Vanderburgh County Prosecutor Nick Hermann Will Have A Democratic Challenger
We have just been told by reliable sources that Vanderburgh County Prosecutor Nick Hermann will have a Democratic challenger this November, it’s going to be former longtime Vanderburgh County prosecutor Stan Levco.Â
Vanderburgh County Democratic Chairman, Scott Danks, says; six attorneys have expressed interest in running against Hermann and that Danks considers Hermann to be “very vulnerable.â€
Danks also stated; “Hermann only tried one case prior to becoming Prosecutor and was found to be ineffective by our Appellate Courts”. “Since becoming Prosecutor over seven and a half years ago, he has only tried a handful of cases and only tries those that he considers to be slam dunks.â€Â
Danks went on to say that; “Hermann has the highest number of not guilty verdicts, dismissals and staff turnover of any Prosecuting Attorney in modern history.â€Â
Danks also claims that Hermann frequently engages in wasteful spending, stating that after Hermann remodeled the prosecutor’s office it was nicknamed the “Nick Mahal.† Danks also alleges that Hermann overpays his pet employees, misrepresents their duties and forces Defendants to use one or more vendors that contribute heavily to Hermann’s campaign.Â
Levco served as Vanderburgh County Prosecutor for over 20 years. Hermann ran against Levco in 2006 and lost by a landslide. Hermann ran again in 2010, and with a Republican tide, won by a narrow margin.
Mr. Danks stated; “Levco is a highly respected career prosecutor. Since leaving the prosecutor’s office, Levco has served as special prosecutor throughout the State, trying high profile, and many times very complex criminal cases. Levco has maintained a very high conviction rate.”
Danks says “the other attorneys who have expressed an interest have indicated they would “stand down†if Levco decides to run, due to Levco’s experience and skill level”.
Danks, who supported Hermann in his successful bid for prosecutor in 2010, said he’s not bashful about admitting when he’s made a mistake and, “that was a big one.â€
Footnote: Â This article was posted by the City-County Observer without opinion, bias, or editing.
INDIANAPOLIS – Susan Bayh turned the tables on me.
This was long ago, early in her time as Indiana’s first lady. Her husband, Democrat Evan Bayh, had ended a 20-year-long run of Republicans holding the state’s top office by winning the governorship in 1988.
The Bayhs were young and beautiful. He was just past 30. She was just shy of it. Susan was a former Miss Southern California. Evan looked like a male model.
Together, they seemed like Indiana’s answer to Jack and Jackie, a heartland Camelot myth in the making, a Hoosier couple destined to dance among the stars. Detractors and political opponents dismissed them as the state’s version of Barbie and Ken, synthetic figures without souls.
I wanted to do a piece on what it felt like to be that youthful and at the center of so much attention and speculation.
The young Mrs. Bayh and I met for the interview at Shapiro’s, a deli on Indianapolis’s near south side.
As we munched on sandwiches, I asked her questions about what her life was like. She answered each one forthrightly and often with a great deal of wit.
But, after she’d answered, she’d pose a question of her own, one similar in tone and scope to mine.
Then, she’d smile and wait for me to respond, refusing to address any more of my queries until I’d dealt with hers.
Finally, I shook my head and laughed.
She asked why.
“I’m trying to figure out the precise moment I lost control of this interview,†I said.
She smiled.
Point made.
The lives she and her husband led were lives like those of other human beings, not the stuff of some fairytale. Their marriage had its joys and stresses, just like everyone else’s.
The important thing to remember, she argued, with charm and grace, was that it was their marriage.
And no one else’s.
I can’t claim to know Evan and Susan Bayh as well as some people do.
But it’s always seemed to me that the key to understanding them was to understand the nature of their reserve. Because so much of their lives had to be exhibited to the public, it was important to them to keep the private parts as private as they could.
They needed some space that could be theirs and theirs alone.
That became clear during the gubernatorial years. The Bayhs wanted to start a family. Their first attempt ended, as it does for so many young couples, in a miscarriage.
The Bayhs had not wanted the public to know Susan was pregnant, but the story leaked. When the pregnancy ended, the young couple had to deal not only with grief and loss but a sense of violation.
I wrote a column at the time saying it was easy to understand why they felt violated, but that I hoped they could take some comfort from the knowledge that many people grieved with them. Sorrow is something we all experience, a part of life that unites us as people.
After the piece ran, Evan Bayh called me. He said the column brought comfort to both him and Susan.
So much time has passed since those days.
The Bayhs did have a family, twin boys who graduate from college this spring. Evan Bayh’s political career stalled after a couple of terms in the U.S. Senate, then crashed in 2016 when his comeback attempt failed.
The fairytale that never was ended.
And now comes the news that Susan Bayh battles brain cancer of the same sort that U.S. Sen. John McCain, R-Arizona, fights. It’s same cancer that took the lives of U.S. Sen. Ted Kennedy, D-Massachusetts, and Beau Biden, former Vice President Joe Biden’s son.
In a statement, the Bayh family said Susan, her husband, and her sons plan to face and fight this cancer with dignity and determination.
Doubtless, they will.
And much of that fight will be hers and theirs alone.
But it is my hope that Susan Bayh and her family will forgive the rest of us for sharing our concern, our prayers, and our heartfelt best wishes.
And that she turns the tables on this disease, just as she did on me oh so long ago.
FOOTNOTE: John Krull is director of Franklin College’s Pulliam School of Journalism, host of “No Limits†WFYI 90.1 Indianapolis and publisher of TheStatehouseFile.com, a news website powered by Franklin College journalism students.
The City-County Observer posted this article without opinion, bias or editing.
The attempt to kill a former Russian spy in England bore an ominous signature: The assailants used a lethal nerve agent of a type developed in the Soviet Union, and British investigators quickly concluded that only the Kremlin could have carried out such a sophisticated hit.
Soon after the March attack, Rex Tillerson, then the U.S. secretary of state, ordered State Department officials to outline the case for designating Russia as a state sponsor of terrorism under U.S. law. Experts in the department’s Bureau of Counterterrorism began to assemble what they thought was a strong case.
But almost as quickly as the review began — within about two days — the secretary of state’s office sent new instructions to drop the initiative, according to State Department officials familiar with the episode.
“There are a lot of issues that we have to work on together with Russia,†a U.S. official said. “Designating them would interfere with our ability to do that.â€
The State Department’s reluctance to impose the terror designation was not a product of Trump administration sympathy for Russian President Vladimir Putin, U.S. officials say. Rather, it reflected an ambivalent and at times contradictory policy toward Russia on terrorism issues that stretches back more than a dozen years, American intelligence officials and foreign-policy experts said.
Even as Washington has grown more concerned about an array of Russian security threats, it has continued to seek Moscow’s cooperation in combating terrorism. Although the approach has yielded few victories against the Islamist militants that the two countries vowed to fight after 9/11, advocates of the policy argue that it has been one of the few areas of common ground in which cooperation remains possible during a period of increasing confrontation.
“Russia is clearly a bad actor on the world stage,†said David McKean, a former director of policy planning at the State Department. “But terrorism is an area where we have to keep trying to talk to them. They can either play a negative role or not play a negative role — or occasionally play a positive role.â€
Yet, as Tillerson’s order for the review suggested, the calculus in Washington has begun to shift. Throughout the civil war in Syria, Russia has strengthened its backing for the regimes in Damascus and Teheran, which Washington has long accused of supporting terrorism, and their ally Hezbollah, an officially designated terrorist group. Russia has intervened more directly in Afghanistan, Pentagon officials have said, shipping arms to the Taliban with little apparent regard for the geopolitical consequences. And the Kremlin has methodically pursued its enemies overseas, ordering a series of assassination attempts in Europe, Turkey and the Middle East, national security officials said.
As the evidence of Russian support for terrorism has grown, the Putin regime’s campaign of cyber attacks and another subversion in the United States, Europe and elsewhere has raised new questions about the utility and viability of narrow efforts at cooperation on issues such as counterterrorism.
“We assume the Russians are like us, and if we would just do a better job of explaining ourselves, they would come around and be allies on counterterrorism,†said John Sipher, a former deputy chief of Russian operations at the CIA. “Russia has been more consistent. They have seen us, not terrorism, as the main enemy all along.â€
In the case of the former Russian spy poisoned in the English town of Salisbury, Sergei Skripal, the Trump administration eventually joined Britain and other allies in retaliating for the attack. Washington and its allies expelled scores of Russian diplomats and imposed financial sanctions on oligarchs and political leaders.
To formally name Russia as a state sponsor of terrorism, however, would represent a more significant step. The State Department’s list, which now includes North Korea, Iran, Syria and Sudan, reflects a formal determination that a foreign government has repeatedly supported acts of international terrorism. (Secretary Tillerson was fired days after he ordered up the aborted review, apparently for reasons that were unrelated. His replacement, Mike Pompeo, has not commented publicly on the prospect of such a designation.)
Under a process first implemented in 1979, the designation results in sanctions barring the country from U.S. foreign aid, arms sales and various forms of commerce. It also restricts U.S. trade and diplomatic contact with nations that do business with countries on the list.
But both Republican and Democratic administrations have wielded the State Department’s terrorism sanctions primarily against countries where the United States has limited interests. Washington has used the tool far more sparingly against powerful nations like Russia, where U.S. relationships include substantial competing equities.
In November, for example, the Trump administration aggressively pushed through the designation of North Korea as a sponsor of terrorism, despite what officials in the State Department and other experts considered a relatively weak evidentiary case.
“Russia much more neatly meets the definition of a state sponsor than North Korea does,†said a national security official familiar with the issue.
The Trump administration cited a series of complaints against North Korea, including the mistreatment of an American college student who died after being released from North Korean custody. But the primary new evidence of repeated support for terrorism was an act that some officials and experts consider insufficient: the 2017 assassination of North Korean leader Kim Jong-Un’s half-brother at Kuala Lumpur International Airport.
“I am delighted to see us get tough with North Korea,†said Daniel Byman, a professor at Georgetown University’s School of Foreign Service. “I’d rather we chose another label.â€
Pakistan, by contrast, has been spared from inclusion on the State Department list despite what U.S. officials say is a well-documented history of funding, training and protecting terrorist groups including the Taliban and Lashkar-e-Taiba. Even after U.S. counterterror agencies have directly implicated Pakistani intelligence officials in such flagrant activity as the 2008 terror attacks that killed 166 people — six of them Americans — in Mumbai, the U.S. government has continued to treat Pakistan as an indispensable if untrustworthy, partner.
Russian leaders have bristled at the idea that they might qualify for inclusion on the terror-sponsors list. Particularly since the 9/11 attacks, the Putin government has cast Russia as a Christian bulwark against the threat of Islamist militancy. Putin was the first foreign leader to call President George W. Bush to express his sympathies after the attacks. As the Bush Administration scrambled to strike back against al-Qaida, the Kremlin provided diplomatic and logistical support for the U.S. military’s operations in Afghanistan.
Russian security forces also worked with Western counterparts to track threats related to Chechnya. And Moscow avoided criticizing the Americans’ use of brutal interrogation methods and secret detentions, despite years of U.S. human rights criticism of Russia’s own counterterror operations.
From the start, however, some U.S. intelligence experts warned that Moscow played by different rules. Sipher, the former deputy chief of Russian operations, recalled his reaction after learning that the then-CIA director, George Tenet, had told Bush that Russia would be a key ally in the new war on terrorism.
“Tenet asked us to put together a paper on how the Russians were going to help us,†Sipher recalled. “We were dumbfounded. We said someone needs to tell the president they are NOT going to be an ally. They are not going to help on counterterrorism.â€
It was not long before signs of Russian duplicity began to surface, Sipher recalled. In the mid-2000s, the CIA learned that Russia had given its allies in Central Asia a database of suspected extremists that included the names of some CIA undercover officers.
“When our officers showed up in certain countries at the airport, they were handcuffed because we popped up on the list as terrorists,†Sipher said.
In what some U.S. intelligence veterans see as a reflection of Putin’s background as a career officer in the Soviet KGB, Russia has mixed fierce tactics against Islamist militants in Chechnya with cooptation and collusion, officials said.
Russian opposition leaders and journalists have accused the Kremlin’s security forces of masterminding a string of mysterious bombings in Russia in 1999. About 300 civilians were killed in the explosions at apartment buildings. The attacks, which the government blamed on Chechen militants, helped then-Prime Minister Putin bolster his standing ahead of the presidential election he won in 2000.
The U.S. case against Russia as a sponsor of terrorism has grown substantially over the past decade, national security officials said.
As Islamist militants began moving into Syria in 2012 to join that country’s civil war, law enforcement agencies in Europe arrested scores of would-be jihadists. By contrast, U.S. officials have said, Russia’s principal internal security agency, the FSB, appeared to encourage militants from predominantly Muslim regions like Dagestan to go to Syria ahead of the 2014 Winter Olympics in Sochi. The FSB carried out this activity to reduce the threat at home during the Winter Games, according to U.S. officials, despite the fact that such militants were likely to join the Islamic State’s fight against the Syrian government, a close Russian ally.
“There must have been senior approval,†said Michael Carpenter, who served as National Security Council director for Russia during the Obama administration. “There was facilitation, payment, passports. There were hundreds, at a minimum, who went to Syria during this period.â€
There have been more direct examples of state-sponsored violence in the pursuit of Chechen rebel leaders and other Kremlin enemies far beyond Russia’s borders, U.S. officials said. Russian spies have been convicted of or accused of murdering suspected Islamist extremists in Dubai, Qatar and Turkey, according to officials, court verdicts and published reports.
Both the United States and Israel have often killed suspected terrorists overseas, notably in drone strikes conducted by the Pentagon or the CIA. But Russia has targeted its own exiled political dissidents with growing frequency — an action that would qualify as terrorism under U.S. law if there is an intent to intimidate a group of people.
In the Skripal case in England, Carpenter said, the seemingly obvious signs of the nerve agent used to try to kill the exiled Russian spy on March 4 was integral to the plot. “I think the Russians planned it as a hit that would lead everyone to think the Kremlin was behind it, and that would spread a chill among former spies,†he said. “Is it terrorism? Yes. It targets that population of former Russian spies and dissidents and sends a message to stop cooperating with the West.â€
Russia had convicted Skripal of working as a British double agent, but released him from prison and sent him to Britain in a spy swap in 2010. The former military intelligence officer, 66, had lived quietly for eight years in the riverfront town of Salisbury until, British officials say, suspected Russian agents smeared the nerve agent Novichok on the handle of his front door.
Skripal was in critical condition for weeks before his health began to improve. On Friday, he was released from the hospital. Authorities moved him to a secret location to continue his recovery. The other two victims — his 33-year-old daughter and a British police officer — were released from the hospital weeks ago.
Russian leaders have denied any involvement in the case, and have even accused the British security services of staging the attack themselves in order to frame Russia. After the director of the MI5 domestic intelligence service said last week that the Kremlin was at risk of becoming an “isolated pariah,†the Russian embassy in London declared: “This shows to what lengths London is prepared to go in order to keep the Western bloc in the UK-led confrontation with Russia.â€
The Skripal attack recalled the 2006 assassination in London of Alexander Litvinenko, a former FSB officer who had also worked with Western intelligence services. After fleeing to London in 2000, Litvinenko had publicly accused Putin of plotting the 1999 bombings in Russia, among other crimes. He was killed by two Russian operatives who poisoned his tea with polonium-210, a rare radioactive substance produced by a Russian military laboratory. A British court convicted the two Russians in absentia, but one of them, Andrei Lugovoy, a retired KGB officer, received a medal from Putin and was elected to the Russian parliament.
A dozen other suspicious deaths in Britain — the victims were Russian expatriates or Britons linked to them — drew less attention over the past 15 years. In the aftermath of the Skripal attack, however, British authorities said they would reexamine those cases, which prominently include the death of Boris Berezovsky, an exiled Russian oligarch, an enemy of Putin who was initially ruled to have committed suicide in 2013.
When Tillerson ordered the review of Russia’s record on terrorism in March, State Department experts examined a history of Russian-sponsored violent activity in neighboring Ukraine as a key element of a case for designation.
In 2004, an anti-Putin presidential candidate, Viktor Yushchenko, blamed Russian operatives for trying to kill him with dioxin. The poison badly disfigured Yushchenko, but he survived and won the Ukrainian election. In another case, last October, Ukraine’s attorney general accused the Russian FSB of teaming with a politically connected gangster to assassinate a fugitive Russian legislator in Kiev.
One of the most serious elements of the case against Russia, U.S. officials said, may be the government’s alleged involvement in the shoot-down of a Malaysia Airlines flight by Russian-backed separatists in eastern Ukraine in 2014. A Russian-made missile killed all 298 people aboard and was part of a wave of separatist bombings and other violence against civilians blamed on Russia after its forces occupied the Crimea region.
U.S. military commanders have also accused Russia of increasing support for the Taliban. Although the Afghan insurgency originated with the Islamic militant fighters who battled the Soviets during their occupation of Afghanistan in the 1980s, Russian forces have provided funding and small arms to the Taliban as part of an effort to undermine U.S. policy in the region, Pentagon officials have said.
Amid calls for stronger retaliation against Russia for the Skripal case and its meddling in the 2016 elections, some members of Congress have pushed the Trump administration to consider designating Russia as a state sponsor of terrorism. Even if the case seems strong, U.S. officials say the action would imperil remaining lines of communication with Moscow and create legal problems for the United States in dealing with nations that do business with Russia.
The Trump administration recognizes Russia’s record, officials said, but senior intelligence officials have emphasized their continued support for a better counterterrorism partnership with the Putin regime.
U.S. intelligence agencies went so far as to extend a highly unusual invitation to Russian spy chiefs, which resulted in a meeting between the sides in January to discuss counterterrorism cooperation. The directors of the FSB and the SVR, Russia’s foreign intelligence service, held talks in Washington with the then-CIA director, Pompeo, and the director of national intelligence, Dan Coats. The Americans reminded the spy chiefs that the CIA had relayed a lead that foiled a terrorist plot in Saint Petersburg in December, but the Russians have so far declined to share any comparable intelligence, a U.S. intelligence official said.
“The intelligence agencies want to have a channel open to the Russians,†the official said. “Historically, at times of political tensions, the spy services have been able to de-escalate while presidents like Putin are playing to domestic audiences. It’s important to keep that back channel.â€
Critics of the meetings took a less optimistic view, saying the U.S. intelligence community sent a message that it is not serious about confronting Russia’s aggressive conduct. The Salisbury attack just weeks later underscored the futility of the outreach effort, those experts said.
“These are the guys behind the interference campaign in the U.S. elections, the guys directing Russian operations in Syria and Ukraine and ordering hits like the one on Skripal,†Carpenter said of the meetings. “Words escape me to express how bad it was.â€
A Gibson County doctor who violated multiple federal regulations when he impermissibly prescribed prescription narcotics to his girlfriend and other patients has lost his appeal to reinstate his Indiana medical license.
In Gerald G. Gray v. Medical Licensing Board of Indiana, 26A01-1707-PL-1595, southern Indiana osteopathic physician Dr. Gerald Gray hired an unlicensed physician to treat his patients in 2004, paid the physician $20 an hour, then billed the physician’s claims at Gray’s standard rates and under his name. Gray also allowed the unlicensed physician to prescribe controlled substances using his DEA registration number, which eventually led to the surrender of Gray’s DEA number, his guilty plea to Medicaid fraud and his indefinite probation in 2006.
Gray was granted a new DEA registration number the following year, but then lied about the revocation of his original registration when he applied to renew his Indiana Controlled Substance Registration in 2009. Meanwhile, Gray began dating his housekeeper, C.P., in 2009, and wrote her 18 controlled substance prescriptions. Gray later learned that C.P. was a prescription drug addict, so he began writing her prescriptions for addiction treatment narcotics.
The Indiana Pharmacy Board asked a DEA investigator to investigate Gray in May 2011 based on their concerns about the prescriptions he was writing, including those for C.P. and for patients who came from as far away as Illinois. Gray was found to be in violation of multiple DEA regulations, but nonetheless sought to end his probation in 2014.
Then in 2015, the state filed a five-count administrative complaint against Gray’s medical license after learning that a local pharmacist refused to fill his controlled substances prescriptions. The Indiana Medical Licensing Board subsequently found Gray had violated five portions of Indiana Code section 25-1-9-4 and, thus, indefinitely suspended his license.
Gray moved for judicial review, which the Gibson Superior Court denied. The Indiana Court of Appeals also upheld the suspension of Gray’s license, with Judge Rudolph Pyle rejecting Gray’s argument that his suspension was not supported by evidence.
Specifically, Pyle pointed to evidence of the pharmacist refusing to fill Gray’s prescriptions as support for the board’s finding that he improperly prescribed and administered narcotics to C.P. and other patients. Pyle also pointed to Gray’s own admission that he administered certain drugs privately to C.P. and other patients in his office and at his home.
The appellate panel also rejected Gray’s argument that there was a “medical necessity†for the prescriptions he wrote, pointing specifically to the hydrocodone prescription he wrote to treat C.P.’s addiction. There is no medical evidence that hydrocodone is approved for treating addiction withdrawal, Pyle said.
Finally, the panel upheld the board’s authority to suspend Gray even though the state did not call any healthcare professionals as witnesses against him.
“The legislature has recognized that the board, which his composed of six physicians, is able to establish standards and determine whether a practitioner has violated one or more of them,†Pyle wrote.
Our research reveals the 100 most dangerous cities in America with 25,000 or more people, based on the number of violent crimes per 1,000 residents. Violent crimes include murder, rape, armed robbery, and aggravated assault. Data used for this research are 1) the number of violent crimes reported to the FBI to have occurred in each city, and 2) the population of each city.
Crime data we use are the most recent data the FBI classifies as ‘Final, non-preliminary.’ It is the most up-to-date and fully vetted data with complete national coverage that is available. We insist on using Final, Non-Preliminary data for our analyses and analytics, rather than basing our research on preliminary data that may need to be updated or have errors in it.
The FBI releases these data approximately 10 months after the close of a calendar year. For example, our 2018 list is based on the 2016Â year total data which was released in Final, Non-Preliminary form in September, 2017. The 2017 year total crime data is not complete. Â The FBI is still working through data issues and reporting issues before that data can be considered Final, and Non-Preliminary.
IS IT TRUE that Henderson Community Methodist Hospital is one of the largest employers in Henderson County? Â …that Henderson Community Methodist Hospital has major economic, employment, educational and quality of life impact in our region?
IS IT TRUE it been alleged that members of the Henderson Community Methodist Hospital Board of Directors will be meeting with Deaconess Hospital Healthcare-Evansville officials today at noon to discuss a possible partnership, merger or some other type of a business agreement between the two area not-for-profits healthcare providers?  …we have no idea of the location of this meeting or if members of the public or the media will be allowed to attend this meeting?
IS IT TRUEÂ it’s been alleged that the proposed Deaconess Healthcare partnership, merger or some other type business agreements with the Henderson Community Methodist Hospital have been discussed for over a year?
IS IT TRUE it’s was alleged that officials of the Owensboro Health System were interested in discussing with the cash scraped Henderson Community Methodist Hospital Board of Directors about a possible partnership, merger or total take over agreement? Â …its alleged that the Henderson Community Methodist Hospital Board of Directors declined to entertain an offer from Owensboro Health System?
IS IT TRUE it has been alleged that the Kentucky Association Of Counties “Lending Trust Fund” indicated an interest in taking on the $23 million bond debt of the Henderson  Community Methodist Hospital’s but their Board of Directors decided against that option?
IS IT TRUE it been alleged that the State of Kentucky law prohibits Deaconess Healthcare-Evansville to take total control of Henderson Community Methodist Hospital?
IS IT TRUE that it’s been rumored there are plans to reduce the size of the Henderson Community Methodist Hospital Board of Directors from 27 members to only nine (9)?  …if that happens the Henderson Community Methodist Hospital would appoint three (3) members, Deaconess Healthcare-Evansville would appoint three (3) members and a third party would appoint the remaining three (3) members to serve on the Henderson Community Methodist Hospital Board Of Directors?  … it’s possible if the appointees of Deaconess Healthcare-Evansville and the three (3) board members representing the third party vote as a block it’s conceivable that Deaconess Healthcare-Evansville could take control of Henderson Community Methodist Hospital Board of Directors?
IS IT TRUE it’s alleged that the $20 million dollar Deaconess’s EPIC software program may be adopted by the new Henderson Community Methodist Hospital Board of Directors?  …if this happens its alleged it could put independent Henderson area physicians on the hook to pay for a new $2.35 per patient fee?
IS IT TRUE that Henderson’s Mayor Steve Austin is the current Vice Chairman of the Methodist Hospital Board of Directors? …that his Mayoral opponent in the upcoming General election Robert Pruitt said: “I believe the citizens of Henderson deserve to have a say in what’s going to happen to Henderson Methodist Community Hospital, and I hope the board doesn’t let Steve Austin destroy our hospital the way he allowed Big Rivers to destroy the Electric Companyâ€?
IS IT TRUE it been alleged that yesterday a couple of department heads at Henderson Community Methodist Hospital were told that they had by next Tuesday to submit three (3) names to be layoff on July 1, 2018?  …if this is true it means that 15 hospital employees will be laid off on July 1, 2018?
IS IT TRUEÂ if Henderson Community Methodist Hospital were forced to close their doors because of poor decisions made by hospital Administrators and Board of Director members the economically disadvantaged citizens living in the Henderson area will be forced to travel to Owensboro or Madisonville because many of the state-sponsored healthcare programs in Kentucky will not reimburse hospitals located in nearby Evansville?
IS IT TRUEÂ that several board members of both hospitals are hoping that members of the mainstream media won’t touch this story because they spend many hundreds of thousands of dollars each year in advertising with these media outlets?
Today’s READERS POLL question is: Do you feel that the Henderson Methodist Community Hospital Board of Director should hold a public meeting to discuss the future of their Hospital?
Please take time and read our articles entitled “STATEHOUSE Files, CHANNEL 44 NEWS, LAW ENFORCEMENT, READERS POLL, BIRTHDAYS, HOT JOBS†and “LOCAL SPORTSâ€.
You now are able to subscribe to get the CCO daily.
If you would like to advertise on the CCO please contact us CityCountyObserver@live.com.
Neglected neighborhoods throughout Indiana will soon have a new tool to attract investors.
More than 150 census tracts in Indiana — including 5 in Evansville and 1 in Princeton — will be included in a new federal initiative that provides a tax incentive for investing capital gains in low-income areas.
Called “Opportunity Zones,†these areas must have a poverty rate of at least 20 percent or a median family income no higher than 80 percent of the state median (or of the metro-area median if that’s higher).
The program, created under the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017, allowed governors to nominate up to 25 percent of all low-income census tracts in the state for the designation. Once approved by the U.S. Treasury Department, Indiana’s designations will apply for 10 years.
The program encourages investment in opportunity zones through investment in “qualified opportunity funds†or “QOFsâ€. QOFs can be created by a variety of entities such as banks, economic development groups, or community foundations. QOFs need a targeted area or interest, but they have plenty of flexibility. For example, a group could create a fund for Midwest opportunity zones, Evansville zones, or even funds for health care facilities in Indiana zones. Each fund must invest at least 90 percent of its assets in opportunity zones, but those investments can be spread throughout multiple zones.
Any gains earned from investments in QOFs are tax-free. Moreover, by investing in QOFs, you can defer the inclusion of capital gains in gross income. Additionally, up to 15 percent of capital gains on investments in QOFs can be excluded from gross income altogether if they stay invested in the opportunity fund at least 10 years. Investments of 5 years can exclude 10 percent.
For example, if you sell stock that results in a $1 million gain, investing that money in a QOF would avoid a $238,000 tax bill that would come from a long-term capital-gains tax rate of 23.8 percent. In 10 years, if the value of the opportunity-fund investment grew to $2 million, the investor would pay $202,300 in taxes on the original $1 million gain and nothing on the second million.
Gov. Holcomb nominated 156 census tracts in 58 counties covering a combined 1,000 square miles and the homes of more than 500,000 Indiana residents. The zones will likely attract a wide range of developments that could include housing, commercial uses, energy projects, or startups that need space to grow.
For more information, please contact the Jackson Kelly attorney with whom you work or Joshua Claybourn in the firm’s Public Finance Industry Group at (812) 422-9444 or jclaybourn@jacksonkelly.com.
FOOTNOTE: Joshua A. Claybourn is counsel in the public finance and utilities industry groups focusing primarily on municipal finance, utility regulation, and commercial transactions. He practices out of the firm’s office in Evansville, Indiana.
Below find Indiana Gov. Eric J. Holcomb’s public schedule for May 25 through 29, 2018.
Friday, May 25, 2018: Gov. Holcomb Media Availability Upon Arrival on First Nonstop Flight From Paris to Indianapolis
WHAT:Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Gov. Holcomb will host a media availability upon returning from his trade mission to Europe on the inaugural flight from Paris Charles de Gaulle Airport (CDG) to the Indianapolis International Airport (IND) on Delta Flight 501.
WHEN:Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Times are subject to change depending on the arrival of the flight. To track the flight from CDG to IND on Friday, May 25, click here.
4:27 p.m. – Inaugural flight from Paris to Indy arrives at IND
5:30 p.m. – B-roll opportunities and media availability for media at IND
WHERE:Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Indianapolis International Airport
Baggage Claim
7800 Col. H. Weir Cook Memorial Dr.
Indianapolis, IN 46241
Friday, May 25, 2018: Gov. Holcomb Delivers Indy 500 Green Flag to Indianapolis Motor Speedway
WHO:Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Gov. Holcomb
First Lady Holcomb
WHAT:Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Gov. Holcomb and the First Lady will bring the green flag back from Europe. After arriving at IND, they will deliver the green flag to Doug Boles, president of the IMS, at the yard of the bricks.
WHEN:Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Times are subject to change depending on the arrival of the flight. To track the flight from CDG to IND on Friday, May 25, click here.
6:15 p.m. – Gov. Holcomb delivers green flag to Doug Boles at IMS’ yard of the bricks.
WHERE:Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Indianapolis Motor Speedway
4790 W. 16th St.
Indianapolis, IN 46222
Members of the media looking to capture the Governor’s arrival at IMS should contact Suzi Elliott at selliott@brickyard.com.
Saturday, May 26, 2018: 62nd IPL 500 Festival Parade
WHO:Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Gov. Holcomb
WHAT:Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â The governor will participate in the parade.
WHEN:Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â 11:45 a.m., Saturday, May 26
WHERE:Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Downtown Indianapolis
Sunday, May 27, 2018: 102nd Running of the Indianapolis 500
WHO:Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Gov. Holcomb
WHAT:Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â The governor will attend the race.
WHERE:Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Indianapolis Motor Speedway
4790 W. 16th St.
Indianapolis, IN 46222
Monday, May 28, 2018: Crown Hill Cemetery’s 150th Annual Memorial Day Ceremony
WHO:Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Gov. Holcomb
WHAT:Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â The governor will give remarks.
WHEN:Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Band concert begins at 1:30 p.m., Monday, May 28
Ceremony begins at approximately 2 p.m.
WHERE:Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Crown Hill Cemetery
700 38th St.
Indianapolis, IN 46208
The event will be held behind the Gothic Chapel.
Tuesday, May 29, 2018: Rotary Club of Indianapolis Luncheon
WHO:Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Gov. Holcomb
WHAT:Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â The governor will participate in a Q&A with Club President Ramona Adams.
WHEN:Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â 11:45 a.m., Tuesday, May 29
Q&A begins at 12:40 p.m.
WHERE:Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Ivy Tech Culinary and Conference Center
As the unofficial start of summer, the Memorial Day holiday weekend is a busy time for Americans. Each year, the highways fill with families in vehicles, on their way to start their summer vacations. To help keep drivers and passengers stay safe, the Indiana State Police is reminding motorists to Click It or Ticket. Aimed at enforcing seat belt use to help keep families safe, the national seat belt campaign will take place May 21 through June 3, concurrent with the busy travel season.
“Buckling up is something that should become second nature,†said Indiana State Police Superintendent Doug Carter. “Besides that. Buckling up is the law. The consequences of not buckling up is real and can include the loss of life. Often, this tragedy could have been prevented with the use of a seat belt. No excuses, buckle up!â€
According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, nearly half (48%) of the passenger vehicle occupants killed in crashes in 2016 were unrestrained. At night from 6 p.m. to 5:59 a.m., that number soared to 56 percent of those killed. That’s why one focus of the Click It or Ticket campaign is nighttime enforcement. Participating law enforcement agencies will be taking a no-excuses approach to seat belt law enforcement, writing citations day and night. In Indiana, the maximum penalty for a seat belt violation is $25.00.
“In 2016, almost twice as many males were killed in crashes as compared to females, with lower belt use rates, too. Of the males killed in crashes in 2016, more than half (52%) were unrestrained. For females killed in crashes, 40 percent were not buckled up.
“If you know a friend or a family member who does not buckle up when they drive or ride, please ask them to consider changing their habits,†said Indiana State Police First Sergeant Rich Myers. “Help us spread this life-saving message before a friend or family member is killed as a result of this senseless inaction. Seat belts save lives, and everyone—front seat and back, child and adult—needs to remember to buckle up—every trip, every time.â€
