Owner to hand over the Fort Hotel

first_imgEarlier this week, Mayor Lantz stated if the City gained control of the property, they would immediately start the process of cleaning up the mess.  In the 2010 budget the City has allocated $250,000 for the clean up.In April of 2008, Fort St. John City Council voted to declare the Fort Hotel a nuisance property.  In May of 2009, the building caught fire and was completely destroyed.  The City purchased Fort Hotel in a property tax sale in 2009 for $72,000. Photo:  A fire in 2009 destroyed what was left of the Fort Hotel – Adam Reaburn/Energeticcity.caCorrection – Earlier this week the Mayor had stated the deadline to pay the outstanding property taxes was Monday.  City staff have since notified us that the date is actually Tuesday at 10:15am.- Advertisement -According to the property owners realtor, the Fort Hotel, will soon transfer to the City of Fort St. John.In a comment posted Friday on Energeticcity.ca, realtor Kevin Pearson says the owner of the Fort Hotel will let the City have the property and will not be paying the outstanding taxes.  According to Pearson, the owner said “he has decided to donate the property to the city.”The comment goes on to say, “the owner has had much grief and financial hardship over this property over the past several years and has decided that he did not want anything to with it anymore.”The owner of the Fort Hotel, Michael Seo, has until Monday at 10am to pay the back taxes owed on the property.  If that deadline isn’t met, the City would take control of the property.Advertisementlast_img read more

Top 10 takeaways after BCCI threatens to cancel India-New Zealand series

first_imgMiffed with the Supreme Court-appointed Justice RM Lodha committee’s direction to stop disbursement of funds to the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI), the Indian cricket board threatened to cancel the ongoing New Zealand series, which still has a Test and five one-day internationals remaining.The panel, headed by Lodha, yesterday ordered banks to halt the disbursements after the BCCI ignored some of the its recommendations for reforming the world’s richest cricket board.However, Lodha today confirmed that it had only directed the BCCI to not disburse funds to the state associations and the board was otherwise free to use its funds for “routine expenditure”.Here are the latest developments on the matter.LODHA WRITES TO BANKS TO HALT DISBURSEMENT OF MONEY TO BCCIThe panel yesterday ordered banks to halt the disbursements after the BCCI ignored some of the panel’s recommendations for reforming the world’s richest cricket board.File photo of Justice RM Lodha. (PTI)BANKS WRITE TO BCCI INFORMING OF FREEZEThe banks, who operate BCCI’s accounts, wrote to the board informing it that the accounts have been placed under debit freeze.BCCI THREATENS TO CALL OFF INDIA-NEW ZEALAND SERIESMedia reports suggested that the BCCI might cancel the remainder of the ongoing India-New Zealand series after Lodha panel’s directive to banks. READ MORE   LODHA CLARIFIESFollowing BCCI’s threat, JLodha today clarified that the board’s accounts had not been frozen.”So far as our email and directions are concerned, it does not restrain BCCI from incurring routine expenditure and expenses on games, matches, series etc,” Lodha told India Today.advertisement”I’m clarifying that BCCI should not have any doubt that they are free to deal with their bank accounts as far as game and routine matters are concerned. There is absolutely no restraint direction by us,” he added.NO QUESTION OF CANCELLING SERIES, SAYS LODHASpeaking to India Today, Lodha said the banks have not been directed to stop the money flow for routine matters and there was no question of calling off the series , which still has a Test and five one-day internationals remaining.India and New Zealand still have to play a Test and five ODIs. (AP Photo)’BCCI CAN COME TO US FOR CLARIFICATION OF ANY DOUBTS’Lodha also said board officials were welcome to contact his panel and he would be happy to clear any doubts.”If there’s any confusion, BCCI must contact the panel. Will give a written clarification to the banks if needed,” he said.LODHA WRITES TO BANKS FOR RELEASING MONEY FOR ROUTINE EXPENSESThe Lodha committee then asked the banks to release funds to BCCI for routine expenses.Gopal Sankaranarayanan, secretary of the Lodha committee, told India Today that the panel has directed the banks to release money to BCCI for routine expenses. He also said that the India vs New Zealand series must go on and reiterated that there was no bar on series payments.NEW ZEALAND SAYS BUSINESS AS USUALA New Zealand Cricket spokesman said they are preparing for the third Test against India as scheduled.He added that they had heard nothing from the BCCI. “It’s the first time we’ve heard of it,” the spokesman told local media. “At the moment we are preparing to play the third test at Indore as scheduled.” READ MORE ANURAG THAKUR SAYS NO CRICKET WITHOUT MONEYDespite a clarification by Lodha. BCCI president Anurag Thakur said that there would be no cricket without money and said it was up to state associations to decide if they wanted to conduct matches. NEW ZEALAND WILL LEAVE FOR INDORE FROM KOLKATA ON WEDNESDAYNew Zealand are scheduled to travel to Indore – the venue for the third and last Test – from Kolkata on Wednesday. NZ are trailing 2-0 in the series after losing the second Test at Eden Gardens on Monday.last_img read more

Kirk Cousins Is Not Better Than Joe Montana So Lets Fix Passer

Chad Henne2008-181,95975.555.3-20.3 Cam Newton2011-183,89186.466.1-20.3 RatingsRatings In the original conception of passer rating, an average rating was about 67. In 2018, only one qualified passer (Arizona Cardinals rookie Josh Rosen) fell below that threshold, and even then just barely (his rating was 66.7). But what if the standards for what makes a good or bad performance had evolved as leaguewide numbers changed? Pro-Football-Reference.com does a great job of adjusting for era with its Advanced Passing indices, which are centered on an average of 100 with 15 points representing 1 standard deviation in either direction. But I wanted to rescale the building blocks of passer rating itself to see how today’s passing numbers would translate to a rating if the NFL had simply allowed its rating system to change with the times.To do that, I looked at the distribution of stats in each category that goes into passer rating — completion percentage, yards per attempt, touchdown percentage and interception rate — from the sample originally used to craft the formula back in the early 1970s (qualified passers from 1960 to 1970). Specifically, I figured out the spread of values (relative to the league) that, in a given category, led to the minimum number of points (0), the average number of points (1) and the maximum (2.375). Under the hood, passer rating is built around these ranges; it hands out points on that 0-to-2.375 scale in each category, then sums up the four values, divides by 6 and multiplies by 100. (Hence, 67 is supposed to be average — a 1.0 in four categories, divided by 6, times 100.)For any era, we can rescale what performance “should” lead to a given value in each category to keep the relative leaguewide distribution the same as it was when passer rating was first conceived.2Just like with PFR’s advanced passing stats, I calculated these distributions using qualified passers in rolling three-season periods to avoid a strange spread in one season causing overly volatile results. (To qualify, a passer needed at least 14 attempts per team game.) So while, say, Alex Smith’s 62.5 percent completion rate in 2018 was worth 1.0 point, so was Don Meredith’s 49.5 percent mark from 1962. Do this for every category in every season, and you have a stabilized version of passer rating that no longer spirals uncontrollably upward with each innovation in the passing game.Some ultra-high ratings change less than you might expect under this new method. Rodgers’s single-season record of 122.5 from 2011 tumbles all the way down to … 121.1. (He was very good that year.) But other seemingly immortal ratings, such as Kirk Cousins’s 99.7 mark this season, get knocked down quite a bit — in Cousins’s case, he falls to a much more reasonable 81.5 rating. (Anyone who watched a Vikings game this year would surely argue that this is more appropriate.) Similarly, Ryan Fitzpatrick’s 100.4 mark this season — yes, that is real, look it up — gets heavily penalized in the interception category (his 4.9 percent INT rate was more than double the league average), taking him down to an adjusted rating of 77.4.Moving further down the list, Joe Flacco’s decent-sounding 84.2 classic rating properly falls to a mediocre 62.8 after our adjustment, while the 30.7 rating of WOAT candidate Nathan Peterman becomes an 11.6 — perilously close to the minimum possible rating of 0.0. (If Peterman had thrown enough passes to qualify, that 11.6 rating would have “surpassed” Ryan Leaf’s 19.1 from 1998 as the lowest-rated season since 1950.)All told, the new ratings are once again grounded in a world where an average quarterback scores about 70 — not exactly 67 because the rolling distribution includes multiple seasons for comparison3Causing 2018 performances to score slightly higher on average, since this year was a better passing season than 2017. — and as a result, the numbers make far more intuitive sense at a glance than the ludicrously inflated official ratings of 2018: According to the NFL’s official passer rating system, the most efficient quarterback in NFL history is Green Bay’s Aaron Rodgers, with a lifetime mark of 103.1.1Pro football’s passer rating has a possible range from 0 to 158.3. That makes sense: Rodgers is generally regarded as one of the greatest QBs to ever play the game. But if you scroll further down the list, the results become much harder to explain. In the world of passer rating, Kirk Cousins is better than Joe Montana; Derek Carr and Matt Schaub top Dan Marino; and, after one season, Broadway Sam Darnold is running circles around Broadway Joe Namath.Passer rating is often criticized as Byzantine (have you seen that formula?), incomplete (it does not include data on rushing plays or sacks) and arbitrary (again, have you looked at the formula?). Yet its biggest shortcoming might be the way it is unmoored from changes in the game itself. Passing has never been more efficient than it was this season, in which the league’s average QB posted a rating of 92.9. That is remarkably high considering that a quarterback who posted a rating of 92.9 would have led all qualified passers in 15 separate seasons from 1950 through 1986. Clearly, the scale needs recalibrating. 28J. FlaccoBAL84.262.8 PlayerTeamOldNew 12S. Jurgensen197482.782.927N. Lomax198882.778.1 26J. WinstonTB90.264.9 14R. FitzpatrickTB100.477.4 * Minimum 14 pass attempts per team gameSource: Pro-Football-Reference.com 10K. CousinsMIN99.781.5 Ratings According to the NFL’s official system, there have been 93 qualified quarterback seasons since 1950 with a passer rating of at least 100.0, and nine of those happened in 2018 alone. After our adjustment, though, there have been only 46 such seasons since 1950,4Four QB seasons cracked the 100.0 mark under the new system but didn’t under the classic passer rating. and only one of those happened this year — the 103.3 mark Drew Brees put up with the Saints. It’s still a golden age for passing, as nearly half of those 46 seasons have happened since 2000, but we’ve also filtered out 51 “false 100s” — seasons that cracked 100.0 on the old scale but not the new one — of which 47 have happened since 2000.The result of our passer rating adjustment is a much more reasonable career leaderboard that features qualified quarterbacks from a variety of different eras: Deflating the ratingClassic and adjusted passer ratings for qualified* 2018 NFL quarterbacks 8D. Brees201897.785.423J. Unitas197378.378.9 Ryan Fitzpatrick2005-184,28581.160.2-20.9 5P. RiversLAC105.587.3 12D. PrescottDAL96.979.0 Case Keenum2013-181,84484.561.8-22.6 * Minimum 1,500 career pass attemptsSource: Pro-Football-Reference.com 9A. RodgersGB97.683.0 PlayerTeamOldNew 8J. GoffLAR101.183.3 30B. BortlesJAX79.854.5 7C. WentzPHI102.285.1 32J. AllenBUF67.937.1 2P. MahomesKC113.898.5 22R. TannehillMIA92.768.8 23M. StaffordDET89.968.6 PlayerYears PlayedAttemptsOldNewDiff. 6D. WatsonHOU103.185.3 13T. BradyNE97.778.8 A new all-time passer rating hierarchyCareer classic and adjusted passer ratings for qualified* NFL and AFL quarterbacks, 1950-2018 13L. Dawson197582.982.728F. Ryan197078.078.0 29C. KeenumDEN81.256.2 Jameis Winston2015-181,92287.864.0-23.8 4M. RyanATL108.193.4 6R. Staubach197983.486.721J. Garcia200887.579.6 33J. RosenARI66.735.9 Ratings 4T. Brady201897.687.219C. Pennington201090.179.9 * Minimum 1,500 career pass attemptsSource: Pro-Football-Reference.com 25A. DaltonCIN89.666.1 PlayerLast YearOldNewPlayerLast YearOldNew 1S. Young199996.794.216F. Tarkenton197880.480.7 18E. ManningNYG92.472.3 31S. DarnoldNYJ77.649.7 21M. MariotaTEN92.370.6 5P. Manning201596.587.120M. Ryan201894.979.8 Ratings The biggest beneficiaries of our changes are 1950s-era passers like Otto Graham, who originally rated in the 70s (discarding his eye-popping pre-1950 numbers, which were compiled in the upstart All-America Football Conference) but leaps up into the mid-80s after judging him in comparison with his peers. San Francisco 49ers legend Steve Young also gets a boost relative to other great QBs from history, reclaiming the No. 1 slot that he’d held in real life before Rodgers and friends came along.At the other end of the spectrum, nobody loses more points of career rating than Blake Bortles, who somehow has an 80.6 mark under the classic system but falls to 55.2 with our adjustments. Here are the biggest losers between the old and new QB ratings: 7R. Wilson2018100.485.422B. R’lisberger201894.379.0 9T. Romo201697.185.024D. Fouts198780.278.4 10O. Graham195578.284.725R. Gannon200484.778.4 Marcus Mariota2015-181,60589.467.5-21.9 2A. Rodgers2018103.192.517B. Starr197180.580.7 3R. WilsonSEA110.996.5 14D. Marino199986.481.429B. Jones198278.578.0 15K. Anderson198681.981.230J. Kelly199684.478.0 Blake Bortles2014-182,63280.655.2-25.4 15B. R’lisbergerPIT96.575.7 Who’s been overrated in traditional passer ratings?For qualified* NFL and AFL passers since 1950, the biggest shortfalls between adjusted and classic passer rating 1D. BreesNO115.7103.3 11A. LuckIND98.779.1 3J. Montana199492.390.018P. Rivers201895.680.5 17M. TrubiskyCHI95.473.2 Ryan Tannehill2012-182,91187.067.2-19.8 11K. Warner200993.783.726B. Griese198077.178.3 24N. MullensSF90.866.3 Mark Sanchez2009-182,32073.352.5-20.8 16D. CarrOAK93.974.0 27A. SmithWSH85.764.5 20B. MayfieldCLE93.771.7 Derek Carr2014-182,80088.868.4-20.4 19C. NewtonCAR94.271.7 A change like this wouldn’t fix the rest of passer rating’s deficiencies, and it wouldn’t include all the fancy bells and whistles you’ll find in a metric like ESPN’s Total Quarterback Rating. But passer rating itself has always been a surprisingly decent metric within any self-contained era; the team with the higher passer rating (by any margin) in a game wins about 80 percent of the time. It’s the comparisons across eras that have become distorted as the game has changed over time. But a simple fix tethering modern stats to the standards contained in passer rating’s formula would go a long way toward restoring sanity to the metric you still see in every NFL box score and broadcast. The Blake Bortleses of the world might not like seeing their shiny 80-something ratings get dumped into the 50s, but it’s a change whose time has come.Check out our latest NFL predictions. read more

MultiState Lawsuit Filed Against Orbital Publishing Group

first_img The suit charges that the companies sent solicitations without indicating subscription expiration details, so consumers were paying fees without realizing their subscriptions weren’t actually up for renewal. Other consumers said they paid for subscriptions they never received. Other companies named in the suit are Liberty Publishers Service, Inc., Express Publishers Service, Inc., Associated Publishers Network, Inc., Publishers Payment Processing, Inc., Adept Management, Inc., Customer Access Services, Inc., Consolidated Publishers Exchange, Inc., Magazine Clearing Exchange, Inc., and Henry Cricket Group, LLC. The suit alleges that Orbital and a group of other companies have been sending illegal solicitation notices as far back as 2010. Orbital and its principal, Laura Lovrien, were named in a similar suit brought by Wisconsin AG J.B. Van Hollen in late 2014. Lydia Pugsley, alleged owner of Adept Management, was also named in the New York suit. In an affidavit filed as part of the New York lawsuit, Dow Jones said it spent $3.5 million to deal with the scam. Part of that money went toward free subscriptions. American City Business Journals estimates its subscribers collectively lost as much as $120,000 from the scam. According to court documents, the companies received payments from the customers and then sent checks to the publishers, pocketing the difference. Some Consumer Reports subscribers were being charged $59.95 for a one-year subscription that actually cost $29.95. The New York Attorney General’s office, along with the Attorneys General of Oregon, Minnesota, Missouri and Texas, have filed a lawsuit against Orbital Publishing Group, Inc.—a periodical subscription agency—and a number of other related businesses for mailing millions of allegedly misleading subscription and renewal notices. The notices were being sent without the permission or knowledge of publishers. At least 44 publications were used in the scheme, according to the suit. Customers receiving the notices were being told they were getting the lowest possible rates when in fact Orbital and a network of other entities were often charging more than double the subscription price. For their part, publishers had been sending cease and desist letters to the companies. Others ran full-page ads and alerts on their websites to warn customers of the illegal solicitations. “It is illegal under New York law to trade on the name of reputable publications and use deceptive advertising to trick consumers into overpaying for goods and services,” says New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman. “New York is home to the largest media market in the country and serves as headquarters to many of our nation’s most important newspapers and magazines. My office will work hard to protect New Yorkers from swindlers and to protect the business of reputable companies who play by the rules.” The  publications that Orbital Publishing Group allegedly used to overcharge customers: 1. America Magazine 2. American Association Individual Investor 3. Car & Driver 4. Catholic Digest 5. Country Woman 6. Daily Word 7. Discover 8. Entertainment Weekly 9. Farm Show 10. Forbes 11. Foreign Affairs 12. Harvard Business Review 13. Kiplinger’s Personal Finance 14. Mother Earth News 15. National Geographic 16. New York Magazine 17. New York Times 18. Old Cars Weekly 19. People 20. Popular Science 21. Science News 22. Shooting Times 23. Smithsonian 24. Southern Living 25. Sports Illustrated 26. The Atlantic 27. The Economist 28. The Nation 29. The New Yorker 30. The Sun 31. The Wall Street Journal 32. The Word Among Us 33. Time 34. Turkey & Turkey Hunting 35. TV Guide 36. US Catholic 37. W Magazine 38. Woman’s World 39. Consumer Reports 40. The Nation 41. Kansas City Star 42. Milwaukee Journal Sentinel 43. Tulsa World 44. Omaha World Heraldlast_img read more

WHS BOYS TRACK Wildcats Get First Win Over Burlington Since Joining Middlesex League

first_imgWILMINGTON, MA — The Wilmington Boys Track team won a big meet against Burlington High, 51.5 to 48.5, on Thursday night at Boston University’s Track and Tennis Center.“In the 7 years we have been in the Middlesex League, we have never beat Burlington, so the victory was especially sweet,” said Head Coach Mike Kinney. “The meet was as close as it possibly could be and the team brought an enormous amount of energy.”Wildcat highlights included:Mike Fothergill rose to the occasion and won three events — the 300, the 55 meter dash, and the long jump.Greg Adamek placed second in the mile and the two mile, a grueling combination with times of 10:17.35 and 4:46.77.Senior Captain Ben Packer won the two mile in 10:13.82.Senior Captain Sam Vince won the hurdles in 8.94.Sean Riley won the high jump.Sam Juergens placed third and second in the long jump and high jump.Tyler Thomas placed second in the shot put with 41’5”.Colton Sullivan placed third in the dash.Richie Stuart placed third in the 300.Senior Captain Kevin Elderd placed second in the 1000 with 2:49.57.Jake Danieli placed second in the 600 with 1:29.96.Nolan Kennedy rounded out the scoring with a third place in the mile with 4:52.57.Like Wilmington Apple on Facebook. Follow Wilmington Apple on Twitter. Follow Wilmington Apple on Instagram. Subscribe to Wilmington Apple’s daily email newsletter HERE. Got a comment, question, photo, press release, or news tip? Email wilmingtonapple@gmail.com.Share this:TwitterFacebookLike this:Like Loading… Related35 WHS Student Athletes Named Middlesex League All-Stars This SpringIn “Sports”WILDCAT WAKEUP: Gaudreau, Sperlinga, Aldrich & Godfrey Shine For Boys TrackIn “Sports”WHS BOYS BASKETBALL: Wildcats Win Season OpenerIn “Sports”last_img read more