is, ‘If Canada calls me up and I need to go to camp, will you let me go?’ Some games and some parts of the season you’re missing kids, but they’re still doing the things that we’re probably doing right here whether they’re on the ice, training or playing with elite players. … They’re in a good environment. It’s just too bad that they’re going to miss Friday night.”With the absence of three blue-liners and a forward, the newest Badgers will get a chance to show what they can do.This season, UW is joined by four freshman forwards, as well as a transfer defenseman and a transfer goaltender.“They look great so far,” senior forward Brooke Ammerman said. “They don’t look shy; they don’t look nervous. They really mesh well with our team.”Not only did Wisconsin win yet another national title last year, but it was also honored with another Patty Kazmaier Award, as then-senior Meghan Duggan was named women’s hockey’s player of the year.Duggan led UW last season with 87 points off 39 goals and 48 assists. In a close second, Knight posted 81 points off 47 goals and 34 assists. “Losing players like Meghan Duggan is obviously huge, but I think with our work ethic and working hard – we’ve looked great so far – I think everybody has to step up whether it be us as leaders on the team or just the freshman to the sophomore step,” Ammerman said. “I think our sophomores came back in great shape, our juniors also. I think the expectation is to grow as a player each year you’re here and bring your best effort.”Last season, much like the men’s hockey team, Johnson switched sophomore Alex Rigsby and junior Becca Ruegsegger in goal. But as soon as postseason play started, it was all Rigsby. Through seven postseason games, Rigbsy allowed 12 goals, but the offense more than made up for its scoring 31 goals en route to its fourth national championship.Despite the success of last season, a new one calls for a whole new challenge.“You basically have to start over,” Rigsby said. “Last year, it didn’t come easy to win that national championship. We have to forget about it and start from scratch and keep working towards possibly and hopefully another one.”And it all starts with Lindenwood.The Lady Lions are entering their first season as a D-I program and have the opportunity to face the sport’s perennial powerhouse.Lindenwood fields only one senior and 14 freshmen, but Wisconsin knows not to take anything for granted.“I’m excited they’re coming here,” Knight said. “It’s awesome to have a home game against them. I’ve never seen them play, so I don’t really know what to expect but that’s the scariest thing. Expect the unexpected.”The Badgers aren’t trying to presume anything – instead they’re just going to enjoy this season’s journey and see where it takes them.“Every season here in the WCHA is extremely long and we play great teams so I think first we have to focus on the journey and really getting our focus back and enjoying the ride,” Knight said. “That’s all it’s about. I can look back on both years that we’ve won the National Championship and the ride there was awesome and those are the memories you take with you.”last_img read more

Sunday blog: How much is city water really worth?

first_imgCommentary by Tracy McCue, Sumner Newscow — The latest throw down at Wellington City Hall comes courtesy of the Kansas Department of Health and Environment.Water quality has become the hot topic since the unfortunate situation in Flint, Mich. The feds have mandated to KDHE that stiffer water regulations must apply.As a result, KDHE has issued a warning to the city of Wellington that it will face stiff fines if it doesn’t stop supplying untreated water to those in the Mayfield area who have tapped in the water lines in turn allowing them to pump for much needed water on their private properties.According to James Jordan story (see here), there has been a gentleman’s agreement since the 1950s in which the city can drill on the personal property of those living in rural Sumner County, east of Mayfield. In turn, these property owners could have access to city water near these wells – albeit it be untreated water.Originally, there were 25 property owners who agreed to the deal. Earlier this year, the council attempted to contact these 25 owners, and 13 of them responded that they don’t want or need water; or could not be reached. That left 12 who responded and needed water. The city formed an agreement with seven property owners to be given $6,000 to help dig a well. The other five property owners have not taken the deal, including one who has refused saying $6,000 wasn’t enough.What it has caused is a sticky situation that may potentially pit the city government against the five Mayfield property owners, who could possibly be out of water source, unless the city builds a water line for an estimated $200,000 so these residence could have treated water. KDHE has giving the council until May 1 to rectify the situation.The mandate seems illogical. If untreated water is such an issue, then why are there hundreds of residents across Sumner County, who have dug themselves a well for their water supply and are using untreated water? Think about this. The city is giving rural residence $6,000 to dig a well for untreated water on the property, so they won’t have to drink untreated city water that came off their property.Bureaucrats. SMH.To the council’s credit, it voted to send a letter to KDHE saying the city won’t shut off the Mayfield residents water supply until a plan could be studied and enacted.This issue is a tough one. Not only is there an ethical issue of cutting water off to people, who have been using the system for over 50 to 60 years, but the city of Wellington also risks losing access to valuable water reserves. As we have learned from the past two dry summers, water is a commodity that the city can ill afford to lose.But then there is this lingering issue, does the city foot $200,000 to pay for a water line going to residents who are not city taxpaying citizens?The issue of water has been a source of contention between the city of Wellington and those who live outside the city limits since, maybe forever. In years past, some rural water districts have struck deals with the city – to gain access to municipal water for an elevated user fee.But in the 1990s, former city manager Carl Myers determined that such agreements were money losing propositions for the city. He contended, not only were rural customers depleting city water reserves but it was extra costly to the city taxpayers, who pay for treatment and infrastructure.His contention is the city of Wellington must take care of its tax base first and is in no obligation to address the needs of others living outside the city limits. At one time a proposed housing addition was to be developed east of town, but because the city and the housing developer could not come to terms over water, that development never materialized. I am unaware that the city of Wellington has not extended use of water to any rural housing addition or other communities since.Not to sound callous, but there is wisdom in Myers’ position, and it would behoove the current council to hold firm and make a sound business decision.Is supplying a water line to five property owners, who do not pay city property tax, a wise investment?People have raised holy hell over this sprinkler system at the Wellington golf course, and people have questioned why Sumner Regional Medical Center is not paying for utilities. But here is the big difference between those expenditures and a proposed water line to rural Mayfield customers. The golf and hospital expenses go toward the greater good of the whole community of Wellington. Supplying water to a few Mayfield residence, who are again not paying city taxpayers, does nothing for those living inside Wellington.Of course, there is the risk of not having access to those wells. There is some justification, that if the city told property owners they could no longer use their water, then they most certainly could come back and say, “Well you can’t use my water either.” Does the city risk losing access to the water supply these wells generate?A reasonable question would be how much of the water is obtained from the private property wells and would losing them put the council in a bind?Another option may be to tell KDHE to go to hell and continue onward. The KDHE has not given the city a specific amount on the fine to be accessed. If the fine is a few hundred dollars or even a few thousand bucks, it could be worth the city’s time to just to ignore the mandate. My feeling is this though that won’t be an option. The government, especially at the state and federal level, always gets its way.A third option is for the city to attempt to annex the property for which the wells sit. That way then the property owners become city taxpayers and building a water line would be completely justified.Also, this doesn’t appear to be something that the city should tackle alone. If this involves rural customers, this should also involve the Sumner County Commissioners.And for something like this to be resolved by May 1 is ludicrous. There are way too many issues involved in play here.My number one complaint with the current Wellington City Council is it tends to overact and get itself in a panic over issues that may need to take more time to investigate.This is a mess. It is also a mess that doesn’t need to be cleaned up this very instant.Follow us on Twitter. Close Forgot password? Please put in your email: Send me my password! Close message Login This blog post All blog posts Subscribe to this blog post’s comments through… RSS Feed Subscribe via email Subscribe Subscribe to this blog’s comments through… RSS Feed Subscribe via email Subscribe Follow the discussion Comments (12) Logging you in… Close Login to IntenseDebate Or create an account Username or Email: Password: Forgot login? Cancel Login Close WordPress.com Username or Email: Password: Lost your password? Cancel Login Dashboard | Edit profile | Logout Logged in as Admin Options Disable comments for this page Save Settings Sort by: Date Rating Last Activity Loading comments… You are about to flag this comment as being inappropriate. Please explain why you are flagging this comment in the text box below and submit your report. The blog admin will be notified. Thank you for your input. +23 Vote up Vote down Farmer · 224 weeks ago If I were one of these six people who own the land the city it taking Water from and just read this article I would tell the City of Wellington to go to Hell and drill wells inside the city limits. What makes you think you could take water off this land for 50 years and not be responsible for the remedy to this KDHE mandate? Once again Wellington only cares for Wellington. Report Reply 0 replies · active 224 weeks ago +12 Vote up Vote down Ted “Theodore” Logan · 224 weeks ago “My number one complaint with the current Wellington City Council is it tends to overact and get itself in a panic over issues that may need to take more time to investigate.” Doesn’t keep you from agreeing with said decisions, though. Report Reply 0 replies · active 224 weeks ago +13 Vote up Vote down Big D · 224 weeks ago This all came about a few years ago when one lady, who was getting the water complained to the state about it being untreated. Hopefully she feels good about herself at this point in time. Report Reply 0 replies · active 224 weeks ago +7 Vote up Vote down Bobby Wilson · 224 weeks ago Really isn’t 200K a small investment for the city when it looks long term? I mean how long does a water line last? 20 years or longer? So 10K a year….it takes care of the people (regardless if they are from Wgtn) who have helped take care if us. Possibly the other owners may want on the line . Small investment long term Report Reply 0 replies · active 224 weeks ago +9 Vote up Vote down Jim Bo Dean Milner · 224 weeks ago As a City resident for over 56 years now I would say it would be best for the City of Wellington to run them treated water. After all we run our utility lines all the way out to the lake and most likely Mayfield. I really don’t care if were going to have to cough up $200,000.00 lets be a good neighbor to these fine folks that has allowed us all these years to run across their fields I am trying to think if there is a rural water system out that direction. If I had the extra money friends I would so gratfully pay for it myself but unfortunately I am in the lower tier of people who pay taxes even though I work 40 hrs. weekly. Trust me taking on the KDHE is going to be so much more expensive in the long run by the time the city hires an architect which seems to always run about $15k to $30k each time they hire one to tell use exactly what we already know. I would hope some one in the City can draw blueprints. There is some beautiful property to build on out that direction that some day could be annexed in to our growing city. Cue can you please show us a data sheet on how many people were in Wellington lets say the last 50 years and cut it by 5 years in a graph lets just have you do it from 1950,1955,1960 up to current population cause I really think at one time it was like 4,000 plus or more back then and now something like just over 7,000 now. Another thing is all these vacant lots in town. Why can’t the city work out agreements with builders here in town to put up homes on these lots. I am sure there are many groups that will pitch in and help out to make these homes profitable but not cost prohibitive. Each home sold will help out in the long run. It’s a pity to us old timers to see all the homes being destroyed and not replaced. It’s a win win for the City of Wellington in many ways if we could somehow make this a reality. Believe it or not some of us really do LOVE LIVING IN WELLINGTON. One other thing I remember was the pride we had in Wellington of having one of the top ten short courses in all of America that had 18 holes, that was somewhere around the 70’s to early 80’s. I am just wondering if that distinction just went away. Report Reply 0 replies · active 224 weeks ago +7 Vote up Vote down Wes Smith · 224 weeks ago I’ve watched the City Council meeting on 55, read this story and the previous story. My question is why do we seem to be in a panic? I’ve not heard much about this until recently and it would seem that this was something that should have been known about quite some time ago. With that being said we should have been discussing this last year and now it would seem we are in a panic to comply with the states mandate when we should already have a solution. Water is a basic necessity and I do agree that we should go to the state and ask for a reasonable amount of time to rectify this debacle. Report Reply 0 replies · active 224 weeks ago +14 Vote up Vote down LiveWell · 224 weeks ago “Supplying water to a few Mayfield residence, who are again not paying city taxpayers, does nothing for those living inside Wellington.” Just because I live outside the city limit sign, does not mean I don’t give my fair share of money to Wellington. Is there a Wal-Mart, Orschelns, or Dillions out in the county?? Where is the nearest gas station?? Well, then we pay taxes in this town too. And also, my county taxes have USD353 bond written all over them, every parcel. I’m thinking that those schools are in the city limits aren’t they? Wait, I live outside the city limits, why am I paying for something inside the city limits???? Love how this city chooses its’ battles… Report Reply 0 replies · active 224 weeks ago +1 Vote up Vote down Carrie · 224 weeks ago As a rural county resident with untreated water, I have looked at purchasing home equipment that would treat the water for me. Why is this not an option for the city, or is the rules for the KDHE that the city would have to maintain equipment and quality of water? It still seems to be the cheaper way to go as the equipment that I looked into was only $3,000 which included a water softener. Report Reply 0 replies · active 224 weeks ago +14 Vote up Vote down Steve Glenn · 224 weeks ago What does “Gentlemans Agreement” mean?? My abstract dated May 1st, 1986 when I purchased my land, Item # 12 list Water exploration contract and easement agreement dated April 26, 1954 between the City of Wellington and M. H. and Ethel Ross filed April 26, 1954 and recorded in Book J-7 Misc. page 495 and item # 13 Easement for water well and pollution control dated March 30,1986 filled April 11,1986 and recorded in Book P-326, page 299. In the meantime, I paid $3,061.63 to get a 95 foot deep well dug which produced about 4 gal. a min, which will not run a household, out of my pocket while they continue to pump millions of gal a year from our land reducing the water level to the point we can not get water to our own home. Yes, they offered us $6,000 but we still do not have a well that will produce enough water or plumbed to home. Do I dig another $3,000 hole?? By the way ” Mr. Ross was a gentleman, and I am sure he did shake their hand while getting the above recorded.” Report Reply 0 replies · active 224 weeks ago -1 Vote up Vote down Jim Bo Dean Milner · 224 weeks ago I have not been able to drink water out of a faucet here in Wellington for a long time and have spent probably $8,000.00 on Culligan bottled water the last 13 yrs. I am so shocked reading this story that our City water supply is not being investigated by the KDHE and was mad as hell they were making such a fuss over Flints water supply when we have been complaining for many years about the water quality here in town. Even Gus told us all he used bottle water to drink. Many people in Wellington are dying from cancer and I just wonder what our treated water has to do with it. One of these days I hope it will be actually drinkable again. Report Reply 0 replies · active 224 weeks ago 12Next » Post a new comment Enter text right here! Comment as a Guest, or login: Login to IntenseDebate Login to WordPress.com Login to Twitter Go back Tweet this comment Connected as (Logout) Email (optional) Not displayed publicly. Name Email Website (optional) Displayed next to your comments. Not displayed publicly. If you have a website, link to it here. Posting anonymously. Tweet this comment Submit Comment Subscribe to None Replies All new comments Comments by IntenseDebate Enter text right here! Reply as a Guest, or login: Login to IntenseDebate Login to WordPress.com Login to Twitter Go back Tweet this comment Connected as (Logout) Email (optional) Not displayed publicly. Name Email Website (optional) Displayed next to your comments. Not displayed publicly. If you have a website, link to it here. Posting anonymously. Tweet this comment Cancel Submit Comment Subscribe to None Replies All new commentslast_img read more

Upset hunt

first_imgJapeth Aguilar wins 1st PBA Finals MVP award for Ginebra Eugenie Bouchard’s bid for Australian Open spot ends in qualifying Ginebra beats Meralco again to capture PBA Governors’ Cup title Princess Robles hopes to soar anew for National U, the same way she did in an upset victory over University of the Philippines. —Sherwin VardeleonLa Salle and Far Eastern University face each other for the first time since last season’s finals, but don’t be surprised if it’s the match between Ateneo and National University that gets more attention on Saturday’s UAAP women’s volleyball.Ateneo, league-leader and on a five-game winning streak, will run into a youthful NU side fresh from a character-building victory over University of the Philippines last Wednesday.ADVERTISEMENT Rogue cops marked as Gamboa’s targets in his appointment as PNP chief “I think that we want to prove that each and every one of us really wants to win,” said Nierva in Filipino. “We’re not complete right now but we want to achieve something.”“We won’t ever say that our team is a pushover, no. We use the negativity as our motivation,” Nierva added.The Lady Eagles are currently the hottest team in the league, rebounding from an opening-game loss to rival La Salle to win every single match after that.“All of these, we take as a challenge,” said Ateneo coach Oliver Almadro. “But I trust the players’ resiliency, they will be ready to make adjustments.”The Lady Tamaraws will have a score to settle against the Lady Spikers, who swept them of the best-of-three titles series—via straight sets in both games.ADVERTISEMENT LATEST STORIES NU coach Norman Miguel said many of his players may be rookies, but they have championship spunk having ruled the juniors division for three straight seasons.“This team has the character molded in them; they have won titles already in high school [and] now they brought that here,” said Miguel after outlasting UP (25-17, 14-25, 17-25, 25-23, 17-15).FEATURED STORIESSPORTSGolden State Warriors sign Lee to multiyear contract, bring back ChrissSPORTSCoronation night?SPORTSThirdy Ravena gets‍‍‍ offers from Asia, Australian ball clubsNotable about that match: The young NU squad faced four match points against a veteran UP squad.Miguel’s main gunners include Princess Robles, Ivy Lacsina and Jennifer Nierva, who feel that the lack of experience should not hamper their season. “That will be our motivation,” said FEU’s Celine Domingo. “We were there already until they beat us twice.”FEU coach George Pascua said the one thing that separates them is “the willingness and desire to win.”La Salle’s team captain Desiree Cheng is a doubtful starter but the Lady Spikers have been getting help from new recruit Lourdes Clemente and rookie Jolina dela Cruz.“The skills set we are equal, but it’s in the character and desire to win that will play a big role in the match,” added Pascua.Sports Related Videospowered by AdSparcRead Next Will you be the first P16 Billion Powerball jackpot winner from the Philippines? Don’t miss out on the latest news and information. Tom Brady most dominant player in AFC championship history Phisgoc reopens talks with Mall of Asia over hosting of basketball event MOST READ Gretchen Barretto’s daughter Dominique graduates magna cum laude from California college Carpio hits red carpet treatment for China Coast Guard PLAY LIST 02:14Carpio hits red carpet treatment for China Coast Guard02:56NCRPO pledges to donate P3.5 million to victims of Taal eruption00:56Heavy rain brings some relief in Australia02:37Calm moments allow Taal folks some respite03:23Negosyo sa Tagaytay City, bagsak sa pag-aalboroto ng Bulkang Taal01:13Christian Standhardinger wins PBA Best Player award Ginebra beats Meralco again to capture PBA Governors’ Cup title Nadine Lustre’s phone stolen in Brazil View commentslast_img read more

G20 Anti-corruption Action Plan Seeks Transparency

first_imgBy the summit’s end, though, China made no attempt to block the action plan or suppress use of the word “bribery.” The push at the 2014 Brisbane meeting was for member nations to pass laws compelling corporations to identify who owns and controls them – the “beneficial owners.”  It, however, fell short of demanding that these persons and entities be known to the public as well as regulatory authorities. That has drawn criticism from some “good governance” groups, including Global Financial Integrity. “G20 countries recognize that bribery imposes a heavy price on both international business and society as a whole,” the action plan document said. “Combating bribery remains an important priority for the G20 growth agenda, including by helping to level the playing field for business, and giving the private sector the confidence it needs to invest…G20 countries also commit to comprehensively and effectively criminalize bribery – as well as the solicitation of bribes – and enforce such laws through civil and criminal actions.” Public official immunity – meaning persons in office are not prosecuted while in those positions – is a practice seen in many countries. It has been widely criticized by good governance groups as a means by which elected officials can engage in criminal activities such as corruption and get away with it – at least during their terms. “The Chinese people are generally far less concerned about foreign bribery than domestic bribery,” said Andrew Spalding, a law professor at the University of Richmond. “As the developed world increasingly enforces foreign bribery rules, this puts them at a competitive disadvantage in developing countries, especially in Africa. China knows that it can exploit this.” The G20 nations, comprising the world’s largest economies, met in mid-November in Brisbane, Australia, and came up with an action plan on how to fight corruption. Ahead of the summit, some observers voiced concerns that China would block action regarding identifying corporate owners. China’s use of “inducements” has been well known, especially in Africa, where the Asian giant has employed cash and other means to gain access to raw materials it needs to feed its industrial production. The plan is an outgrowth of what happened in 2010 when G20 leaders created the “Anti-Corruption Working Group” at a summit in Toronto. “For companies in any of these industries, it is the areas of interaction between private and public sectors which are most likely to generate opportunities for corruption – for example, public procurement and customs,” wrote Brook Horowitz in the FCPA Blog, which focuses on corruption. Public sector transparency and integrity is also a focus of the G20 plan. They are essential for “preventing the misuse or diversion of public funds and conflicts of interest, which can have a significant negative impact on economic growth and development,” the plan said.  The plan also addressed what it calls “high risk sectors” where corruption can invade legitimate market activity. The plan notes one area it calls “the extractive sector” – the mining and collection of raw materials from iron ore to timber. Another section calls for G20 members to approach the anti-corruption fight globally as well as within each state’s borders. The plan says they must “commit to helping to end impunity for corruption offenses, by working together to investigate and prosecute [offenders], to recover the proceeds of such offenses, and to deny entry and safe haven to corrupt officials and those who corrupt them – including mutual legal assistance and extradition consistent with the UNCAC [United Nations Convention Against Corruption]”Greg Thompson, with Transparency International Australia, says now that the words of the 2014 G20 Summit have been put to paper, it’s time to carry them out. “Effectively preventing and combating corruption in these high-risk sectors is essential to create an environment conducive to investment and to ensure critical assets and resources are not diverted away from economic growth and development,” the plan said. The Action Plan also calls on the private sector to adopt transparent and accountable standards of corporate behavior. It calls on G20 countries to institute and step up “developing anti-corruption education and training for business – and by examining best practices for encouraging businesses to implement robust compliance programs and self-report breaches of corruption laws.” “The devil,” he says “will now be in the detail of what every country – including Australia – does post-Brisbane to implement these actions.”Share this:Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)last_img read more