Latest news with #KyleMartin
Yahoo
20 hours ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
ND Ethics Commission has no authority to punish officials violating ethics laws, state leaders argue
Photo illustration by Mark Harris for ProPublica. Source images: Getty, Kyle Martin for the North Dakota Monitor. This article was produced for ProPublica's Local Reporting Network in partnership with the North Dakota Monitor. Sign up for Dispatches to get our stories in your inbox every week. Ever since North Dakota voters created an ethics watchdog agency seven years ago, dubious lawmakers have pushed back against giving it power to actually keep an eye on state officials. That was true in the session that just ended, as legislators shut down many requests from the Ethics Commission, keeping the agency on a modest budget and rebuffing measures that would have given it more latitude in its investigations. The offices of the governor and attorney general also argued during the session that the state constitution does not permit the commission to create or impose penalties for ethics-related violations. 'I was hopeful that the tide was turning,' said Rep. Karla Rose Hanson, a Democrat from Fargo and member of the Appropriations Committee, which worked on the commission's budget. 'But my general perspective is that the legislative body as a whole, specifically the majority party, is very hostile to the Ethics Commission and their work.' Voters created an ethics commission in North Dakota. Then the Legislature limited its power. North Dakotans, fed up with what they saw as ethical lapses by public officials, voted in 2018 to amend the state constitution and create the Ethics Commission. The amendment set rules for public officials and empowered the commission to both create more rules and investigate alleged violations related to corruption, elections, lobbying and transparency. North Dakota was one of the last states to establish an ethics agency and since then, the commission has struggled to fulfill its mission, the North Dakota Monitor and ProPublica reported this year. The amendment left some ambiguity about the commission's role and whether it can enforce ethics laws, leading to ongoing disagreements about how it operates. State leaders' actions this year further hamstrung the agency at a time when public officials across the country have been working, in various ways, to reverse or rein in policies created through citizen-led ballot initiatives, including those related to abortion and employee benefits. Danielle Caputo of the national nonprofit Campaign Legal Center said several state governments have worked to undermine ethics initiatives in particular. North Dakota leaders' assertions this year that the ethics agency cannot punish officials for wrongdoing is another example of that, she said. 'We have seen what appears to be a concerted effort in those states to overturn ballot initiatives or to twist their language in a way that's most beneficial to those who want less enforcement,' said Caputo, whose organization has studied the issue. She said North Dakota is 'one of the more egregious examples of that that I've seen.' In an email to the North Dakota Monitor and ProPublica, the governor's office called Caputo's take a 'gross mischaracterization' and said the governor does not oppose the Ethics Commission. In a separate email, Chief Deputy Attorney General Claire Ness called the notion that the attorney general's office is undermining the intent of voters 'unimaginable.' As government officials debate the commission's authority, North Dakotans have reported more concerns about ethics violations to the agency this year than in any other. The commission as of late May had received 72 complaints this year. There were 41 complaints filed in all of 2024. By the end of last month, the commission had 63 pending complaints, some of which date back to 2022. The agency — which has three full-time staff members and five commissioners who receive a small stipend to oversee the work — has yet to disclose whether it has substantiated a complaint. (State law requires that the commission keep complaints confidential until the end of the process, so little is known about the nature of the filings.) The Ethics Commission supported House Bill 1360 this session that it said would have overhauled its process to speed up investigations and allow it to close cases sooner. Under the measure, sponsored by eight Republicans and two Democrats, the commission would have been able to settle and dismiss complaints at any time instead of at only certain stages in the complaint process. It also would have been allowed to investigate alleged ethics violations without someone filing an official complaint. The agency currently cannot investigate some North Dakotans' tips because they must be submitted as formal complaints, which some complainants are uncomfortable doing, agency staff have said. Staff from the offices of Gov. Kelly Armstrong and Attorney General Drew Wrigley, both Republicans, testified against the bill because they said it would have given the commission too much power. Faced with strong opposition from state leaders and their own reluctance to give the agency more authority, the House voted overwhelmingly to reject the legislation. Most of the House sponsors voted against it. Rep. Austen Schauer, a West Fargo Republican who chaired the committee that worked on the legislation, acknowledged tension between the Ethics Commission and the Legislature and oppositional testimony from the executive branch. 'The bill was basically DOA, and we just had to move on,' Schauer said. Lawmakers instead settled on tweaks to the existing process; one requires the commission to develop time management standards and another allows it to informally settle ethics complaints with the accused. Those settlements would only be made public if all parties to the agreement consent. 'There's people that for years have been sitting with this complaint over their head, which is absolutely unfair,' said Rep. Mike Nathe, a Bismarck Republican who has criticized the commission and proposed some of the changes. He also said he thinks the commission's caseload includes fake complaints submitted by North Dakotans who want to 'weaponize' the system against their political opponents. (Because state law requires that the commission keep complaints confidential, this claim cannot be verified.) Rebecca Binstock, the Ethics Commission's executive director, said the agency will look for ways to work around the hurdles that continue to slow down the investigation process. 'The Commission must now consider how to fix the process absent legislation,' Binstock wrote in an email. The Legislature also approved a measure that protects its members from prosecution for voting on something that would provide them with a financial benefit as long as they disclose their conflicts. Lawmakers, some of whom said they want to keep the commission small out of consideration to taxpayers, also turned down the agency's request for $250,000 over the next two years for a fourth staff member who would conduct training and education for the public. That would have allowed current employees to spend more time investigating complaints, agency staff said. 'I don't recall a discussion with the public being, 'We're gonna have a multimillion-dollar branch of government,'' Rep. Scott Louser, a Minot Republican, said during a legislative hearing in April. State leaders also argued the Legislature is the only entity that can create penalties for ethics violations and delegate enforcement of those penalties to state agencies. The commission can only punish officials for wrongdoing if the Legislature gives it that authority, they said. Chris Joseph, the governor's general counsel, testified this year that if the commission were given the power to both create and enforce penalties, it would be 'defining, executing and interpreting its own rules' without oversight from other parts of state government. The commission, however, says its enforcement authority is implicit in the constitutional amendment. That interpretation could soon be tested. Binstock indicated in an email that commission staff members have wrapped up investigating several cases and are waiting on commissioners to take action, which could include imposing penalties. Ellen Chaffee, part of a group called the Badass Grandmas that organized the ballot initiative and drafted the amendment, said voters intended for the Ethics Commission to impose punishments for wrongdoing. 'The people who worked on the amendment had understood that the only way to have unbiased follow-up on any violations of ethics rules was for the Ethics Commission to have that responsibility,' she said. Mike Nowatzki, the governor's spokesperson, said if the amendment does not reflect what the advocates wanted, 'they can always seek to clarify it with another constitutional amendment.'
Yahoo
02-06-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Standing Rock appeals dismissal of latest Dakota Access Pipeline lawsuit
Opponents of the Dakota Access Pipeline gather Nov. 1, 2023, in Bismarck ahead of a public meeting on an environmental impact statement. The Standing Rock Sioux Tribe opposes the pipeline, citing concerns for its water supply and sovereign rights. (Kyle Martin/For the North Dakota Monitor) The Standing Rock Sioux Tribe is asking the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals to review a federal judge's decision to dismiss its latest lawsuit against the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers over the Dakota Access Pipeline. Standing Rock filed the lawsuit in October, asking the court to find the pipeline must be shut down because it still lacks an easement authorizing it to pass under the Missouri River's Lake Oahe reservoir, which is regulated by the Army Corps. 'The Corps of Engineers has not earned the trust of our Tribe,' Standing Rock Chairwoman Janet Alkire said in a statement last week announcing the appeal. 'We cannot rely on the Corps to properly evaluate DAPL, so we are continuing our legal efforts to protect our water and our people from this dangerous pipeline.' Greenpeace seeks reversal of verdict, arguing jury wanted to 'punish' someone for pipeline protests The Army Corps originally granted the easement to the pipeline's developer in 2017, but Boasberg revoked it in 2020 after finding the agency had issued the permit without completing the full environmental review required by federal law. The matter was brought to him through a lawsuit the tribe filed against the Army Corps in 2016. Boasberg at the time directed the Corps to withhold making a decision on the easement until it completes a full environmental impact study. He also ordered the pipeline to be shut down, though that demand was later reversed by an appellate court. Five years later, the Army Corps still has not finished the environmental review. It published a draft in late 2023. Standing Rock in its latest suit argues that keeping the pipeline open without an easement is a violation of federal law. The tribe also alleges the Army Corps is at fault for a number of other regulatory violations related to the pipeline. In court filings, Standing Rock has said it intends to present new evidence related to the pipeline's safety. The pipeline company has indicated previously it does not consider that information credible. U.S. District Court Judge James Boasberg tossed the suit in March, finding that the courts cannot intervene in the matter until the Army Corps wraps up its environmental study. 'No matter its frustration with Defendants' sluggish pace, it is not yet entitled to a second bite at the apple,' he wrote in his March order. Boasberg previously indicated that while the agency works on the study, it has the option of enforcing its property rights since the pipeline is operating on federal land without authorization. 'The Corps has conspicuously declined to adopt a conclusive position regarding the pipeline's continued operation, despite repeated prodding from this Court and the Court of Appeals to do so,' he wrote in a 2021 order. Standing Rock leaders say they hope the D.C. Circuit will overturn Boasberg's decision to dismiss the case. In her statement, Alkire said the tribe fears the Army Corps' study will 'whitewash' the pipeline's risk to the surrounding environment. The pipeline crosses Lake Oahe just north of the Standing Rock Reservation. The tribe opposes the Dakota Access Pipeline as a threat to its sovereignty, water supply and cultural heritage sites. Federal judge dismisses Standing Rock's latest lawsuit over Dakota Access Pipeline Alkire also underscored the tribe's dismay over a March jury verdict that found the environmental group Greenpeace at fault for damaging the pipeline developers property and business as part of its protests against Dakota Access Pipeline. The jury ordered Greenpeace to pay the company, Energy Transfer, roughly $667 million. Standing Rock has criticized the verdict as based on a false narrative that Greenpeace, and not Standing Rock and other tribes, led the protests. 'We saw Energy Transfer's efforts to re-write history as we know it and lived it in their lawsuit against Greenpeace,' she said. In April, another federal judge ordered the Army Corps to pay North Dakota $28 million in connection to the anti-pipeline protests, finding the agency's actions had wrongfully forced the state to pay millions policing the protests and cleaning up the aftermath. The Dakota Access Pipeline passes through unceded land previously recognized as belonging to the Sioux Nation in 19th century treaties with the U.S. government. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Yahoo
23-05-2025
- Automotive
- Yahoo
Letter: ODOT does more than people know
There's a lot of talk about the Oregon Department of Transportation's budget in Salem and the fact that a transportation package is still in the air made me realize that a lot of Oregonians don't know all that ODOT workers do. My name is Kyle Martin. I'm a transportation maintenance specialist 2 with ODOT in Hermiston. From fixing guard rails, paving, and filling potholes to shutting down the road due to a wreck, anyone who uses roads is touched by our work. You don't think of us bashing out windows, putting out vehicle fires or pulling people out of their cars. I've had to ask, 'Can you get out of your rig? It's on fire.' I remember a time I was plowing heavy snow, and I had a family in a Chevrolet Suburban in front of me that lost control and rolled at milepost 191 on Interstate 84. A whole family began to crawl out the windows. I lifted the wing of my plow and threw out flares to ensure they were not hit by oncoming traffic. In that case no one was seriously injured, but that's not always the case, and I've seen some things that will stick with me for the rest of my life. For the sake of all Oregonians, I hope that legislators land a transportation package so we can work at full capacity. It's hard to do a project like paving when there are road closures due to accidents. We're already running thin as it is. Kyle Martin Stanfield
Associated Press
22-05-2025
- Entertainment
- Associated Press
Beat the Heat: Urban Air Launches "Unlimited Play Summer Pass" for 120 Days of Nonstop Fun
Guests who purchase before Memorial Day will receive an extra month of unlimited play for FREE DALLAS, May 22, 2025 /PRNewswire/ -- Urban Air Adventure Park, the nation's largest indoor adventure park operator and part of Unleashed Brands, is turning up the fun this summer with the launch of its 'Unlimited Play Summer Pass' – offering 120 days of unlimited play starting at just $59.99. After the strong success of last summer's Summersational Play Pass, Urban Air is back with even more value for families. For a limited time, guests who purchase before Memorial Day – Monday, May 26 – will also receive an extra month of unlimited play for FREE. Perfect for keeping kids active, engaged, and out of the heat, the 'Unlimited Play Summer Pass' is available now nationwide and offers families unbeatable value. Pricing ranges from $59.99 to $109.99, depending on location, with no blackout dates and daily access to the park's top attractions. Summer Pass members also get exclusive food and beverage deals at the Urban Air Café all summer long. 'Our guests loved last year's Summersational Pass, and this year we wanted to go even bigger with our Unlimited Play Summer Pass,' said Kyle Martin, Chief Marketing Officer at Urban Air. 'With rising temperatures and growing demand for screen-free activities, we're proud to offer families an affordable, exciting option where kids can be active, explore, and have fun every single day.' Urban Air Adventure Park's 200+ locations nationwide feature a diverse lineup of attractions, including Sky Rider, Adventure Slides, air court, warrior course, climbing walls, trampolines and more— all in a safe, climate-controlled environment ideal for beating the summer heat. Open seven days a week, Urban Air is the go-to destination for families seeking affordable, action-packed fun all summer long. The 'Unlimited Play Summer Pass' can be purchased online or in-park at Families who act fast will lock in an entire season of adventure for the price of just a few visits. Urban Air is part of the Unleashed Brands family, which includes other leading youth enrichment concepts such as The Little Gym, Water Wings Swim School, Snapology, Sylvan Learning, XP League, Class 101, and Premier Martial Arts. Together, these brands help kids learn, play, and grow. To explore franchising opportunities with Urban Air, visit About Urban Air Adventure Park Urban Air Adventure Park is the Nation's #1 destination for family fun, featuring a variety of attractions perfect for all ages. The award-winning national franchise brand is the largest adventure park operator in the world with more than 350 parks open or under development. Urban Air, founded in 2011, was in search of a higher purpose to help kids have fun while achieving activity goals that enhance their social and physical skills. For more information visit About Unleashed Brands Unleashed Brands currently includes portfolio brands Urban Air,The Little Gym, Sylvan Learning, Snapology, XP League, Class 101, Premier Martial Arts. It was founded to curate and grow a portfolio of the most innovative and profitable brands that help kids learn, play, and grow. Over the last 10 years, the team at Unleashed Brands has built a proven platform and know-how for scaling businesses focused on serving families. Its mission is to impact the lives of every kid by providing fun, engaging, and inspiring experiences that help them become who they are destined to be. For more information, please visit View original content to download multimedia: SOURCE Unleashed Brands
Yahoo
14-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Appeals court rules against North Dakota tribes in voting rights case
Legislators attending a Redistricting Committee meeting Dec. 13, 2023, look at maps of different proposals. An appeals court on Wednesday ruled in favor of North Dakota in a voting rights case. (Kyle Martin/For the North Dakota Monitor) A federal appeals court on Wednesday found that the Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa and Spirit Lake Nation don't have standing to bring a voting discrimination claim against the state of North Dakota. The 8th Circuit Court of Appeals in a 2-1 decision overturned a 2023 decision by a North Dakota federal judge that found the state's 2021 redistricting plan unlawfully diluted the tribes' voting power. Attorneys representing the tribes say the appellate court's ruling eliminates voters' ability to challenge racial discrimination under the Voting Rights Act in North Dakota and the six other 8th Circuit states. The Campaign Legal Center in a Wednesday statement called the decision a 'stunningly antidemocratic move.' 'This decision severely undermines the Voting Rights Act and is contrary to both the intent of Congress in enacting the law and to decades of Supreme Court precedent affirming voters' power to enforce the law in court,' said Mark Gaber, senior director for redistricting at the Campaign Legal Center. Tribes, state argue redistricting case to federal appeals court The appellate court already limited voters' ability to challenge potential violations of the Voting Rights Act in 2023, when it decided private citizens cannot bring lawsuits under Section 2 of the law, which protects voters against racial discrimination. Only the U.S. attorney general can file such claims, the court ruled. For a time, the question remained open as to whether voters have the right to bring those same allegations under a separate federal civil rights law: Section 1983 of Title 42 of the United States Code. On Wednesday, a panel of 8th Circuit judges decided the answer is no. The language of the Voting Rights Act does not authorize citizens to file race discrimination claims through Section 1983, Judge Raymond Gruender wrote in the majority opinion. Chief Judge Steven Colloton dissented. He noted that Section 1983 says people may sue for 'the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws.' 'The reference to 'and laws' encompasses any law of the United States,' Colloton wrote. His dissent also criticizes the court's 2023 decision, writing that Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act 'expressly forbids 'a denial or abridgement of the right of any citizen of the United States to vote on account of race or color.'' Since 1982, private plaintiffs have brought more than 400 actions based under Section 2, he wrote. The lawsuit originated from a legislative redistricting plan approved by the North Dakota Legislature in 2021 following the 2020 Census that put the Turtle Mountain and Spirit Lake reservations in new districts. Judge selects legislative district map in tribal voting rights case The Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa, Spirit Lake Nation and three Native North Dakota voters in 2022 filed a federal lawsuit against the North Dakota Secretary of State's Office over the map, arguing the plan was discriminatory because it weakened the power of Native voters. The lawsuit was brought under both Section 1983 and Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. U.S. District Judge Peter Welte in 2023 ruled in favor of the tribes and in January 2024 ordered the map be substituted with one that placed the reservations in the same voting district. The Secretary of State's Office appealed the ruling, asking the 8th Circuit to overturn Welte's decision on the basis that the tribes don't have standing to sue and that the redistricting plan was not discriminatory. The parties presented oral arguments to the 8th Circuit in October. North Dakota Attorney General Drew Wrigley and Secretary of State Michael Howe did not immediately respond to requests for comment Wednesday. In October, North Dakota Solicitor General Philip Axt argued on behalf of the Secretary of State's Office. He told the judges that the plaintiffs want 'to go back to an ancient regime where private rights were inferred from congressional silence.' The 8th Circuit in its Wednesday order sent the case back to Welte and directed him to dismiss the lawsuit. It was not immediately clear what impact the decision could have on the voting districts. The appellate court's opinion does not speak to the validity of the redistricting plan itself, only that the plaintiffs lack the right to sue in the first place. 'Today's ruling wrongly forecloses voters disenfranchised by a gerrymandered redistricting map, as Native voters in North Dakota have been, from challenging that map under the Voting Rights Act,' Native American Rights Funds Staff Attorney Lenny Powell said in a Wednesday statement published by the Campaign Legal Center. Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Chairman Jamie Azure and Spirit Lake Nation Chairperson Lonna Jackson-Street did not respond to requests for comment Wednesday. The court's decision is only binding in the 8th Circuit, which includes North Dakota, South Dakota, Arkansas, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri and Nebraska. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
