text:
Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw's Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you're ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Section 13(c) of the Urban Mass Transportation Act of 1964 requires a state or local government to make arrangements to preserve transit workers' existing collective-bargaining rights before that government may receive federal financial assistance for the acquisition of a privately owned transit company. Petitioner city entered into a " 13(c) agreement" with respondent transit union in order to obtain federal funds to acquire a failing private bus company and convert it into petitioner Jackson Transit Authority. Thereafter, the Authority's unionized workers were covered by a series of collective-bargaining agreements. In 1975, however, the Authority notified the union that it no longer considered itself bound by the newest of the collective-bargaining agreements. The union subsequently filed suit in Federal District Court, seeking damages and injunctive relief and alleging that petitioners had breached the 13(c) and collective-bargaining agreements. The District Court held that it lacked subject-matter jurisdiction because the complaint rested on contract rights that should be enforced only in a state court. The Court of Appeals reversed, holding that there was subject-matter jurisdiction because the claim arose under a federal law, specifically 13(c), and that 13(c) implicitly provided a federal private right of action.
Section 13(c) does not provide the union with federal causes of action for alleged breaches of the 13(c) and collective-bargaining agreements. While 13(c)'s language supplies no definitive answer, the legislative history is conclusive that Congress intended that such agreements be governed by state law applied in state courts. Congress designed 13(c) as a means to accommodate state law to collective bargaining, not as a means to substitute a federal law of collective bargaining for state labor law. Pp. 20-29.
650 F.2d 1379, reversed and remanded.
BLACKMUN, J., delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court. POWELL, J., filed a concurring opinion, in which O'CONNOR, J., joined, post, p. 29. [457 U.S. 15, 16]
Joseph S. Kaufman argued the cause for petitioners. With him on the briefs was William R. Rice.
Linda R. Hirshman argued the cause for respondent. With her on the brief was Earle Putnam. *
[ Footnote * ] Briefs of amici curiae urging reversal were filed by John J. Vlahos and Ray E. McDevitt for the American Public Transit Association; by Benjamin L. Brown, J. Lamar Shelley, James B. Brennan, Henry W. Underhill, Jr., George Agnost, Roger F. Cutler, John Dekker, Lee E. Holt, George F. Knox, Jr., Walter M. Powell, William H. Taube, John W. Witt, Max P. Zall, Conard B. Mattox, Jr., and Charles S. Rhyne for the National Institute of Municipal Law Officers; by William J. Olson and James H. Wentzel for the Public Service Research Council; and by Donald H. Clark and Gregory A. Giordano for the Tidewater Transportation District Commission.
Edward J. Hickey, Jr., Michael S. Wolly, and Thomas A. Woodley filed a brief for the Railway Labor Executives' Association as amicus curiae urging affirmance.
Briefs of amici curiae were filed by Joseph H. Elcock and Ronald G. Busconi for the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority; and by W. Stell Huie and Terrence Lee Croft for the Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority.
JUSTICE BLACKMUN delivered the opinion of the Court.
Under 13(c) of the Urban Mass Transportation Act of 1964 (Act or UMTA), 78 Stat. 307, as amended, 49 U.S.C. 1609(c), 1 a state or local government must make arrangements to preserve transit workers' existing collective-bargaining rights before that government may receive federal financial assistance for the acquisition of a privately owned transit company. This case presents the issue whether 13(c) by itself permits a union to sue in federal court for alleged violations of an arrangement of this kind or of the collective-bargaining agreement between the union and the local government transit authority. [457 U.S. 15, 17]
When the Act was under consideration in the Congress, that body was aware of the increasingly precarious financial condition of a number of private transportation companies across the country, and it feared that communities might be left without adequate mass transportation. See S. Rep. No. 82, 88th Cong., 1st Sess., 4-5, 19-20 (1963). The Act was designed in part to provide federal aid for local governments in acquiring failing private transit companies so that communities could continue to receive the benefits of mass transportation despite the collapse of the private operations. See 2(b) and 3, as amended, 49 U.S.C. 1601(b) and 1602.
At the same time, however, Congress was aware that public ownership might threaten existing collective-bargaining rights of unionized transit workers employed by private companies. If, for example, state law forbade collective bargaining by state and local government employees, the workers might lose their collective-bargaining rights when a private company was acquired by a local government. See Urban Mass Transportation - 1963, Hearings on S. 6 and S. 917 before a Subcommittee of the Senate Committee on Banking and Currency, 88th Cong., 1st Sess., 318-323 (1963) (Senate Hearings) (statement of Andrew J. Biemiller, Director, Department of Legislation, AFL-CIO). To prevent federal funds from being used to destroy the collective-bargaining rights of organized workers, Congress included 13(c) in the Act. See H. R. Rep. No. 204, 88th Cong., 1st Sess., 15-16 (1963).
Section 13(c) requires, as a condition of federal assistance under the Act, that the Secretary of Labor certify that "fair and equitable arrangements" have been made "to protect the interests of employees affected by [the] assistance." The statute lists several protective steps that must be taken before a local government may receive federal aid; among these [457 U.S. 15, 18] are the preservation of benefits under existing collective-bargaining agreements and the continuation of collective-bargaining rights. The protective arrangements must be specified in the contract granting federal aid. 2
In 1966, petitioner city of Jackson, Tenn., applied for federal aid to convert a failing private bus company into a public entity, petitioner Jackson Transit Authority. See App. 12a-16a. In order to satisfy 13(c), the Authority so created entered into a " 13(c) agreement" with respondent Local Division 1285, Amalgamated Transit Union, AFL-CIO-CLC, the union that represented the private company's employees. See 29 CFR pt. 215 (1981). Among other things, the 13(c) agreement guaranteed the preservation of the transit workers' collective-bargaining rights. App. 16a-20a. The Secretary of Labor certified that the agreement was "fair and equitable." Its substance was made a part of the grant contract between the city and the United States, and the city received approximately $279,000 in federal aid. [457 U.S. 15, 19]
Thereafter, until 1975, the Authority's unionized workers were covered by a series of collective-bargaining agreements. Six months after a new 3-year collective-bargaining agreement was signed in 1975, see id., at 31a, however, the Authority notified the union that it no longer considered itself bound by that contract. See id., at 45a. 3
Ultimately, the union filed suit in the United States District Court for the Western District of Tennessee. It sought damages and injunctive relief, alleging that petitioners had breached the 13(c) agreement and the collective-bargaining contract. App. 8a, 10a-11a. 4 The District Court concluded that it lacked subject-matter jurisdiction to hear the suit because the complaint rested on contract rights that should be enforced only in a state court. 447 F. Supp. 88 (1977).
The United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit reversed. 650 F.2d 1379 (1981). Relying on Bell v. Hood, 327 U.S. 678 (1946), that court first determined that it had subject-matter jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. 1331, because the union's claim arose under the laws of the United States, [457 U.S. 15, 20] specifically 13(c). The court then held that 13(c) implicitly provides a federal private right of action. Section 13(c) reflects national labor policy, the Court of Appeals reasoned, and the rights protected by the statute are thus federal rights. The court concluded that it was consistent with the congressional intent behind 13(c) to permit enforcement of these federal rights in federal court.
Because of the importance of the interpretation of 13(c) for local transit labor relations, 5 we granted certiorari. 454 U.S. 1079 (1981).
While the Court of Appeals treated this as a private right of action case, see, e. g., Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. v. Curran, 456 U.S. 353 (1982), it does not fit comfortably in that mold. Indeed, since 13(c) contemplates protective arrangements between grant recipients and unions as well as subsequent collective-bargaining agreements between those parties, see H. R. Rep. No. 204, 88th Cong., 1st Sess., 16 (1963), it is reasonable to conclude that Congress expected the 13(c) agreement and the collective-bargaining agreement, like ordinary contracts, to be enforceable [457 U.S. 15, 21] by private suit upon a breach. See Transamerica Mortgage Advisors, Inc. v. Lewis, 444 U.S. 11, 18 -19 (1979). The gist of the union's position is not that 13(c) creates an implied right of action to sue for violations of the statute. Instead, the union argues that "[i]t was the intent of Congress that federal law would determine the binding effect of labor protective agreements under 13(c) and of the collective bargaining agreements reached pursuant to 13(c) between unions and recipients of UMTA funds" so that those agreements "are enforceable in the federal courts." Brief for Respondent 24.
The issue, then, is not whether Congress intended the union to be able to bring contract actions for breaches of the two contracts, but whether Congress intended such contract actions to set forth federal, rather than state, claims. Admittedly, since the private right of action decisions address the related question whether Congress intended that a particular party be able to bring suit under a federal statute, those decisions may provide assistance in resolving this case. But the precise question before us is whether the union's contract actions are federal causes of action, not whether the union can bring suit at all to enforce its contracts. See Local Div. 732, Amalgamated Transit Union v. Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority, 667 F.2d 1327, 1329-1334 (CA11 1982). 6 [457 U.S. 15, 22]
As the union points out, on several occasions the Court has determined that a plaintiff stated a federal claim when he sued to vindicate contractual rights set forth by federal statutes, despite the fact that the relevant statutes lacked express provisions creating federal causes of action. In Machinists v. Central Airlines, Inc., 372 U.S. 682 (1963), the Court held that a union had a federal cause of action to enforce an award of an airline adjustment board included in a collective-bargaining contract pursuant to 204 of the Railway Labor Act, 45 U.S.C. 184 (1958 ed.). Similarly, in Norfolk & Western R. Co. v. Nemitz, 404 U.S. 37 (1971), the Court ruled that a railroad's employees made out federal claims when they sought to enforce assurances made by the railroad to secure the Interstate Commerce Commission's approval of a consolidation under a provision of the Interstate Commerce Act, 49 U.S.C. 5(2)(f) (1970 ed.). And recently, in an analogous private right of action decision, the Court permitted a federal suit for rescission of a contract declared void by 215 of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, 15 U.S.C. 80b-15, although the statute itself made no express provision for private suits. Transamerica Mortgage Advisors, Inc. v. Lewis, 444 U.S., at 18 -19. See also Mills v. Electric Auto-Lite Co., 396 U.S. 375, 388 (1970) (recognizing federal right to rescind contracts rendered void by 29(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 15 U.S.C. 78cc (b)); American Surety Co. v. Shulz, 237 U.S. 159 (1915) (finding federal-question jurisdiction to hear suit on supersedeas bond required by Rev. Stat. 1007).
These decisions demonstrate that suits to enforce contracts contemplated by federal statutes may set forth federal claims and that private parties in appropriate cases may sue in federal court to enforce contractual rights created by federal statutes. But they do not dictate the result in this case. Whenever we determine the scope of rights and remedies under a federal statute, the critical factor is the congressional intent behind the particular provision at issue. See, e. g., [457 U.S. 15, 23] Transamerica Mortgage Advisors, Inc. v. Lewis, 444 U.S., at 18 ; Cannon v. University of Chicago, 441 U.S. 677, 688 (1979); Machinists v. Central Airlines, Inc., 372 U.S., at 685 -692; see also n. 9, infra. Thus, if Congress intended that 13(c) agreements and collective-bargaining agreements be "creations of federal law," Machinists v. Central Airlines, Inc., 372 U.S., at 692 , and that the rights and duties contained in those contracts be federal in nature, see id., at 695, then the union's suit states federal claims. Otherwise, the union's complaint presents only state-law claims. See Miree v. De Kalb County, 433 U.S. 25 (1977).
We begin with the language of the statute itself. See, e. g., Universities Research Assn., Inc. v. Coutu, 450 U.S. 754, 771 (1981). The bare language of 13(c) is not conclusive. In some ways, the statute seems to make 13(c) agreements and collective-bargaining contracts creatures of federal law. Section 13(c) demands "fair and equitable arrangements" as prerequisites for federal aid; it requires the approval of the Secretary of Labor for those arrangements; it specifies five different varieties of protective provisions that must be included among the 13(c) arrangements; and it expressly incorporates the protective arrangements into the grant contract between the recipient and the Federal Government. 7 See n. 2, supra. On the other hand, labor relations between local governments and their employees are the subject of a longstanding statutory exemption from the National Labor Relations Act. 29 U.S.C. 152(2). Section 13(c) evinces no congressional intent to upset the decision in the National Labor Relations Act to permit state law to govern the relationships [457 U.S. 15, 24] between local governmental entities and the unions representing their employees. See Cort v. Ash, 422 U.S. 66, 78 (1975) (noting reluctance to permit suit in federal court when "the cause of action [is] one traditionally relegated to state law").
While the statutory language supplies no definitive answer, the legislative history is conclusive. A consistent theme runs throughout the consideration of 13(c): Congress intended that labor relations between transit workers and local governments would be controlled by state law.
In 1963, Secretary of Labor Wirtz presented the original version of 13(c) to the relevant House and Senate Committees. Before both Committees, Members of Congress expressed concern about the effect of the statute on state laws. And Secretary Wirtz explained to both Committees that, while attempts would be made to accommodate state law to the preservation of collective-bargaining rights, state law would control local transit labor relations. The Secretary told the House Committee that "this proposal is submitted on this basis, . . . that the State laws must control." Urban Mass Transportation Act of 1963, Hearings on H. R. 3881 before the House Committee on Banking and Currency, 88th Cong., 1st Sess., 482 (1963) (House Hearings). A Committee member raised the issue again; the Secretary repeated that "State laws would be controlling in the situation," though he suggested that there "would be few, if any, situations" where state law and 13(c) could not be reconciled. House Hearings, at 486. When similar concerns were expressed during his testimony before the Senate Committee, the Secretary reiterated: "I should like it quite clear that I think that there could be no superseding here of the State law." Senate Hearings, at 313.
The House and Senate Reports took the Secretary at his word. The House Report advised that 13(c) would ensure protection of the interests of workers, but that "subject to the basic standards set forth in the bill, specific conditions for worker protection will normally be the product of local bargaining [457 U.S. 15, 25] and negotiation." H. R. Rep. No. 204, 88th Cong., 1st Sess., 16 (1963). The Senate Report was more direct: "In regard to the question as to whether these provisions would supersede State labor laws, the committee concurs in a statement made by the Secretary of Labor `that there could be no superseding of State laws by a provision of this kind.'" S. Rep. No. 82, 88th Cong., 1st Sess., 29 (1963).
During the debates, the role of state law under 13(c) was discussed at length. Senators Goldwater and Tower suggested that 13(c) would supplant state law with federal law. 109 Cong. Rec. 5416 (1963). Senator Williams, one of the bill's chief sponsors, replied: "The legislative history has to be corrected" because "we must have a record that will show that the bill does not preempt State law; it does not control or dominate with irrevocable authority local situations." Id., at 5417. The proposed statute, Senator Williams continued, would not "preempt or be a substitute for State law." Ibid. Senator Goldwater remained adamant that "we are attempting a major alteration in the Nation's labor laws." Id., at 5418. But Senator Sparkman, the Chairman of the Senate Committee, repeated the Secretary's assurance that 13(c) "will not supersede or displace or override" state law. 109 Cong. Rec. 5418 (1963). 8 [457 U.S. 15, 26]
The Senate returned to the issue during a colloquy between Senator Goldwater and Senator Morse. Senator Goldwater feared that the proposed statute would override state laws denying public employees the right to strike. Id., at 5673. Senator Morse assured Senator Goldwater otherwise that "the State law would supervene." Ibid. When Senator Goldwater inquired about state laws other than those concerning the right to strike, Senator Morse replied in the same vein: "The amendment does not supersede any State policy." Ibid.
In an important exchange, Senator Goldwater noted that local government employers were excluded from the coverage of the National Labor Relations Act, see 29 U.S.C. 152(2), and asked whether 13(c) would be inconsistent with that exclusion. 109 Cong. Rec. 5673-5674 (1963). Senator Morse responded that the language of the bill "make[s] it clear that the Taft-Hartley exemptions are not changed by the amendment." Id., at 5674. See also id., at 5422 (remarks of Sen. Javits) (state law could not be overridden "under any phase of the Taft-Hartley law"). Senator Morse underscored the purpose of the amendment: "I cannot emphasize the point more than I already have done in the legislative history in our debate. It deals with municipal and State problems, and not Federal problems." Id., at 5674. Finally, Senator Goldwater asked whether state law would control if there were no specific state law forbidding strikes by public employees. Senator Morse adhered to the same course: "In the absence of any local law, it would be for the State court to decide whether [the employees] had that right." Ibid.
A similar, but more abbreviated, interchange took place on the House floor. When some Congressmen questioned the effect of 13(c) on state law, they were reassured by Congressman Multer that "[n]othing in this bill . . . will infringe upon local law, whether it be of a State or municipality." 110 [457 U.S. 15, 27] Cong. Rec. 14980 (1964). And Congressman Rains repeated, "there is not one line in this bill that would vitiate in any way any State or local law." Ibid.
Thus, Congress made it absolutely clear that it did not intend to create a body of federal law applicable to labor relations between local governmental entities and transit workers. 9 Section 13(c) would not supersede state law, it would leave intact the exclusion of local government employers from the National Labor Relations Act, and state courts would retain jurisdiction to determine the application of state policy to local government transit labor relations. Congress intended that 13(c) would be an important tool to protect the collective-bargaining rights of transit workers, by ensuring that state law preserved their rights before federal aid [457 U.S. 15, 28] could be used to convert private companies into public entities. 10 See 109 Cong. Rec. 5673 (1963) (remarks of Sen. Morse) (if city proposed to reject collective bargaining, it would be ineligible for federal aid). But Congress designed 13(c) as a means to accommodate state law to collective bargaining, not as a means to substitute a federal law of collective bargaining for state labor law. 11 [457 U.S. 15, 29]
Given this explicit legislative history, we cannot read 13(c) to create federal causes of action for breaches of 13(c) agreements and collective-bargaining contracts between UMTA aid recipients and transit unions. 12 The legislative history indicates that Congress intended those contracts to be governed by state law applied in state courts. 13
Accordingly, the judgment of the Court of Appeals is reversed, and the case is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
[ Footnote 2 ] Section 13(c) reads in full:
[ Footnote 3 ] According to the union's complaint, the Authority since 1966 had contracted with a private individual, T. O. Petty, for the management of the transportation system. App. 6a-7a. The union negotiated its 1975 contract with Petty; when he left as manager of the system, the Authority claimed it was not bound by the contract he had negotiated. Id., at 47a. The union alleged that petitioners had promised in the 13(c) agreement to be bound by the contracts Petty had signed and that petitioners violated both the 13(c) agreement and the 1975 collective-bargaining contract. App. 7a-8a.
[ Footnote 4 ] Prior to filing suit, the union asked the Secretary of Labor and the Secretary of Transportation to find that petitioners had violated the 13(c) agreement and to ensure that petitioners complied with the agreement. Both Secretaries refused. See 650 F.2d 1379, 1381 (CA6 1981).
In addition to relief directed at petitioners, the union requested that the two Secretaries be ordered to take appropriate enforcement action against petitioners to compel compliance with the 13(c) agreement. App. 11a. Both the District Court and the Court of Appeals refused the union's request. See 447 F. Supp. 88, 90-92 (1977); 650 F.2d, at 1387-1388. The union has not sought review of this ruling, and we express no opinion on that aspect of the litigation.
[ Footnote 5 ] Several Courts of Appeals, in addition to the Sixth Circuit, have decided that 13(c) authorizes federal suits for violations of 13(c) agreements and collective-bargaining contracts between recipients of UMTA funds and transit unions. Division 587, Amalgamated Transit Union, AFL-CIO v. Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle, 663 F.2d 875 (CA9 1981); Local Div. 714, Amalgamated Transit Union, AFL-CIO v. Greater Portland Transit District, 589 F.2d 1 (CA1 1978); Local Div. 519, Amalgamated Transit Union, AFL-CIO v. LaCrosse Municipal Transit Utility, 585 F.2d 1340 (CA7 1978); Division 1287, Amalgamated Transit Union, AFL-CIO v. Kansas City Area Transportation Authority, 582 F.2d 444 (CA8 1978), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 1090 (1979). One Court of Appeals has reached the opposite conclusion. Local Div. 732, Amalgamated Transit Union v. Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority, 667 F.2d 1327 (CA11 1982). In a related decision, the First Circuit has concluded that the terms of 13(c) agreements do not override conflicting provisions of state law. Local Div. 589, Amalgamated Transit Union, AFL-CIO v. Massachusetts, 666 F.2d 618 (1981), cert. pending, No. 81-1817.
[ Footnote 6 ] Thus, we agree with the Court of Appeals that, strictly speaking, the District Court had jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. 1331 to hear the union's suit. Under Bell v. Hood, 327 U.S. 678, 681 (1946), jurisdiction exists if the complaint is "drawn so as to claim a right to recover under the Constitution and laws of the United States." The complaint alleged a violation of the 13(c) agreement required by the UMTA and of the subsequent collective-bargaining agreement contemplated by the Act, and prayed for relief under federal law. We do not consider the union's asserted federal claims to be "wholly insubstantial and frivolous," 327 U.S., at 682 -683, so that the District Court lacked jurisdiction to entertain the union's suit. Thus, the District Court had jurisdiction for the purposes of determining whether the union stated a cause of action on which relief could be granted. Id., at 682. See also Wheeldin v. Wheeler, 373 U.S. 647 (1963).
[ Footnote 7 ] The statute also provides that the protective "arrangements shall include provisions . . . which shall in no event provide benefits less than those established pursuant to section 5(2)(f). . . ." As we explain, see n. 9, infra, this portion of the statute strengthens the union's position, but we do not consider it at all determinative.
[ Footnote 8 ] The union points to the fact that Congress rejected amendments that would have required the continuation of collective-bargaining rights only to the extent not inconsistent with state law. See 109 Cong. Rec. 5422 (1963); id., at 5582; id., at 5684; 110 Cong. Rec. 14980 (1964). But, as Senator Williams explained, those amendments were rejected not because Congress thought 13(c) would supplant state labor law but because such an amendment was "clearly . . . unnecessary" to guarantee that 13(c) would not "supersede or preempt or override State law." 109 Cong. Rec. 5421 (1963). Accord: 110 Cong. Rec. 14980 (1964) (remarks of Reps. Multer and Rains).
Beyond the explanation given by Senator Williams and repeated on the House floor, the defeat of these amendments merely reflected a congressional intent that the Federal Government be able to seek changes in state law and ultimately to refuse financial assistance when state law prevented compliance with 13(c). See 109 Cong. Rec. 5684 (1963) (remarks of Sen. Morse); id., at 5422 (remarks of Sen. Javits).
[ Footnote 9 ] In light of the legislative history of 13(c), we do not find Transamerica Mortgage Advisors, Inc. v. Lewis, 444 U.S. 11 (1979), or Machinists v. Central Airlines, Inc., 372 U.S. 682 (1963), to be controlling. Both cases turned on the language, purpose, and legislative history of the particular statute involved, see Transamerica, 444 U.S., at 18 -19; Machinists, 372 U.S., at 685 -695, and we read the congressional intent behind 13(c) to be far different from the congressional purpose underlying the statutes at issue in those cases.
Norfolk & Western R. Co. v. Nemitz, 404 U.S. 37 (1971), of course, is not to be overlooked. In that case, the Court decided that a railroad's employees stated federal claims when they alleged a breach of an agreement entered into by the railroad under 5(2)(f) of the Interstate Commerce Act, 49 U.S.C. 5(2)(f) (1970 ed.). Section 13(c) refers to 5(2)(f) and provides that the protective arrangements shall not provide benefits less than those established by 5(2)(f). See nn. 2 and 7, supra. If, when it passed 13(c), Congress had expressed an awareness that 5(2)(f) assurances could be enforced in federal court, or if there was reason to presume such awareness, the reference in 13(c) to 5(2)(f) would make this a different case. See generally Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. v. Curran, 456 U.S. 353 (1982). But the legislative history contains no such congressional recognition. Furthermore, Nemitz was decided several years after 13(c) was enacted. Consequently, we find the specific legislative history of 13(c), not the holding of Nemitz, to be determinative.
[ Footnote 10 ] The union relies upon the fact that Congress strengthened the language of 13(c) during the course of its passage. Congress wrote 13(c) to require protective provisions "necessary for" the protection of collective-bargaining rights, rather than provisions "as are found to be appropriate for" the protection of those rights, as the Kennedy administration had recommended. See House Hearings, at 476; 110 Cong. Rec. 14976 (1964). In addition, 13(c)(2) was amended at the request of Senator Morse to require the "continuation" of collective-bargaining rights rather than the mere "encouragement" of the continuation of those rights. See 109 Cong. Rec. 5627 (1963); id., at 5685. But these alterations in the bill demonstrate only that Congress demanded that the Secretary ensure that state law preserved collective-bargaining rights before he provided federal aid for acquisition of a private transit company. When viewed in conjunction with the discussion of state law in the legislative history, the modifications of the original bill do not prove that Congress intended that federal rather than state law would govern a contract between a UMTA aid recipient and a union representing its employees.
[ Footnote 11 ] Senator Javits summarized:
[ Footnote 12 ] Based on the legislative history, we could not permit the union to bring a federal suit if we characterized its complaint as alleging that petitioners violated 13(c) itself by virtue of the alleged contractual breaches. See Brief for Respondent 33-34.
Nor does 42 U.S.C. 1983 (1976 ed., Supp. IV) permit the union to bring suit. As the Court held in Maine v. Thiboutot, 448 U.S. 1 (1980), 1983 encompasses deprivations of rights secured by all "laws" of the United States, of which 13(c) is, of course, one. But because we have determined that Congress did not intend that breaches of 13(c) agreements or collective-bargaining contracts would constitute deprivations of federal rights secured by 13(c), the union has no cause of action under 1983. See Middlesex County Sewerage Authority v. National Sea Clammers Assn., 453 U.S. 1, 19 -21 (1981).
[ Footnote 13 ] There are other possible remedies for violations of 13(c) agreements and collective-bargaining contracts. The union, of course, can pursue a contract action in state court. In addition, the Federal Government can respond by threatening to withhold additional financial assistance. See Local Div. 589, 666 F.2d, at 634-635.
While we hold that the union cannot sue in federal court to enforce its contracts, we express no view on the entirely separate question whether the Federal Government could bring a federal suit against a UMTA funding recipient for violating the terms of its grant agreement with the Government. Such a suit would involve a different contract from the 13(c) agreement and the collective-bargaining agreement at issue in this case. See generally Local Div. 732, 667 F.2d, at 1338-1339; Local Div. No. 714, 589 F.2d, at 13.
JUSTICE POWELL, with whom JUSTICE O'CONNOR joins, concurring.
As the Court notes, this case "does not fit comfortably in [457 U.S. 15, 30] [the] mold" of our implied right of action cases. Ante, at 20. Congress here provided for the making of contracts that it must have intended to be enforced. The Court thus identifies the question correctly as whether Congress intended those contracts to be enforced in federal court. Ante, at 21. This of course is precisely the question on which implied rights of action cases properly are decided. See, e. g., Middlesex County Sewerage Authority v. National Sea Clammers Assn., 453 U.S. 1, 13 (1981); Texas Industries, Inc. v. Radcliff Materials, Inc., 451 U.S. 630, 639 (1981).
There are other parallels between this case and those in the more familiar implied right of action "mold." Most significantly to me, both kinds of cases involve the same fundamental issues of congressional and judicial power. By enforcing contract rights not within the jurisdictional grant conferred by Congress, as much as by improperly "inferring" a right of action, "a court of limited jurisdiction necessarily extends its authority to embrace a dispute Congress has not assigned it to resolve. . . . This runs contrary to the established principle that `[t]he jurisdiction of the federal courts is carefully guarded against expansion by judicial interpretation . . .,' American Fire & Cas. Co. v. Finn, 341 U.S. 6, 17 (1951), and conflicts with the authority of Congress under Art. III to set the limits of federal jurisdiction." Cannon v. University of Chicago, 441 U.S. 677, 746 -747 (1979) (POWELL, J., dissenting).
Because a federal court should exercise extreme caution before assuming jurisdiction not clearly conferred by Congress, we should not condone the implication of federal jurisdiction over contract claims in the absence of an unambiguous expression of congressional intent. As I do not view this position as inconsistent with the reasoning of the Court, I join its opinion. [457 U.S. 15, 31]
Was this helpful?
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw's Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you're ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)


text:
Jose Ferrer - Mi Pensamiento Eres Tu
Suggested For You
Christian Podcasts
Christian Music Videos
Christian Podcasts
Inspirational Videos
Comedy Videos
Cute Videos
Today's Devotional
A Prayer for Fall - Your Daily Prayer - September 29
Today as we pray for the upcoming fall, may it be a reminder to us of the work of God in our lives and hearts. We are being made into His image and transformed into His likeness.
Top Music Videos
Christian News
The latest news and hot topics trending among Christian music, entertainment and faith life.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
The type of tire required can vary with the type of vehicle to which it is fitted. The tire size and service description can, to some extent, determine the type of tire being fitted.
As the diversity in the different types of vehicles increases it becomes more important to ensure the correct type of tire is fitted. A tire will be designed to ensure it compliments the key characteristics of that type of vehicle with some of the different classifications being:
1) Compact class vehicles
2) Mid-sized and executive class vehicles
3) High Performance class vehicles
4) SUV´s
5) 4x4 and off road vehicles
6) MPV's and vans
7) Camper vans
8) Hybrid & electric vehicles
A tire may also carry an OE markings which are used to identify the homologated tires for vehicles and offer end-consumers an option when it comes to changing their tires.
It is always adviseable to consult a tire expert (tire manufacture or reputable tire dealer).
Examples of OE markings:


text:
A few months ago, a friend called to say that she was telling her office mates about how I love to grill pizza and they set to searching for my recipe on this site and couldn't find it. Gulp, I said, I've just never written it up! From that day forward, I made it my Summer Priority to walk you through pizza on the grill, but I have failed at each turn. Either we've made the pizza too late in the evening and the pictures came out anything but appetizing, or the day I decided to try again, it has rained. Seriously. If you want thunderstorms to suddenly threaten, let me promise to make you grilled pizza for dinner.
Last night was the final straw, or the day I finally threw my hands in the air and declared that a proper introduction to grilled pizza will probably have to wait until next summer. (Fortunately, Jen and Dietsch at Last Night's Dinner won't make you wait that long.) I have had this grilled eggplant and olive pizza on the agenda even since I spied it in this month's Gourmet and knew that it immediately needed to get in my belly. Four days later (a typical time lag these days from "idea" to "execution", sadly) I had the ingredients amassed, the energy to give it a try and even a friend's yard to grill in, thus of course, the weather went downhill. But I persevered, climbing into the far reaches of our linen closet where we stash kitchen stuff that doesn't get much use (whispering hello to my 12-inch wedding cake pans and canneler molds), unearthing my cast iron panini pan (hey, close enough, right?) and setting to grill to my heart's content, weather be damned.
And despite the fact that I generally feel indoor grilling is a sham — once you remove the smoldering charcoal flavor, the sun on your shoulders and the beer bottle condensating on a weathered picnic table, what's left that's worthwhile? — it was going along swimmingly, that is, until Alex came home and declared it "partly cloudy" in our apartment; whoops! Anyway, smoky plumes emanating from the kitchen aside, if this pizza can be this good cooked on a shoddy indoor grill pan, I can only imagine how dreamy it will be seared over fire in your backyard or on your rooftop this weekend. Smoky eggplant, briny olives and blistered bubbles of provolone… my friends, what are you waiting for?
Pizza, previously: We are a little bit obsessed with pizza here at the Smitten Kitchen, so no pizza recipe on this site would be complete without a tour of the pizza madness that has come before it. First, there are two dough recipes on the site, a Really Simple Homemade Pizza Dough and a slightly stepped-up one that includes a splash of wine and honey. There's also a post that includes lots of pizza-making tips in one place: 10 Paths to Painless Pizza Making. Beyond that, there are a ton of untraditional pizza recipes in the archives, from a Broccoli Rabe version with Caramelized Onions to an Acorn Squash and Gorgonzola Pizza, not to mention a Potato Pizza, which is exactly as transcendent as you would expect from carbs topped wtih carbs topped with rosemary, olive oil and sea salt. Check out the full list here, and don't be surprised if you never order pizza delivery again.
One year ago: Grilled Eggplant with Caponata Salsa, Chocolate Peanut Butter Cake and Slow-Roasted Tomatoes
Two years ago: Brownie Mosaic Cheesecake
Grilled Eggplant and Olive Pizza
Adapted from Gourmet, August 2009
This recipe defies many of the things that I usually preach about pizza, namely that I generally go for pizzas that are thinner and less overloaded with toppings. You're also more likely to get the results you want from them on a grill or in an oven. But this one — with its pre-grilled eggplant slices piled thick and melty and blistering-prone provolone — has got me rethinking my thin pizza biases because it's hearty, smoky and delicious.
Makes 4 hearty dinner servings, or 9 appetizer-size portions
1 garlic clove, minced
1/3 cup extra-virgin olive oil
1 1/4 pound eggplant, cut into 3/4-inch-thick rounds
1 pound store-bought pizza or homemade pizza dough at room temperature (1 1/2 of this recipe will yield a 1-pound dough)
5 ounces sliced provolone, cut into short thin matchsticks (1 1/4 cups)
Handful pitted green olives, coarsely chopped (1/3 cup)
1/4 cup chopped flat-leaf parsley
To make this pizza on a grill, or in a grill pan: Stir together garlic and oil. Brush some of garlic oil on both sides of eggplant and season with 3/4 teaspoon salt and 1/2 teaspoon pepper. Grill over direct medium heat, covered, turning once, until tender, 6 to 8 minutes total. Cut into roughly one-inch pieces and set aside.
Stretch dough into about a 12- by 10-inch rectangle (or into the shape of your grill pan, which in my case, was square) on a large baking sheet or your counter and lightly brush with garlic oil. Oil grill rack, then put dough, oiled side down, on grill. Brush top with more garlic oil. Grill, covered, until underside is golden-brown, about 2 to 3 minutes.
Using tongs, return crust, grilled side up, to baking sheet. Scatter eggplant, cheese, olives, and parsley (whoops, forgot mine) over crust. Slide pizza from sheet onto grill and grill, covered, until underside is golden-brown and cheese is melted, about 3 to 5 minutes. (If you're using an oven-safe grill pan, you can slide the pan into a preheated 500 degree oven at this point, as we did, which gets the toppings that much more blistered.) Season to taste with salt, pepper and a red pepper flakes.
To make this pizza in the oven: You can either fry or roast the eggplant slices, brushed with garlic oil, until tender. Prepare the pizza as you would any other, rolling or stretching out the dough, mounding on the toppings and sliding it onto a baking sheet or pizza stone in an oven that has been preheated to its top temperature. It will be ready in about 10 minutes.


text:
This block uses another new to me technique - making half square triangles with Triangles on a Roll!
Triangles on a Roll are fun and super-easy! It takes a little patience to get the paper pinned down in such a way that it is flat and not bunchy, but once it's all down, it makes the process much faster. I neglected to shorten my stitch length (again, I am a dolt) so I had a little bit more trouble ripping the paper off but still easy-easy!
For these blocks I used Moda Bella Solids in Off White, Spearmint, and Clementine. At the end of each post for this Quilt Along, I'll be posting links to my previous posts, so check them out if you so decide:
Blocks 3A & 3B
Block 4
Block 4
We are at the halfway point now! Woot woot!


text:
The North Face Spire 32
This stable pack has tons of padding and support.
Brand: The North Face Gear Reviews
Model: Spire 32
[most stable]
"The hipbelt has enough padding and support to carry a small building," says one tester who humped this pack on a two-day, 42-miler along the Uwharrie National Recreation Trail in North Carolina. Stability and load transfer are good enough for 50 pounds, and freedom of motion is excellent on tricky terrain.
Key ingredient: tubular X-configured stays that underlay the plastic framesheet. How it works: The top two points of the X are positioned just above each shoulder and they connect directly to the load-lifter straps; the bottoms anchor into the hipbelt next to each of your iliac crests. These precise connections transfer weight, while the X's junction (located at the center of your back) allows the pack to twist, torque, and pivot—just like your spine. The result is top-notch support and mobility. It also ventilates better than average, thanks to thick, open foam that "literally pumped air across my back," says one tester.
The Lobo has plenty of loading options—lower and side zippers, plus a wide top opening and a huge shove-it pocket. Smart: A deep head scoop allows for clearance even when the lid is extended with whopper loads. Quibble: Some testers found the wide hipbelt restrictive on high-step climbs.


text:
Warren Buffet, the 2nd richest man on the planet, released his annual letter to shareholders over the weekend. He apologized for the fact that this was the second year in a row that his company, Berkshire Hathaway (BRKA), has lagged the S&P 500 Index. He has openly said in the past that it will be very hard for a company of Berkshire's size to beat the S&P 500 by very much, especially of you buy a low-cost index fund like Vanguard's VFINX. Of course, he is a very humble man. Over the past 40 years, Berkshire has grown its book value per share at an annualized rate of 21.9%. That's more than twice the S&P 500's 10.4% annualized return in that time.
His other comments include the fact that he is predicting further weakening of the dollar due to the U.S.'s huge trade and budget deficits, and he is currently sitting on $44 Billion dollars of cash since he can't find suitable companies to invest in. I wonder if he keeps some of that at Capital One 360? I'm thinking no.
I've often dreamed about owning a Class A share of Berkshire Hathaway, but at $90,000 a pop, it'll be a while. Still want part of the action? There's the Class B shares (BRKB), which are approximately worth $3,000, or 1/30th the price of an A share. The catch? First, you lose some voting rights. Second, you are not eligible to help choose where their charitable contributions go. Of course, if you can't afford an A share chances are your vote won't matter anyways. Finally, while each Class A share is convertible at any time into 30 shares of Class B, the opposite isn't true. And sometimes you can get a Class B share at a discount to 1/30th of a Class A share, so there are some opportunities. Definitely something I'm monitoring. I'm not really sure about how to hedge against currency risk, though. More information about Berkshire available here.


text:
Jules Bianchi will race for Marussia this year, the team has announced.
The French driver, who missed out on taking the second Force India seat yesterday, will replace Luiz Razia at the team.
Team principal John Booth confirmed Razia's contract with the team has been "terminated" just 23 days after it was announced he would drive for them.
"We have found ourselves in a situation where we have had to terminate our contract with Luiz Razia." said Booth.
"Having made clear the basis on which we must operate in 2013, and given the steps we had taken to put that new structure in place, we had no alternative but to remain true to the principles which we had identified as being key to securing our long-term future."
Bianchi said: "Racing in Formula One this season has been my goal over the winter and after evaluating a number of options I am very excited to have this opportunity to demonstrate that I am ready for this next step in my racing career.
"I am also very grateful to the Ferrari Driver Academy that has always supported me and has given me the possibility to mature as a racing driver enabling me to be fully prepared for this new exciting challenge.
"The next two weeks of preparation for the season will be incredibly busy but I am ready to get started tomorrow with my first day in the MR02."
Booth added: "Jules is a proven talent who is highly regarded within the Paddock. He has been on a clear trajectory towards Formula 1 and has achieved some impressive performances through the various feeder formulae, notably his 2012 season in Formula Renault 3.5 when he was also Reserve Driver for Force India.
"He is part of the Ferrari Driver Academy and his obvious pedigree put him on the radar for a number of teams over the winter as a driver ready to step up to Formula One."
2013 F1 season
- Mercedes originally favoured Heidfeld for Hamilton's seat
- Take F1 Fanatic's new 2013 season quiz
- F1 Fanatic's new year thanks and credits 2014
- The complete F1 Fanatic 2013 season review
- The drivers, teams and cars of 2013
Browse all 2013 F1 season articles
Image ?�?� Force India


text:
The best place to share and enjoy the most awesome urbex & abandoned places images.
Use of this Website constitutes acceptance of the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Designated trademarks and brands are the property of their respective owners. Social icons designed by Abhishek Pipalva (CC BY-SA 3.0)
We use our own and third party cookies to improve your browsing experience and our services. If you continue using our website is understood that you accept this cookie policy.


text:
Tour de Delta awarded $50,000 Sport Canada hosting grant
On behalf of The Honourable Bal Gosal, Minister of State (Sport), Delta Mayor Lois E. Jackson announced at a media conference today the awarding of a $50,000 Hosting Grant from Sport Canada to the Tour de Delta, which includes the White Spot | Delta UCI 1.2 Road Race.
"Delta is fortunate to have strong support and partnerships for our community projects and events, and today I am especially grateful to the Government of Canada, the Sport Canada Hosting Program, and Cycling Canada for supporting the White Spot Delta UCI Road Race with this $50,000 hosting grant," said Mayor Lois E. Jackson.
The grant is a tremendous contribution to the overall growth of the UCI 1.2 White Spot | Delta Road Race, which was won in 2013 by Steve Fisher (then with then with Hagens Berman Cycling, now with Team Jelly Belly p/b Maxxis). Leah Kirchmann (Optum p/b Kelly Benefit Strategies) won the White Spot | Delta Road Race on the women's side last year.
"This grant acknowledges the efforts made by the community, sponsors and the Corporation of Delta in supporting the inclusion of the women's race as a 1.2 UCI event this year. We are very pleased to be working with Cycling BC and Cycling Canada to provide a training ground for coaches and officials, as it's vital that we have well trained individuals working in the sport," noted Race Director Mark Ernsting at the media conference. "Without this grant, the future of the sport wouldn't be as stable as it will be now with the proper leaders involved… and it's only getting bigger. For example, last year we had 51 women on the start line and this year, with teams registering on a weekly basis, we anticipate well more than 70."
Cycling Canada President John Tolkamp was also in attendance this morning and he stressed how far funding like this can go towards inspiring young athletes to get involved in the sport.
"The funding for the event supports our strategic goals of developing cycling in Canada, a key priority being the women's road sector. Women's road cycling will benefit greatly from this additional support and resources from Sport Canada," said Tolkamp. "Road cycling is an area where we believe Canada is, and can be, competitive internationally. Having a race in Canada where we can collect international qualification points allows more Canadian athletes to participate. When you combine that with "home field" advantage, it allows our cyclists the opportunity to maximize qualify points."
Meanwhile, the international profile of the BC Superweek series and the Tour de Delta is growing more and more due to the support of Cycling Canada and valuable community partners.
"Having an international race in the BC Superweek series has really increased the attendance of international riders. This is one of our goals to bring international calibre racing to British Columbia. This year, we expect to see 12 different nations represented among the athletes racing on various teams," Ernsting added. "On behalf of everyone involved, we thank Cycling Canada and Sport Canada for their support with this Hosting Grant."
BC Superweek features $120,000 in prize money available during nine races over 10 days. BC Superweek runs from July 4-13, and is made up of the Tour de Delta (July 4, 5, 6), UBC Grand Prix p/b Mahony & Sons (July 8), Global Relay Gastown Grand Prix (July 9), Giro di Burnaby p/b Appia Developments (July 10) and the Tour de White Rock (July 11, 12, 13). For more information, visit www.bcsuperweek.ca.


text:
You are hereHome ›
Calendar of Events
Events for March 31, 2022
Mar 31
Gather all vegetables that may be going bad in your fridge and make a soup from it! in your home. This workshop will be led by cookbook author Anne-Marie Bonneau who has lived plastic-free since 2011.
Mar 26 to Apr 2
Learn the fundamentals of successfully growing food in your backyard in this engaging six-part series workshop taught by local gardening experts. Saturdays from 10am - 12pm on March 26th, April 2nd, 9th, 16th, 23rd, and 30th. One registration enrolls you in all six sessions.
Mar 25
The Urban Forestry Council is scheduled to meet on Friday, March 25, 2022 at 8:30 a.m. TBA
Mar 24
Learn about the benefits of a plant-forward diet and unique cooking techniques on an induction hob with Chef Kelvin.
Mar 24
Join the Exploratorium for a conversation with SF Department of Environment Director Debbie Raphael to learn about the City of San Francisco's new Climate Action Plan.
Mar 22
The Commission on the Environment meeting meets on Tuesday, March 22, 2022 at 5:00 p.m. at City Hall, Room 408, One Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Jr. Place, San Francisco, CA 94102
Mar 19
Teach your kids to ride without training wheels! This class is for children ages 2-5. Pedal bikes, balance bikes, and helmets can be provided for your little one to use for free.
Mar 18
Live music returns to the Golden Gate Bandshell's iconic stage with another season of free outdoor performances in Golden Gate Park. All shows during March will feature women or women-fronted bands in celebration of International Women's Month.
Mar 16
SF Bicycle Coalition is partnering with Bay Wheels to offer a course covering bicycling for everyday riding in SF and how to use the Bay Wheels system. Join for a chance to win an annual Bay Wheels membership in the raffle.
Mar 16
Hear from Caitrin Chappelle, an associate director of TNC's California Water Program leading the Healthy Rivers and Springs strategy. Prior to joining TNC, she managed research and operations at the Public Policy Institute Water Policy Center and conducted research on natural resource management and California water policy.
Mar 15
Learn about all the cycling options for kids and parents, as well as tips, tricks, and tools for biking with your children safely and conveniently.
Mar 14
The Commission on the Environment Policy Committee meeting meets on Monday, March 14, 2022 at 5:00 p.m. via City Hall, Room TBA, One Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Jr. Place, San Francisco, CA 94102
Mar 13
Learn bike-handling skills you need to safely and confidently ride in city traffic. The class will be conducted in a car-free space and is the second in the Smart City Cycling sequence.
Mar 13
Looking to grow roses in pots? Wondering how to get started? Join the San Francisco Rose Society for a live event at the Golden Gate Park Rose Garden.
Mar 12
Celebrate Arbor Day with SF Public Works to kick off a new community program #LoveOurCity: Neighborhood Beautification Day. Join us for a day of greening and help plant 120+ trees all over Bayview Hunters Point.
Mar 10
Learn about the many financial assistance programs available to income-qualifying residents, including the Clean Cars for All grant, Driving Clean Assitance grant, and county-specific programs in the San Francisco Bay Area.
Mar 9
Learn the safety information and gear you'll need to ride in all conditions.
Mar 9
The Municipal Green Building Task Force is scheduled to meet on March 9, 2022 at 1:30 p.m. at the new location, 49 South Van Ness Ave, San Francisco, CA 94103. Room TBA.
Mar 9
Join Recology for a free virtual tour of its facility! Learn all about what happens to the materials tossed in the compost, recycling, and landfill bins in San Francisco, and how you can move towards a zero-waste future.
Mar 8
Join Acterra for a live cooking class with Chef Kelvin. Learn about the benefits of a plant-forward diet and unique cooking techniques on an induction hob. This session will focus on Spinach Pesto Grilled Cheese and Tomato Soup.


text:
2006 Chevy Silverado Intimidator SS
Dale Earnhardt honored with special edition Chevy truck.
Related Video
What has 345 horspower, 380 lb.-ft. or torque, all-black paint, "Intimidator" badges and will spin the rear wheels? A Monte Carlo with a Nothrstar engine in the trunk? No. The 2006 Chevy Silverado Intimidator SS, that's what. Your buddies behind the bow tie will be making 1,333 special edition pickups to honor the late Dale Earnhardt, with a donation going to his foundation for every truck sold.
When compared to the "normal" Silverado SS, the Intimidator is more than just a badge package. It will include a lowered ride height, performance suspension, two-stage multi-leaf springs, Tenneco shocks, a stiffer front stabilizer bar and harder front jounce bumpers. It will also be rear wheel drive with a 3.73 locking rear differential. Unfortunately, this will not be unique to the Intimidator, a GM representative says that every model year 2006 Silverado SS will be twisting only the rear wheels.
The exterior will feature monochromatic black paint and "Intimidator" badges on the front doors and on the back of the truck. Chrome 20-inch wheels will be standard, along with a silver grille insert and a spoiler on the tailgate.
The interior boasts large Dale Earnhardt Legacy logos embroidered on the front headrests and the racer's signature on the tachometer. There is also an "Intimidator" badge on the instrument panel and floormats with the "Intimidator" script. The special edition truck will also include standard features found on every Silverado SS, including 4-speed auto transmission, cruise control, keyless entry, power front seats, radio controls on the steering wheel, power windows, engine oil cooler and transmission fluid cooler.
The Silverado Intimidator SS is the sixth "signature edition" vehicle to be offered by Chevrolet. It joins the 2002 Dale Earnhardt Signature Edition Monte Carlo (3,333 units), the 2003 Jeff Gordon Signature Edition Monte Carlo (2,424 units), the 2004 Monte Carlo Intimidator SS (4,000 units), the 2004 Dale Earnhardt Jr. Signature Series Supercharged SS Monte Carlo (2,883 units), and the 2005 Tony Stewart Signature Series Supercharged SS (1,020 units).
MotorTrend Recommended Stories
Trending Pages
Electric Kia EV9 Priced Like a Mainstream, Gas-Fed 3-Row SUV
2024 Honda Prologue First Look: A Honda SUV With GM's Ultium Electric Guts
How Honda Turned the Chevy Blazer EV Into the Prologue Electric SUV
BYD Tang First Drive: A $107,000 Chinese Answer to Audi
UAW-Detroit Automaker Strike Expands to More GM, Ford Plants: What You Need to Know


text:
May 26, 2021
Grim and James are joined by Jerry Cthulhu, ThatGuy, Flavortown,
Nickie the Dude, Zac Hawkins, Adam Tarsis, and Suzanne! I don't
even know what this show is anymore. Enjoy the chat!
Support us financially at https://www.patreon.com/cruzinwithsteak or cruzinwithsteak.com/donate
Check out our anime review show Shonen Dump www.shonendump.com
Join our Discord ChatRoom https://discord.gg/PmdJaJY ||
Send us hatemail or love mail at email@example.com
Live Show Every Tuesday at 9pm est on CwS Radio
Check out Jerry's show "Nox Mente' at https://noxmente.simplecast.com/
thanks go out to Sir Felix Ortega II for providing all the
jingles and outtro music. Check out and support felix's work at
Check out our website at https://www.cruzinwithsteak.com
Follow us on Twitter @cruzinwithsteak @gromsteak @jamesCruz_cle


text:
|#ifndef fooqueryschedhfoo
|#define fooqueryschedhfoo
|This file is part of avahi.
|avahi is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it
|under the terms of the GNU Lesser General Public License as
|published by the Free Software Foundation; either version 2.1 of the
|License, or (at your option) any later version.
|avahi is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, but WITHOUT
|ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of MERCHANTABILITY
|or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the GNU Lesser General
|Public License for more details.
|You should have received a copy of the GNU Lesser General Public
|License along with avahi; if not, write to the Free Software
|Foundation, Inc., 59 Temple Place, Suite 330, Boston, MA 02111-1307
|typedef struct AvahiQueryScheduler AvahiQueryScheduler;
|#include <avahi-common/address.h>
|#include "iface.h"
|AvahiQueryScheduler *avahi_query_scheduler_new(AvahiInterface *i);
|void avahi_query_scheduler_free(AvahiQueryScheduler *s);
|void avahi_query_scheduler_clear(AvahiQueryScheduler *s);
|int avahi_query_scheduler_post(AvahiQueryScheduler *s, AvahiKey *key, int immediately, unsigned *ret_id);
|int avahi_query_scheduler_withdraw_by_id(AvahiQueryScheduler *s, unsigned id);
|void avahi_query_scheduler_incoming(AvahiQueryScheduler *s, AvahiKey *key);


text:
I'm sentimental and emotional by nature. I pretend to be tougher than I am to make up for that. I once did this assessment of my "emotional" work nature and basically it said I was super over sensitive, however, I was someone who would hide that I was hurt and would instead set people on fire in a rage rather than admit I was hurt.
Well that seems rather extreme. I have never "actually" set someone on fire.
What I've found though is that the more time I have ever have to spend trying to be part of a process/group/relationship the less time I'm actually able to be me. The less me I am, the less happy I am. Eventually I'm a spectator. That's when I start to fail. Work, relationships, anything. If I'm not able to just be me without being judged/criticized etc for being a flawed human I can't be a positive part of whatever it is.
I've watched bad things, wrong things happen to good people. But I wasn't me and I didn't have my voice. I had the voice that was acceptable, and it wasn't loud enough, it wasn't strong enough to truly be heard. The voice that could be heard was the one that agreed and complied.
There's this phrase someone said to me 20 years ago, "Children of alcoholics accept the unacceptable."
It's one of the truest things ever written. If you can accept that at the age of 8 you had to figure out how to use a phone book to look up the various bars your dad might be in, because you mom is bleeding and in labor, there isn't much you can't accept. And that's the problem with me. I've spent a long time accepting things that weren't right, weren't me.
Suddenly, though, I feel like me. I'm happy. I'm connecting, I'm sharing, I'm talking. I don't feel bad about who I am - I don't feel like I have to be someone ELSE in order to be liked.
I was so tired of being someone else.
Maybe I'll just be me for a while. I'm flawed. But I'm really quite awesome.
Tuesday, August 02, 2016
I'm Much More Me
Posted by Gidge Uriza at 8:02 AM
1 comments:
- Samara Barzane said...
Yes you ARE awesome :)
- Tue Aug 02, 09:08:00 AM


text:
If you've heard people raving about fifty-year-old kiddie shows like Thunderbirds and couldn't understand what all the fuss was about...well, watch this clip from Paul Starr, made by a rival production company. It'll make you appreciate Stingray like never before!
To understand what I'm talking about, watch the first 1:45 of the video up top, taken from the pilot of Paul Starr, which ultimately didn't get an order for a full series. OK, now take a look at the Stingray intro:
Even if you're not a fan of Stingray or the other Gerry Anderson shows, you've got to admit the difference between these two is absolutely massive. Stingray doesn't look like a toy in close-up, it's not being obviously pulled along on strings, the ocean actually looks like the ocean instead of somebody's bathtub, the ocean door really appears to be built into the rock face (and it doesn't have "UNDER-SEA BASE" written on it, which has to be considered a plus), you can understand (and get to see) how the characters get in and out of the submarine, and even the hangar itself is full of background details that give the illusion that this is actually a real set and not just a tiny model.
Stingray manages to pull off two submarines jumping out of the water one after the other more convincingly than Paul Starr does with...well, with just about anything. And that's not even getting into the editing, music, or the puppets themselves, all of which I would argue are considerably better on Stingray, though I'll admit that's a bit more subjective.
Now, I don't want to be too harsh on what is, in the end, just an unaired pilot. And it's not like Paul Starr's creators, Roberta Leigh and Arthur Provis (both former business partners of Gerry Anderson back in the 1950s), weren't capable of creating quality television. Their previous attempt at puppet science fiction, the black-and-white Space Patrol, ran 39 episodes and is generally considered a perfectly decent little show.
But still, there's a reason why Paul Starr never went to series, and there's a reason why the model team on Stingray (and all the other Supermarionation shows) ended up working on visual effects for 2001: A Space Odyssey, The Empire Strikes Back, and the Alien movies.
I'll admit that the works of Gerry Anderson are a bit of a sci-fi obsession of mine, perhaps behind only Isaac Asimov and Doctor Who. I'll leave a discussion of the relative merits of Supermarionation (not to mention its absolutely incredible live-action follow-up UFO) for another day, but I will say this: even if you want to argue that shows like Thunderbirds, Stingray, and Captain Scarlet don't stand up today as anything other than model porn, then it's the best damn model porn ever made.
I'll leave you with the intro to Thunderbirds, which still remains one of my favorite things ever.
Paul Starr clip via BoingBoing; thanks to Gregory La Vardera for the tip!


text:
BMW of Denver
Home of the Free Lifetime Oil Change (see dealer for details)!
BMW of Denver is the only BMW EXCLUSIVE dealer in the region!
BMW of Denver Management Staff
Bill McConnell
General Manager
Steve Rumnock
Service Manager
Matt Irish
Parts Manager
Our store is the hub for all your BMW Motorcycle needs. From our stellar service team, outstanding selection of parts, accessories and apparel, the friendliest most knowledgeable sales staff; you know you've found the place you've been looking for when you stop in!
Join riders from all across the country; whether you're close to the Denver Metro area, Foothills or coming from Wyoming, Utah, Kansas or New Mexico. Visit Colorado's only Exclusive BMW Dealership.
It's worth the Ride!!!
Click here for hours and location.


text:
Payment Methods
Shipping Options
Indinavir Sulfate
Indinavir is an antiviral medication used to treat HIV, which causes AIDS by preventing HIV cells from multiplying in your body.
Product Description
General information
Indinavir belongs to the class of medications called protease inhibitors. It is used in combination with other HIV medications to treat the infection caused by the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). HIV is the virus responsible for acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS). It also lowers your risk of getting HIV complications (such as new infections, cancer). This medication may also be used to prevent HIV infection after contact with the virus. Indinavir is not a cure for HIV. It does not prevent the spread of HIV to others through sexual contact or blood contamination.
Take Indinavir exactly as prescribed by your doctor. Take this medication by mouth with a full glass of water on an empty stomach (at least 1 hour before or 2 hours after food), usually 3 times daily. Drink at least 6 full glasses of water or other liquids throughout the day to decrease the risk of kidney stones. The recommended indinavir dose for treating adults with HIV or AIDS is 800 mg (two 400 mg capsules) every eight hours. If you are taking certain other medications, a lower dose may be recommended. The recommended dose for people with liver disease is 600 mg every eight hours.
Before taking Indinavir you should talk with your doctor if you have kidney stones, liver disease, liver failure, cirrhosis, hepatitis, diabetes, hemophilia, coronary artery disease, heart attack, kidney disease, kidney failure, high blood fat levels, any allergies. Taking indinavir will not prevent you from passing HIV to other people through unprotected sex or sharing of needles. Children may be more sensitive to the side effects of this drug.
Do not take Indinavir if you are allergic to indinavir or any ingredients of this medication or are taking any of the following medications: alprazolam, amiodarone, astemizole, cisapride, ergot derivatives, midazolam, pimozide, terfenadine, triazolam. Let your doctor know if you are pregnant or breastfeeding.
Possible side effectbuy stromectol
Get emergency medical help if you have dry or itchy skin, abdominal or stomach pain, difficulty in sleeping, acid reflux, nausea, heartburn, diarrhea, loss of appetite, bloody urine, increased urination, hives, difficulty breathing, swelling of your face, lips, tongue, constipation, dizziness, weakness, headache, sleepiness, rash, vomiting, jaundice (yellowing of the skin or eyes), easy bruising, mood changes, tired feeling, bloating, numbness, weight loss, pale stools, peeling, back pain, chills, fever, rapid heartbeat, swollen abdomen. If you notice other effects not listed above, contact your doctor.
Drug interactions
Tell your doctor about all other medications you use, especially: seizure medications (phenytoin, felbamate, carbamazepine), HIV/AIDS medications (nevirapine, lamivudine, zidovudine), drugs for male erectile problems (tadalafil, vardenafil, sildenafil), insulin, heart rhythm medications (quinidine, disopyramide, amiodarone), cyclosporine, tacrolimus, cholesterol-lowering medicines (fluvastatin, cerivastatin, simvastatin, lovastatin), calcium channel blockers (nimodipine, verapamil, nifedipine), antidepressants (fluoxetine, amitriptyline, citalopram, nortriptyline, doxepin), antibiotics (telithromycin, erythromycin, clarithromycin), antifungal medications (fluconazole, ketoconazole, itraconazole), fluticasone. Interaction between two medications does not always mean that you must stop taking one of them. Tell your doctor or prescriber about all prescription, over-the-counter, and herbal medications you are taking.
Missed dose
Take the missed dose as soon as possible. Skip the missed dose if it is time for your next scheduled dose. Don't take extra medicine to make up the missed dose.
If you think you have overdosed the medicine seek emergency medical help at once. The overdose symptoms are nausea, emesis, diarrhea, lower back ache, bloody urine.
Store the medicine at room temperature between 59-77 degrees F (15-30 degrees C) away from light and moisture. Do not store the drugs in the bathroom. Keep all drugs away from reach of children and pets.
The information presented at the site has a general character. Note please this information cannot be used for self-treatment and self diagnosis. You should consult with your doctor or health care adviser regarding any specific instructions of your condition. The information is reliable, but we concede it could contain mistakes. We are not responsible for any direct, indirect, special or other damage caused by use of this information on the site and also for consequences of self-treatment.
My Cart
0.00£ (0 items)Go to Cart


text:
You guys? I'm frightened. Over the past few days, thanks to a barrage of interviews leading up to the premiere of her film, Jennifer's Body, I'm actually starting to like Megan Fox quite a bit. I know. I know!
Now, listen. People have often jumped in whenever I post anything remotely Megan Fox related to write a comment like, "Oh, so everyone hates Megan Fox now?" or "Why does Jezebel hate Megan Fox so much?" I don't think that's really a fair assessment of my personal opinion of Fox—I don't hate her, as I don't even know her—but I do admittedly find myself annoyed at the role she plays; the sex kitten who drops little quotes about how she's so crazy and sexy and cool or whatever while SexyFacing all over the red carpet. But as far as Megan Fox, Person goes, lately I've found myself laughing with her rather than at her, much to the chagrin of some of my friends, who feel she should be banished to SexyFace Island forevermore.
So why DO people hate Megan Fox so much? I suppose most of it comes from her interviews, wherein she says basically whatever the hell she's thinking, which often leads to scandalous headlines soon after. In several of these interviews, she intimated that women hated her because she came across as confident, and women found that threatening. Many of us, myself included, read those statements as "Whateva, you're just jealous, stupid bitches!"
But in retrospect I think what Fox, who often admits to having fairly shitty self-esteem, was saying has a bit of truth to it. Women don't hate Megan Fox because she comes across as confident; they hate the Megan Fox Archetype, because, in a way, it validates all of the high school notions of what sexiness is: porn-star poses, slow motion boob shots, and references to lesbianism and bisexuality as kinks instead of sexual orientation. What Fox is marketed to represent is exactly what the "bad girls" who came before her were marketed to represent: a "naughty," slightly crazy (as of course, no "sane" woman would ever say such scandalous things) woman who uses her sexuality to get what she wants. And for many women, the idea that we need to put on our best SexyFace and be a "man-eater" to feel empowered or sexual is an irritating one. She is the personification of the Cosmo brand of sex, and that is why women find her so annoying.
However, I don't think Fox is that person, and she admits it; "I think I understand why actors go insane, because you're merchandised, you're a product that gets sold," she says, "So the media has to brand you, to label you something. The lines between reality and fantasy get blurred and you can lose yourself in that." When Tracie compiled a list of Fox's most insane statements earlier this summer, one could see a pattern emerging: she'd be quoted saying something that sounded a bit shocking or offensive, and then quoted soon after, clarifying her remarks or noting that what she said was taken out of context. It's almost as if she's trying to balance being Megan Fox: International Sex Symbol and Megan Fox: Human Being, and her quotes represent a weird mix of the two.
She's smart enough to know that this character she plays is a career goldmine—nobody is going to send Megan Fox Cate Blanchett's reject scripts, you know? But she's also, through her wacky interviews, attempting, in a way, to take down the very thing she represents from the inside, constantly using any platform given to her to remind us all that she's not exactly what the press makes her out to be; she farts, she stinks, she fucks up, and she worries about her career after her looks go away: "The reality is, if you're nothing but a pinup, at 33 you're reaching your expiration date. I have to develop skills, I have to get better, I have to be a good actress."
There are only two roads for sex symbols in America: they can transition in to serious actress mode a la Angelina Jolie, or they can spiral out of control, like Lindsay Lohan or Marilyn Monroe. Often enough we end up posting stories on how we shouldn't kick the fallen ones when they're down, but I've realized that perhaps we should also consider not kicking the Megan Foxes of the world on their way up—instead, we should root for them to subvert the roles they're positioned to fill, and to find a way to break out of the boxes that Hollywood always tends to place women in.
If Megan Fox wasn't in that role, someone else would be, and at least Fox is willing to say things that don't necessarily fit her persona. This is not to say that Fox doesn't often drop some truly heinous statements, and that she isn't riding this thing all the way to the bank, or that she's not a willing participant in the SexyFace games, but I'm pretty sure she's in on the joke, and maybe, just maybe, she'll be the one the make the rest of the world realize how stupid all of this really is. If nothing else, she'll certainly give us something to talk about for the next few years.
Megan Fox: Crazy Or Sly Like A Fox? [ABCNews]
Sly As A Fox, Despite Her Handlers [Globe And Mail]
Earlier; Megan Fox's 50 Best (& Worst) Bon Mots


text:
Fine Foods & Pharmaceuticals N.T.M. S.p.A.
Founded in 1985 at Brembate (Bergamo) as a laboratory for the study of fluid bed granulation technology and its applications for the pharmaceutical and nutraceutical industry, Fine Foods & Pharmaceuticals N.T.M. very soon started to produce excipients and semifinished products.
Early 1989 the start for a "full time" activity as a contract manufacturer for oral solid forms dedicated to pharmaceutical and nutraceutical markets was given.
Later, new facilities for pharmaceuticals at Brembate (1991) and for nutraceuticals at Zingonia-Verdellino (1997), were opened. Over the years plant engineering has followed, and was adapted to, market requirements, strengthening in all solid oral forms (powder, granules,film-coated or plain tablets, hard-gel capsules) and virtually in every kind of packaging: sachets, bags, bottles, blisters, jars, tubes and strips. To complete pharmaceutical services another production plant was acquired early 2008 in Nembro (Bergamo), for toll-manufacturing production of tablets, film- and sugar-coated tablets as well as hard-gelatine capsules.
Last but not least Fine Foods & Pharmaceuticals N.T.M. installed lines for producing and packaging of monodose bottles for liquids, with or without cap for powders.
Main technology at Fine Foods & Pharmaceuticals N.T.M. is fluid bed granulation, by which instant soluble powders and effervescent forms are produced (granules, tablets).
Today Fine Foods & Pharmaceuticals N.T.M. is the biggest independent Italian contract manufacturer for nutraceuticals and an important player in the pharmaceutical market, with more than 330 employees, more than 150 customers and a global turnover of €80 million.


text:
Showing 1 to 1 out of 1 results
TextEEBO-TCP (Phase 1)To the kings most excellent Maiesty. The humble petition of the citizens of Yorke, delivered to His Majesty by the high sheriffe of Yorke.Date of publication:
1642Description:Initial. Imperfect: tightly bound, with loss of print. Reproduction of original in: Eton College. Library.This item contains 4 files (54.49 KB).Publicly Available


text:
This HTML version of is provided for convenience, but it is not the best format for the book. In particular, some of the symbols are not rendered correctly.
You might prefer to read the PDF version, or you can buy a hardcopy here.
Think Stats: Probability and Statistics for Programmers
Allen B. Downey
Version 1.6.0
Copyright 2011 Allen B. Downey
Permission is granted to copy, distribute, and/or modify this document under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported License, which is available at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/.
Like this book?
Are you using one of our books in a class?We'd like to know about it. Please consider filling out this short survey.
This document was translated from LATEX by HEVEA.


text:
Set up and run reports on your invoicesShow transcript
Video Transcript: Set up and run reports on your invoices
Hello, this video was designed to show you how easy it is to view and create custom reports via the Tungsten Network portal. Tungsten Network offers a variety of reporting features accessible to our customers. During this tutorials I will show you how to view reports related to invoices and credit notes submitted, how to view and download custom reports and finally how to download copies of invoices or credit notes previously submitted to your customer via Tungsten Network.
From the home page, go to the "Reporting" link in the main menu. Click "Invoices submitted".
To maximize your search results, it's best to start with the date category field. Once your selection has been made from the drop down menu, please move to the date range field. Select a date range or a custom date range. Once the date category and range have been selected, select which customers you would like returned in your search results. It's important to update the invoice status selection prior to generating your report. If reporting on invoices or credit notes in multiple status, please ensure all boxes are checked. Click "More fields" to expand the search criteria section.
Select the currency and invoice type from the drop down menus. If searching for a specific invoice or credit note, enter the number, gross amount or purchase order number in the specified fields. Your report is ready to be created. Prior to generating the report, please update the report content from the drop down menu. This will ensure the results returned are specific to your reporting needs.
Now it's time to determine if you would like to generate the report to display on your screen, save the report under "My reports" or export the report in the Excel or CSV format. To display the report on your screen, click "Run".
The report contains all fields selected from the report content drop down menu. After reviewing the report, click the question mark if you have any questions or concerns related to the returned results. Clicking the question mark will allow you to create a support ticket with the Tungsten Network help desk.
If you would like to download a copy of an invoice or credit note that has been delivered to your customer, click the image icon. If you included an attachment with your electronic invoice or credit note, the attachment will be found here.
To save the custom report for use at a later time, click "Save as". You will be prompt to enter the custom name of the report in the specified field. Click "Save" to complete the process. The saved reports can be found on the home page of the Tungsten Network portal. You can also access the saved reports under the "Invoices submitted" and "My reports" pages located under the "Reporting" link in the main menu.
To export your custom report for use at a later time, click "Export". Confirm if the report should be exported as an Excel spreadsheet or a CSV flat text file. The system will allow you to open or download the custom report after your selection is made.
The reporting link in the main menu provides access to other reporting features available to you on the Tungsten Network portal. For example, purchase orders received. If your customer utilizes PO services through Tungsten Network, this feature will be available to you. PO services will allow you to utilizes the "PO Convert" function to submit invoices or credit notes to your customer.
If your customer does not have PO services, you must use the "Create invoice" feature located under "Invoicing" in the main menu. For more information on PO convert or standard electronic invoicing, please visit our "Help and Support" link to view our helpful How to tutorials. Suppliers using our Integrated Solution may have access to view purchase order under "My POs" available in the main menu.
You also have access to view or download Tungsten Network billing reports. The billing report provides details related to invoices submitted to you by Tungsten Network.
The last feature available under"Reporting" gives you access to Tungsten Early Payment history. If early payments are taken through Tungsten Bank, you can track these transactions from the Tungsten portal.
Using the reporting features via Tungsten Network is very easy. You are encouraged to use the "Help & Support" page if you need assistance navigating the Tungsten Network portal or are experiencing a technical issue using the site.


text:
The NEW GOST Watch HD IVR (Internet Video Recorder) is similar to a traditional DVR with the added advantage of being accessible either locally or remotely via the internet. The 4 Terabyte IVR utilize an advanced custom H.264 / MJPEG4 dual codec decoding compression. The IVR is capable of storing the video from 8 cameras / devices at 20 frames per second for up to 90 days. For a maximum of 8 cameras, the frame rate will be reduced dynamically to a slightly lower frame rate. In cases where there is little activity in view of the camera being recorded, the maximum storage may actually be increased due to the use of H.264 compression. Recording time may be diminished in very high activity applications, such as cameras looking out at a busy marina with constant shimmering water in view.
The GWHD A/D Gateways install in minutes and can be connected to any standard analog camera with a BNC connector.
The GOST Watch HD can be used as a stand-alone surveillance system or as part of the GOST Insight HD System. A variety of cameras are available for purchase from GOST, or the system can be an easy add-on to existing cameras on board.


text:
The cost of rooftop solar-powered electricity will be on par with prices for common coal or oil-powered generation in just two years -- and the technology to produce it will only get cheaper.
The prediction, made by Deutsche Bank's leading solar industry analyst, Vishal Shah, is part of a report on Vivint Solar, the nation's second-biggest solar panel installer. Shah believes Vivint Solar is doing so well that it will double its sales each year for the next two years.
The sharp decline in solar energy costs is the result of increased economies of scale leading to cheaper photovoltaic panels, new leasing models and declining installation costs.
Today, only 10 states boast solar energy costs that are on par with those of conventional electricity generation methods, such as coal-fired power plants. Those states include Arizona, California, Connecticut, Hawaii, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, New Mexico and Vermont.
Last year, those states using solar power accounted about 90% of U.S. installations. But, by 2016, Deutsche expects solar energy to reach price parity in all 50 states.
For example, the cost of solar-generated electricity in the top 10 states for capacity ranges from 11-15 cents per kilowatt hour (c/kWh), compared to the retail electricity price of 11-37 c/kWh. In those states, there is currently about 6 gigawatts (GW or billion watts) of solar electricity installed. However, with the price of solar panels dropping, new solar leasing programs and the availability of low-cost financing, Deutsche expects an installed capacity growth of about 400% to 500% over the next three to four years.
Currently, the U.S. has 16GW of installed solar capacity, with nearly 5GW of solar capacity was added last year alone, according to Deutsche.
One of the factors spurring growth is the expiration of the federal government's solar investment tax credit (ITC). That measure, passed in 2008, offered a 30% tax credit for residential and business installations. When it expires in 2016, the tax credit will drop to a more permanent 10%.
"Consequently, we expect to see a big rush of new installations ahead of the 2016 ITC expiration," Shah stated in his research document.
At the same time, Deutsche Bank believes the cost to finance solar installations will also drop from 7.9% today to about 5.4% next year. Financing for installations is expected to stabilize at around 6.5% by 2019.
Amit Ronen, director of George Washington University's Solar Institute, was a key Congressional staffer behind the 2008 ITC legislation. Along with the ITC law, one of the driving forces behind adoption of solar power and the ensuing reduction of costs, he said, has been the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) SunShot Initiative, which helps fund research, manufacturing and market creation. SunShot has a goal for solar energy to reach price parity with conventional power sources by 2020.
"They say they're about 60% of the way there because [of solar] panel prices.... They've come down 80% over the past five years," Ronen said.
The cost of solar panels, or solar hardware, used to represent two-thirds of the overall price to install solar power. Over the past five years, however, that has flipped to where "soft costs," which include labor, permitting and advertising, now represent the majority of the cost.
The U.S. has lagged behind some other countries in progressive solar energy policies that have been successful in lowering soft costs of solar installations.
Germany, for example, instituted a generous feed-in tariff policy that guaranteed if a residence or business installed solar all the power produced would be purchased at a fixed rate for 20 years. This assurance facilitated a huge increase in installations which lead to massive price drops in solar energy costs.
"Germany decided to make a massive investment in solar even though they have relatively poor solar resources," Ronen said, referring to the lack of sunny days in Northern Europe. "For example, Seattle is the worst place in the continental U.S. for solar. Germany's worse than Seattle."
After the Fukushima nuclear disaster in 2011, Germany also decided to shutter its oldest nuclear plants, and set its sites on phasing out all plants by 2022 in favor of renewable energy.
"The German experience shows that with motivated leaders and the right policies, even a country with relatively poor solar resources and a large industrial base can reliably and affordably integrate high levels of solar energy into their electricity mix," Ronen said.
Deutsche said solar system prices in the U.S. are expected to decline from just under $3 per watts today, to under $2.50 per watt over the next 18 months, leading to a further decline in the price per kilowatt-hour of solar to 9-14 cents, "driving further acceleration in solar shipments."
The U.S. solar installer market is still highly fragmented, Shah noted in his analysis. But he expect that to shift dramatically over the next three to five years as large solar manufacturers and installers, such as First Solar and SolarCity, grow to facilitate economies of scale in a post-ITC environment.
"We believe the availability of residential leasing options...also acts as a significant growth catalyst for the sector, considering the fact that solar leasing companies are highly profitable and have strong incentive to maximize the number of leasing customers ahead of ITC expiration in 2016," Shah said.
One area of concern is net metering, Shah noted. Net metering is the ability for residential and commercial solar installations to sell unused power back to utilities, making the electrical meter a two-way street.
Currently, 43 states and the District of Columbia have implemented net metering policies, some of which are more favorable than others.
Several states, such as Arizona, California, New Mexico, Idaho, Louisiana, Wisconsin, are discussing revisions to their net metering policies to include fixed monthly charges for residences and businesses that install solar to make it less competitive with conventional energy. The rationale, as given by utilities, is that they must build and maintain the electrical grid over which all power is transferred, so solar installations should be charged a fee to help pay for that.
Last year, for example, Arizona's largest power utility -- Arizona Public Service -- sought a monthly rate increase of $50 to $100 for solar-using customers. Arizona regulators settled on a roughly $5 per-month fee for those solar customers of Arizona Public Service.
"Fixed monthly charges would make solar less competitive if implemented," Shah stated.


text:
Special Activities
Check out the pricing page to see all of the special activities we offer including Toddler Time, Black Out Teen Night, Theme Thursdays, Family Night and many more.
1Wall to Wall Trampolines
Wall to Wall TrampolinesJump on the largest, highest quality trampoline deck around.
2Basketball Hoops
Basketball HoopsDunk like the pros on one of the two basketball hoops.
3Ninja Course
Ninja CourseDo you have the strength and endurance to conquer the Ninja Course?
JoustingHand to hand combat just got interesting. Show your friend who's boss and toss them into the foam pit below.
1Dodgeball Courts
Dodgeball CourtsThe right way to play dodgeball is on a trampoline half pipe! Get your friends together in an epic foam-ball battle. The last team standing wins!
2Toddler Area
Toddler AreaYour little ones will love an area just for them! Trampolines, foam pits and seating for mom and dad. Check out our Toddler Time most weeks.
3Rock Climbing
Rock ClimbingDon't worry about a fear of heights when all you see below is a sweet foam pit!
4Foam Pits


text:
Notice of Directory Information
The Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA), a Federal law, requires that Chickasaw City School District, with certain exceptions, obtain your written consent prior to the disclosure of personally identifiable information from your child's education records. However, Chickasasaw City School District may disclose appropriately designated "directory information" without written consent, unless you have advised the District to the contrary in accordance with District procedures. The primary purpose of directory information is to allow the Chickasaw City School District to include this type of information from your child's education records in certain school publications. Examples include:
Directory information, which is information that is generally not considered harmful or an invasion of privacy if released, can also be disclosed to outside organizations without a parent's prior written consent. Outside organizations include, but are not limited to, companies that manufacture class rings or publish yearbooks. In addition, two federal laws require local educational agencies (LEAs) receiving assistance under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA) to provide military recruiters, upon request, with the following information - names, addresses and telephone listings - unless parents have advised the LEA that they do not want their student's information disclosed without their prior written consent.
If you do not want Chickasaw City School District to disclose directory information from your child's education records without your prior written consent, you must notify the District in writing by September 1, 2015 for the 2015-2016 academic year. Chickasaw City School District has designated the following information as directory information:
- A playbill, showing your student's role in a drama production
- The annual yearbook;
- Honor roll or other recognition lists
- Graduation programs; and
- Sports activity sheets, such as for sports, showing weight and height of team members.
- Student ID number, user ID, or other unique personal identifier used to communicate in electronic systems that cannot be used to access education records without a PIN, password, etc. (A student's SSN, in whole or in part, cannot be used for this purpose.)
- Student's name
- Address
- Telephone listing
- Electronic mail address
- Photograph
- Date and place of birth
- Grade level
- Dates of attendance
- Major field of study
- Degrees, honors, and awards received
- Weight and height of members of athletic teams
- The most recent educational agency or institution attended
1 These laws are: Section 9528 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (20 U.S.C. § 7908) and
10 U.S.C. § 503(c).


text:
Mike Baker's Associated Press story today on the state's economic forecast emphasizes the most salient point, something that could be lost in the press releases.
"Washington state government can expect to bring in $16.1 million less than projected in the current budget cycle because of a lackluster economic recovery, forecasters said Wednesday" is what Baker wrote in the AP story Wednesday.
That might be confusing to some who read the state's Office of Financial Management press release that carries the headline "Washington quarterly revenue projection for 2011–13 increases $156 million."
Both are correct, but context is important. State revenues are up $172 million for the two-year budget because of "policy changes and fund shifts," wrote Brad Shannon at the Olympian. Subtract $16 million from revenues lost by the overall economy and you get that $156 million increase.
In relative terms the $16 million is more or less flat, according to House Ways and Means Chairman Ross Hunter, a Medina Democrat. Compared to the forecast a year ago when revenues were projected to be down $780 million from earlier predictions, that's true. The celebrations over the most recent numbers, however, are tepid at best and fraught with warnings about events that could make the numbers a lot worse.
OFM's press release follows, as does the governor's official
statement and those from Republican budget leadership. If
Democratic leadership from the Legislature issues any statements
I'll add them.
Continue reading