In a follow-up to his intermittent serial saga of stories on the malfunctioning water filter at the Erie Courthouse back in November of last year, Erie Times-News Reporter(?) Kevin Flowers reported today that the bill for the repairs has reached $600,000 and is still climbing.
Flowers further reported today that: "The Nov. 21 incident was caused by a malfunctioning water filter in an equipment room on the courthouse's sixth floor. (Luigi)Pasqual (procurement and maintenance supervisor) said county officials and insurance adjusters are still trying to determine why the water filter malfunctioned."
It's not credible that county officials have not yet determined who or what caused the malfunction. Their failure or reticence to do so suggests that certain county "leaders" from Executive Mark DiVecchio on down are avoiding accountability to cover up wrongdoing on someone's (s') part, with Flowers's witting or unwitting concurrence.
Nor has Flowers, as a presumed "investigative journalist" (see Managing Editor Pat Howards self-serving column recently on press awards), made any apparent attempt to get to the bottom of the mystery, which has cost the county far,far more than the mere repair costs cited above in terms of lost county work hours and other residual expenses.
Neither Flowers nor any responsible county official has even acknowledged additional collateral costs, much less ventured a guesstimate of them, which almost certainly will approach or exceed $1 million.
By injecting the role of "insurance adjusters" into his story, Flowers implies that whatever or whoever caused the malfunction (factory defect, incompetent installation, operator/human error, etc.),county taxpayers are protected. But even if the insurer or insurers pay the repair bill cited above (though not the collateral costs), there is still the hefty $25,000 upfront insurance deductible county taxpayers will have to pay, if they haven't already.
This isn't the first time I've blogged on his matter. Back in November of last year, I wrote:
According to an article in the Erie Times-News today written by Reporter Kevin Flowers, around 3 am. Thursday, a stainless steel water filter on the sixth floor of the Erie County Court House failed during extensive renovations there.
"The breakdown sent as many as 900 gallons of water cascading downward through the courthouse’s east wing, soaking ceiling tiles, saturating carpets and splashing computers, telephones and other office equipment", Flowers wrote. " It also set off a chain of events that postponed scheduled hearings and shut down business at the courthouse, 140 W. Sixth St., for the entire day.
"Among the areas damaged was the fifth floor, where a $3.9 million renovation project is nearing completion. Although courthouse rumors Thursday put the damage at as much as $1 million, DiVecchio and other county officials said it could take a day or two to determine that," according to Flowers.
Flowers said "Luigi Pasquale, the courthouse’s manager of procurement and the supervisor of county facilities, said insurance is expected to cover most of the loss.
'I think it’s under control now,'’ said DiVecchio, who consulted with President Judge Elizabeth K. Kelly, Sheriff Bob Merski and other county officials before deciding around 8 a.m. Thursday to shut the building down and send roughly 600 courthouse employees home for the day.
According to Flowers,Pasquale said the water filter was installed about four months ago. The county has a $25,000 deductible for such damage, Pasquale said, which means that county dollars would cover the first $25,000 of repair and insurance would cover of the rest."
The above is yet another example of poor, partial and superficial reporting by the Erie Times News.
The article answers the fundamental questions of what, where and when, but neglects the crucial question of "why." Why did the filter fail? Was it factory defective, or was there human error in installing it?
In either case, taxpayers should not have to pay for the damages and repairs, or for the costs of sending home 600 county employees while repairs are effected..
Basic investigation could and should determine where the blame for the failure lies, and the accountable party or parties should be assessed accordingly.
Do your job, Kevin and quit glossing over and covering up the failures of your buddies at the courthouse.
Tody's article demonstrates that neither County Executive DiVecchio nor Flowers has stepped up to do his job. Maybe it's time for feisty County Controller Sue Weber to step into the breach.
Sunday, April 26, 2009
Sunday, April 12, 2009
Erie Times-News Press Awards - The Rest of the Story
In today’s edition, the Erie Times News announced that “thirteen Erie Times-News writers, photographers and page designers earned 18 top awards” in the Pennsylvania Newspaper Assn’s 2009 Keystone Press Awards statewide competition (By my count, it’s 17, but whose counting?).
In that context, Managing Editor Pat Howard boasted: "These awards reach into all corners of our newsroom to highlight excellence both in print and online. It's well-deserved recognition for the journalists being honored, and a reflection of the talent and commitment our entire staff brings to bear every day in serving our audiences in ways no other news organization in the region can.”
That seems curiously at odds with my longstanding contention that the Times-News’s press credentials are, with a few exceptions, by and large mediocre at best, its news and editorial coverage of issues, people and events important to its Erie readers usually inept, shallow, biased, unprofessional, irrelevant, mis and uninformed.
Unless I'm wrong, how could the Times-News seemingly have scored so lavishly in this year’s press awards competition?
Let’s put that into perspective. The article said that “The Times-News competes in Division II, for newspapers in the 50,000-to-99,999 circulation.” What the article didn’t do is put that distinction in context, which is needed to grasp its implications.
For purposes of the Keystone Awards, the commonwealth’s newspapers are divided into eight divisions. Division I includes Pennsylvania’s most prominent newspapers with the largest circulations. There are only seven of them: the largest, the Philadelphia Inquirer which also publishes the Philadelphia Daily News; the Pittsburgh Post Gazette, the Allentown Morning Call, the Pittsburgh Tribune, the Harrisburg Patriot-News and - although it’s technically a statewide cooperative news service, not a newspaper - the Associated Press.
Division Two consists of six newspapers: the Erie Times-News, the York Daily Record/Sunday News, the Scranton Times-Tribune, the Reading Eagle, the Bucks County Courier-Times, and the Lancaster Intelligencer Journal/Sunday News. In each division .there are about 40 award categories, with awards being given for first and second place winner, and in a few cases honorable mention. That means there are about 120 different award opportunities available to Division II newspapers, of which the Times-News received awards in 17.
However, less than half the categories deal with the principal news and editorial writing functions, which are the hallmark of any newspaper, and about half of those encompass sports writing, a lesser function in terms of the broad public interest.
In the most important news writing category, investigative reporting, the Times-News did not score, beat out by the York Daily Record/Sunday News and the Scranton Times-Tribune.
In another key function, editorial writing, the Times-News took a second place. In commentary/columns, the Times-News was outwritten by the Lancaster Intelligencer Journal and the York Sunday News. In the spot news category, the Times-News was bested by the York Daily Record and the Reading Eagle. In the ongoing news category, it tanked, losing out to the Bucks County and Scranton newspapers.
The Times-News took a first in the Special Projects category and second place in the “niche” category, whatever that is. It also took a second place in news series writing, firsts in feature and /feature beat writing, a first for a business/consumer story, a first in sports beat reporting, a second in feature photo, first in sports photo and second in online journalistic innovation (the internet). It lost out in News Beat reporting to the Reading and Lancaster papers. Photographer Jack Hanrahan distinguished himself with a top Specialty award in the visual category in competion with all of Pennsylvania’s newspapers, including the Big Seven.
Though the Times-News appears to have won its proportionate share of press awards, the most telling factor is that none of them was in the top most vital news and editorial reporting and writing categories
Another interesting point to note is that all of the Times-News’s A-list reporters, writers and columnists were skunked in the competition, like Howard, Ed Mead, Kevin Cuneo, Kevin Flowers, John Guerriero and Ed Palattella.
Also noteworthy is that most of the top news and editorial writing awards went to newspapers in the more densely populated eastern part of the state, where, unlike the Times-News, they face intense competition from other newspapers, including big metropolitan sheets.
In that context, Managing Editor Pat Howard boasted: "These awards reach into all corners of our newsroom to highlight excellence both in print and online. It's well-deserved recognition for the journalists being honored, and a reflection of the talent and commitment our entire staff brings to bear every day in serving our audiences in ways no other news organization in the region can.”
That seems curiously at odds with my longstanding contention that the Times-News’s press credentials are, with a few exceptions, by and large mediocre at best, its news and editorial coverage of issues, people and events important to its Erie readers usually inept, shallow, biased, unprofessional, irrelevant, mis and uninformed.
Unless I'm wrong, how could the Times-News seemingly have scored so lavishly in this year’s press awards competition?
Let’s put that into perspective. The article said that “The Times-News competes in Division II, for newspapers in the 50,000-to-99,999 circulation.” What the article didn’t do is put that distinction in context, which is needed to grasp its implications.
For purposes of the Keystone Awards, the commonwealth’s newspapers are divided into eight divisions. Division I includes Pennsylvania’s most prominent newspapers with the largest circulations. There are only seven of them: the largest, the Philadelphia Inquirer which also publishes the Philadelphia Daily News; the Pittsburgh Post Gazette, the Allentown Morning Call, the Pittsburgh Tribune, the Harrisburg Patriot-News and - although it’s technically a statewide cooperative news service, not a newspaper - the Associated Press.
Division Two consists of six newspapers: the Erie Times-News, the York Daily Record/Sunday News, the Scranton Times-Tribune, the Reading Eagle, the Bucks County Courier-Times, and the Lancaster Intelligencer Journal/Sunday News. In each division .there are about 40 award categories, with awards being given for first and second place winner, and in a few cases honorable mention. That means there are about 120 different award opportunities available to Division II newspapers, of which the Times-News received awards in 17.
However, less than half the categories deal with the principal news and editorial writing functions, which are the hallmark of any newspaper, and about half of those encompass sports writing, a lesser function in terms of the broad public interest.
In the most important news writing category, investigative reporting, the Times-News did not score, beat out by the York Daily Record/Sunday News and the Scranton Times-Tribune.
In another key function, editorial writing, the Times-News took a second place. In commentary/columns, the Times-News was outwritten by the Lancaster Intelligencer Journal and the York Sunday News. In the spot news category, the Times-News was bested by the York Daily Record and the Reading Eagle. In the ongoing news category, it tanked, losing out to the Bucks County and Scranton newspapers.
The Times-News took a first in the Special Projects category and second place in the “niche” category, whatever that is. It also took a second place in news series writing, firsts in feature and /feature beat writing, a first for a business/consumer story, a first in sports beat reporting, a second in feature photo, first in sports photo and second in online journalistic innovation (the internet). It lost out in News Beat reporting to the Reading and Lancaster papers. Photographer Jack Hanrahan distinguished himself with a top Specialty award in the visual category in competion with all of Pennsylvania’s newspapers, including the Big Seven.
Though the Times-News appears to have won its proportionate share of press awards, the most telling factor is that none of them was in the top most vital news and editorial reporting and writing categories
Another interesting point to note is that all of the Times-News’s A-list reporters, writers and columnists were skunked in the competition, like Howard, Ed Mead, Kevin Cuneo, Kevin Flowers, John Guerriero and Ed Palattella.
Also noteworthy is that most of the top news and editorial writing awards went to newspapers in the more densely populated eastern part of the state, where, unlike the Times-News, they face intense competition from other newspapers, including big metropolitan sheets.
Wednesday, April 8, 2009
Legislative pay raise payback is self serving
A staff-written article in today's Erie Ties-News reports that nine of ten state legislators from northwestern PA. say they are returning, or will return to the state or donate to charity the automatic 2.8 cost of living pay increases they received effective the beginning of this year, about $2,200 for rank and file legislators. Those in leadership positions voted themselves more.
One online commentor wrote: "Let's remember our legislators, all 253 of them, are the second hoghest paid in the US. Only Calif. are paid more. With 67 counties PA could do with 100 legislators not the 253 we have. That alone will save 200 million."
I don't know whether "hoghest" was a Freudian slip, a pun, or a typo, but it's highly appropos. While PA legislators have the second-highest salaries, their total compensation packages including, per diem, travel allowance, staff allowance, health and pension benefits, etc., are the highest in the land, making the PA legislature the costliest in the nation. By most reckonings, it's also the most corrupt.
If those legislators who say they are contributing their pay raises to charity think they are off the hook, they must think that charity begins at home, because they are the beneficiaries nevertheless of the pay hike by virtue of the fact that they are using it to buy votes, in effect, a bribe.
Whether they return or donate the increment, it still goes towards their eventual retirement benefits.
The article doesn't tell us how long these legislators intend to return or donate the increment. Is it just until the end of the fiscal or calendar year, or the end of the legislative biennium, or beyond? Or just until the next middle-of-the-night/no-public-hearing pay raise comes along?
The article also does not report whether these legislators will support legislation now pending which would reduce the size of the legislature by half. Like most Erie Times-News articles, it filters self-serving legislative pronouncements through rose-colored glasses.
One online commentor wrote: "Let's remember our legislators, all 253 of them, are the second hoghest paid in the US. Only Calif. are paid more. With 67 counties PA could do with 100 legislators not the 253 we have. That alone will save 200 million."
I don't know whether "hoghest" was a Freudian slip, a pun, or a typo, but it's highly appropos. While PA legislators have the second-highest salaries, their total compensation packages including, per diem, travel allowance, staff allowance, health and pension benefits, etc., are the highest in the land, making the PA legislature the costliest in the nation. By most reckonings, it's also the most corrupt.
If those legislators who say they are contributing their pay raises to charity think they are off the hook, they must think that charity begins at home, because they are the beneficiaries nevertheless of the pay hike by virtue of the fact that they are using it to buy votes, in effect, a bribe.
Whether they return or donate the increment, it still goes towards their eventual retirement benefits.
The article doesn't tell us how long these legislators intend to return or donate the increment. Is it just until the end of the fiscal or calendar year, or the end of the legislative biennium, or beyond? Or just until the next middle-of-the-night/no-public-hearing pay raise comes along?
The article also does not report whether these legislators will support legislation now pending which would reduce the size of the legislature by half. Like most Erie Times-News articles, it filters self-serving legislative pronouncements through rose-colored glasses.
Sunday, April 5, 2009
News media which once bashed "convicted" Alaska U.S. Senator Stevens, now ignore his exoneration
When former U.S. Senator Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, the longest serving Republican in U.S. history, was indicted last year, then convicted in federal court a mere seven days before last November's general election, on charges of failing to disclose gifts from an Alaska friend and oilfield executive, the Erie Times-News, scores of other newspapers, editorialists and pundits penned tens of thousands of disparaging words condemning Stevens and gloating over the political demise of one of the most powerful figures in beltway politics in recent decades.
Stevens narrowly lost his reelection bid last November by a mere 3,000 votes out of more than 290,000 cast. Nearly half Alaska's voters believed he was innocent and voted to reelect him notwithstanding his conviction. His narrow defeat was irrefutably attributable to the taint of his conviction.
But last week, when U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder issued his stunning announcement that he would ask the judge who presided over Stevens's trial to reverse the conviction and dismiss the charges with extreme prejudice (meaning the Justice Dept. could not refile them),nor seek a new trial due to gross prosecutorial misconduct, and withholding vital exculpatory evidence, the silence from Sen. Stevens's news media and other captious critics has been deafening.
The prosecutorial team which engineered Stevens's false conviction, professional bureaucrats appointed under an earlier Democrat administration, has been removed from the case by Holder and is under internal investigation. Two of the three team leaders are Democrats who contributed to Barack Obama's presidential csampaign.
Other than the obligatory story reporting the attorney general's shocking announcement,the Erie Times-News and countless other newspapers, editorialists and pundits have ignored Steven's exoneration.
Simple civil courtesy demands apologies from those media who mercillessly bashed Stevens for gratuitously defaming an innocent person falsely convicted.
Stevens narrowly lost his reelection bid last November by a mere 3,000 votes out of more than 290,000 cast. Nearly half Alaska's voters believed he was innocent and voted to reelect him notwithstanding his conviction. His narrow defeat was irrefutably attributable to the taint of his conviction.
But last week, when U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder issued his stunning announcement that he would ask the judge who presided over Stevens's trial to reverse the conviction and dismiss the charges with extreme prejudice (meaning the Justice Dept. could not refile them),nor seek a new trial due to gross prosecutorial misconduct, and withholding vital exculpatory evidence, the silence from Sen. Stevens's news media and other captious critics has been deafening.
The prosecutorial team which engineered Stevens's false conviction, professional bureaucrats appointed under an earlier Democrat administration, has been removed from the case by Holder and is under internal investigation. Two of the three team leaders are Democrats who contributed to Barack Obama's presidential csampaign.
Other than the obligatory story reporting the attorney general's shocking announcement,the Erie Times-News and countless other newspapers, editorialists and pundits have ignored Steven's exoneration.
Simple civil courtesy demands apologies from those media who mercillessly bashed Stevens for gratuitously defaming an innocent person falsely convicted.
Wednesday, April 1, 2009
U.S. Senator Ted Stevens of Alaska vindicated
Back in Nov 28, 2008, Ed Mathews (Mead) wrote in his column:
"Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens, 85, had held that Senate seat for 40 years, longer than any Republican in history. After being convicted recently, it was hard to see how he could expect to keep his seat against his Democratic opponent,Mark Begich. He lost the seat in a close race."
In response, I wrote:
"The reason Ted Stevens lost his reelection bid to the U.S. Senate is because he was stuck in Washington, D.C, defending himself against dubious charges during his trial and unable to campaign for reelection in Alaska, while his opponent campaigned freely throughout that vast constitutency. Stevens has appealed his conviction on grounds of proven prosecutorial and juror misconduct which should have resulted in a mistrial,if not dismissal of the charges."
Stevens, who was the U.S. Senate's longest serving Republican with 40 years of service, was fully vindicated today with an announcement by U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder that the charges against him have been dismissed and his conviction reversed due to prosecutial misconduct, tampering with evidence and mishandling prosecution witnesses, among other things. Stevens was charged with failing to disclose gifts and services he allegedly received valued at $250,000.
AG Holder also said there would be no retrial. The federal prosecutors who handled the case were removed from it and are under internal investigation by the Justice Dept. Stevens' conviction in federal court in Washington, D.C. in October of last year came ony seven days before the November election in Alaska, yet he lost to his Democrat opponent by only 3,000 votes out of 290,000 cast. Despite his (flawed) conviction, nearly half Alaska's voters believed he was innocent.
"Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens, 85, had held that Senate seat for 40 years, longer than any Republican in history. After being convicted recently, it was hard to see how he could expect to keep his seat against his Democratic opponent,Mark Begich. He lost the seat in a close race."
In response, I wrote:
"The reason Ted Stevens lost his reelection bid to the U.S. Senate is because he was stuck in Washington, D.C, defending himself against dubious charges during his trial and unable to campaign for reelection in Alaska, while his opponent campaigned freely throughout that vast constitutency. Stevens has appealed his conviction on grounds of proven prosecutorial and juror misconduct which should have resulted in a mistrial,if not dismissal of the charges."
Stevens, who was the U.S. Senate's longest serving Republican with 40 years of service, was fully vindicated today with an announcement by U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder that the charges against him have been dismissed and his conviction reversed due to prosecutial misconduct, tampering with evidence and mishandling prosecution witnesses, among other things. Stevens was charged with failing to disclose gifts and services he allegedly received valued at $250,000.
AG Holder also said there would be no retrial. The federal prosecutors who handled the case were removed from it and are under internal investigation by the Justice Dept. Stevens' conviction in federal court in Washington, D.C. in October of last year came ony seven days before the November election in Alaska, yet he lost to his Democrat opponent by only 3,000 votes out of 290,000 cast. Despite his (flawed) conviction, nearly half Alaska's voters believed he was innocent.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
