Her convicted murderer, Brian McCarthy, plead guilty on Thursday, August 13, 1987 and was convicted to 23 years to life for her murder. He was denied parole at his first hearing in 2009. New York State law allows for subsequent parole hearings every 24 months. Every two years, my brother, mother, sister and I meet with the Victim Impact Unit of NYS Corrections Dept to make formal statements to ask for his parole to continue to be denied. Every 24 months we recount the horrific details for her murder and the lack of remorse and repeated offenses that her killer has shown while in prison. Every 24 months, we remind them that in one of his parole hearings, he didn’t even know Katy’s name when asked about his victim. We remind them of the beautiful life that he took and how we miss her every day.

Every 24 months we present our ongoing online petition to the board as a way to remind them that she is not forgotten, and we demand justice for the life he took. Justice demands that he be made to spend every day of his life in prison for taking the life of an innocent victim.

I am writing to you as a concerned resident of the Mat-Su Borough. I was recently researching the registered sex offenders that live in my area in an attempt to be fully aware for my childrens' safety; in the process of doing so, I found that among the many in my area, one in particular, a Mr. Kenneth Lynn Griffeth, has taken up residency off of Valley View Dr which is a road off of Vine Rd. The subject that lives here has been convicted of sexual abuse of a minor in the 2nd degree. I take issue with his residency as the backyard of his property backs up the playground of Knik and Goose Bay Elementary Schools. I contacted the sex offender registry office in Anchorage and was advised that unless somebody is on conditions or probation, that sex offenders are free to take up residency wherever they like.

This brings a sickening feeling to my gut knowing that a person who is capable of such a heinous act would have free access to grounds filled with our children which we presume to be safe at school. I am now aware that there are no rules or residency restrictions in place for convicted sex offenders as to restrict their access to places such as elementary schools, middle schools, or parks and playgrounds; I am writing you in a request that this issue may be addressed by our state legislature in hopes of having tighter restrictions placed on people convicted of such crimes.

Currently there are 21 states in the United States which have adopted sex offender residency laws and restrictions. Examples as follows:

Tennessee - Statutory Citation 40-39-[2]11(a)-(b)
"A sex offender cannot live within 1,000 feet of schools, childcare facilities, or the victim."

Oklahoma - Statutory Citation OSA tit. 57 SS590
" A registered sex offender cannot live within 2,000 feet of a school."

Ohio - Statutory Citation 2950.031(A)
"A sex offender may not live within 1,000 feet of any school, childcare facility or place where children gather"

These are only a few examples of the ordinances and laws enforced in other states. More follow the same suit including Alabama, Arkansas, California, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Minnesota, MIssouri, Oregon, South Dakota, Texas, Washington and West Virginia.

It is my hope that this issue may be addressed before the unthinkable happens to an innocent child in our community. These types of issues normally don't get much thought or attention until an incident has already occurred, but I ask that you give some serious thought and eventually take up action in hopes of preventing a future crime against one of our children.

Please contact me if there is any assistance I can provide in helping this legislation get traction.

Thank you for your time on the matter.

Poor roads and bridges are reducing safety, damaging vehicles, and lowering on time deliveries due to congestion and delays. The cost to repair the roads increases substantially as they go from fair to poor.

If we do not increase the investment in our transportation infrastructure, it is estimated that the number of Michigan roads in poor condition will increase to 65% by 2018 (currently 32%).

The Problem: A "mixing zone" is an area in a waterbody where pollution levels exceed water quality standards designed to protect people and fish. Normally, a pollution discharge must meet water quality standards at the end of the discharge pipe. When the discharge is too polluted to meet such standards, regulators often employ mixing zones - which are simply loopholes that allow compliance to be measured downstream, after the polluted discharge has dispersed in the receiving water. Mixing zones adopt the long-discounted notion that dilution is the solution to pollution, and in practice, they create sacrifice zones where water and habitat quality fail to meet the fish protection goals of the Clean Water Act.

The Solution: Speak Out! Let the Governor and ADEC know you oppose increased pollution in Alaska's renowned salmon streams (see talking points below):

Ernesta Ballard, Commissioner
Alaska Dept. of Env. Conservation
410 Willoughby Avenue, Suite 303
Juneau, AK 99801-1795
Email: ernesta_ballard@dec.state.ak.us
ph: (907) 465-5066; fx: (907) 465-5070

Governor Frank Murkowski
State of Alaska
Box 110001
Juneau, AK 99811
Email: frank_murkowski@gov.state.ak.us
ph: 907.465.3500 fx: 465.3532

Attend a Public Hearing!!! ADEC will hold public hearings (see schedule below) and we need people to come out in force to reject this short-sighted proposal:

Fairbanks , August 24 from 4-6 p.m. - 119 N Cushman Street, Suite 101 .
Anchorage , August 25 from 4-6 p.m. - 716 W. 4 th Ave, Suite 200 .
Juneau , August 26 from 4-6 p.m.- Terry Miller Building , Suite 111

Send a Letter to the Editor!

Letters to the Editor
Anchorage Daily News
P.O. Box 149001
Anchorage, AK 99514
letters@adn.com

For more information, contact:
Cook Inlet Keeper (Anchorage Office): 907.929.9371
Alaska Center for the Environment: 907.274.3621

TALKING POINTS

MIXING ZONES & SALMON STREAMS

· Alaska Law Rightly Prohibits Mixing Zones in Salmon Streams. Alaska law currently prohibits mixing zones in salmon streams because mixing zones allow pollution at levels above state standards designed to protect fish. The state says it is simply conducting "housekeeping" to make permit decisions easier for industry and agencies; the fact is that the new rule will allow toxic pollution discharges in Alaska salmon streams where none occur now. Polluting industries have lobbied for years for this loophole, and now, the Murkowski Administration is set to reward them with yet another way to foist pollution treatment costs onto everyday Alaskans.

· Polluting Salmon Streams Will Hurt Fish Marketing Efforts. In response to the global glut of farmed salmon, the Alaska salmon industry is successfully branding and marketing wild, fresh and clean Alaska salmon to consumers who demand quality seafood. If the Administration adopts the proposed rules, farmed fish vendors will have a powerful to undermine Alaska salmon sales. Furthermore, salmon marketing and certification entities - such as the Alaska Seafood Marketing Institute, Kenai Wild, Copper River Red Salmon and the Marine Stewardship Council - may be forced to amend their salmon quality specifications and grades to reflect fish taken from waters with heightened pollution from mixing zones.

· The Murkowski Administration Is Gutting Fish Habitat Protections. The Murkowski Administration has embraced an extreme anti-salmon agenda since taking office. At the start of his term, the Governor effectively silenced the biologists in the Alaska Department of Fish & Game's Habitat Division, by moving them to the resource development agency - the Department of Natural Resources. Soon after, he and his supporters gutted the primary state law which protects salmon habitat in coastal watersheds - the Alaska Coastal Management Program - by effectively removing citizens and local governments from decisions affecting coastal salmon habitat. The Murkowski Administration has also pressed hard to allow pesticide and herbicide spraying around salmon streams. Together, these sweeping changes herald disturbing rollbacks to common sense protections for our wild salmon and the people and communities they support.

· More Pollution Threatens Fisheries Health & Consumer Safety. The State of Alaska does not regularly sample and test salmon for toxic pollution. Research from the Exxon Valdex oil spills has proved that low levels of hydrocarbons - as low as one part per billion - can harm fish eggs and smolt. Furthermore, many Native and subsistence consumers eat large quantities of salmon, and toxins in the fish can bioaccumulate in human fat cells, leading to health concerns (especially for vulnerable populations, such as pregnant women and children). As a result, the current proposal to allow more pollution in salmon streams adopts a "head in the sand" approach to fisheries health and consumer safety.

· The Comment Period Falls During Prime Fishing Season. The Murkowski Administration chose to wait until the middle of the fishing and subsistence seasons to open a 45 day comment period - when those people who would be most affected by the proposed rule are unavailable. As a result, the comment period should be extended until October 31, to allow stakeholders a realistic opportunity to weigh-in on this important proposal.

For more information, contact:

Cook Inlet Keeper (Anchorage Office): 907.929.9371
Alaska Center for the Environment: 907.274.3621

Colorado's Commission on Judicial Discipline dismisses 97% of complaints against judges. The rate is so incredibly high because Colorado's Supreme Court writes the rules for the commission, and the executive director of the commission reports to the Supreme Court. The proceedings before the commission are confidential. Proceedings before a commission that disciplines judges should be public in Colorado like they are in 35 other states.

Voters receive insufficient information about judges. The commissions on judicial performance that make recommendations to voters about judges don't know whether the judges they're recommending have been disciplined. The commissions have no investigative power and do not receive background checks on the judges. The commissions are not required to hold public hearings. And judges do not receive annual reviews by the commissions. The infrequency of reviews and the commissions' lack of information ultimately turns into the public's lack of information regarding judges.

However each year the disabled Veteran must go into a local government office and certify that they are still qualified for this benefit. This is where I feel the problem is, if paperwork becomes "lost" that Veteran loses. The veteran faces potential discrimination from government officials who "doubt" paperwork.

It is time to stop asking our Disabled Veterans to fight! Our country sent them off to war. Even if you don’t agree with the war (who does) PLEASE HELP ME TELL MY STATE TO STOP ASKING ITS VETERANS TO FIGHT!!!

I know first hand the difficulties facing our disabled Veterans in the state of Vermont. My husband is one, and we are currently fighting our town on the exemption issue. Our town Collection Agent refused to discuss the exemption issue with us when she was first presented my husband's paperwork. She questioned why it did not detail his medical issues. I refused to give her private medical information. Since then our town has claimed no attempt has ever been made to get this benefit and of course they can not find the paperwork we have provided. I contacted each of my Senators and Rep for my county, out of 13 only 2 would speak with me.

It is shocking but this type of discrimination (my personal opinion) happens everyday to many Veterans. It is our elected officials who sent these young men and women off to war and it is their responsibility to ensure fair, legal, ethical, and just treatment is provided.

This should apply even if they voted no for the war, even if it was a predecessor who made the vote .... they now hold the responsibility! The voters provided this benefit and if the elected officials will not honor this law what is next?! What group will find themselves facing the same discrimination?

International House

Attn: Office of the President

500 Riverside Drive

New York, NY 10027

Good evening, President of International House (NY):

We are current residents, alumni, and community members of International House NYC (“IH”). We are in receipt of your email “COVID-19 Update 3.22.2020” that was just sent out at 7:55 PM on March 22, 2020. We write in response to your email expressing your “urgency to expedite departures from the South Building” advising residents to move out of the International House “no later than Tuesday, March 24th if at all possible to prevent last minute crowding.” We are either students, researchers or artists. Your directive that we leave as soon as possible is causing so much fear and panic especially because we are international students, researchers or artist-fellows.

We have been told by lawyers that your request is in direct conflict with Governor Cuomo’s Stay-At-Home order directing residents to self-quarantine in their homes with the exception of essential workers. (See Executive Order No. 202-8) Most importantly, he issued a moratorium on evictions for 90 days. This means no one is to leave their current residence. Your request also poses an even greater public health risk to all New Yorkers. Two members of the IH community have been already found positive for COVID-19 - one IH staff member and one resident. Shockingly, we were not made aware that any resident was found positive until late Saturday night on March 21st, when we were told this resident died because of COVID-19. Your office has acknowledged that “numerous residents and staff have had close contact with this affected [staff member] in recent weeks and as such I-House is now considered an at-risk community.” (Email sent from the President’s Office on March 19, 2020 at 12:13 PM) You are forcing this “at-risk community” that is likely to have been exposed to COVID-19 to further expose any New Yorker whom we will come into contact with after leaving the International House. Therefore, we should in no way be forced to move out of our residence at the IH facility while New York State is fighting the spread of COVID-19.

We demand that IH follows the Governor’s Executive Order. There must not be any closing of the facility and we must not be forced to leave within 48 hours. The IH must continue to provide shelter to us during this public health crisis. While providing shelter, IH must also provide appropriate and necessary services, which include but not limited to deep cleaning of all the residence rooms and common areas, access to food, proper sanitising equipment, and appropriate staffing to provide these services while we remain where we are as per the Governor’s Executive Order. Your letter stated you are closing the cafeteria effective Tuesday, with no provision of food to those of us without kitchen facilities.

We demand that you retract your notice of having IH residents move out. Instead, let residents stay and self-quarantine with the appropriate and necessary services. Not only is this the responsible thing to do, but it is also the right thing to do under the Governor’s Executive Order and under the current pandemic. Please respond immediately.

Sincerely,

Residents of International House