On May 22, Newport’s mayor stunned the city when she announced her resignation just 75 days after taking office. At that evening’s city council meeting, Beth Barnes read aloud a letter alleging that she had been “intimidated and bullied [and] commanded not to do certain things” by fellow council members and the now-retired city manager, Laura Dolgin. 

Barnes was Newport’s first new mayor in 14 years and, to some, represented an injection of new energy and fresh ideas in a city still trying to recover from the EB-5 investment fraud scandal, which left an entire block gutted and dashed hopes of reviving the local economy through promised new development. 

Commonly referred to as “the hole,” the remnants of demolished buildings sit on Main Street at the very center of downtown Newport, fenced off and overgrown with trees. Finding resolution for what many residents consider an eyesore and a reminder of the city’s unfulfilled promise has remained a hot button political issue.

Frustrations have reached a high boil in recent years, with other previous abrupt resignations from the city council. At public meetings, accusations frequently fly between council members and exchanges with members of the public have become increasingly hostile. 

Pam Ladds, a Newport resident who regularly attends council meetings, said Barnes is not alone in feeling bullied. “All of us have experienced abuse from our city officials in the past, which consists of raised voices, temper tantrums, name calling, threats,” she said. 

But some former city officials point the finger elsewhere.

Paul Monette, who was Newport’s mayor from 2009 to 2022, puts the blame for the tone of meetings on some of the residents who attend. “These vocal people, you know, they’ve made it personal.” He added, “A huge, silent majority were concerned about the people who go to the meetings [who] they feel have become abusive under the guise of free speech and transparency.”

Julie Raboin, who served on the council from 2017 to 2019, attributed the hostilities to the former city manager. 

“It became apparent that [Dolgin] was not interested in public input,” Raboin said. “Once people started feeling that [they were] not being listened to, they got angry. And then that just became the status quo. People spoke louder and louder, trying to be heard.”

‘People will want to see you fail’

At the root of Barnes’ premature departure appears to be a fundamental disagreement over the role of the mayor. 

Sitting at her dining room table last week, Barnes spoke to VTDigger in her first in-depth interview since she resigned. 

One of four candidates for the post and the only woman, Barnes campaigned on a promise to “Reenergize Newport,” prioritizing engagement with the community, a solution for “the hole” and protections for Lake Memphremagog, which borders Newport. “We hadn’t had a mayor or a city council that was actually visible, actually out in the community,” said Barnes, who moved to Newport from California a decade ago. “And to me, that’s what being a mayor means.”

It was Barnes’ first time serving in public office, but she recalled feeling optimistic that with a little guidance her “enthusiasm and energy … would be able to win the day and change the town.” 

Barnes recalled eagerly jumping into her new role, attending a virtual training session hosted by the Vermont League of Cities and Towns, organizing community hikes and reaching out to mayors in neighboring cities. Ahead of her first council meeting as mayor, she studied videos of past council meetings to learn word-for-word how the former mayor had run them. (The mayor is a member of the city council, which also has a president.)

But almost immediately, Barnes began to encounter gestures of disapproval. 

In one of their first meetings, Dolgin, the city manager, said to her, “People will want to see you fail.” (Dolgin told VTDigger she had “wanted [Barnes] to brace herself emotionally, so that she would be prepared for people to give her feedback that was uncomfortable.”) 

When Dolgin and the council learned that Barnes had reached out to the various department heads to introduce herself, she said she was told she was acting outside the bounds of her role as mayor. 

“I was sent an email [by Laura Dolgin] telling me that I was forbidden to meet any department heads, that Ms. Dolgin would arrange a meeting with all of them with her present,” Barnes said. “But I was not to meet with any city employee one-on-one.”

The substance of the request, if not the tone, is understandable, one national advocate for the city manager form of government said. The city manager is supposed to be the conduit between the city council and staff, according to Jason Grant, director of advocacy at International City/County Management. 

“How [councils] engage that could be different” from one city to another, he said. “What you don’t want is any official contacting any official as they wish without agreement of the council.”

In another case, Barnes contacted Dolgin to get caught up on the status of “the hole.” 

“Her response to me was there’s no urgency on this. And I felt like there was an urgency. I was the new mayor. And I just wanted to be brought up to speed on what was happening,” Barnes said.

When Barnes arranged a meeting with Michael Goldberg, the court-appointed receiver charged with handling the funds from the EB-5 program, council members and the city manager again chastised her by email, she said. 

“The mayor cannot conduct city business without the council’s consent,” Dolgin wrote in an email obtained by VTDigger. “You are running out ahead of long-term projects that require sensitivity and I am concerned your rogue and unbridled interference will cause damage for the city.” 

“Stop diminishing our roles by overstepping yours,” council member Chris Vachon added in a subsequent email. “Get trained in your roles and responsibilities.” 

Barnes said she resigned before the scheduled meeting with Goldberg.

Council member Clark Curtis declined to speak with VTDigger for this story. Council members Vachon, Kevin Charboneau and John Wilson did not respond to voicemails or emails requesting comment.

The dynamic between the new mayor, the city manager and the rest of the city council came to a head in two executive sessions in May that Barnes says violated Vermont’s open meeting laws.

Executive sessions are meetings held without the public present. State law limits discussion during those sessions to predetermined advertised agenda items that meet specific exceptions to the requirement that public bodies conduct business in public. Barnes would not disclose what exactly was said, citing fear of legal repercussions. 

“I walked in and there was another physical agenda,” Barnes said. “I have it, but I cannot show it to you because it would be a violation. They crucified me. Every single step I had made in that two months was picked apart.”

Barnes said the executive sessions were directed by the city manager. “Laura led the charge. Always. And (the other council members) fell into lockstep.”

‘A shock to my system’

Dolgin was Newport’s city manager for almost eight years before retiring on June 2 and leaving her home in the neighboring town of Derby. She told VTDigger her retirement was unrelated to city politics. 

In a phone interview from Virginia, where Dolgin now lives, she described her interpretation of the charter. 

“Newport is a city manager form of government,” she said. “The mayor is mostly ceremonial and facilitates the meeting, sets the agenda. There’s a clause in the charter that says the mayor is ultimately responsible for the finances and that sort of thing — but that’s ceremonial because it’s the city manager’s responsibility.”

Still, city managers are not elected officials, but rather are appointed by the elected officials on the city council. In Newport, the manager may receive a salary of up to $105,000, according to a recent posting for Dolgin’s former job. The mayor receives an annual stipend of $2,000, while council members are paid $1,750. 

Dolgin declined to comment on Barnes’ allegations of bullying, only referring to them as “sensational.” She would not comment on the executive sessions, citing confidentiality and the concern that Barnes might be preparing a lawsuit. 

The state largely leaves municipalities like Newport to interpret and enforce charters for themselves. 

A 2014 guide produced by the Secretary of State’s Office acknowledged, “There are a number of situations in which two or more officials have potentially conflicting authority. This can cause confusion, particularly when the officials are not communicating well with one another.” 

Newport’s charter, which was last updated in 1966, is vague about how the mayor and the city manager should co-exist. 

It states that the city manager is the “administrative head of the municipal government under the direction and supervision of the Council,” while the mayor is the “Chief Executive Officer of the City.” There is notable overlap in the way the roles are described, but the city manager’s role is commonly considered administrative, while the council and mayor are responsible for directing policy. 

“The value of [a city manager form of government],” according to Grant of International City/County Management, “is that it forces dialogue.” Since the council must have a majority vote when making policy decisions, “no one individual should be able to dictate their will.” 

At that level, the city manager role is advisory. In theory, Grant said, “city managers actually have no power to drive decisions. City managers cannot vote. They can be [fired] at any time. The idea that the city manager is driving [decisions] assumes that the city council has decided that they have no power, which is false.” 

Monette, the former mayor, said he had worked well with Dolgin. “You go out and you talk to people. You promote the community. But I would never get involved with the day-to-day. That’s why you have a city manager to do that.”

Melissa Petterssen, who served on the council for four years, saw the matter in simple terms: “[Dolgin] was a strong personality. [Barnes] couldn’t handle that.”

But former council president Raboin described Dolgin as “a very controlling figure” and said council members faced enormous pressure to conform to the recommendations Dolgin made to them. 

In response to the allegations of bullying, Raboin defended members of the council, several of whom she had worked with, saying, “The pattern of communication had been in place for so long that I don’t think they realized the level of dysfunction that they were all participating in.”

Barnes admits she was unprepared for the way the city manager and the council interacted with each other and the public. “I know that Newport has always kind of had its own M.O.,” Barnes said. “I just had never been so close to it. And it was a little bit of a shock to my system.” 

‘An open slate’

Today, Newport is left without a mayor and without the city manager who played such an outsize role in the city’s politics for the past eight years. With the council recruiting applicants to fill the city manager position and a special mayoral election slated for August, the city is left in a state of uncertainty.

Monette expressed concern about the “very, very negative impact” Barnes’ resignation has had on the community. “I hear it kind of doesn’t make Newport look good around the state,” he said, adding that he thinks there is a “silent majority, who are very disappointed in [Barnes] with what happened. They think this is a step backwards.”

Others strongly disagree. They see the moment as full of promise. Newport resident Pam Ladds called it a “growth point,” adding, “What happened is shining a light on what needs to change. You can’t cover wounds up — they don’t heal.”

Barnes wants to see the city look forward and take advantage of the new engagement her resignation has prompted. 

“More people are coming to the city council meetings. Oh my gosh, it’s been standing room only. That never happened before,” said Barnes. “I don’t think it’s about me anymore. I think it’s about the people mobilizing in a really good, positive way.”

Others agree that the potential is there for the city to shake off old habits and enter a new, more cooperative phase. 

“There hasn’t been an opportunity like this in a decade where there’s such an open slate,” said Raboin. “This could be the start of a whole new era of positivity and growth and co-creation of the city that everybody says they want.”

Read the story on VTDigger here: A new mayor’s abrupt resignation sparks debate in Newport.

By Jaymie Baxley

North Carolina is in the process of reviewing Medicaid eligibility for more than 2.9 million residents amid the unwinding of a federal mandate that prevented states from kicking people off the rolls during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Known as the continuous coverage requirement, the mandate created by Congress in early 2020 protected Medicaid beneficiaries from losing coverage even if they no longer qualified for the program. It expired in April with the end of the public health emergency, allowing states to disenroll residents for the first time in nearly three years.

Terminations are not set to begin until July in North Carolina, but a top Medicaid official for the Biden administration has noticed a concerning trend among states that are further along in the process.

“What we’re seeing across the country for states that have started to disenroll people is that there are large numbers of terminations,” Daniel Tsai, director of the Center for Medicaid and CHIP Services at the U.S. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, said during a videoconference with North Carolina reporters on June 9.

He said a lot of the people losing coverage was because of “procedural red tape,” rather than being over the income limits that determine eligibility. The issue is compounded by a lack of public awareness, according to Tsai. He said many at-risk enrollees do not know about the unwinding and the effect it could have on their benefits.

“I would anticipate when terminations actually start, then you’re going to start to see a bunch of folks realizing for the first time that this is happening,” he said. “That’s of concern to all of us, and we really want to make sure that people get the word out.”

While the criteria for Medicaid varies from place to place, most states use the federal poverty level as a baseline for eligibility. This means the people at greatest risk of losing coverage should be those with incomes that now exceed the limit for their state, which in North Carolina is $24,860 in annual earnings for a family of three.

Several states are reporting worryingly high rates of terminations for what are essentially paperwork issues. A recent study by KFF, formerly known as Kaiser Family Foundation, found that more than 80 percent of unwinding-related terminations in Arkansas, Florida, Indiana and West Virginia involved residents who “did not complete the enrollment process and may or may not still be eligible for Medicaid.” 

“Millions of Americans’ health insurance and health care coverage is really at risk,” Tsai said. “We are urging every state across the country to do more and to take up many of the strategies we have put out on the table from a federal standpoint that really help make it easier for eligible people to stay covered.”

Resuming renewals 

One strategy the Biden administration is promoting, Tsai said, is automatically renewing coverage for people who continue to qualify for Medicaid. According to North Carolina’s unwinding plan, the state hopes to complete most renewals “without any contact with the beneficiary” using information collected from wage databases and other sources. 

Still, there will be cases where the state does not have all the information needed to confirm a Medicaid recipient’s eligibility and must reach out to the person by mail. If that beneficiary fails to respond within 30 days, their coverage could be terminated. 

“One of the really important messages for people is to not only update their contact information, but return the mail,” Tsai said.

Before the pandemic, Medicaid participants typically underwent annual or semiannual reviews to verify that they continued to qualify for coverage. But people who were added to the rolls while the federal mandate was in place have never gone through that process. Statewide enrollment grew 36 percent during the pandemic, with over 797,000 people newly qualifying for coverage from March 2020 until April of this year.

“What we find is a lot of people have no idea that Medicaid renewals have started,” Tsai said. “Consumers were told for three years, ‘Don’t worry, your Medicaid coverage is protected.’ 

“All of a sudden federal law has changed. A renewal form comes but the average consumer doesn’t know what Congress has done and doesn’t even know they need to respond to something.”

In a statement to NC Health News, the N.C. Department of Health and Human Services said 300,000 people are expected to lose coverage over the next 12 months. The agency says it is working to “ensure people eligible for Medicaid do not lose coverage and those no longer eligible are transitioned smoothly to affordable health plans.”

For some North Carolinians, that may mean going through the federal health insurance marketplace.

People ordinarily have only 60 days to enroll in a marketplace plan after losing Medicaid, but CMS has created a special enrollment period for individuals affected by the unwinding. They can apply for marketplace coverage at any time through June 31, 2024.

Expansion overlap

The timing of the unwinding presents a unique challenge for North Carolina, which is set to become the 40th state to expand access to Medicaid. 

Medicaid expansion was signed into law by Gov. Roy Cooper mere days before the continuous coverage mandate expired. It is expected to benefit hundreds of thousands of North Carolinians with incomes that are less than 138 percent of the federal poverty level for their family size — $34,306 for a family of three — up from the state’s previous limit of 100 percent.

DHHS has confirmed that many residents who lose coverage during the unwinding will become eligible again once expansion officially goes into effect, likely this summer. That won’t happen until a state budget is approved, which still could be months away.

“When you start renewals with expansion still to come and you’ve got a gap, it just leads to people having a gap in coverage and some confusion and resource challenges,” Tsai said. “Hopefully folks will have every chance in North Carolina to, if they’re eligible for Medicaid expansion when that starts, be able to seamlessly transition into that.

“And of course, if they’re not eligible for Medicaid, we want to make sure they’re getting over to other forms of coverage.”

The post As NC begins Medicaid ‘unwinding,’ federal official warns of worrying trends appeared first on North Carolina Health News.

Attention San Juan Bautista:  There’s a new sheriff in town!
Well, a new full-time deputy sheriff anyway: Deputy Desi Villanueva has been with the San Benito County Sheriff’s Department for two years, after having previously worked at the Merced Police Department.

“I realized I wanted to work for a sheriff’s office a lot more,” Villanueva said. “I was so excited to come here. Hollister is a great place for me because I really appreciate small towns. And obviously, when the assignment came up for San Juan Bautista, I jumped at it as fast as I could.”

Villanueva first became interested in law enforcement because he liked the structure, and he found that he got considerable satisfaction from getting the chance to help people.

“I like that people trust us,” he said. They pretty much call us when all else fails or when they can’t get the help that they need. We can then exercise every resource we have, and I really like being able to solve problems, especially here on patrol.”

“Our new deputy is awesome,” said San Juan Bautista City Manager Don Reynolds, “and he’s really excited and enthusiastic about working for our town. He’s a lot more visible than we had in the past, and we’re so excited to have him on board.”

Villanueva was officially stationed in San Juan on May 24 but has worked in the city before that, both on regular patrols and for events like the recent Rib Cookoff. Currently, he will be scheduled to patrol at least on Wednesdays through Saturdays from 2 p.m. to midnight.

“There’s a lot of extra days that I will be working,” he said, “so you might see me here on a Sunday or on a Tuesday. We want the San Juan deputy to be visible and out on the street. I don’t want people just to see a patrol car. I want people to see me working, so I am going to be walking around as much as I can.”

One reason for the constant patrolling is to monitor some of the more common problems in San Juan, such as tourist traffic and visitors who might not understand how small the town is.

“We see them coming in here speeding,” he said, “and we have a lot of traffic and parking issues. I’m working with code enforcement to combat some of these problems, pretty much like any normal law enforcement agency. But things can be a lot different because we’re very small.”

Villanueva is also hoping his presence on the street will make people more comfortable about approaching him with law enforcement concerns.

“The businesses all have my cell number and can flag me down if there is a problem,” he said, “but anyone can come up to me and talk on a personal level. 100% of my effort, time, and energy is going to San Juan, and I am here to help solve its issues and make sure everything that the residents need me to do is handled the best I can.”

While he intends to be a visible presence in town if he is needed and cannot be found, Villanueva said that residents could reach him through existing channels by either calling 911 for emergencies or 831-636-4080 for non-emergencies.  

“If there’s anything that the people of San Juan want done or they want us to look at something,” he said, “call in and let us know. That’s what I’m here for, to help people combat the problems that they have.”

 We need your help. Support local, nonprofit news! BenitoLink is a nonprofit news website that reports on San Benito County. Our team is committed to this community and providing essential, accurate information to our fellow residents. It is expensive to produce local news and community support is what keeps the news flowing. Please consider supporting BenitoLink, San Benito County’s public service, nonprofit news.

The post San Juan Bautista gets a new full-time deputy sheriff appeared first on BenitoLink.

Police and private security for a Canadian mining company arrested an Indigenous protester and demolished a protest blockade erected by descendants of a survivor of the 1865 massacre at the site, according to land and water defenders who were there.

By Will Atwater

On Friday, three large chemical manufacturers agreed to contribute $1.19 billion to a fund to settle lawsuits brought by water utilities across the country that allege that the companies contaminated drinking water supplies with per- and polyfluorinated chemicals, or PFAS.

This announcement comes as lawsuits — filed by state governments, environmental advocacy groups, water utilities and others — accusing Chemours, DuPont and Corteva of poisoning the environment and causing illness among people with long-term exposure to PFAS are piling up.

Seven years after the Wilmington Star-News first published the announcement about the presence of GenX compounds in Cape Fear River deposited there by DuPont spinoff Chemours, the settlement agreement was met with skepticism by many in the environmental community.

“I am extremely concerned about this, as lawyers are going to make a ton of money off the backs of contaminated communities — and giant chemical corporations are getting out easy,” said Dana Sargent, executive director of Cape Fear River Watch, a Wilmington-based environmental advocacy group.

Cape Fear River Watch sued Chemours in 2018 for discharging the chemical GenX into the Cape Fear River. The action led to a consent order among Cape Fear River Watch, Chemours and the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality.

The order required Chemours, among other things, to develop and execute a PFAS remediation plan for contaminated air, soil and water for the affected lower Cape Fear River Basin communities. 

This area includes New Hanover, Brunswick, Columbus and Pender counties. Like many critics, Sargent believes the pledged funds represent a small fraction of what’s required to address the nationwide problem.

“This settlement comes nowhere near the amount needed to cover the devastation they have caused. It is clear they’re coming out on top; their stocks have gone up as their shareholders see this as their liability issues being behind them,” Sargent said. “I am grateful that, to my knowledge, lower Cape Fear utilities are not participating in this settlement.”

Since the 1940s, PFAS — referred to as “forever chemicals” for their persistence in the environment and the human body — have been used in the manufacturing of oil and water-resistant products, as well as products that resist heat and reduce friction. 

More than 12,000 PFAS compounds are almost ubiquitous in nonstick cookware, cosmetics, cleaning products, dental floss, water-resistant clothing and textiles, and in some firefighting foams and firefighting turnout gear.

While there is no definitive evidence about PFAS posing health risks to humans, there is mounting research that suggests links between extended exposure to forever chemicals and weaker antibody responses against infections in adults and children, elevated cholesterol levels, decreased infant and fetal growth, and kidney and testicular cancer in adults.

Who’s eligible?

Settlement funds are only available to municipal water systems with detectable levels of PFAS and systems required to monitor for PFAS per “EPA monitoring rules or other applicable laws,” according to the news release. 

Water systems not eligible include those managed by state and federal governments and small systems that currently have no PFAS detected and are not required to be monitored. Also, water utilities in the Cape Fear River Basin are ineligible unless they request to opt in, the release says.

In response to the recently announced settlement, the Cape Fear Public Utility Authority, which would be allowed to opt in based on the guidelines outlined in the agreement, posted a response on its website that states, in part:

“Unfortunately, CFPUA has not been provided with the terms of the agreement and we do not know what compensation CFPUA should expect if it were to participate. Our utility’s financial losses and future financial commitments to address our upstream neighbor’s pollution are substantial, and any settlement must substantially address these damages. 

“Litigation will continue until the polluter provides solutions that meet our community needs. CFPUA must consider the best interests of the Authority and the community it serves.”

In 2019, CFPUA, which provides drinking water to more than 200,000 customers in the Wilmington area, started construction on a $43 million granular activated carbon filtration system at its Sweeney Water Treatment Plant to remove GenX and other PFAS compounds from the drinking water supply. 

CFPUA anticipates spending “$3.7 million for Fiscal Year 2023 [and] $5 million in subsequent years,” according to the utility’s 2022 annual report. 

The millions of dollars spent by CFPUA and the ongoing financial burden required to maintain the system are examples of why critics argue that the settlement amount falls short of what’s needed.

“Chemours, DuPont and Corteva’s recent $1.19 billion agreement will not cover the installation of reverse osmosis filters to all 101 water providers in North Carolina, let alone the over 150,000 public water systems in the U.S.,” said Beth Kline-Markesino, founder of North Carolina Stop GenX in Our Water, a grassroots advocacy organization based in Wilmington. 

A closer look at the agreement

The following are key points outlined in the agreement, according to the release:

• Chemours will contribute 50 percent (about $592 million), DuPont about $400 million and Corteva about $193 million. The court ordered the money to be deposited in a fund and made available within 10 business days of being approved by the court.

• If the agreement is finalized in 2023, a final ruling will be delivered by the U.S. District Court for the District of South Carolina. Then, those wishing to join the settlement will have a certain amount of time to do so. If not enough water systems join the settlement, the chemical companies can decide to opt out of the agreement. 

• If an agreement can’t be reached with plaintiffs, the chemical companies have vowed to defend themselves in court against pending litigation.

Though many environmental advocates argue that the best way to address the issue of PFAS contamination is for manufacturers to stop producing the chemicals, there was a sliver of optimism coming from the North Carolina Attorney General’s office after first hearing about the settlement agreement. Attorney General Josh Stein has filed several lawsuits against Chemours.

“Our office is pleased to see Chemours/DuPont/Corteva beginning to take some responsibility for their actions,” said Laura Brewer, Stein’s communications director. 

“We look forward to reviewing the details of the proposed settlement. Based on initial reports, this proposed settlement does not address all of the issues in A.G. Stein’s lawsuit,” she said. “A.G. Stein’s case against these companies continues, and he will continue his work to ensure that the water North Carolinians drink is clean and safe.”

The post Critics skeptical as chemical companies agree to $1.19 billion PFAS settlement appeared first on North Carolina Health News.