How to resolve AdBlock issue? 
News
- Details
- Written by: Tom Philpott
The Senate Veterans Affairs Committee has released details of the GI Bill reform package it approved last month. It includes almost every change sought by veterans’ service organizations, institutes of higher learning, trade unions, vocational schools and VA administrators.
The only two key elements missing are an estimate from the Congressional Budget Office on what these reforms will cost, and a plan to pay for them as worries over deficit spending mounts in Washington D.C.
The Post-9/11 Veterans Educational Assistance Improvements Act of 2010 (S 3447) would expand education options beyond the pursuit of a college degree and into almost any type of training a veteran might want.
At the same time, S 3447 would enhance and simplify the payment formula, ease confusion for students and pare administrative headaches for schools.
The new GI Bill also would be opened to at least 80,000 National Guard members mobilized since 9-11 who previously were denied coverage. And its monthly living allowance would be used in a special way to support enrollment in apprenticeships and on-the-job training programs.
These are just some of the highlights. Sen. Daniel Akaka (D-Hawaii), committee chairman, is leading the reform effort and drawing bipartisan support. The CBO cost estimate should be known before Congress returns in September when attention will turn to finding ways to pay for the bill.
Rep. Walter Minnick (D-Idaho) has introduced a near identical bill in the House (HR 5933). Among its early co-sponsors is Rep. Bob Filner (D-Calif.), chairman of the House Veterans Affairs Committee. His committee plans its own hearing on GI Bill reform Sept. 16, a move that raises hope among veterans’ groups and educators that a final bill could be passed this year, even with elections in November and a lameduck Congress thereafter.
At the Senate’s GI Bill reform hearing in July, senior officials with the departments of Veterans Affairs and Defense expressed support for most changes in Akaka’s bill. But at the urging of VA officials most provisions wouldn’t take effect until Aug. 1, 2011, to allow sufficient time to implement.
Sen. Richard Burr (N.C.), ranking Republican on the committee, made clear in July he was miffed at Akaka for introducing S 3447 alone, in May, after calling in April for bipartisan cooperation on GI Bill reform. At the markup hearing Aug. 5, however, Burr praised the bill and the many changes Akaka accepted on feedback from veteran groups, educators and colleagues.
The bill, Burr said, “would help create a program that will be fair and generous, no matter where a veteran lives or chooses to go to school.” By covering vocational training, it “would allow more veterans and their families to pursue educational programs that best meet their needs.”
Akaka’s original bill “was good,” said Eric Hilleman, national legislative director for the Veterans of Foreign Wars. “The one he’s put out [of committee] is outstanding. We’re super-excited about it.”
Here are more details:
– The revised GI bill would fully cover tuition and fees for all in-state degree programs including doctorates or graduate degrees. Removed would be a cap tied to the most costly in-state under graduate degree program.
– Payments to private or non-state colleges would be simplified using an identical $20,000 cap across all states. Private college payments no longer would capped at the highest priced in-state school. This would raise veterans’ assistance in 45 states and clarify for private colleges the point at which standard GI Bill coverage stops and the new for additional assistance using the Yellow-Ribbon feature starts. The $20,000 ceiling would be adjusted every Aug. 1 to reflect changes in education costs nationwide.
– Veterans who take enough online classes to exceed “half-time” student status could receive 50 percent of the GI Bill’s monthly living allowance. Currently they don’t qualify for any of this payment which is based on local military housing allowance rates for married E-5s.
– Post-9/11 students on active duty, or their enrolled spouses, would qualify for the $1,000 annual book allowance.
– Any guard member called to active duty since 9/11 by the president or secretary of defense under Title 32, used often for domestic emergencies or homeland security missions, or to serve full-time under the Active Guard and Reserve program, would be eligible for the Post-9/11 GI Bill.
– Veterans enrolled in a qualified on-the-job or apprenticeship training would be paid 100 percent of the applicable living allowance for the first six months, 80 percent for the second six months, 60 percent for the third, 40 percent for the fourth, and 20 percent for any subsequent periods of training. This would be in addition to their GI Bill benefit, to be set for vocational training at the lesser of $20,000 a year or actual tuition and fees.
Hilleman said VFW and other veterans groups lobbied hard to correct the eligibility inequity for Guard members and to extend coverage to OJT and vocational training, a “huge benefit for many veterans.”
Tim Embree with Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America agreed, saying, “These are the folks starting small businesses back in their home towns. It’s so vital to get them included.”
The big hurdle to passage would seem to be the cost. But Embree said he is confident that won’t derail the effort.
“We’ve been working very closely with Congress on identifying ways to pay for these reforms,” he said. And “the GI Bill, more than any other, ends up paying for itself” as shown following World War II. “We’re just finishing the job on the Post-9/11 GI bill. And this will prove to be the shrewdest investment made in this generation of veterans.”
To comment, send e-mail to
Follow Lake County News on Twitter at http://twitter.com/LakeCoNews and on Facebook at http://www.facebook.com/pages/Lake-County-News/143156775604?ref=mf .
- Details
- Written by: Lake County News Reports
The meeting will focus on work of the group’s subcommittees.
The Lake County Respect For All Task Force, a group of local individuals, is striving to increase awareness about safe and inclusive learning environments.
The group is working to identify possible actions to help the Lake County community. Subcommittees are working on outreach projects, gathering information for a list of community resources, providing training and awareness for school personnel and administrators, strengthening policies and procedures for use in the schools, and helping campuses with their efforts for student activities, including upcoming Challenge Days at two Lake County high schools.
The Respect For All Project is a program of GroundSpark. More information about the project is available on the GroundSpark Web site, www.groundspark.org.
A proposal for the Lake County project explains that GroundSpark, The Respect for All Project “is a non-profit organization that seeks to create safe, hate-free schools and communities by providing youth and the adults who guide their development the tools they need to talk openly about diversity in all of its forms.”
As part of its work toward safe and inclusive learning environments, task force members identified a list of goals and split up responsibilities. The goals include identifying community resources, networking and expanding the task force, pursuing support for gay/straight alliances, developing and fundraising for Challenge Day events at schools, and reviewing policies and implementation strategies.
Challenge Days are planned at both Lower Lake High School and Clear Lake High School (Lakeport).
The task force supports the goal of the presentations to eliminate bullying, violence and other forms of oppression. According to the Challenge Day website (www.challengeday.org), the mission of Challenge Day is “to provide youth and their communities with experiential programs that demonstrate the possibility of love and connection through the celebration of diversity, truth, and full expression.”
Clear Lake High School’s Challenge Day event is scheduled for Sept. 20 and 21; Lower Lake will hold its event Sept. 22 and 23.
The Lake County Respect For All Task Force welcomes participation by new members. Individuals interested in helping the task force in its efforts to assist youth and their families in assuring safe and inclusive learning environments are invited to attend the meetings.
In Lake County, the Respect For All Project, in cooperation with Lake County Healthy Start and Lake County Family Resource Center, is collaborating with local educators, high school students, community leaders, and representatives from a variety of organizations.
Lake County was chosen as one of three California counties for the pilot project through GroundSpark. The task force has been meeting periodically over the last 18 months.
Follow Lake County News on Twitter at http://twitter.com/LakeCoNews and on Facebook at http://www.facebook.com/pages/Lake-County-News/143156775604?ref=mf .
- Details
- Written by: Dennis Fordham
Generally, adopted children are treated like natural born children. Issues can arise, however, regarding whether an adoptive may inherit from the estate of the natural (blood) parents, whose relationship was severed by the adoption; and also in regards whether the child may inherit (through the adoptive parent) from the adoptive parent’s own family (such as inheriting from the parents of a deceased adoptive parent).
Usually, adoption severs the rights of the adopted child from the natural born parents (i.e., the adopted out family). There are important exceptions.
First, if the adopted child both lived with the natural parent and he or she either was adopted by a spouse of either natural parent or was adopted after the death of either natural parent, it follows that the adopted child still inherits from the natural parent.
For example, consider a child whose parents get divorced, remarry, and who is then adopted by the stepparent. That child can still inherit from his natural parent’s estate provided the child lived with that natural parent.
Likewise, if a natural parent dies before the child was born and the child is later adopted by a spouse of either natural parent, the child can still inherit.
Whether an adopted child may inherit through his or her adopted parents and receive an inheritance from the adoptive parent’s own family is contentious.
For example, if the adoptee was adopted as an adult and did not live in his adoptive parent’s household as a minor, then it is very unlikely that the adopted child would be treated as a child for purposes of inheriting under the trust or will of the “adoptive” grandparents. Likewise, if the grandparent’s trust or will was signed after the adoption by their child, then the adoptive child is unlikely to be treated as a child.
Next, generally, unlike an adopted child, a stepchild and a foster child are not treated as children unless the relationship began while the child was a minor (i.e., growing up); continued throughout the lifetimes of parent and child; and there is clear and convincing evidence to show that the parent figure would have adopted the child except for a legal impediment that existed until the non-biological parent died. The objection of the natural parent to an adoption is an example of such a legal impediment, but only until the child becomes an adult at age 18.
In limited cases, a stepchild or foster child who is unable to meet the foregoing standard may still inherit under a theory of equitable adoption. That is, if there was an adoption agreement between the stepparent or foster parent and the child and the parties both faithfully observed the agreement, the child may be entitled to inherit a share of the parent’s estate.
Lastly, the foregoing discussion is not relevant where the deceased person’s estate planning documents expressly deals with the issue of whether or not the adopted child, step child or foster child inherits. That is, if the trust or will expressly disinherits an adopted child, or expressly defines the terms “child” or “issue” not to include step children or foster children, then the legal document controls.
Editor’s Note: Attorney Dennis A. Fordham is a Board Certified Specialist in Estate Planning, Trust and Probate Law. Fordham concentrates his practice in the areas of estate planning and various aspects of elder law, including Medi-Cal benefits. Mr. Fordham was qualified as a Certified Specialist in 2009 by the State Bar of California Board of Legal Specialization, and is licensed to practice law in California and New York. He earned his BA at Columbia University, his JD at the State University of New York at Buffalo, and his LLM in Taxation at New York University. His office is located on the 2nd Floor at 55 First Street, Lakeport, California and he can be reached by calling 707-263-3235 or e-mail at
Follow Lake County News on Twitter at http://twitter.com/LakeCoNews and on Facebook at http://www.facebook.com/pages/Lake-County-News/143156775604?ref=mf .
- Details
- Written by: Lake County News reports
Judge Richard Henderson sentenced Upton Adams, 22, to three years of probation, 30 days in the county jail, mandatory counseling and will be subject to a three-year criminal protective order prohibiting him from contacting the victim.
Deputy District Attorney Shannon Cox prosecuted Adams, who was represented by Deputy Public Defender Eric Rennert, according to the Mendocino County District Attorney's Office.
According to the investigation, on July 22, 2009, Adams – 21 years old at the time – was working part-time as a teacher’s assistant at Mendocino College in a summer school class attended by high school students. On that date, he and a 15-year-old student engaged in a single act of sexual intercourse.
On July 24, 2009, officials at the college were notified of this behavior via an anonymous email, officials reported.
As a result, college officials immediately terminated Adams from his position and notified the Mendocino County Sheriff’s Office, which interviewed both the victim and Adams. Officials said both acknowledged the encounter and both described it as consensual.
Adams allegedly acknowledged his wrongdoing to the deputy and, after conducting its investigation, the sheriff’s office forwarded its report to the District Attorney’s Office for consideration of criminal charges.
The District Attorney’s Office initially filed a single count of unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor as a felony. However, after consulting with the victim and the victim’s mother, it was determined that a misdemeanor plea was an appropriate resolution of the case, officials reported.
Factors considered included that Adams had no criminal history, it was an isolated incident, there was no threat of force, and Adams admitted his wrongdoing at the earliest possible stage to both law enforcement and the court, according to the report.
During sentencing, Cox argued that Adams should receive a sentence of county jail, stressing the need to send a message to Adams and the community that this type of behavior will not go unpunished.
Henderson handed down the sentence based on the position of trust Adams held as a teacher’s assistant and also taking into account the age disparity between Adams and the victim, the District Attorney's Office reported.
Follow Lake County News on Twitter at http://twitter.com/LakeCoNews and on Facebook at http://www.facebook.com/pages/Lake-County-News/143156775604?ref=mf .