Saturday, October 27, 2007

10/28/07 Good Morning Flint!

Terry Bankert
-Property division
-Centerist democratic ideology
-global warming
On 10/16/2007 the Michigan Court of Appeals released an unpublished case which was on appeal from Kent Circuit Court,02-009694-DM. Susan Day was the Plaintiff and Ricky Engvall was the Ricky Engvall. e-Journal Number: 37366

Issues: Divorce;
Whether the trial court properly valued and distributed the marital assets; Whether the trial court should have awarded the plaintiff-wife an equity interest in the marital home;

MCL 552.19; Reeves v. Reeves; Byington v. Byington; Korth v. Korth; MCL 552.401; Sparks v. Sparks; Whether the trial court correctly valued the plaintiff’s medical practice; Kowalesky v. Kowalesky; Jansen v. Jansen; Dragoo v. Dragoo; Whether the trial court properly valued plaintiff’s retirement account.

The parties were married on June 26, 1995, and separated in September 2002.
At the time of separation, Susan Day was 38 years of age and Ricky Engvall was 52 years of age.
This was Susan Day’s third marriage and the second marriage for Ricky Engvall. Susan Day and
Ricky Engvall are the parents of one minor child, Olivia, born on March 24, 2000. Prior to entry of the judgment of divorce, Susan Day gave birth to another child who is not a product of the marriage relationship.

Susan Day initiated divorce proceedings on October 1, 2002, but due to the protracted nature of the litigation, which spanned 13 days of trial, and other delays a judgment of divorce was not entered until July 11, 2006.

The trial court properly did not award the Susan Day-wife an equity interest in the marital home, adopted the defense expert’s valuation of her medical practice, and assigned the value for distribution of her retirement account as of December 2004.

Susan Day argued on appeal, inter alia, the trial court erred in failing to award her any equity interest in the marital home.

"The distribution of assets in a divorce proceeding is controlled by MCL 552.19."
The trial court properly acknowledged and credited Ricky Engvall’s premarital interest in the home.

The fact the parties jointly expended monies in the remodeling and renovation of the property, which did not lead to an increase in the value of the residence, was irrelevant.
Thus, the trial court properly found the only marital increase in the home was $140,000, which was subsumed by the remaining mortgage debt of $200,000 assigned to Ricky Engvall as a liability, resulting in a negative equity for marital distribution.

If anything, the trial court’s decision did not go far enough to attain equity because Ricky Engvall had to assume all of the outstanding liability on the home.

If full equity had been attained, Susan Day would have been required to share the $60,000 equity shortfall.

Here, it was questionable whether Susan Day actually contributed to the improvement of the home.

While the appraised value of the home increased, it did not exceed the debt incurred to pay for the remodeling and improvements to the property.

The court held it was not inequitable for the trial court to account for Ricky Engvall’s prior and substantial equitable interest in the home, and affirmed the judgment of divorce.

Susan Day appeals as of right the judgment of divorce asserting the trial court erred in the
valuation and distribution of assets. We affirm.

II. Trial Court Ruling
On May 26, 2006, the trial court issued its bench ruling, resulting in a 105-page transcript
detailing testimony during the course of trial.

The trial court did attribute fault for the breakdown of the marital relationship to Susan Day based on her participation in extramarital affairs and lack of "regret or remorse" for its impact on the marriage.

In reference to the distribution of assets, the trial court awarded Ricky Engvall the marital
home along with responsibility for the outstanding $200,000 mortgage.

... In making the award the trial court indicated, "I have to give Mr. Engvall credit for the $310,000 asset that he brought into the marriage here." Despite an increase in equity over the course of the marriage of $140,000, the trial court observed that a debt of $200,000 remained "due and owing" resulting in a "$60,000 shortfall." There were loans student and otherwise rolled into the mortgage.
As a result, Susan Day did not receive any proceeds from the marital home.
Specifically, this statutory provision only allows the trial court to distribute assets, which have
"come to either party by reason of the marriage." As a result, "[w]hen apportioning marital
property, the court must strive for an equitable division of the increases in marital assets ‘that
may have occurred between the beginning and the end of the marriage.’" Reeves v Reeves, 226
Mich App 490, 493; 575 NW2d 1 (1997), quoting Bone v Bone, 148 Mich App 834, 838; 385
NW2d 706 (1986).
As a result, when determining the division of property in a divorce action,
the trial court is required to initially identify any assets, along with their respective values, which comprise separate or pre-marital property. Byington v Byington, 224 Mich App 103, 114 n 4; 568 NW2d 141 (1997). Typically, the equity accumulated by one spouse with regard to property that was owned before the marriage constitutes separate property, which that spouse is entitled to retain. Korth v Korth, 256 Mich App 286, 291-294; 662 NW2d 111 (2003).
When dividing property, marital assets are typically valued at the time of trial or when
the judgment is entered, although a court may, in its discretion, use an alternative date.
Byington, supra at 114 n 4. As such, Susan Day provides no legal support for her argument that the retirement account should have been valued at the time of separation. "A party may not leave itto this court to search for authority to sustain or reject its position." Sherman v Sea Ray Boats,
Inc, 251 Mich App 41, 57; 649 NW2d 783 (2002) (punctuation and citation omitted).
Further, in challenging the timing of the valuation of this asset, Susan Day ignores the trial
court’s determination that marital assets were used and included within her retirement accounts.
On Comcast Channel 17 on the show In My Opinion
Saturday- 10/27/07
Tomorrow children with Gene Warren, Henry Hatter and Tracey Atkins ATKINS
Wednesday -10/31/07
Improving public education.Lee Black Richard Dicks Jr., Ronald Berry Robinson and Terry Bankert.
- Climate change/ global warming..its continuing !

- Get active in the Democratic Party. It needs your help. click membership and join today!

Consider participating in one of Phil Powers community conversations.
Michigan's Defining Moment - Public Engagement CampaignSpend a little time on the future of your state! Join us to build a bipartisan, grass-roots vision for a new Michigan and a network of citizens who will work to hold elected officials accountable during this era of change and challenge. Take action today:

The Center believes that the Michigan political system has in large part failed to live up to its responsibilities in that it has tended to be excessively partisan and largely driven by ideologues of the left and the right and thus failed to scope adequate policy responses to our present crisis. One result has been that most people, who are naturally in the middle of the road, feel discontented and left out in the cold. The Center intends to encourage a citizen movement of people who are moderate in attitude, bi-partisan in approach and aggressive in policy orientation.

An argument for a Centrist Democratic Ideology.

I support the argument for a Centrist Group within the small [d] democratic party. [d] is the rank in-file not the leadership or corporate structure of the various levels of the party.


1. Michigan is in trouble.

2 As a state, we have been sluggish in our reaction to the political and economic transformation taking place inside – and perhaps more importantly – outside the United States.

3.Third, and on a more positive note, we in Michigan are blessed, more
than most States, with assets we can utilize to make the changes necessary to compete in a 21st
century world. The challenge is to use our resources in lucid, geometric, productive,
cooperative, and aggressive ways, and to do it now.

4.In both the public and private sector, the need for analytic skills, for competent scrutiny of all
sides of an issue, for even-handed, well-informed decision making has never been greater. The
polarization, the anger, the irrational posturing, sometimes extreme, that passes for learned
discourse, denigrates our time-honored tradition of thoughtful deliberation, measured dialogue,
and reasoned conclusion.

5.We can disagree, we can argue, we can engage in intense debate. All are part of the established
process of creating policy. But vapid, mindless ideology, trapping adherents in an irresolvable
clash of absolutes, locked and loaded, is not.

6. We cannot survive unless we quickly become more adaptable. If all sides are polarized, then no one is engaged in the necessary debate.

7.Frequently, when confronted with certain inconvenient details about an issue, the response has been that there is really no need to go into detail. Some organizations, public, and private,
demand total fealty, and threaten political or professional oblivion for non-compliance.

8.Some leaders would rather be more important in a world of chaos, than less important in a world of order – an unfortunate, but wholly accurate observation. We have no time, in 2006, for this sort of nonsense.

9. We need constructive engagement from all sectors.

10.Oppose Regionalism – the schism separating West Michigan from Southeast Michigan, and vice-versa, is wide, deep, and growing. For those who define our State as that territory west of the JacksonLansing-Claire-Straits of Mackinac line, or that which lies in Wayne, Oakland, and Macomb Counties, or the land north of the Muskegon-Bay City Line, or that land north of the Bridge, where we Trolls are unwelcome – get over it! Our State borders are what they are, and we are in this together, no matter in which of the 83 counties we reside.

11.Partisanship – simply put, there is too much of it! Ideas that help our economy, and in turn, help our people, all of our people, transcend narrow ideologies every time. I believe all members of the legislature go to Lansing honorably and nobly motivated. But, in fact, too many are
ultimately manipulated and captured by ideologues, not by ideas. There are no mentors left in
the legislature, and without guidance wrought from years of service, it is easy to take the wrong
fork in the road when formulating public policy. Experience counts! What the eye hasn’t seen,
the mind can’t comprehend.

12.We are in this together because we love this State and its people. We come at this not as Republicans or Democrats, labor or management, people from West Michigan or Southeast Michigan, public or private, but as Michiganders. Let’s get on with it!


see The Center for Michigan video at

see educations & Michigans Economic Future

Have a great Saturday
Terry Bankert
My thoughts on The Flint Mayoral Race.

Sphere: Related Content

Saturday, October 20, 2007

Grand parents Rights

GOOD MORNING FLINT By Terry Bankert 10/20/2007
origional post to:

Issues: Grandparent visitation; Court: Michigan Court of Appeals (Published) The case originated in Wayne County Case Name: Brinkley v. Brinkley 10/16/2007 e-Journal Number: 37353 Judge(s): Per Curiam - Wilder, Borrello, and Beckering On remand from the Supreme Court sending the case back to the Michigan Court of Appeals “for plenary consideration of the grandparents-maternal grandparents’ constitutional issue,” the court held MCL 722.27b(5) does not unconstitutionally violate the defendants-grandparents’ due process or equal protection rights. 722.27b Order for grandparenting time; circumstances; acknowledgment of parentage; commencement of action; procedures; affidavit; notice; opposing affidavit; hearing; basis for entry of order; condition; record; court mediation; frequency of filing complaint or motion seeking order; attorney fees; order prohibiting change of domicile of grandchild; effect of entry of order; modifying or terminating order. (5).If 2 fit parents sign an affidavit stating that they both oppose an order for grandparenting time, the court shall dismiss a complaint or motion seeking an order for grandparenting time filed under subsection (3). This subsection does not apply if 1 of the fit parents is a stepparent who adopted a child under the Michigan adoption code, chapter X of the probate code of 1939, 1939 PA 288, MCL 710.21 to 710.70, and the grandparent seeking the order is the natural or adoptive parent of a parent of the child who is deceased or whose parental rights have been terminated. The Grandparents, the Bacas, had visited their grand-children frequently , taken them on vacations and bought toys after the divorce. Following a divorce, the defendant-mother became estranged from defendants and denied them further contact with the children. She/childrens mother persuaded the plaintiff-father to do the same. The Bocas the maternal grandparents argued MCL 722.27b(5) , the state Law that controls grandparent visitation rights, denies them their substantive due process right to maintain a familial relationship, which is in their grandchildren’s best interests. The Bocas/Defendants contended they have a fundamental right to maintain a relationship with their grandchildren and, therefore, the strict scrutiny test applies. The court held MCL 722.27b(5) is rationally related to the legitimate goal of protecting and encouraging the grandparent-grandchild relationship without infringing on the parents’ fundamental right to manage the upbringing of their children. MCL 722.27b was amended to avoid the constitutional deficiencies found in the previous statute. As amended, the statute affords broad deference to parents by limiting the circumstances in which grandparents may seek visitation, by imposing the burden of proof on grandparents, and by requiring dismissal of petitions for grandparenting time when two fit parents jointly oppose visitation. Subject to specific exceptions, MCL 722.27b grants absolute deference to parents who have an intact marriage or domestic relationship, and to fit parents who unanimously oppose visitation. The statute grants qualified deference in four circumstances. None of the circumstances are implicated where a child’s natural parents are both fit and both oppose grandparent visitation as in this case. The issues decided in this case were: Whether MCL 722.27b(5) violates the defendants-maternal grandparents’ constitutional rights to due process and equal protection; Substantive due process challenge to the constitutionality of MCL 722.27b(5); Morreale v. Department of Cmty. Health; Keenan v. Dawson; DeRose v. DeRose; Troxel v. Granville; Tolksdorf v. Griffith; W. A. Foote Mem’l Hosp. v. City of Jackson; Frame v. Nehls; Whether defendants have a fundamental right to maintain a relationship with their grandchildren; Johnson v. White; In re Morton; In re Clausen; Whether the strict scrutiny or rational test applied; Whether MCL 722.27b(5) deprives defendants of procedural due process; Hinky Dinky Supermarket, Inc. v. Department of Cmty. Health; Morales v. Michigan Parole Bd. In this situation, MCL 722.27b(5) was rationally related to the legitimate purpose of preserving the fit parents’ fundamental right in managing the care, custody, and control of their children. - The "In My Opinion" Show with Host Ronald Barry Robinson and Friends. Seen on Comcast Cable Television Channel 17 every Saturday at 6 P.M. and Wednesday at 8:30 P.M. Co-Hosts: Mr. Henry Hatter, Attorney Terry Bankert, Mrs. Tracy Blackwell Saturday October 19, 2007 6 P.M. Topic: Mayoral Candidate Mr. Dayne Walling - Host Mrs. Tracy Blackwell For further information please go to ( Access Forums, follow prompts to The "In My Opinion" Show - My pick for Mayor follows. I have taken my stand you take yours. - On WFLT 1420 A.M. radio on my show Know the Law 9:00 A.M. until 9:30 A.M Judge Herman Marable will appears to talk about his student of the month. This is a call in show. 239-5733 Have a great day! Terry Bankert or 21104

Sphere: Related Content

Thursday, October 18, 2007

Some definitions


Global warming refers to the increase in the
average temperature
of the Earth's near-surface air and oceans in recent decades and its projected continuation.

The global average air temperature near the Earth's surface rose 0.74 ±/wiki/Plus-minus_sign 0.18 EC (1.33 ± 0.32 EF) during the last 100 years. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) concludes, "most of the observed increase in globally averaged temperatures since the mid-20th century is very likely due to the observed increase in anthropogenic greenhouse gas concentrations"[1] via the greenhouse effect.

Natural phenomena such as solar variation combined with volcanoes probably had a small warming effect from pre-industrial times to 1950 and a small cooling effect from 1950 onward.[2][3] These basic conclusions have been endorsed by at least 30 scientific societies and academies of science, including all of the national academies of science of the major industrialized countries.
However, a few individual scientists disagree with some of the main conclusions of the IPCC.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was established in 1988 by two United Nations organizations, the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), to evaluate the risk of climate change caused by human activity.

The IPCC shared the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize with former Vice President of the United States Al Gore [1].

The IPCC does not carry out research, nor does it monitor climate or related phenomena. One of the main activities of the IPCC is to publish special reports on topics relevant to the implementation of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).[2] (The UNFCCC is an international treaty that acknowledges the possibility of harmful climate change; implementation of the UNFCCC led eventually to the Kyoto Protocol.)

The IPCC bases its assessment mainly on peer reviewed and published scientific literature. [3] The IPCC is only open to member states of the WMO and UNEP. IPCC reports are widely cited in almost any debate related to climate change.[4][5] National and international responses to climate change generally regard the UN climate panel as authoritative.[6]

All IPCC technical reports face extensive scientific review. The summary reports (i.e. Summary for Policymakers), which draw the most media attention, include review by participating governments in addition to scientific review.[7]


The Working Group I Summary for Policymakers (SPM) was published on
2007[12] and revised on 5 February 2007[13]. There was also a 2 February 2007 press release[14]. The full WGI report[15] was published in March. The key conclusions of the SPM were that[16]:

Warming of the climate system is unequivocal.

Most of (>50% of) the observed increase in globally averaged temperatures since the mid-20th century is very likely (confidence level >90%) due to the observed increase in anthropogenic (human) greenhouse gas concentrations.

Hotter temperatures and rises in sea level "would continue for centuries" even if greenhouse gas levels are stabilized[17], although the likely amount of temperature and sea level rise varies greatly depending on the fossil intensity of human activity during the next century (pages 13 and 18)[13].

The probability that this is caused by natural climatic processes alone is less than 5%.
World temperatures could rise by between 1.1 and 6.4 EC (2.0 and 11.5 EF) during the 21st century (table 3) and that:

Sea levels will probably rise by 18 to 59 cm (7.08 to 23.22 in) [table 3].

There is a confidence level >90% that there will be more frequent warm spells, heat waves and heavy rainfall.

There is a confidence level >66% that there will be an increase in droughts, tropical cyclones and extreme high tides.

Both past and future anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions will continue to contribute to warming and sea level rise for more than a millennium.

Global atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide have increased markedly as a result of human activities since 1750 and now far exceed pre-industrial values over the past 650,000 years

An outline of chapters in the WGI report (as of November 3, 2005)[18] and a list of the report's authors (as of March 10, 2005)[19] were made available before publication of the SPM.
The Summary for Policymakers for the Working Group II [1] report was released on April 6, 2007[20]. The Summary for Policymakers for the Working Group III report [21] was released on May 4, 2007. The AR4 Synthesis Report (SYR) will be released in November 2007.

More to come.

Terry Bankert

Sphere: Related Content

Tuesday, October 16, 2007


Global warming could further damage Michigan's economy
This review posted on Good Morning Flint,Michigan USA

Posted ORIGIONALY by By Elizabeth Shaw / Flint Journal

April 22, 2007 09:06AM

[A review and conversation. Comments of Terry Bankert in captions , deleted text...-trb]

[Did you know..-trb]

According to the U.S. Department of Energy, Michigan's carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuels grew 4 percent between 1990 and 2004. Michigan ranked 10th nationwide for the most carbon dioxide emissions in 2004,...


Jim Koan sees global warming in every damaged bud on his apple trees at Almar Orchards this spring.

More frequent and erratic weather extremes - hallmarks of climate change - are already happening here, Koan said.

"We haven't had any normal years in the last few years, with some of the worst extremes in weather closer together than I can ever remember," said Koan, 58. "It won't take too many catastrophes to wipe us out."

[This may bolster the argument that we are simply in a cycle.-trb]

Much may be at stake for the rest of us, too.

[I agree though it appears hard to get the publics attention.-trb]

Climate change could hit Michigan square in the economic gut - and not in the far-off future, but during the lifetimes of many of us.

From the anglers and shippers who ply the Great Lakes to a snowmobile dealer in Mt. Morris Township, changing weather could impact nearly every aspect of our lives and local environment: farming, hunting, fishing, wildlife, water quality and supply, tourism, recreation, air quality, fish and bird species, forests, wetlands, lakes and human health.

[How will global warming do this?]

"Agriculture, tourism and the automotive industry are the top three in Michigan's economy, and two of those are heavily dependent on water," said Abby Rubley of Environment Michigan.

"We're already feeling the loss in the automotive sector. We can't afford to see it in our other two major industries, too."

[This smacks of scare tactics to compare our loss of auto jobs withthe environment.-trb]

That already declining automotive sector accounted for nearly 10 percent of nonfarm jobs in Genesee County in 2005 - about 15,000 jobs in all, according to the state Department of Labor and Economic Growth. And global warming's impact on the industry could affect those jobs.
Transportation sources make up about a third of greenhouse gases, with cars, sport-utility vehicles and light trucks accounting for almost 22 percent, according to the National Environmental Trust.

That's led to intense political pressure to raise corporate average fuel economy, or CAFE, standards.

["What is CAFÉ? Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) is the sales weighted average fuel economy, expressed in miles per gallon (mpg), of a manufacturer’s fleet of passenger cars or light trucks with a gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) of 8,500 lbs. or less, manufactured for sale in the United States, for any given model year. Fuel economy is defined as the average mileage traveled by an automobile per gallon of gasoline (or equivalent amount of other fuel) consumed as measured in accordance with the testing and evaluation protocol set forth by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)."
see -trb]

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has estimated it would cost $100 million for the auto industry to meet proposed CAFE increases over the next 10 years. About 80 percent of that would be borne by domestic automakers, said General Motors' Washington spokesman Greg Martin.

[We have saftey legislation to make cars safer on the ground,why not in the air also?-trb]

"Transportation may be one-third of the problem, but the auto industry is being asked to bear 100 percent of the solution," said Martin. [ Is this true, it sounds like an overstatement.-trb]

Changes could cost consumers $3,000-$5,000 per vehicle, depending on the model, he said.

[Will mass production lower these prices?-trb]

"When you look at any CAFE increase that doesn't match up with what's technically achievable, it's going to have a devastating economic effect on the automakers and the communities in which they operate."

Others, however, say a CAFE increase is just what the industry needs to drive innovation toward fuel efficiency, hybrids and hydrogen-powered vehicles.

GM is also working to shrink the so-called carbon footprint of vehicle-making itself, said local GM spokeswoman Sharon Morton. In the Flint area, GM has reduced carbon dioxide emissions by 9.6 percent in the past five years by using less energy.

In the orchard business, meanwhile, this spring could be the worst yet, Koan said.

"This year, we had the warmest December and January on record, so the trees didn't harden down and go to sleep like they normally would."

Then another warm spell hit after a brief winter - just in time for budding plants to be ravaged by freak April blizzards.

"We haven't ever seen this much cold with the buds as far along as they were and with hard winds driving that cold," said Koan. "We're still waiting to see how much damage there is."
How much change is ahead, and how soon?

By the time a baby born today gets out of college around 2030, local summers may feel noticeably warmer, more like those in current-day Ohio, according to a recent report from the Union of Concerned Scientists, an independent scientific research and analysis group.

[The Union of Concerned Scientists is the leading science-based nonprofit working for a healthy environment and a safer world.
UCS combines independent scientific research and citizen action to develop innovative, practical solutions and to secure responsible changes in government policy, corporate practices, and consumer choices. is a group we should all join.-trb]

[At their web site :"The Nobel peace prize was awarded to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and former Vice President Al Gore and underscores the urgent need for action to ensure a safe and healthy world for future generations.

"The Nobel committee's recognition affirms that policymakers need to listen to the best available science and act upon it to avoid dangerous climate change," said Peter Frumhoff, a lead author of the IPCC's fourth assessment report and director of science and policy at UCS. -trb]

By the time that newborn is a great-grandparent in 2095, a Michigan summer may feel like one in northern Arkansas today, with our winters milder and with little snow, like those now in Ohio.
By then, Michigan's average summer temperatures could be 5-10 degrees warmer in winter and 7-13 degrees hotter in summer, said the UCS report.

The Great Lakes might moderate some of the effects of global warming for Michigan, said Marty Kaufman, University of Michigan-Flint professor of earth and resource science.

The bad news: The Great Lakes themselves are at risk as shrinking winter ice results in more evaporation and lower lake levels.

"Michigan's primary feature is the Great Lakes, and that's where we'll feel our largest economic impact," said Kaufman. "It may affect shipping, recreation and tourism just for starters. And that's huge."

Local winter sports businesses are already feeling the heat.

Snowmobilers are driving farther north each year to find usable trails, said Michael Nord, owner of Nord-Ride Motorsports Inc. in Mt. Morris Township.

[I have wondered why I see fewer snowmobiles. Bad snow or dying sport?-trb]

"The true snowmobiler is always going to find snow no matter what. But it seems every year less and less people are snowmobiling and are switching to other alternatives like quad runners," said Nord. "We've shifted our business dramatically through the last 10 years because of the weather."

Michigan's greenhouse gas emissions are rising, even as industry in the state declines.
According to the U.S. Department of Energy, Michigan's carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuels grew 4 percent between 1990 and 2004. Michigan ranked 10th nationwide for the most carbon dioxide emissions in 2004, the most recent year for which state-by-state data is available. [ If a national policing poicy attaches debts and credits and other costs for emissions can we absour this cost? Why should we now in our decline be punished for the economic wealth we have brought this county speaking of Michigan USA.-trb]

Much of that can be linked to Michigan's natural gas-fired power plants, where carbon dioxide emissions more than doubled in that same time period.

"Given the risks from global warming, it's incredibly irresponsible for Michigan's global warming pollution to increase," said Environment Michigan field director Abby Rubley. "It's like the doctor telling you that you need to go on a serious diet, but instead you go straight for the McDonald's."

[To say we are irresponsible is an easy out. You have to cost benefit it to Michigan. To ignore this economic disaster may be a prudent economic decision for Michigan. Who can fault us?....EVERYONE!-TRB]

Wind power, ethanol and fast-train technology are just some of the strategies that could help turn it all around, said UM-Flint's Kaufman.

"We're not shooting blanks here in Michigan. We've got the means in terms of engineering expertise, research groups, labor force and tangible resources," he said. "We just lack the motivation."

Sizzling impact of Global Warming on Michigan
Terry Bankert 10/17/07

Sphere: Related Content


By Terry Bankert
Posted to Flint Talk at
andFlint Citizen
I haven’t paid much attention to the debate over global warming.
I guess it takes a Vice President to write a book [I have not read the book], win an Oscar [I have not seen the movie] and accept a Nobel Peace prize.Okay Al Gore you have my attention.

How to learn more quickly?
I knew there was this outfit called the Green Party.

SO I Googled it. Beats buying a book.

The following is from the 2004 Green Party Platform As ratified at the 2004 Green National Convention in Milwaukee, WI.
As usual from this point on my comments until –end--if any will be [-trb], no other comments will be added and if deleated will show as ...


Earth's atmosphere is in great danger due to man-made chemicals and hydrocarbon emissions. Chloro-fluorocarbons, hydrochloro-fluorocarbons, and other related ozone-depleting substances should be banned as soon as is possible. [I have a ways to go. I don't know what products these are.-trb]The Green Party urges the U.S. Congress to act immediately to address the critical global warming and climate change issues.

When the U.S. Senate voted 95-to-0 to oppose any global warming treaty that does not also bind developing countries to specific, if smaller, carbon emissions reductions in the future, which many industrializing countries oppose, it put a roadblock in the way of progress by all nations. [This was in 2004-trb]With only 4% of the earth's people, the United States produces more than 20% of carbon emissions. [ I would think that we have a great responsibility.-trb]

From 1990 to 1996, total U.S. emissions grew by an amount equal to what Brazil and Indonesia produce every year. Per capita, the United States emits 85% more than Germany, twice as much as England and Japan, and currently nearly 10-times as much as China. [ I bet the rest of the world thinks we have an environmental debt to pay.-trb]

Climate change presents very real economic and social opportunities for new and sustainable jobs from new energy technologies, including both energy efficiency and renewables. Yet, too often, the focus of debate has been only on the pain of adjustment to carbon reductions, This is because of the influence of multinational business on government policies.

We must implement the following policies if we are to make a start on protecting our global climate:

1. An early target must be set to prevent emissions from rising so far that future reductions become even more difficult.

2. Avoiding loopholes is even more important now than an ambitious target. Unless a very ambitious target is set, which now seems unlikely, allowing sinks and trading within the protocol will create such loopholes that no real reductions will occur. Trading and sinks must be left until there is much more scientific precision in how they are measured.

3. Targets are not enough without credible policies and measures to achieve them. We urge all governments to table a list of the policies and measures they intend to adopt to attain their target, for example eco-taxes and energy performance standards.

4. Nuclear power is not an acceptable alternative to fossil energy. We should not accept country commitments that depend on increasing nuclear capability. We must join the solar age.

5. We endorse the Contraction and Convergence model under discussion at international talks (which as proposed would eventually give every human being an equal right to the atmosphere) as the most practical way to achieve justice and participation for developing countries.

6. As a nation, we must implement public and private initiatives at every level to support the Global Climate Treaty signed at the Earth Summit in 1992, committing industrial nations within a time framework to reducing emissions to 1990 levels.

7. The most authoritative assessment to date concludes that a worldwide carbon dioxide emissions reduction of 50-70 percent is necessary to contain climate change. The Kyoto Climate Protocol in 1998 falls far short, calling for only a five percent reduction. Nonetheless, the agreement is an important first step that all parties - especially the U.S. - should ratify as soon as possible.

8. We must drastically reduce, then eliminate, the use of fossil fuels. We must use energy more efficiently, and from clean, renewable sources. We must preserve the many valuable natural services including climactic stability provided by intact ecosystems....

9. If we fail to summon the political will now to make these investments, the costs of climatic disruptions will almost certainly force us to make them later at a greater expense. Greenhouse gases and the threat of global warming must be addressed by the international community in concert, through international treaties and conventions, with the industrial nations at the forefront of this vital effort.

Now this was two years ago, Al Gore and the Union of Concerned Scientist seem to have a lot to say.

Others say this Global Warming is a falsity being promoted by the left.
How can it not be happening, global warming?

How can we opposed moving to new technologies?

The issue is far to complicated to spout off on.

Any site recommendations are appreciated.

Yes Al Gore I am going to read your book and watch your movie.

Stay tuned.

Terry Bankert

Sphere: Related Content

Monday, October 8, 2007

Changing Custody of a Child

Leder v Leder 7/26/07 NO:275237
Posted here with modification of style by Terry Bankert
full article
summary at


In a recent case a Mother appeals as of right the trial court’s order denying her motion to change the custody of the minor children born during her marriage to defendant. On cross-appeal, defendant challenges the trial court’s determination that he had been uncooperative with plaintiff regarding legal issues related to the children and the court’s imposition of additional requirements to ensure cooperation in the order. The Court of Appeals did not disagree with the trial court.

II. No Change In Circumstances Or Proper Cause For A Change Of Custody

This Court applies three standards of review in custody cases. The great weight of theevidence standard applies to all findings of fact. A trial court’s findings regarding the existenceof an established custodial environment and regarding each custody factor should be affirmedunless the evidence clearly preponderates in the opposite direction.

An abuse of discretionstandard applies to the trial court’s discretionary rulings such as custody decisions. Questions oflaw are reviewed for clear legal error.

A trial court commits clear legal error when it incorrectlychooses, interprets, or applies the law. Vodvarka v Grasmeyer, 259 Mich App 499, 507-508; 675 NW2d 847 (2003). [Citations omitted.]

A trial court may modify a custody award when the moving party establishes that a"change in circumstances" has occurred or when the party establishes proper cause forreconsideration. MCL 722.27(1)(c); Phillips v Jordan, 241 Mich App 17, 24; 614 NW2d 183(2000).

To establish "proper cause," the moving party must present evidence of "one or moreappropriate grounds that have or could have a significant effect on the child’s life to the extentthat a reevaluation of the child’s custodial situation should be undertaken." Vodvarka, supra at511.

To establish a "change in circumstances," the moving party "must prove that, since theentry of the last custody order, the conditions surrounding custody of the child, which have orcould have a significant effect on the child’s well-being, have materially changed." Id. at 513.The moving party must establish something beyond "normal life changes" in order to justify thecourt’s reconsideration. Id. at 513-514. "[W]hen a modification of custody would change theestablished custodial environment of a child, the moving party must show by clear andconvincing evidence that it is in the child’s best interest." Phillips, supra at 25.

However, thetrial court may not reconsider the best interest factors until the moving party has establishedproper cause or a change in circumstances by a preponderance of the evidence. Vodvarka, supraat 509.

In determining whether a plaintiff has established proper grounds for reconsidering theexisting custody order, a trial court may use the best interest factors of MCL 722.23 as a guide.Vodvarka, supra at 511-512. MCL 722.23(c) requires the court to consider the "capacity anddisposition of the parties involved to provide the child with . . . medical care."

Sphere: Related Content