Month: October 2019

by William Skink

All hail Lord Checota,

O benevolent Checota, Sultan of Sound, you have pleased Orpheus and Missoula music denizens with the foresight of your investments. Where shall we, you’re loyal devotees, bring you our offerings of milk and honey?

O Lord Checota, when shall we consecrate the sacred Fox grounds on which you have contractually entered? At your direction your loyal devotees shall murmur prayers and spells as you navigate the dark labyrinth of business complexity required to build a 100 million dollar civic events center.

O Lord Checota, does the Mayor’s engorged appendage stiffen at the thought of what your talents shall erect? Does he delight in the semantic PR shift away from the “convention center” concept to your much more seductive event center rebranding campaign?

You brought the high priest to bless your Blackfoot amphitheater. Wilma lies pensive at your feet, wearing a Top Hat and nothing else. The valley is yours, Lord Checota. Command us, Lord. We are yours.

by William Skink

On Friday the city of Missoula marked the opening of two access points for the West Broadway Island. While the city touted this unnecessary use of public money to build a bridge meant to increase recreational use with the hope that meth heads and other addicts will decrease their use of the area, Missoula County has a different bridge problem.

The big story in the Missoulian on Sunday is the continued stalling efforts by the small contingent of selfish property owners hell bent on stopping the creation of a new bridge at the end of South Street. Instead of the bridge being built where all the studies indicate it should be built, these obstructionists insist that rehabbing the “functionally obsolete” Maclay bridge is the way to go.

What I don’t get is how a situation where school buses and fire trucks that exceed the 11 ton weight limit of the bridge has been allowed to fester year after year. I suggest reading the whole Sunday piece in the Missoulina. Here is a portion:

The Maclay Bridge is classified as “functionally obsolete” by state and federal standards. Because it is a one-lane bridge on a two-way street, it has a recommended 100-vehicle-per-day limit. In 2010, the state counted an average 2,610 vehicles per day.

The weight limit posted on the bridge is 11 tons. The school buses that drive over it each day, four times a day, as they ferry children to and from Big Sky High School and Target Range School weigh around 11 tons empty.

The Missoula Rural Fire Department’s trucks are only allowed to cross it on the way to emergency situations, at a 5 mph crawl, but must go a different way back to the station, as some of the trucks are more than double the posted weight limit.

The Missoula Rural Fire Department puts their firefighters at risk every time they crawl 5mph across this obsolete bridge. Is Missoula County ok with that? The Target Range school district puts school kids at risk every day those heavy buses go over that bridge. Is the school board ok with that? How about Beach Transportation, are they ok with their drivers crossing a bridge that will be closed this week to patch literal holes?

The Missoulian article goes on to essentially expose Dave Strohmaier for being a deceitful player in this two decade long obstruction effort by his South Street pals. Strohmaier boxes himself in with his own words. Here’s more from the article:

Since Maclay Bridge replacement or rehabilitation options were first investigated in 1994, the South Avenue Bridge project was identified as the best option out of 16 studied, including various rehabs and leaving the bridge as is.

That conclusion came after examining environmental impacts, cost-benefit ratio, impacts to private property, and a whole host of other factors. Three different rehabilitation options were rated the worst projects for investment. The rehab options could cost $14 million if the roads are brought to modern safety standards, and that would have to be paid for by the county and its residents, as the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) has made it clear it will not fund that option.

Despite this, Strohmaier remains a strong advocate for finding a way to rehabilitate the bridge. He said he would not support any option that forced people from their homes, and that no rehab options would meet federal standards. But he said it’s not accurate for people to accuse the county of stalling the review of studies needed to move the project forward before funding goes away.

“For the most part these documents have been in the possession of the Montana Department of Transportation for the better part of a year under their review,” Strohmaier said.

What Strohmaier didn’t mention is that the Montana Department of Transportation (MDT) was spending those months addressing questions and criticisms — 31 pages of them — that he raised about the work.

I am beyond angry over the bullshit pouring from Strohmaier’s mouth because what he is essentially saying is that the status quo of a few property owners is more important than the safety of my kids. I’m not going to stand for that.

by William Skink

I continue to be amazed at Trump Derangement Syndrome (TDS) and its ability to transform people and institutions who once appeared objective and rational. Finding any kind of sane analysis outside this polarizing madness is difficult.

This piece I read yesterday strikes a nerve in a good way because its author disdains both parties. Only when one acknowledges the total corruption of body politic can one begin to see clearly what’s developing.

Here’s a bit from the piece by Charles Smith that resonated with me describing how Hillary and the Democrats got into bed with the alphabet agencies:

To aid their mono-maniacal campaign, the Democrats partnered with the most anti-Democratic and corrupting force in America, the alphabet agencies of Imperial Pretensions, the CIA et al., who are institutionally bound to view the citizenry’s right to choose its government and its government’s policies with utter disdain: we rule the Empire, and democracy is only acceptable as long as it rubber-stamps our rule.

This aligned perfectly with the Clinton dynasty’s view, and so the unending campaign to unseat The Donald was launched.

For better or worse, this unholy alliance put the Democratic Party’s legitimacy on the gambling table. The Democratic Party, whether it accepts or understands this reality or not, has devolved to an absurdist cable-channel devoted exclusively to unseating The Donald, regardless of the cost and regardless of the sacrifices required to pursue what is increasingly a quixotically misguided venture.

Wittingly or unwittingly, every institution allied with the Democrats has also put its legitimacy on the gaming table, the most important of which is the mainstream media, including the quasi-public Propaganda Broadcast Service (PBS). The corporate media and PBS have been reduced to late-night TV programming, selling the same flimsy gadgets with the same tired pitch: “But wait–there’s more!”

All of which leads us to the question: will the Clintons destroy the Democratic Party, or perhaps even more saliently: have the Clintons already sealed the fate of the Democratic Party?

What happened before and after the presidential election of 2016 needs a total and honest accounting. The problem is all our institutions that provide checks and balances are corrupt. ALL OF THEM.

A great message for the US electorate to send in 2020 if the options are as deplorable as 2016 would be a national boycott of the elections. Don’t vote for them. Don’t give them legitimacy. The public literally has little to no say in the legislative outcomes that govern us, so why give these sociopaths the pleasure of our consent over this sham?

Or not, and hope impeachment gives you the easy way out. Suckers.

by William Skink

As winter leapfrogs ahead of fall this year in Missoula, the final plan on where homeless overflow will be directed has yet to be made public.

Plan A of getting churches to handle the overflow ran into this problem in September:

The City of Missoula’s attempt to keep the homeless population warm this winter may get snagged on the issue of separation of church and state, the city’s attorney warned in an email Monday.

City zoning laws regulate buildings used as emergency homeless shelters, and prevented one long-running winter warming shelter, the Union Gospel Mission, from operating last winter because it wasn’t up to code. When the Poverello Center capped the number of people it could safely house, local officials scrambled to find a temporary solution.

Eventually space was found at the Salvation Army building on Russell Street, and city officials allowed it to be used as a temporary emergency shelter, forgoing the formal review process. Now, the city wants to make it easier for places like churches and other religious organizations to become emergency winter shelters.

If the legal complexities of church and state prevent plan A from being implemented, what is plan B?

Remember, after last winter, the Salvation Army was supposedly a “hard no” on doing a repeat. For perspective, here are notes from a public meeting of the Mayor’s Downtown Advisory Committee held last April about what went down last winter:

The Salvation Army stepped up to provide services for those who could not stay at the Poverello Center. They opened the day after Christmas 2018 and closed at the end of March 2019. The Salvation Army served up to 70 people per night. They were not as strict as the Poverello Center and allowed pets and husbands and wives to stay together. Operationally it was very hard on the Salvation Army staff since they managed a more difficult clientele. There was property damage, people with mental health issues, needles in the bathrooms and items stored outside under bushes. The Good Food Store did have problems but they worked with the Salvation Army.

Plans are already in the works to discuss warming efforts for winter 2019. The Salvation Army decided not to participate this winter since they had issues managing the daytime hours. The transfer center was used as a temporary warming facility winter 2018. Eran explained that they are now looking locally for a place to house people 24 hours per day and that plan will be taken to the council and the commissioners in the future.

Ethan Smith said that the police were called to the Salvation Army every night and staff was overwhelmed. Ethan recommended that whomever housed people this next winter should have training.

Bryan asked if the Salvation Army gave a hard no or if they might be willing to house a few people. Eran thought that was a good question and it was possible that they would be open to that. They were doubling or tripling their staff this winter when they typically only had four people working.

Bryan saw the value of a central facility but wondered if several organizations could work together. Churches could be an option. Transportation was an issue though; each facility would have to find a way to transport people to their facilities.

Despite all the talk of hopes and plans and churches saving the day, from what I’m hearing, it’s all fallen through, and a mad scramble is on to repeat the shit-show of last winter. If the Salvation Army is once again the host site for homeless overflow, I’d be very curious to know how that came to be.

by William Skink

It may not seem like I want Democrats to be successful, considering all the derision and scorn I have heaped on the national brand over the years, but at the state level, I would like Democrats to at least make a minimal effort to succeed. Doing so could mean saving the veto power of the Governor’s office and keeping some legislative sanity so another Medicaid slaughter doesn’t go down.

Were blog posts more widely read, two recent ones would be raising serious questions about what the hell Democrats in Montana are doing to be successful.

One of the only things I appreciate about blogger Greg Strandberg is his digging into the numbers, and when it comes to Democrats in Montana, it’s clear they know how to raise and spend money, but to what end? From the link:

The GOP raised $20,000 in September and spent $28,000. They now have $27,000 in the bank.

The Dems raised $113,000 in September and spent $72,000. They now have $123,000 in the bank.

Later in the post Strandberg breaks down how much money Montana Democrats pay their seven paid staffers to run the Democratic show in the state. When you contrast what Democrats are spending to what the GOP is spending, you might assume spending more money on more staffing would translate into more political activity, but thanks to this surprisingly candid blog post from the Montana Post, that is apparently not the case:

The most pressing problem should be the easiest to fix. The Party needs to stop being silent. A look at the press releases page on the party’s web site shows the latest post was added over three weeks ago. The Facebook page? Other than posts about fundraising events, it’s a ghost town. Twitter? About one post a week.

And these have been pretty damn momentous times. Where was the Montana Democratic Party when thousands of Montana kids were out on the streets demanding action on climate change? The Party couldn’t offer support for these future voters even though our Party platform demands action on the climate?

Where has the Montana Democratic Party been on the latest wave of Trump scandals and his potential impeachment? While Republicans are gearing up their predictable attacks on the rule of law and their specious defense of the President, where is the voice of the Democratic Party defending the inquiries that will take place in Congress?

Parties play a unique role in our political system and some of that role must be to be the cudgel of the party, to take swings at Republican candidates for office that might be too difficult for candidates to take. Given the copious ammunition their voting records and public statements provide, Republicans should be taking hits from the MDP almost every week, if not every day. That’s just not happening.

Summer is over, and these people can’t muster more than a tweet a week? Really?

Is it laziness? Is it a strategic stand-down because Montana is considered a lost cause to the national party?

It’s inexcusable for the Democratic party apparatus in Montana to be taking in so much money with so little to show for it. Even the most doggedly loyal Democrat blog in the state is getting tired of this feeble refusal to fight for anything beyond financial contributions.

Change or keep losing, Montana Democrats. The choice is up to you.