Melanie May | 28 June 2019 | News “The team at SkillForce have strived to secure the businesses future, but despite best efforts, are now faced with a challenging situation.“At the moment our attention is focused upon finding a suitable purchaser for the business, so that we’re able to secure the future of SkillForce and enable the continuation of its legacy supporting young people and ex-forces personnel in local communities.”Employees have been informed of the situation and potential outcomes. 549 total views, 3 views today AddThis Sharing ButtonsShare to TwitterTwitterShare to FacebookFacebookShare to LinkedInLinkedInShare to EmailEmailShare to WhatsAppWhatsAppShare to MessengerMessengerShare to MoreAddThis5 Education charity SkillForce has announced that it is seeking a merger or acquisition following intense financial pressures.In the past year SkillForce and its flagship education programme The Prince William Award, has delivered programmes to almost 15,000 pupils, while tripling the number of beneficiaries it works with in three years.The charity has the Royal Patronage of HRH The Duke of Cambridge and delivers The Prince William Award (PWA) in his name. This is a year-long programme for 6–14 year olds delivered for two hours each week in partner schools culminating in graduation ceremonies for pupils and the awarding of certificates and badges for their progress and achievements.Over the last academic year, the charity has also won local awards for its commitment to children’s education, and the MOD (ERS) Gold award for its commitment to former services personnel. It has also been shortlisted for numerous other awards.However, despite its successes, the charity’s delivery model relies on serviced income from schools and the balance fundraised from a range of corporate organisations, trusts and foundations. It has found this model coming under intense financial pressures in recent years, and has now sought the help of the specialist business recovery and insolvency team from Smith Cooper to ensure the best outcome possible for its programmes and its staff. Over the course of the next month, the company will continue to trade whilst a purchase or merger is sought.CEO Ben Slade said:“We are devastated that, despite an immense amount of hard work from everyone at SkillForce since 2015, we find ourselves in such a challenging position which means we simply cannot continue to operate as we currently do.“It is now my greatest hope that the charity and its award programmes can live on through a merger or acquisition. For me, ongoing support for our beneficiaries and continued employment for our staff have to be the priority.”“We continually hear from parents, teachers and supporters that our work is making a difference to children and young people and feel this important work must continue.“The charity’s financial position has been closely monitored for a long period of time and making the decision to seek specialist assistance in negotiating its future is the right decision by our trustees to ensure the best possible outcome for our beneficiaries and our staff at this very challenging time.”Dean Nelson, Head of Business Recovery and Insolvency at Smith Cooper, commented: Advertisement Education charity SkillForce seeks acquisition or merger 548 total views, 2 views today AddThis Sharing ButtonsShare to TwitterTwitterShare to FacebookFacebookShare to LinkedInLinkedInShare to EmailEmailShare to WhatsAppWhatsAppShare to MessengerMessengerShare to MoreAddThis5 Tagged with: Finance merger About Melanie May Melanie May is a journalist and copywriter specialising in writing both for and about the charity and marketing services sectors since 2001. She can be reached via www.thepurplepim.com.
Subscribe Get our daily Pasadena newspaper in your email box. Free.Get all the latest Pasadena news, more than 10 fresh stories daily, 7 days a week at 7 a.m. Original Latin King of Comedy, Paul Rodriguez will return to the Ice House Comedy Club on June 20 and 21. Longtime comedian Paul Rodriguez has been making audiences laugh all over the world (in Spanish and English) for nearly three decades with his unique brand of humor that is a perfect blend of his Latin heritage, the American dream and his undeniable universal appeal. Like Richard Pryor, Lenny Bruce, and George Carlin, Paul has achieved iconic status in the comedy world.Rodriguez’s film credits include Without Men, Cats & Dogs: The Revenge of Kitty Galore, The Deported, I’m Not Like That No More, Disney’s blockbuster hit Beverly Hills Chihuahua, The World’s Fastest Indian, A Cinderella Story, How to Get the Man’s Foot Outta Your Ass, Ali, Tortilla Soup, Crocodile Dundee in LA, Rat Race, Bloodwork, Chasing Papi and D.C. Cab, among others.As an accomplished writer, director and producer for television, motion pictures and feature shows, Rodriguez has several hit projects to his credit including the comedy concert film The Original Latin Kings of Comedy, which he executive produced and starred in along with Cheech Marin, George Lopez and Carlos Mencia; the feature film A Million to Juan, which he also wrote, directed and starred in; six comedy specials for HBO including Loco Slam, Live in San Quentin and Idiots and Armadillos. As executive producer, he recently struck comedy again with his Comedy Central stand-up concert DVD, Comedy Rehab.Among his many credits, Rodriguez has also made guest appearances on several late night shows including The Wanda Sykes Show, The Tonight Show with Jay Leno, Last Call with Carson Daly, and Politically Incorrect. Additionally, he has guest starred in several television series including Extreme Makeover: Home Edition, Kathy Griffin: My Life on the D-List, Shaken Not Stirred, DIRECTV’s Supreme Court of Comedy, Showtime’s original series Resurrection Boulevard and American Family. He has also lent his voice to popular animated series including King of the Hill, Dora the Explorer and The Proud Family.Paul Rodriguez will perform four (4) shows on June 20 and 21. The complete show schedule for June 12 through 22 is listed below:Thu. 6/12 – Steve-O (Special Event) – 8 p.m.; $22.50Fri. 6/13 – Amir K featuring Jay Dee – 8:30 & 10:30 p.m.; $20Sat. 6/14 – Justin Willman – 8 & 10 p.m.; $20Sun. 6/15 – Father’s Day with Jon Reep, featuring Bil Dwyer – 7 p.m.; $12.50Mon. 6/16 – ClosedTue. 6/17 – ClosedWed. 6/18 – Rudy Moreno’s Wednesday Night Funnies – 8 p.m.; $12.50Thu. 6/19 -7 Comedians for $7 with Brett Martin and more – 8 p.m.; $7Fri. 6/20 – Paul Rodriguez (Special Event) – 8:30 & 10:30 p.m.; $25Sat. 6/21 – Paul Rodriguez (Special Event) – 8:30 & 10:30 p.m.; $25Sun. 6/22 – Fritz Coleman Speaks to a Generation (Special Event) – 7 p.m.; $15There is a two-drink minimum and patrons must be at least 18 to attend. The Ice House is located at 24 N. Mentor Ave. in Pasadena. For more information or to purchase tickets, call (626) 577-1894 or visit www.icehousecomedy.com. First Heatwave Expected Next Week EVENTS & ENTERTAINMENT | FOOD & DRINK | THE ARTS | REAL ESTATE | HOME & GARDEN | WELLNESS | SOCIAL SCENE | GETAWAYS | PARENTS & KIDS More Cool Stuff Top of the News 9 recommended0 commentsShareShareTweetSharePin it Name (required) Mail (required) (not be published) Website Nightlife Return of the King, Paul Rodriguez Performs From STAFF REPORTS Published on Thursday, May 22, 2014 | 5:26 pm Make a comment Community News Pasadena Will Allow Vaccinated People to Go Without Masks in Most Settings Starting on Tuesday Pasadena’s ‘626 Day’ Aims to Celebrate City, Boost Local Economy Community News Herbeauty9 Of The Best Metabolism-Boosting Foods For Weight LossHerbeautyHerbeautyHerbeauty6 Strong Female TV Characters Who Deserve To Have A SpinoffHerbeautyHerbeautyHerbeautyEase Up! Snake Massages Are Real And Do Wonders!HerbeautyHerbeautyHerbeautyThe Most Heartwarming Moments Between Father And DaughterHerbeautyHerbeautyHerbeautyAmazing Sparks Of On-Screen Chemistry From The 90-sHerbeautyHerbeautyHerbeautyLove Astrology: 12 Types Of Boyfriends Based On Zodiac SignsHerbeautyHerbeauty Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked * faithfernandez More » ShareTweetShare on Google+Pin on PinterestSend with WhatsApp,Virtual Schools PasadenaHomes Solve Community/Gov/Pub SafetyPASADENA EVENTS & ACTIVITIES CALENDARClick here for Movie Showtimes Business News Home of the Week: Unique Pasadena Home Located on Madeline Drive, Pasadena
ColumnsCan Jurisdictional Objection Be Raised At Any Stage Of The Arbitration Proceeding? – A Legal Conundrum Kritanjali Sarda14 Jun 2020 6:08 PMShare This – xSection 16(2) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 [hereinafter “the Act”] mandates that a plea that the Arbitral Tribunal does not have jurisdiction shall not be raised later than the submission of the statement of defence. However, the Arbitral Tribunal may admit a later plea on jurisdiction if it considers the delay is justified [Section 16(4) of the Act]. Additionally, Section…Your free access to Live Law has expiredTo read the article, get a premium account.Your Subscription Supports Independent JournalismSubscription starts from ₹ 599+GST (For 6 Months)View PlansPremium account gives you:Unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments.Reading experience of Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.Subscribe NowAlready a subscriber?LoginSection 16(2) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 [hereinafter “the Act”] mandates that a plea that the Arbitral Tribunal does not have jurisdiction shall not be raised later than the submission of the statement of defence. However, the Arbitral Tribunal may admit a later plea on jurisdiction if it considers the delay is justified [Section 16(4) of the Act]. Additionally, Section 4 of the Act states that a party who knows that any provision from which the parties may derogate, has not been complied with and yet proceeds with the arbitration without stating his objection to such non-compliance without undue delay or, if a time limit is provided for stating that objection, within that period of time, shall be deemed to have waived his right to so object. Further, Section 34 of the Act provides for setting aside of an arbitral award. The issue which arises is whether a party can raise a jurisdictional objection for the first time in a proceeding under Section 34 of the Act or will the party be deemed to have waived its right to object to the jurisdiction having regard to Section 16 read with Section 4 of the Act. This issue is better understood by analyzing the case laws in this regard. In MSP Infrastructure Ltd. v. Madhya Pradesh Road Development Corporation Ltd., the issue before a 2 Judge Bench of the Supreme Court was whether a party to the arbitration proceeding could be permitted to raise a jurisdictional objection that the Arbitral Tribunal constituted under the Madhya Pradesh Madhyastham Adhikaran Adhiniyam, 1983 (“MP Act of 1983”) would take precedence over the one constituted under the 1996 Act that too by way of an amendment to the petition filed under Section 34 of the Act. It was held in paragraph 16 of the judgment that “all objections to jurisdiction of whatever nature must be taken at the stage of submission of the statement of defence, and must be dealt with under Section 16 of the Act. However, if one of the parties seeks to contend that the subject-matter of the dispute is such as cannot be dealt with by arbitration, it may be dealt under Section 34 by the Court”Further, the Court in paragraph 17 also held that public policy of India does not refer to a State law and refers only to an all-India law. In paragraphs 16 and 17 in MSP Infrastructure the Supreme Court drew a distinction between a challenge to jurisdiction under Section 16 of the Act and a petition to set aside an arbitral award under Section 34 of the Act holding that the courts under Section 34 of the Act can decide only upon the “subject matter of the dispute not being arbitrable” and does not refer to “jurisdiction”. Subsequently, a three Judge Bench of the Supreme Court in Lion Engineering Consultants v. State of Madhya Pradesh and Ors., overruled the observations in paragraphs 16 and 17 of MSP Infrastructure. It is pertinent to note that the other paragraphs of the judgment in MSP Infrastructure were not overruled and still lay down the correct law and thus have to be abided. In MSP Infrastructure, the counsel for Respondent also argued that objection as to absence of jurisdiction can be raised at any stage since the order of a court passed without jurisdiction is a nullity. However, the Court held that this position of law is settled in relation to civil disputes in court but not in relations to arbitration. Parliament having enacted a special law (1996 Act) in its wisdom having knowledge of the existing law if it chose to enact a provision contrary to the general law on the subject, its wisdom cannot be doubted. It is important to keep in mind this ratio of the Court in MSP Infrastructure while deciding cases of jurisdictional objections in an arbitration proceeding. In Lion Engineering it was contended that the Arbitrator’s jurisdiction was circumscribed MP Act of 1983which provided for a specific forum to adjudicate the dispute in question. Although this plea was not raised before the Arbitrator under Section 16 of the Act, the Supreme Court held:”We do not see any bar to plea of jurisdiction being raised by way of an objection under Section 34 of the Act even if no such objection was raised under Section 16″. Lion Engineering has far reaching impact on subsequent cases wherein parties to the arbitration proceeding relying on Lion Engineering case have raised a jurisdictional objection directly in proceeding under Section 34 of the Act despite the fact that the same could have been raised but not raised before the Arbitrator under Section 16 of the Act. One such case is Salar Jung Museum &Anr. v. Design Team Consultants Pvt. Ltd wherein a petition was filed before the Delhi High Court under Section 34 of the Act seeking to set aside an arbitral award. It is pertinent to note that in this case the Arbitrator was appointed on an application filed by the Respondent before the Delhi High Court under Section 11 of the Act. The reference order of the Court under Section 11 of the Act stated that the appointment of the Arbitrator was confined to the claim of the alleged shortfall in consultancy fees alone. It was contended that the learned Arbitrator had exceed his jurisdiction by deciding claims of refund of security deposit and balance of supervision charges other than the claim for consultancy fees. This jurisdictional objection was not raised in the course of arbitration proceedings. The question was whether it can be taken for the first time in proceedings under Section 34 of the Act. The Petitioner relied on Lion Engineering to support its submission that such an objection could be raised for the first time in a proceeding filed under Section 34 of the Act. However, a Single Judge Bench of the Delhi High Court distinguished the judgment in Lion Engineering stating that the objection in Lion Engineering arose from a statutory bar which governed the jurisdiction of the Arbitrator. Contrary to the same, in the present case, the challenge was not based upon any inherent lack of jurisdiction in the Arbitrator but upon the reference order itself. The Delhi High Court held that in such a case, the party concerned cannot be permitted to participate in the arbitration proceedings, contest the claim on merits, and thereafter raise a jurisdictional objection. The Delhi High Court relied on the concept of consensual dispute resolution to state that where the jurisdictional objection is capable of waiver [Section 4] by the affected party, the failure to raise it before the Arbitrator signifies consent to the Arbitrator’s jurisdiction. A party cannot, in such a case, participate in the proceedings without demur and then seek to assail the validity of the proceedings in the face of an unfavorable award. Similarly, even in situations where a specific dispute is referred to the Arbitrator, and the Claimant subsequently seeks adjudication of other claims as well, if the Respondent does not object, the resulting claims may also have been agreed to arbitrate as well. The Delhi High Court in Salar Jung Museumcase relied on the judgment of a Single Judge of the Supreme Court in Quippo Construction Equipment Limited v. Janardan Nirman Pvt. Limited wherein objection regarding the venue of arbitration and holding of a common arbitration arising out of several agreements was raised in a proceedings filed under Section 34 of the Act by a party which did not participate in the proceedings at all. The aforesaid objections were not raised by the Respondent before the Arbitrator and the Respondent let the arbitral proceedings conclude and culminate in an ex-parte award. Therefore, the issue was whether the Respondent could be said to have waived the right to raise any of the aforesaid objections. The Supreme Court held that “Considering the facts that the Respondent failed to participate in the proceedings before the Arbitrator and did not raise any submission that the Arbitrator did not have jurisdiction or that he was exceeding the scope of his authority, the Respondent must be deemed to have waived all such objections”. The intention of Section 16 of the Act is clear. It seeks to disable a party from challenging the jurisdiction of Arbitrator / Arbitral Tribunal belatedly, having submitted to the jurisdiction. It is interesting to see how the judgment in Lion Engineering will be considered in future or will it be reconsidered in view of Supreme Court’s observation in MSP Infrastructure where it upheld the prohibition laid down under Section 16(2) of the Act and stated that the intention of the legislature in enacting Section 16 of the Act was to prevent the mischief of challenging the jurisdiction of the Arbitral Tribunal at a later stage and further observed that “It would be quite undesirable to allow arbitrations to proceed in the same manner as civil suits with all the well-known drawbacks of delay and endless objections even after the passing of a decree.” Thus, if a party is allowed to raise a jurisdictional objection at any stage of the arbitration proceeding, then the very purpose of Section 16 of the Act would be rendered redundant. Further, the view in Lion Engineering is also increasingly being (mis)used as a mechanism to delay the arbitration proceedings, which is against the very purpose of using arbitration as a speedy dispute resolution mechanism in contrast to ordinary judicial proceedings before the Courts. Views Are Personal Only(Author is a B.A.LLB (Hons.) Student at School of Law, Christ (Deemed to be University), Bengaluru) MSP Infrastructure Ltd. v. Madhya Pradesh Road Development Corporation Ltd, (2015) 13 SCC 713. Id.at para 16.  Id. at para 17. Lion Engineering Consultants v. State of Madhya Pradesh and Ors., (2018) 16 SCC758. MSP Infrastructure, para 14. Id.  Salar Jung Museum & Anr. v. Design Team Consultants Pvt. Ltd., Delhi High Court- O.M.P.(COMM)44/2017; Decided on 21.05.2020 .  Quippo Construction Equipment Limited v. Janardan Nirman Pvt. Limited, 2020 SCC OnLine SC 419. Next Story
Home » News » ‘Offer management’ platform to launch in UK co-founded by star agent previous nextProptech‘Offer management’ platform to launch in UK co-founded by star agentOffr enables agents, vendors and those making offers on a property to communicate via a common platform, helping reduce fall-throughs by 50%.Nigel Lewis27th January 20201 Comment1,784 Views The Negotiator has been shown a new proptech platform that claims to revolutionise how prospective buyers make offers on a property for sale.Called Offr, it’s a tech platform that enables estate agents to move the offer management process online and help them and vendors control and understand more about each offer and who’s making it and how prepared each buyer is to move to SSTC.It’s a white-labelled widget that sits on an agent’s website and enables approved buyers to make an offer at the click of a button. This, it is claimed, will drive more traffic and buyer engagement to agents’ site.Created by an Irish tech firm which has recently moved its operations to London, it is backed by an investment of €1 million from two Irish banks and has been in Beta mode for the past 18 months.Its launch is being spearheaded by Phil Farrell (pictured, above), who as well as being an estate agent with 27 years’ experience, is well known in Ireland for his property column in the Irish Independent.Ten million“We estimate that there are eight to ten million offers made in the UK every year on residential property but no one is capturing this information and managing it,” he says.“To speed up the house buying and selling process it’s essential to bring information about potential buyers into the offer process earlier and, among many things, weed out the tyre kickers.”The platform came out of auction house Allsop’s move into Ireland during the late noughties and the online tech developed by the company to handle online bids for properties. Its former director in Ireland and until recently the force behind BidX1 online auction site, Robert Hoban, is a co-founder with Farrell along with tech guru Niall Dawson.Offr is due to officially launch in May or June this year in the UK and is already being tried out by several high-profile agents. It plans to charge £300 a month to agents who want to list unlimited number of properties, and an undisclosed per-property charge for those who don’t.Read more about proptech.Offr Phil Farrell Allsop January 27, 2020Nigel LewisOne commentAndrew Stanton, CEO Proptech-PR Real Estate Influencer & Journalist CEO Proptech-PR Real Estate Influencer & Journalist 27th January 2020 at 10:42 amI must profess a personal interest with Offr, in the sense that two of the directors Phil Farrell and Robert Hoban, were plying me with several pints of Guinness last Friday night in a hostelry in London Bridge. Putting that aside, and unlike Guinness which is said not to travel well across the water, Offr certainly does.I have been following the fortunes of this company for some time, and as a person very much in the know as my day time job is networking with all sectors of the proptech and real estate industry, meeting CEO’s, project managers, data scientists, captains of the finance, banking and legal industry and more, I love it when someone gets it right.And Robert, Phil have definitely got it right, with their offering – Offr.In between the pints Phil and Robert said their biggest problem was articulating what their service was. I suggested it was ‘two taps – Offr’ – meaning with two taps of your smart phone you can offer on a property, this is an integral part of their service. It also suggests that the service is instantaneous and seamless, the modern consumers touchstone.Phil rightly said, two taps seems more like Michael Flatterley, but after another pint of the black stuff I said well what is the Offr proposition?With an Irish gleam in his eye, Phil then said that Offr is a service for agents that runs alongside their existing business, it enhances it, and gives transparency to all parties, with a dashboard system that allows all stakeholders to be super connected.They went on to say that they had looked at the slow model of real estate, all the sticking points, and they had digitally engineered a better model with the buyer and the vendor at the centre of all things. Also, a transparent and time specific way of agreeing sales, still on the traditional private treaty basis. But, where buyer’s are pre-qualified before they offer (Offr), and at point of sale, within seconds the memo of sale can be produced, and all parties who offered and were unsuccesful would be instantly told.Then the proptech in the Offr solution really kicks off, with all ther stakeholders in the sale, buyer, seller, solicitors, all on a dashboard system able to see in real time the progress of the sale.For me – though I am no longer selling property, if I was I would use Offr (not the drink talking) because – it works – at point of pitching for the business in front of the vendor the Offr solution will gain vendors, and it will run along the existing way the agent works, it will also support a higher fee.So, more instructions, a better listing fee, a quicker sale being agreed and a speedier more transparent route to exchange.My advice – look on the Offr website today and get in contact with these two Robert or Phil, they may not buy you a pint, but, they will transform the bottom line of your business for the better.Log in to ReplyWhat’s your opinion? Cancel replyYou must be logged in to post a comment.Please note: This is a site for professional discussion. Comments will carry your full name and company.This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.Related articles BREAKING: Evictions paperwork must now include ‘breathing space’ scheme details30th April 2021 City dwellers most satisfied with where they live30th April 2021 Hong Kong remains most expensive city to rent with London in 4th place30th April 2021
Fine Particulate(0-23 CST avg)Air Quality IndexGoodGoodGoodGoodNA* OzoneAir Quality IndexGoodGoodGoodModerateNA* FridayMay 19SaturdayMay 20SundayMay 21MondayMay 22TuesdayMay 23 Air quality forecasts for Evansville and Vanderburgh County are provided as a public service. They are best estimates of predicted pollution levels that can be used as a guide so people can modify their activities and reduce their exposure to air quality conditions that may affect their health. The forecasts are routinely made available at least a day in advance, and are posted by 10:30 AM Evansville time on Monday (for Tuesday through Thursday) and Thursday (for Friday through Monday). When atmospheric conditions are uncertain or favor pollution levels above the National Ambient Air Quality Standards, forecasts are made on a daily basis.Ozone forecasts are available from mid-April through September 30th. Fine particulate (PM2.5) forecasts are available year round. * Not Available and/or Conditions Uncertain.Air Quality Action DaysOzone Alerts are issued by the Evansville EPA when maximum ozone readings averaged over a period of eight hours are forecasted to reach 71 parts per billion (ppb), or unhealthy for sensitive groups on the USEPA Air Quality Index scale.Particulate Alerts are issued by the Evansville EPA when PM2.5 readings averaged over the period of midnight to midnight are forecasted to reach 35 micrograms per meter cubed (µg/m3).Current conditions of OZONE and FINE PARTICULATE MATTER are available in near real-time on the Indiana Department of Environment Management’s website.National and regional maps of current conditions are available through USEPA AIRNow.FacebookTwitterCopy LinkEmail Ozone(peak 8-hr avg)(expected)NA*NA*NA*NA*NA*
84, of Bayonne passed away on October 24, 2017. Born in Jersey City on June 12, 1933 to Frank E. Martin Sr. and Mary (nee: Koerner), Frank attended St. Patrick’s Elementary and Snyder High School and was a very patriotic man that loved his country and its flag. He was a proud Korean War Veteran honorably discharged and a Ceremonial Honor Guard for President Eisenhower. Frank was the proprietor of Martin’s Exterminating serving Hudson County for over 45 years and a past Grand Knight of the Bayonne Knights of Columbus. Frank was the husband to Norma (nee: Barone) for the past 60 years. He was the father to Joseph (Onelia), Michael, Brian (Catherine) and Lynda Dugan and grandfather to Ryan, Jacqueline, Tyler & Joseph Martin, Shayne & Skylar Dugan and Michael & Kelly Nausedas and their children Riley & Sean. Brother-in-law to Grace Barone and survived by many nieces, nephews, cousins & friends. In lieu of flowers, memorial donations to Wounded Warrior Project. Funeral arrangements by MIGLIACCIO Funeral Home, 851 Kennedy Blvd.
was born March 1, 1921 in Monteferrante, Italy and immigrated to Bayonne in 1938. Gene proudly served in the US Army as a Sergeant during WW2. Upon completing Military Intelligence School at Camp Ritchie, Gene was stationed in Naples with the Allied Military Government and served as a translator, being fluent in English and Italian. After Naples, Gene joined the famed 10th Mountain Division, 85th Regiment, Company K and was sent to northern Italy. Gene was one of many brave men who fought, and won, in the battle of Mt. Belvedere against the Germans. Gene worked as an electrician for Best Foods in Bayonne for over 40 years. Predeceased in death by his brother, Charles, Gene is survived by his sister, Blanche, his two nieces, Carla (Alex) and Joan (Izak), and his great nephews, Nic, Zeke, and Sam. Funeral arrangements by MIGLIACCIO Funeral Home, 851 Kennedy Blvd.
A quick test of observation and memory:Where in Ocean City can these fish be found? Tell us in the comments section. And try your hand at more “Where in O.C.?” challenges.__________Sign up for OCNJ Daily’s free newsletter“Like” us on Facebook
“Hamilton” creator Lin-Manuel Miranda talks about finding your voice as a writer and the role of the playwright in addressing history during a conversation with Nieman Foundation Curator Ann Marie Lipinski as part of the Pulitzer Centennial Celebration on Sept. 11-12, 2016 <a href=”https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2TiHINIYGLA” rel=”nofollow” target=”_blank”> <img src=”https://img.youtube.com/vi/2TiHINIYGLA/0.jpg” alt=”0″ title=”How To Choose The Correct Channel Type For Your Video Content ” /> </a> In a year when the media have been cast as untrustworthy villains in the tank to candidates of both major parties, Scottish essayist Thomas Carlyle’s belief that the press — what he called the Fourth Estate — is as vital to the functioning of democracy as government itself can sound naïve and antiquated. But there are still plenty of true believers who take the media’s public responsibility as an inviolable and sacred duty. Many of the country’s most accomplished truth-tellers will be on campus this weekend (Sept. 10 and 11) as the Nieman Foundation for Journalism at Harvard hosts a two-day celebration (click here for tickets) marking the 100th anniversary of the Pulitzer Prize. The prize recognizes outstanding achievements in journalism and the arts and is among the most prestigious awards given to reporters, photojournalists, critics, authors, poets, playwrights, musicians, and news organizations.The event will feature past and present winners, including legendary biographer Robert Caro, a 1966 Nieman Fellow; documentary filmmaker Laura Poitras, who aided the publication of documents stolen by Edward Snowden that disclosed a national surveillance program; musician Wynton Marsalis, whose “Blood on the Tracks” was the first jazz composition to win a Pulitzer; and “Hamilton” creator Lin-Manuel Miranda, a 2015 winner, in a recorded presentation riffing on the theme of accountability and abuse of power. Washington Post reporter Bob Woodward, who shared the 1973 Pulitzer with reporter Carl Bernstein for the investigation into the Watergate hotel break-in that led to President Richard Nixon’s resignation, and who won again in 2002 for his work leading The Post’s 9/11 coverage, will lead a panel discussion with Poitras and Dean Baquet, The New York Times’ executive editor, on journalism’s ongoing role in keeping governments honest. With the mainstream media shrinking, Woodward spoke with the Gazette about the state of watchdog journalism and whether the political press has done a good job in deeply scrutinizing the 2016 presidential candidates. GAZETTE: Awards founder Joseph Pulitzer’s populist, sensational style of journalism would fit right into today’s media environment. What’s the state of watchdog journalism today, and how does it compare to, say, 50 years ago when you started, or at the creation of the Pulitzers a century ago? WOODWARD: There’s a lot of great work in journalism being done. The problem is the message managers in government, business, and everywhere — even the message managers/spokespeople in the media — have greater and greater power, so they assert that power by curtailing disclosure, limiting transparency. We know less and less about what really goes on. You have to dig and find people and records and documents, and it takes a long time. I was at a dinner sitting next to Al Gore, the former vice president. This was 10 years ago or so; he was out of office. I asked him how much we know about what goes on that’s of consequence? And he said, “One percent,” and I kind of died. I asked, “Well, suppose you wrote a memoir that told all, what would we know then about what goes on of consequence?” And he said, “Two percent.” Lots of institutions have gone through a public airing. Certainly the White House; we did a book on the Supreme Court in 1979 (“The Brethren”), and the reaction was to button up. Same with the intelligence agencies: “Button up, tell less, and explain only when absolutely necessary.” The impulse is to conceal and hide and not answer rather than to be forthright and come clean. They feel burned, they feel, “Gee, we can muscle our way through this.” The second part of this, which compounds it, I think, is the Internet, which is all impatience and speed most of the time. Everything comes and goes. Great stories that news organizations have done just go up in the ether. There’s so much out there, how do you pick? What does it mean? And disclosures that really tell us about character — take Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton — that are important, that don’t lead to investigations or grand juries or FBI inquiries or SEC actions, come and go. So there’s this focus on, “Does it lead to an investigation?” Well, some of the things that lead to investigations are nonsense, and some of the things that don’t are really essential to understanding who these people are. GAZETTE: The political media has been roundly criticized this election season for its relatively toothless coverage during the primaries, particularly around Trump’s unlikely rise and a habit of proffering false equivalence or “he said/she said” about candidates’ statements and actions. Now, we have instances of media figures working for or openly advocating for Trump (such as editor Matt Boyle of Breitbart News advising and writing speeches for him, and former Fox News chairman Roger Ailes advising Trump behind the scenes). How do you grade the coverage thus far, and should the profession do its own “autopsy” after the election to reconsider what it’s doing, and how? WOODWARD: I would disagree that it was toothless. There was a lot of serious reporting during the primaries. At the end of March, Bob Costa, a reporter at the Post, and I interviewed Trump and we published the transcript and there are all kinds of things in there. For instance, he says, “I bring out rage in people,” and he’s proud of it. He forecast a giant recession, he was very pessimistic about the economy, and since then it’s only done better. He was asked, because he was running in the primaries in the Republican Party, a party that contained Lincoln and Nixon, “Why did Lincoln succeed?” And Trump’s answer was, “He did some things that needed to be done.” [We then asked,] “Why did Nixon fail?” “Because of his personality.” And we had to say, “Yeah, but his criminality was part of it.” And Trump said, “Oh, yeah.” It tells you who he is. The same with Hillary Clinton. There were just voluminous stories on her. Let me give you an example from The New York Times, Feb. 20, 2016, a two-part series they did on Hillary’s role in Libya. It explains her role, exactly what she wanted to do. At one point, after [Libyan leader Moammar] Gadhafi’s death, it quotes her saying to some of her staff, “We came, we saw, he died.’ There was a series of spectacular Post stories about the Clinton Foundation, about her time at the State Department, and so forth. [Woodward digs into a file folder he keeps of recent Post stories on the Clintons and cites more than a dozen stories.] Incredible, important stories that are well-documented. Really great work, things done in 2014, 2015, and early this year. I could give you a similar file on Trump, an amazing number of stories that are in the book “Trump Revealed” [by The Washington Post’s Marc Fisher and Michael Kranish]. [Amazon CEO and Post owner] Jeff Bezos has these conferences. Last fall, I gave a talk about Nixon and the latest book I had done, “The Last of the President’s Men,” about thousands of documents from the Nixon White House that aide Alexander Butterfield escaped with and Butterfield’s experience with Nixon, which we didn’t know about. Afterward, Bezos came up and said, “Could we have known about Nixon before he became president?” And I said, “I think we could’ve done a better job.” And he said, “OK, what we need to do is, when it gets down to two candidates, make sure we do the stories in the Post or do a series or do a book or whatever so no one can go into a voting booth in November and be able to say, ‘I couldn’t find out who these people were.’” I think we could always do better and we could always do more. I wouldn’t worry about the criticism. Look at the record: It’s remarkable but never sufficient. GAZETTE: With ongoing efforts to delegitimize the press by politicians and others, in this post-factual world, is truth-telling or speaking truth to power as relevant or as effective as it once was, especially when many people now choose their own facts and seek out media outlets that confirm their views? WOODWARD: There’s been a lot of criticism of the press, some of it legitimate, some of it not legitimate, but I don’t think anyone’s succeeded in delegitimizing the press. GAZETTE: Even though public opinion polling shows people say they trust the press as little as they ever have? WOODWARD: But they always say that! (Laughs.) Go back to Nixon and Watergate. It was an overwhelming disbelief that this could have happened, that this was true. So skepticism, dislike of the press, that’s something we should try to counter by being more factual, by doing a better job. But I wouldn’t get tangled up and lose our emotional poise because there’s some criticism. It just does not amount to delegitimizing the media, in my view. GAZETTE: What I mean is that we know there’s a sizable portion of people who believe that the press is illegitimate or that it’s biased in favor of one side or another. WOODWARD: There’s a lot of that, there’s no question. You’re coming in very hard on this idea that it’s over for the media. It’s not over for the media. Look at the whole business about the email server. It was a combination of Congress and the media establishing what happened here — the State Department releasing stuff, and lawsuits, with judges involved. There’s a whole phalanx of individuals and institutions working to get stuff out. In this case, it seems to be succeeding. GAZETTE: Are you at all concerned about how the press will be treated in a Trump administration, given his practice of threatening and retaliating against news outlets, including The Washington Post, whose coverage he doesn’t agree with, or his use of nondisclosure agreements to prevent aides and others from talking? WOODWARD: No. They always say, “Oh you can’t find out what goes on in the CIA, you can’t find out what goes on in the White House.” As I say, it’s harder and the message managers have more power and authority, but you can still do it. If he has nondisclosure agreements, working hard you can get around those things. GAZETTE: Do you think the heroic success you had with the Watergate investigation or your subsequent career … WOODWARD: Delete “heroic.” (Laughs.) We made mistakes, we were lucky, we had a publisher and editors who were willing to support us. They were the ones taking the risks. And if the Senate and the House impeachment investigation, the independent counsel — if you didn’t have those, it would have died. GAZETTE: Do you think your Watergate experience and then your career writing about the powerful improperly motivates young reporters to focus on unearthing sexy, career-making scandals rather than chasing stories like last year’s Pulitzer-winning series by the Associated Press about enslaved seafood workers in Southeast Asia that led to saved lives? Few would have thought of fish-processing companies as powerful before that investigation. WOODWARD: It turns out they were powerful and in control of people’s lives in a shocking way. I thought that was a masterful piece of reporting. I try to write about presidents because they have extraordinary power. It makes a difference who is president. It’s going to make a big difference whether Trump or Hillary Clinton is president — a defining difference, and it may define an era, quite likely. GAZETTE: You’ll be talking with filmmaker Laura Poitras and New York Times executive editor Dean Baquet about journalism’s role holding governments accountable. Who or what entity merits greater scrutiny than they’ve received thus far? WOODWARD: Anything that has power. I’ve tried to write about the White House, the CIA, the Supreme Court, the Federal Reserve, Congress, the intelligence agencies, and those at the government power centers. All of those deserve a very good look. The process of examining [Fox News chairman] Roger Ailes by that reporter from New York magazine, Gabe Sherman, the [sexual harassment] lawsuits, and other media scrutiny, led to the departure of Ailes. The opposite side of this is, at times, there’s a feeling of self-satisfaction, self-congratulation in the media. “Wow, look, we did that; we really got that right.” There shouldn’t be self-satisfaction because it’s ongoing [work]. That, I think, triggers a lot of the public hostility to the press. They see people on these cable news shows sitting around, basking in self-love, in each other, and making declarations about politics and candidates and other things. People look at that and say “What do they know? Who are they to say?” So it requires careful navigation between the points of being very aggressive and trying to be thorough and also not getting in a mode of high-fiving each other around the newsroom. Sometimes it is done right, sometimes not. This interview has been edited for clarity and length.Lin-Manuel Miranda talks Hamilton and Hip-Hop, Power and Playwriting