COLUMBIA, S.C. (AP) — Stanley “Boom” Williams ran for 107 yards on 14 carries as Kentucky held on to beat South Carolina 26-22 on Saturday night.The Wildcats (2-0, 1-0 Southeastern) snapped a 22-game road losing streak despite gaining 92 yards and getting just four first downs in the second half.South Carolina (1-1, 0-1) had a chance to tie on a two-point conversion midway through the fourth quarter, but Pharoh Cooper fumbled on the try and Denzil Ware returned the ball 98 yards to give Kentucky two points and what proved to be the final margin.Cooper had nine catches for 100 yards. Junior quarterback Perry Orth took over for injured starter Connor Mitch. He was 13-of-20 for 179 yards, but threw an interception with 4:32 to go at the Wildcats 26 with the Gamecocks down four.South Carolina coach Steve Spurrier said after the game Mitch suffered a separated shoulder. “That usually takes a year,” he said. It was Kentucky’s first SEC road win in six years.ALL THE COLLEGE FOOTBALL ACTION IN WEEK 2
- Council tweaks anti-corruption rules
HomeNewsCity CouncilCouncil tweaks anti-corruption rules May. 16, 2016 at 6:30 amCity CouncilCouncil tweaks anti-corruption rules Matthew Hall5 years agocity attorney marsha moutriecity councilCity Hallcity manager rick colecity of santa monicacouncilmembersjohn huestonLos Angelesmarsha moutrieNewsoaksoaks initiativerick coleSanta Monicasanta monica californiaSanta Monica City Councilsanta monica news Step by step, City Hall is working toward a clearer, stronger, more robust set of anti-corruption laws.Council approved clarifications and guidelines for its rules as their May 10 meeting and previewed some of the more substantial changes that will likely become a ballot initiative this November.The May 10 decision adopted proposals put forward by attorney John C. Hueston in a report he issued in April of this year.Council hired Hueston to prepare a report on two related topics, conduct of city employees during the hiring/firing of Elizabeth Riel and enforcement of the City’s ethics laws known as the Oaks Initiative.Riel was offered a job with the city but had that offer withdrawn after Councilwoman Pam O’Connor complained. The report said O’Connor’s actions could constitute a breach of the City charter but the Council chose not to implement any formal sanctions.Hueston was also asked to review the Oaks rules. Citizens have filed Oaks complaints but the complaints were not acted on due to concerns in the City Attorney’s office over enforcement objectivity and constitutionality.The report concluded the law is enforceable but recommend revisions that would address some of confusion regarding the law’s intent and constitutionality.Last week, Council approved clarifications and guidelines that deal with the law as it was passed including clarifying definitions of public officials, clarifying the method of determining a public benefit, narrowing definitions of campaign advantages and creating a more readable, easily understood document.The proposals were passed without changes, but not without conversation.The new rules apply to whoever has “final authority” over approving a city contract and the council questioned if that would limit Oaks’ scope in a way that excluded employees who might not have final approval but who could have had significant influence over the process.City Manager Rick Cole said contract approvals have significant checks and balances in place that prevent anyone, including him, from making a unilateral decision. He said the expectation should be on the senior staff to ensure the system was clean and that ultimately it made sense to have Oaks apply to elected or appointed officials, the city manager and department heads, but not to the lower level staff.“The spirit of Oaks is what we’re all trying to restore and focus on,” he said. “It’s possible that somewhere buried somewhere in the city’s organization chart, someone might have some influence over the selection of a vendor and Oaks is really designed to make sure that’s transparent and the person can’t march of and take a position with that company as soon as the contract is signed. I think that’s better enforced by the city manager and department heads under the charter than to reach down and figure out who had influence over what contract.”He said alternatives that enforced Oaks further down the staffing ladder would create havoc due to record keeping and subjectivity concerns while also going against the spirit of the rules.Several councilmembers began to ask about provisions of the Oaks rules that appear to bar non-profit directors whose organizations receive city money, such as individuals that sit on the boards of neighborhood councils, from making political donations.City Attorney Marsha Moutrie said one of the criticisms of Oaks when it was first drafted was that the law penalized volunteer efforts but as the law is now incorporated into the City Charter, fixing that problem and others would require a public vote.She said her office has begun thinking about a ballot initiative for the November election that will hopefully address those lingering [email protected] :city attorney marsha moutriecity councilCity Hallcity manager rick colecity of santa monicacouncilmembersjohn huestonLos Angelesmarsha moutrieNewsoaksoaks initiativerick coleSanta Monicasanta monica californiaSanta Monica City Councilsanta monica newsshare on Facebookshare on Twitteradd a commentPCB lawsuit heads to trialBeware the bikes on the sidewalks!You Might Also LikeBriefsNewsInput Invited for Marine Park Improvement ProjectsGuest Author2 days agoBriefsNewsPublic Health Emphasizes the Importance of Vaccinations as Distancing and Masking Guidelines Relax Next WeekGuest Author2 days agoBriefsNews“Righting Our Wrongs” performance on June 11Guest Author2 days agoBriefsNewsSEATTLE Feds plan to curtail West Coast salmon fishing to help orcasGuest Author2 days agoBriefsNewsBeach House Begins Community Re-Opening June 15Guest Author2 days agoColumnsFeaturedNewsOpinionWhat’s the Point?whats the pointGAY PRIDE MONTH IS HERE FOR ALL OF USDavid Pisarra2 days ago
- Proposed Discharge Permit Under Review for Creston Water-Bottling Plant
Email The Montana Department of Environmental Quality is accepting public comments on a wastewater discharge permit for a water-bottling plant proposed in Creston.The state agency released the draft permit Monday for the Montana Artesian Water Company’s proposed plant at 1085 Egan Slough Rd.The permit, if granted, would regulate the discharge of wastewater into an unnamed tributary of the Flathead River. The draft permit includes effluent limits and monitoring requirements to protect the receiving water quality and habitat, according to the DEQ.Lew Weaver, the owner of Montana Artesian Water Co., is seeking to pump 710 acre-feet of water annually from an underground aquifer near Egan Slough along the Flathead River, the equivalent of 1.2 billion 20-ounce water bottles.Weaver’s request, and his goal to produce 140,000 water bottles per hour, 24 hours a day, 365 days a year at a facility on his farmland, drummed up considerable attention, fueling concerns among neighbors and residents across the valley.Weaver has defended his plans, saying he followed the proper regulatory steps and studied the potential environmental consequences.As proposed, the company would discharge water from the building’s temperature control system and water used to rinse bottles before being filled. Water would be drawn from an onsite, artesian, public water supply well.The same water bottled for drinking would be used for two purposes that result in a discharge of effluent to be authorized by the proposed permit, according to the DEQ. The first would be non-contact heating water, which is an enclosed heating system. The second would be drinking water bottle rinsate, which is the water used to rinse the drinking water bottles, as a cleaning step, prior to the bottles being filled with drinking water. This rinsate water would be discharged to the receiving water via a second pipe.According to the draft permit, the discharge flow into the receiving water body is not expected to have any adverse impacts on the geology, soil quality or stability.The DEQ says the permit would include effluent limits, monitoring requirements and other conditions that would ensure the water quality standards were protected. The permitted outfalls will cause a slight increase in water quantity within the receiving water.An increase in local traffic may occur with the potential to increase dust, according to the DEQ. “However, the increase particulate matter would be short-lived and not significant,” the draft permit states. “Flathead County has approved a road approach for this project.”Seven plant species of special concern were identified by the Montana Natural Heritage Program to potentially be in the project area. This project would be located in a well-developed residential and agricultural area and it is not anticipated that any of the species of concern will be impacted by the proposed project, according to the DEQ.Effluent limits and permit conditions will ensure water quality standards for aquatic life are protected, according to the DEQ.Eleven animal species and seven plant species of special concern were identified by the Montana Natural Heritage Program to potentially be in the project area. The discharges to the unnamed tributary are proposed to be located approximately 1,300 feet from the confluence of the receiving water with the Flathead River, which is considered bull trout habitat at this location. Bull trout are protected as a threatened species.The DEQ states the permit limits would protect aquatic life in the receiving water prior to its confluence with the Flathead River and would prevent impacts to bull trout.A public hearing will be held on Monday, Aug. 1. The hearing is strictly limited to accepting and recording public comments on the draft wastewater discharge permit. DEQ officials will respond to all comments received during the public-comment period, including the public hearing, in writing at a later date. It will begin at 6 p.m. in the Creston School gymnasium at 4495 Montana Highway 35.The deadline for submitting comments is Aug. 5.The DEQ permit does not grant a water right. Instead, the Montana Department of Natural Resources and Conservation is reviewing whether to issue a water right permit for the plant.The DNRC in May validated dozens of formal objections from farmers, property owners and other entities over the water-bottling plant, prompting an additional layer of government review and triggering a hearing around the controversial plan.The draft wastewater permit, fact sheet and environmental analysis can be reviewed on the DEQ website.Comments may be submitted at the hearing or by mail to DEQ Water Protection Bureau, PO Box 200901, Helena, MT 59620-0901 or by email to [email protected] Stay Connected with the Daily Roundup. Sign up for our newsletter and get the best of the Beacon delivered every day to your inbox.