Tuesday 4 June 2019

US Court Blocks Trump's Border Wall As Court Case Proceeds


It would appear that two years and four months after Donald Trump was sworn in as President of the United States of America a healthy resistance against his heavy-handed autocratic tendencies is still alive and well........

“The position that when Congress declines the Executive’s request to appropriate funds, the Executive nonetheless may simply find a way to spend those funds “without Congress” does not square with fundamental separation of powers principles dating back to the earliest days of our Republic."  [Judge Haywood S. Gilliam, US District Court Northern District of California, Sierra Club et al v Donald J. Trump et al, 24 May2019]


American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), 25 May 2019:

From the beginning of his campaign for president, Donald Trump claimed that he was going to build a wall along the southern border. He said “nobody builds walls better than me.” He said the wall would be “big” and “beautiful.” He said someone elsewould pay for it. And he said it would be built so fast that “your head would spin.”

Last night, for the first time, a federal judge made clear to President Trump he couldn’t get his wall by illegally diverting taxpayer money.

The judge’s ruling comes in an ACLU lawsuit on behalf of the Sierra Club and the Southern Border Communities Coalition (SBCC). Together, the Sierra Club and SBCC represent the communities who live in, protect, and treasure the lands and communities along our southern border. For years, these communities have engaged in the democratic process and successfully persuaded their congressional representatives to deny President Trump funding to build his wall.

Our lawsuit centers on the question of whether the president abused his power to divert funds for a border wall Congress denied him. Unfortunately for President Trump, the Constitution is clear on the matter: only Congress has the power to decide how taxpayer funds are spent. And Congress, like border communities, said no to the President’s wall.

Congress didn’t bow to Trump’s pressure even after he caused the longest government shutdown in U.S. history over his demands for billions of dollars for his wall. Congress allocated only a fraction of the money that Trump demanded, and imposed restrictions on where and how quickly any border barriers could be built.

In a blatant abuse of power meant to circumvent Congress, President Trump declared a national emergency on February 15, 2019, and announced he would illegally divert $6.7 billion from military construction and other accounts for the border wall project.

From the beginning, the emergency was obviously a sham. Trump said as much himself when he declared the emergency, saying he “didn’t need to do this” but he’d prefer to build the wall “much faster.” He added that he declared a national emergency because he was “not happy” that Congress “skimped” on the wall by denying him the billions he demanded.

Despite this, the Trump administration tried to argue in court last Friday that Congress never actually “denied” President Trump the billions of dollars he is now trying to take from the military. The court rejected the administration’s argument, reminding the administration that “the reality is that Congress was presented with—and declined to grant—a $5.7 billion request for border barrier construction.”

The court’s ruling blocks the sections of wall that the Trump administration announced would be built with military pay and pension funds. It also invites us to ask the court to block additional projects as they are announced in the future. The judge emphasized the government’s commitment to inform the court immediately about future decisions to build.

It may be easy to ridicule President Trump’s desperation for a border wall — an absurd and xenophobic campaign promise for which he has only himself to blame. But as pointless and wasteful as it may be, Trump’s campaign promise now threatens to cause irreparable and real damage to our constitutional checks and balances, the rule of law, border communities, and the environment.

The wall is part of an exclusionary agenda that President Trump has targeted, over and over, at people of color. From his notorious Muslim Ban, to his efforts to eliminate protections for immigrants from Haiti, Sudan, Nicaragua, and El Salvador, courts have found“evidence that President Trump harbors an animus against non-white, non-European” immigrants. Trump has repeatedly justified his wall by lying about border communities, falsely claiming that America needs a wall.

Border communities know firsthand that walls are dangerous and wasteful. They divide neighborhoods, worsen dangerous flooding, destroy lands and wildlife, and waste resources. As our clients explained to the court, “we are a community that is safe, that supports migrants, that works well together and supports one another, that is worthy of existence.”  What border communities truly need is infrastructure and investment, not militarization and isolation.

The court’s order is a vindication of border communities’ advocacy for themselves, and of our Constitution’s separation of powers. As the court wrote, “Congress’s ‘absolute’ control over federal expenditures—even when that control may frustrate the desires of the Executive Branch regarding initiatives it views as important—is not a bug in our constitutional system. It is a feature of that system, and an essential one.”


Monday 3 June 2019

Clarence Valley Council to do away with dedicated council meeting chamber in Maclean?


OPTION 3, ground floor: Green: civic hall; blue: library; purple: front/desk lobby; orange: CVC administration (10 staff, 30 on new level); white: innovation hub; grey: core (lifts and shared amenities). Image: CVC from Clarence Valley Independent, 10 April 2019

Clarence Valley Council, media release, 28 May 2019:

Your views sought on Maclean community hub

LOWER Clarence residents are being offered the opportunity to shape what the future of community facilities in Maclean might look like.

Currently facilities like the library, council offices, the civic hall and community services are spread across the town, but the Clarence Valley Council is now investigating bringing those together while making improvements to the civic hall.

Mayor, Jim Simmons, said the whole of the Lower Clarence was growing and community infrastructure needed to grow to keep pace with it.

“Maclean is the geographical centre of the Lower Clarence, so it makes sense to have a central hub for many community assets,” he said.

“At the moment we are just investigating, but we would like the community to be involved and to give us their input.

“Council staff has put together a web page (https://www.clarenceconversations.com.au/maclean-community-precinct)
where people can have a look at a range of concept plans and offer their views.

“The more people who put their thinking caps on and offer suggestions the more likely we are to come up with something fantastic.”

Cr Simmons said once a final concept was decided, council would seek funding to take the project to the next step.

Consultation is open until June 30.
Release ends



The consultant has estimated costs for each of the three options, any of which, when adopted, will result in the hub being contained within the boundaries of the current CVC chambers and the civic hall.

Councillors were advised that the plan “addresses the current and future usage of council buildings” and that the completed concept would “function as a community hub, where people gather for a range of community activities, programs, services and events”.

OPTION 1: cost $12,963,000 or $4,883 per m2; Modification to the existing civic hall; Demolition of existing offices on site; and, Refurbishment of existing CVC administration building with a library, reducing the size of administration to leave enough space for 40 CVC staff.

OPTION 2: cost $15,945,000 or $4,053 per m2; Modification to the existing civic hall; Demolition of existing offices on site; Refurbishment of existing CVC administration building; and, New build library with car parking under.

OPTION 3: cost $23,739,000 or $5,162 per m2; Modification to the existing civic hall; Demolition of existing offices on site; and, Refurbishment of existing administration building, including a new level and roof, with a library and event spaces – this option the concept plan states, will provide an “expanded innovation hub, compared to other options”.

Options 1 and 3 include “new green space for public events, with buildings activating off the new area”; and, “accessibility upgrades to improve the new library fit-out, [which] will also add accessibility to the administration area”.

The report to council stated: “The Concepts presented are for the purpose of seeking grant funding.

“Prior to any works taking place, further community engagement and situational review (facility usage, sustainability, community need, etc.) would be required to inform final design decisions.

“…The current asset management requires the upkeep of 3 properties and 4 facilities.
“The finalised proposal would reduce this to 2 properties and 2 facilities.”

Even when trying to do the right thing are Morrison Government MPs hampered by the penny-pinching ways of their leader


Lismore City Council, 9 April 2019:

As a result of the significant flood event of April 2017 that impacted Lismore in the wake of ex-tropical Cyclone Debbie, Lismore City Council was successful in securing funding for the repair and remediation of a major landslip located at Beardow Street, Lismore Heights.

The initial works at an estimated and approved cost of $1.12 million were funded by the Natural Disaster Relief and Recovery Arrangements (NDRRA).

Contaminated soil was discovered during the restoration process and the cost of remediation is significantly greater than the currently available funding.

When contamination was discovered, eligibility for compensation through the NDRRA changed outside of Council’s control. Council was initially advised that the remediation was eligible for NDRRA funding. This advice was rescinded in late 2018. Negotiations with State agencies continue on this matter and work has stopped while funding issues are resolved.

The area is still contaminated and material needs to be removed. A schedule of works has been developed for full remediation of the site.

The residents in the vicinity of the landslip rightly seek a resolution to the issues associated with access to property, remediation, repairs to the landslip and the lack of clarity around timeframe for completion.

Residents have worked with Council to manage the issues and need closure. They are acutely aware of the process Council needs to follow and have justifiably reached a point where a solution is both required and demanded.

Council’s estimated cost to complete the remediation works is an additional $2.4 million. Council’s December 2018 quarterly budget review provides $700,000 to address the remediation at Beardow Street. Council has been advised of an alternate estimate to complete the works in the order of $5.7 million undertaken by an affected landowner. To date Council has been unable to source the estimated funding shortfall of $1.7 million from Government.

Council is continuing to negotiate a funding outcome. Council held an emergency meeting with Roads and Maritime Services (RMS) on Thursday, 14 March 2019 to find a solution. RMS management attended the site on Tuesday, 19 March 2019 to discuss options. A steering committee has been formed with Council and RMS staff. RMS has made available their geotechnical and environmental specialists, however no alternate solution has been recommended. RMS has made application to the Office of Emergency Management (OEM) for a review of NDRRA eligibility. OEM have escalated the matter to the Federal Government for review of eligibility, however there is no guarantee of success and no time frame for a response. On 29 March 2019 RMS requested Council make application for a Specific Purpose Grant. The outcome of this application is unknown.

The nearest licenced disposal site for the asbestos contamination is in Queensland. The Queensland waste levy comes into effect on 1 July 2019. The levy will add $2 million to the cost of the project in contaminated soil disposal costs.

Council has engaged litigation specialists to provide advice on NDRRA eligibility and options to secure funding. The current advice is to commence with formal correspondence to RMS and/or OEM. This action is underway.

The solution proposed is for Council to obtain the required $1.7 million shortfall from government. We require support from Council for the actions taken to date as well as support for any legal proceedings instigated to recover the restoration costs associated with this natural disaster event. 

On 26 April 2019 during the recent federal election campaign The Northern Star reported that all the candidates, including sitting Nats MP Kevin Hogan, had been asked to commit $10 million to fully remediate this site.

On 27 May 2019 a Lismore journalist stated that Hogan has committed $2.4 million to remediate the asbestos and chemical contaminated landslip. Although it was not explained how he could do this when the new Lib-Nats Coalition Government is weeks away from being sworn in by the Governor-General or why he was committing to less than a quarter of the money requested.

Council is still considering instigating legal proceedings to progress the eligibility of its initial claim for state funding.

Sunday 2 June 2019

US President Donald J Trump finally admits in writing that Russia helped get him elected in 2016



* My blue highlighting

Only weeks away from mid 2019 and staring into a future where the full force of climate change prevails and still denialists are being given media air time


Here is one of Australia's own 'professional' climate change denialists who allegedly uses a stage name............
Here is a genuine voice of science and reason (click on thread)....... 

Saturday 1 June 2019

Quote of the Week



“Big corporations can’t operate in a world that remains tethered to the permanent present of  [Australian Resources Minister] Canavan’s imagining, they have to plan for the future, and the future is carbon constraint.” [Political Editor Katherine Murphy, The Guardian, 30 May 2019]


Photoshop of the Week


via @sarahrees