The Mesa del Caballo Water Committee will hold a community meeting for residents at 7 p.m. on Thursday, May 12, at the El Caballo/Community Center Clubhouse.
The topic of the meeting is "Mesa del's Water Situation - Now and Into the Future." Topics to be covered in this first of several informational meetings are water hauling for 2011, Brooke Utilities pump maintenance, well drilling, and Mesa del's water options.
Monday, May 9, 2011
GC Redistricting Committee meets May 10 in SV
NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING
OF THE GILA COUNTY
REDISTRICTING ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Pursuant to A.R.S.§38-431.02, notice is hereby given to members of the Gila County Redistricting Advisory Committee and to the general public, that the Committee will hold a public meeting at 5:30 p.m. on May 10, 2011, at the Star Valley Public Works Yard, 5320 E Hwy 260, Mile Post 257 with interactive television available at the Gila County Administrative Offices located at 610 E. Hwy 260, in Payson, and the Gila County Board of Supervisors hearing room at 1400 E Ash Street, in Globe. Members of the Committee will attend the meeting in person or be present via interactive television. The meeting agenda will be available on the Gila County website, Friday, May 6, 2011.
AVISO DE REUNIÓN PÚBLICA
DEL COMITÉ CONSULTIVO DE REDISTRIBUCIÓN DE DISTRITOS
DEL CONDADO DE GILA
Conforme a A.R.S.§38-431.02, el aviso se da por este medio a los miembros del comité consultivo de Redistribución de Distritos del condado de Gila y al público en general, que el comité llevara a cabo una reunión pública en el 5:30 P.M. el 10 de mayo de 2011, en la yarda de las obras públicas del Star Valley, los 5320 E Hwy 260, poste 257 de la milla con la televisión interactiva disponible en las oficinas administrativas del condado de Gila situadas en 610 E. Hwy 260, en Payson, y el justa del condado de Gila de supervisores que oyen el sitio en la calle 1400 de la ceniza de E, en globo. Los miembros del comité assistirán a la reunión personalmente o estarán presentes vía la televisión interactiva. La agenda para esta reunión estará disponible en la páginelectrónica del Condado de Gila el día viernes 6 de mayo de 2011.
Sunday, May 8, 2011
Councilors Blair and Connell team up at CAC
The next meeting of the Citizens Awareness Committee will be held on Thursday, May 12 at 2 p.m. at the Payson Public Library.
Our guest speakers will be:
Photos of Su Connell and Ed Blair by Jim Keyworth
Su Connell and Ed Blair
Town of Payson Council Members
Their Topic will be:
"Review of Recent Major Issues, Resolved and Pending before the Town Council"
The public is invited.
Our guest speakers will be:
Photos of Su Connell and Ed Blair by Jim Keyworth
Town of Payson Council Members
Their Topic will be:
"Review of Recent Major Issues, Resolved and Pending before the Town Council"
The public is invited.
Smithsonian food exhibit opens in Fort Apache
America by Food exhibit will be making its second to last stop in Fort Apache. The Nohwike' Bagowa Museum, White Mountain Apache Tribe will host this Smithsonian exhibit, opening this Saturday, May 7 through June 19.
Featured Community Event
Saturday, May 14Ndee La Ade'/Gathering of the People 12th Annual Great Fort Apache Heritage Reunion will feature Apache foods, acorn stew tasting, food demonstrations, and other Key Ingredients activities, in addition to the Apache Song and Dance Celebration, Run/Walk, Fort Apache tours, and arts and crafts demonstrations.
Special Features
Wild and cultivated Apache plant foods, both historical and currentTraditional food gathering and preparation tools
Historic photographs of Apache foodways
An Apache "Food Pyramid" of traditional and indigenous foods
Demonstration programs on traditional foods such as telapi, a fermented beverage made from corn sprouts
Demonstration programs on Apache burden basket weaving and saddlebag making
A portion of the local exhibit will become a traveling educational trunk for use in local schools.
Host Organization
Nohwike' Bagowa Museum, White Mountain Apache Tribe, Fort ApacheLocation: 127 Scout Road, Fort Apache
Website: www.fortapachearizona.org
Phone: 928-338-4625
Project Director: Karl Hoerig, Museum Director
Community Summary
Dago Te: Hello and Welcome from the White Mountain Apache Tribe. Our beautiful home abounds in tradition, wildlife, outdoor recreation, and resources unparalleled in the Southwest. Home to historic Fort Apache, the White Mountain Apache Reservation offers something for everyone!The White Mountain Apache Tribe has around 15,000 members, and our tribal trust lands consist of over 2,600 square miles in east-central Arizona. We were placed here under the White Mountain by our Creator at the beginning. In this land our ancestors learned to be Ndee-The People-and we have learned from them.
The U.S Army began construction of the post that eventually became Fort Apache in 1870, in consultation with local Apache leaders to help keep the peace in this region. The army abandoned it in 1922, and the next year the site became the home of the Bureau of Indian Affairs' Theodore Roosevelt Indian Boarding School. T.R. School continues today as a middle school, under the administration of the Tribal Council.
Established in 1969, Nohwike' Bagowa (House of Our Footprints) Museum serves as a repository for the Tribe's cultural heritage through the preservation and exhibition of oral histories, archival materials and objects of cultural, historical and artistic significance to the White Mountain Apache people.
Exhibition Dates and Hours
May 7 through June 19, 2011Mondays through Saturdays: 8 AM to 5 PM
Sundays: 11 AM to 3 PM
Featured Community "Restaurants"
A local food tradition is the "Tailgate Café," every day at locations around the town of Whiteriver (4 miles north of Fort Apache) where community members sell frybread and beans, Apache dumplings, green chile burritos, and other local favorites from their truck tailgates or roadside tables. Occasionally Apache delicacies such as acorn stew and barbecued corn are available. Tasty food and great prices! Featured Recipe
BEEF AND SQUASH STEW (Be'ilkan Bitoo')Courtesy of the Nohwike' Bagowa (House of Our Footprints) Museum, the White Mountain Apache Tribe's center for cultural interpretation and heritage perpetuation.
2 pounds stew meat
6 or 7 small squash, any variety
1 cup ground acorn meal
Preparation
Boil the meat for one hour, then add halved squash and continue to boil for an additional 1/2 hour. Add the acorn meal right before serving. Use wooden or plastic spoons or forks, and fix the stew in an intact enamelware cooking pot. (If the pot has a chip or crack, the stew will turn a green color.) Serves 12.
Key Ingredient: Acorn Meal
Acorns were an important part of the Western Apache traditional diet, and even in recent decades families kept a container of acorn meal on the kitchen table to be used like salt and pepper. Gathered in the Fall from oak trees, acorns are a good source of protein, minerals, fiber, and complex carbohydrates, which help control blood sugar levels. Acorn stew, made with beef, squash, or homemade dumplings, continues to be considered a special food for many Apache people.
Official state firearm violates AZ Constitution
In today's Sunday (May 8) Arizona Republic, columnist E.J. Montini hilariously rips the state legislature for naming an official state firearm in violation of the state constitution. He writes: "If lawmakers decide to designate an 'official bulls-eye' to complement our official revolver, they might consider using a rendering of the state's Constitution. They've already managed to blow a hole in it without firing a shot."
The problem: by making the Colt Single Action Army Revolver the official Arizona firearm, the state is illegally endorsing one company over all other gun manufacturers.
Click on news.azcentral.com to read the entire column. Better yet, pick up a copy of the Republic on your way back from Mother's Day Brunch. Or call 1-800-332-6733 for home delivery.
The problem: by making the Colt Single Action Army Revolver the official Arizona firearm, the state is illegally endorsing one company over all other gun manufacturers.
Click on news.azcentral.com to read the entire column. Better yet, pick up a copy of the Republic on your way back from Mother's Day Brunch. Or call 1-800-332-6733 for home delivery.
Saturday, May 7, 2011
Public favors equal custody for children of divorce
The public favors equal custody for children of divorce, according to findings in a pair of studies by Arizona State University researchers that will appear in the May 2011 journal Psychology, Public Policy, and Law.
The authors cited polls and ballot initiatives that showed there was great public support for equal custody. But the new research goes further by showing that in a series of hypothetical cases those surveyed had a strong preference for dividing the child’s time equally between mother and father, and that was so even when there were high levels of parental conflict for which both parents were equally to blame.
Equally shared custody arrangements are advocated by most fathers’ groups, according to the authors, who concluded: “The striking degree to which the public favors equal custody combined with their view that the current court system under-awards parenting time to fathers could account for past findings that the system is seriously slanted toward mother, and suggests that family law may have a public relations problem.”
The lead author, Sanford L. Braver, a professor of psychology in ASU’s College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, said the studies were conducted as part of an undergraduate honors thesis in psychology by co-author Ashley M. Votruba, under the director of Braver and the other co-authors, Ira Mark Ellman, a professor in ASU’s Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law, and William V. Fabricius, an associate professor of psychology. Votruba, who is now a graduate student in both psychology and law at Arizona State University, began her research in this area as a student in Barrett, The Honors College at ASU.
Those responding to the surveys in the studies were from a Pima County jury pool in Tucson, Ariz. Of 643 jurors present throughout the times of the two surveys, altogether 367 chose to participate.
Survey participants in the first study were asked to imagine they were a judge deciding a series of hypothetical cases. In one case vignette, the mother provided 75 percent of the couple’s pre-divorce child care-giving duties. In another vignette, the father provided 75 percent of the couple’s pre-divorce child care-giving duties. And, in the third vignette, the parental couple was described as having divided the pre-divorce child care 50-50.
“It is important to note that all three vignettes specified that neither parent wanted equal custody, but were instead each requesting ‘as much living time with the children’ as possible because each now genuinely feels the children would be better off mostly in their care and not so much in the care of the other parent,” wrote the authors.
In the scenario where the parental couple split child care 50-50 before the separation or divorce, some 69 percent of respondents thought living time should be divided equally between the parents, and almost all the rest responded: “Live with mother, spend a lot of time with dad.”
Braver said he “was surprised that exactly equal time with each parent was also the most preferred alternative in both 75-25 scenarios, selected by just less than half the respondents in each case, and there was no difference between male and female respondents in their judgment of what should happen in these cases.”
Respondents also were asked what they thought would happen if the three situations described in the survey questions involved real families “in today’s courts and legal environment.” Under those parameters, respondents believed the cases would come out differently than they would prefer. Only 28 percent thought the parents in an actual case would be allocated equal living time, even when they had divided child-care duties equally before the separation or divorce. Most predicted the mother would get most of the time with the child in all three vignettes.
“So, our respondents seemed to believe that the legal system was gender-biased,” said Braver.
“This perception of what the legal system would do is important because a party’s litigation choices might well be based on what they or their lawyers believe courts will do, regardless of whether those beliefs are accurate,” according to the authors.
In the second study, one scenario was described as a fairly amicable divorce, while a second case depicted that both parents became extremely angry at each other after the separation, and remained so.
Imagining they were the judge, some 66 percent of the respondents chose an equally shared living arrangement for children in the low-conflict case, nearly identical to the first study. Yet almost as many, 64 percent, made the same choice in scenarios where there was a mutually high conflict situation. Braver noted that “this is far different than what actually happens. High parental conflict is perhaps the most important circumstance that would keep real decision-makers from awarding equal custody. Instead, they’d try somehow to make a choice between the two parents, and limit the time of the other parent with the child.”
According to the authors, “in both studies, the public’s inclination to favor equal time custody awards survived factual elaborations that would cause most courts and custody evaluations to reject them.”
In the report, titled “Lay Judgments About Child Custody After Divorce,” the ASU researchers stated that these studies “yield several findings with important implications for family law,” including:
* In most of the custody cases they were asked to decide, the survey respondents made the judgment that equal custody was strongly preferred, a preference that current law does not generally allow unless the two parties agree.
* There apparently is widespread belief that the legal system will fashion custody awards far more favorable to mothers than the respondents believe appropriate.
“Decision-makers need to recognize the widespread opposition to the current standards that award equal custody only rarely. If they think those standards are nonetheless necessary, they need to be more active in defending and justifying their preferences to the public,” Braver said.
The studies were conducted in May and June 2008. Females comprised 55 percent of the responding sample, 60 percent were currently married, 36 percent had been divorced, 65 percent had children, and the median age was 51. Some 19 percent of the sample had no more than a high school graduation, while 20 percent had more than a college degree. The median household income was $45,000.
The authors cited polls and ballot initiatives that showed there was great public support for equal custody. But the new research goes further by showing that in a series of hypothetical cases those surveyed had a strong preference for dividing the child’s time equally between mother and father, and that was so even when there were high levels of parental conflict for which both parents were equally to blame.
Equally shared custody arrangements are advocated by most fathers’ groups, according to the authors, who concluded: “The striking degree to which the public favors equal custody combined with their view that the current court system under-awards parenting time to fathers could account for past findings that the system is seriously slanted toward mother, and suggests that family law may have a public relations problem.”
The lead author, Sanford L. Braver, a professor of psychology in ASU’s College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, said the studies were conducted as part of an undergraduate honors thesis in psychology by co-author Ashley M. Votruba, under the director of Braver and the other co-authors, Ira Mark Ellman, a professor in ASU’s Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law, and William V. Fabricius, an associate professor of psychology. Votruba, who is now a graduate student in both psychology and law at Arizona State University, began her research in this area as a student in Barrett, The Honors College at ASU.
Those responding to the surveys in the studies were from a Pima County jury pool in Tucson, Ariz. Of 643 jurors present throughout the times of the two surveys, altogether 367 chose to participate.
Survey participants in the first study were asked to imagine they were a judge deciding a series of hypothetical cases. In one case vignette, the mother provided 75 percent of the couple’s pre-divorce child care-giving duties. In another vignette, the father provided 75 percent of the couple’s pre-divorce child care-giving duties. And, in the third vignette, the parental couple was described as having divided the pre-divorce child care 50-50.
“It is important to note that all three vignettes specified that neither parent wanted equal custody, but were instead each requesting ‘as much living time with the children’ as possible because each now genuinely feels the children would be better off mostly in their care and not so much in the care of the other parent,” wrote the authors.
In the scenario where the parental couple split child care 50-50 before the separation or divorce, some 69 percent of respondents thought living time should be divided equally between the parents, and almost all the rest responded: “Live with mother, spend a lot of time with dad.”
Braver said he “was surprised that exactly equal time with each parent was also the most preferred alternative in both 75-25 scenarios, selected by just less than half the respondents in each case, and there was no difference between male and female respondents in their judgment of what should happen in these cases.”
Respondents also were asked what they thought would happen if the three situations described in the survey questions involved real families “in today’s courts and legal environment.” Under those parameters, respondents believed the cases would come out differently than they would prefer. Only 28 percent thought the parents in an actual case would be allocated equal living time, even when they had divided child-care duties equally before the separation or divorce. Most predicted the mother would get most of the time with the child in all three vignettes.
“So, our respondents seemed to believe that the legal system was gender-biased,” said Braver.
“This perception of what the legal system would do is important because a party’s litigation choices might well be based on what they or their lawyers believe courts will do, regardless of whether those beliefs are accurate,” according to the authors.
In the second study, one scenario was described as a fairly amicable divorce, while a second case depicted that both parents became extremely angry at each other after the separation, and remained so.
Imagining they were the judge, some 66 percent of the respondents chose an equally shared living arrangement for children in the low-conflict case, nearly identical to the first study. Yet almost as many, 64 percent, made the same choice in scenarios where there was a mutually high conflict situation. Braver noted that “this is far different than what actually happens. High parental conflict is perhaps the most important circumstance that would keep real decision-makers from awarding equal custody. Instead, they’d try somehow to make a choice between the two parents, and limit the time of the other parent with the child.”
According to the authors, “in both studies, the public’s inclination to favor equal time custody awards survived factual elaborations that would cause most courts and custody evaluations to reject them.”
In the report, titled “Lay Judgments About Child Custody After Divorce,” the ASU researchers stated that these studies “yield several findings with important implications for family law,” including:
* In most of the custody cases they were asked to decide, the survey respondents made the judgment that equal custody was strongly preferred, a preference that current law does not generally allow unless the two parties agree.
* There apparently is widespread belief that the legal system will fashion custody awards far more favorable to mothers than the respondents believe appropriate.
“Decision-makers need to recognize the widespread opposition to the current standards that award equal custody only rarely. If they think those standards are nonetheless necessary, they need to be more active in defending and justifying their preferences to the public,” Braver said.
The studies were conducted in May and June 2008. Females comprised 55 percent of the responding sample, 60 percent were currently married, 36 percent had been divorced, 65 percent had children, and the median age was 51. Some 19 percent of the sample had no more than a high school graduation, while 20 percent had more than a college degree. The median household income was $45,000.
Friday, May 6, 2011
Arizonans with pre-existing conditions now eligible
The Commonwealth Fund recently estimated that 155,862 Arizonans are potentially eligible for the Pre-existing Condition Insurance Plan (PCIP), a new program created under the Affordable Care Act.
These are Arizonans with cancer, heart disease, lupus, or other serious medical problems that have caused them to be turned down for insurance coverage, or for whom insurance coverage is far too expensive.
PCIP could be a life-saver for many of these Arizona residents. But so far, the program has gotten too little public attention.
PCIP is a bridge program for children and adults in all 50 states and the District of Columbia who’ve been locked out of the health insurance market because of a pre-existing condition. About $5 billion has been appropriated to fund PCIP. In 2014, Americans—regardless of their health status—will have access to affordable health insurance when the nation transitions to a new marketplace.
Under PCIP, Arizonans with pre-existing conditions can receive coverage for a wide range of medical benefits, including physician’s services, hospital care, and prescription drugs. They won’t be charged a higher premium because of their medical condition and their eligibility isn’t based on income. Like standard health insurance plans, they’re required to pay a monthly premium, a deductible, and some cost-sharing expenses. Premiums may vary depending on where they live, their age, and which health plan they choose.
To qualify for PCIP, you must:
- be a citizen of the United States or residing here legally;
- have been uninsured for at least 6 months before applying;
- and have a pre-existing condition or have been denied insurance coverage because of your health condition.
To find out more about the Pre-Existing Condition Insurance Plan, including eligibility, plan benefits and rates and how to apply, visit www.pcip.gov. Click on “Find Your State” and select your state from a map of the United States or from a drop-down menu for details.
These are Arizonans with cancer, heart disease, lupus, or other serious medical problems that have caused them to be turned down for insurance coverage, or for whom insurance coverage is far too expensive.
PCIP could be a life-saver for many of these Arizona residents. But so far, the program has gotten too little public attention.
PCIP is a bridge program for children and adults in all 50 states and the District of Columbia who’ve been locked out of the health insurance market because of a pre-existing condition. About $5 billion has been appropriated to fund PCIP. In 2014, Americans—regardless of their health status—will have access to affordable health insurance when the nation transitions to a new marketplace.
Under PCIP, Arizonans with pre-existing conditions can receive coverage for a wide range of medical benefits, including physician’s services, hospital care, and prescription drugs. They won’t be charged a higher premium because of their medical condition and their eligibility isn’t based on income. Like standard health insurance plans, they’re required to pay a monthly premium, a deductible, and some cost-sharing expenses. Premiums may vary depending on where they live, their age, and which health plan they choose.
To qualify for PCIP, you must:
- be a citizen of the United States or residing here legally;
- have been uninsured for at least 6 months before applying;
- and have a pre-existing condition or have been denied insurance coverage because of your health condition.
To find out more about the Pre-Existing Condition Insurance Plan, including eligibility, plan benefits and rates and how to apply, visit www.pcip.gov. Click on “Find Your State” and select your state from a map of the United States or from a drop-down menu for details.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
