Broadway Grosses: The Band’s Visit & Kinky Boots Go Out on a High Note

first_img View Comments Sasson Gabay & Katrina Lenk in “The Band’s Visit”(Photo: Evan Zimmerman for MurphyMade) It was a week of goodbyes for a pair of Tony-winning Best Musicals, both of which reported strong grosses in their last week on Broadway. In its final slate of main-stem performances, the high-heeled hit Kinky Boots took in a gross of $1,009,004.95, filling the Al Hirschfeld Theatre to 79.09% capacity, while 2018 Tony winner The Band’s Visit made $756,098.50, packing the Barrymore to 94.89%. Newcomer productions that posted strong numbers this past week include Heidi Schreck’s What the Constitution Means to Me, in its best week yet with $410,926.66, at 98.82% capacity, and the revival of Oklahoma!, which held steady in its opening week at $451,273.50, playing to SRO crowds at 102.70% capacity.Here’s a look at who was on top—and who was not—for the week ending April 7.FRONTRUNNERS (By Gross)1. Hamilton ($2,940,209.00)2. The Lion King ($2,160,102.00)3. Wicked ($1,833,162.00)4. Harry Potter and the Cursed Child ($1,802,396.00)5. To Kill a Mockingbird ($1,628,150.48)UNDERDOGS (By Gross)5. What the Constitution Means to Me ($410,926.66)4. Hillary and Clinton ($391,944.50)3. Gary: A Sequel to Titus Andronicus ($381,334.00)2. Ink ($258,935.60)**1. All My Sons ($248,769.00)*FRONTRUNNERS (By Capacity)1. The Book of Mormon (103.08%)2. Oklahoma! (102.70%)3. Hamilton (101.57%)4. Dear Evan Hansen (101.46%)5. Come From Away (101.33%)UNDERDOGS (By Capacity)5. The Prom (77.75%)4. Beautiful: The Carole King Musical (75.84%)3. The Ferryman (75.28%)2. Chicago (74.84%)1. King Kong (66.59%)*Number based on four preview performances**Number based on seven preview performancesSource: The Broadway Leaguelast_img read more

Judge Roby worries about ‘massive judicial burnout’

first_imgJudge Roby worries about ‘massive judicial burnout’ Judge Roby worries about ‘massive judicial burnout’ In the 19th Circuit, Chief Judge William Roby says resources “have been stretched paper thin” and he’s worried about “massive burnout” of his judges. “Our family judges are working in their offices from 8 a.m to 8 p.m. on many days, and are taking vast amounts of paperwork home at night and on weekends to complete.“These work habits, workloads, and type of stressful cases are an unhealthy combination for any person, especially people who are under tremendous stress from hearing extremely emotional cases,” Roby said.Because of lost support staff in the family division, “now our judges have to spend valuable court time doing clerical functions, both in and out of court, rather than productively hearing cases and making decisions. Pro se cases are continually delayed, because i’s have not been dotted and t’s haven’t been properly crossed” and, therefore, judges cannot go forward with the cases.“Pro se litigants are voicing their frustration on messages left for case managers and the trial court administrator.”Felony judges in four counties are swamped.“We will need to move some of our county judges into the circuit felony division just to help us keep our heads above water. This will result in evictions and other county civil cases having to sit on the back burner for a considerable length of time,” Roby said.Family court case mangers have been whittled down from seven to four.“The impact to children and families could reasonably be severe to the individuals involved. Children in dysfunctional family systems may be at risk of harm due to the significant lack of court resources to effectively identify, coordinate, and manage the related cases. Victims of domestic violence may not receive all the protections afforded under our laws due to insufficient staffing resources to be able to provide to the court the necessary criminal and domestic violence information at the time of disposition on final injunctions.”Losing a senior trial court law clerk and trial court law clerk has caused a huge workload, delays, and backlog of post-conviction cases.“Ultimately, the margin of error becomes larger with fewer trial court law clerks to perform increasing workloads. Such errors may result in re-hearing and re-trying cases at substantial costs,” Roby said. — Senior Editor Jan Pudlowcenter_img December 15, 2008 Regular Newslast_img read more

How voters’ perception of trust may have influenced the 2016 presidential election

first_imgShare Pinterest Share on Twitter Email New research sheds more light on why President Donald Trump was able to defeat his Democratic rival Hillary Clinton in the 2016 presidential election.The study, published in American Behavioral Scientist, investigated Americans’ trust in the two presidential candidates. The research indicates that while neither candidate was perceived to be trustworthy, Trump was trusted more where it mattered most — on a key issue in the swing states.“The topic of trust, particularly in organizations, has been of interest to my colleagues and me for some time,” said study author Sherwyn P. Morreale, a professor in communication at the University of Colorado at Colorado Springs.center_img “We have developed and written extensively about a research-driven model of trust that has five drivers, or reasons, why people trust others, or not. The model outlines five underlying drivers of trust: openness and honesty, identification, concern for others, reliability, and competence.”“As the presidential primaries and then the general election campaign ensued, quite a few pollsters called attention to the lack of trust in the political candidates,” Morreale added. “Intrigued by those polls, we realized that the unanswered question was why, what were the underlying drivers or reasons or causes of the lack of trust, particularly in Clinton and Trump.”“We determined therefore to apply our model of five trust drivers to investigating public opinion nationally of the two candidates. The two census-representative national polls reported in our published study provide a clear answer to the question of why.”The researchers conducted one survey of 1,500 Americans immediately before the first presidential debate and a second survey of another 1,500 Americans after the third debate.Clinton was rated as more open and honest than Trump after the first debate, but this relationship had reversed after the third debate. However, Clinton was also considered more competent, concerned for others, reliable, and a person with whom respondents could identify after the third debate. Clinton was seen as a bit more trustworthy than Trump, but overall Americans had little trust for either candidateThe study also found that Clinton was more trusted regarding the issues of health care, crime/violence/guns, education/college affordability, race relations, and climate change/environment. Trump was more trusted on terrorism/national security and immigration. The two candidates had equivalent trust perceptions for economy/jobs.An analysis of swing states, which were key to Trump’s electoral victory, showed that terrorism/national security was a focal issue. “The trust advantage on this issue for Trump in part contributes to understanding the Electoral College difference from the popular vote,” the researchers wrote.“Perhaps the general public should be somewhat more aware of how they make judgments about trust or the lack thereof — in political leaders, government, governmental institutions and organizations,” Morreale told PsyPost. “Then in the best of all worlds, we could interact with these entities in a focused and better informed manner.”The researchers also found several demographic differences.Gender had no link to trust evaluations for Clinton, but it was linked to evaluations of Trump. Men were significantly more trusting of Trump than women and transgender individuals.There was a stark difference in regards to race and ethnicity. Black Americans were more trusting of Clinton than Trump, while white Americans were more trusting of Trump than Clinton.More educated Americans tended to be more trusting of Clinton than those with less education, while less educated Americans tended to be more trusting of Trump.Liberals viewed Clinton as trustworthy, while conservatives viewed Trump as trustworthy. But moderates tended to view neither of them as trustworthy.“As the study indicates, there is some tendency for various demographics to shape our perceptions of trust or the lack thereof; just knowing that about ourselves could be informative,” Morreale explained. “That is not to say that the collective thinking of any group of people is not valid; rather, becoming aware of our collective perceptions may serve all of us well.”The study makes no claims about causality and trust is only one factor of many that influenced the 2016 election.“Good research should always yield as many if not more questions than it answers,” Morreale said. “That is our hope, with this study. That said an important societal question may be how the electorate and the leaders whom we elect can move back to the more trusting climate and culture that existed until approximately the middle of the 20th century.”“Albeit, the rise of information dissemination through mass and social media probably is a significant impacting factor. However, continuing to address the public’s generalized lack of trust contemporarily, as it relates to the five drivers, is a question that could and perhaps should be addressed.”The study, “Voters’ Perceptions of Trust in 2016 Presidential Candidates, Clinton and Trump: Exploring the Election’s Outcome“, was also co-authored by Pamela S. Shockley-Zalabak and Carmen Stavrositu. Share on Facebook LinkedInlast_img read more

Study finds less corruption in countries where more women are in government

first_imgLess than a quarter of the members of the U.S. Senate are women and only 19 percent of the women in the U.S. House of Representatives are women. It is also noteworthy that the United Stated never had a women head or president.The authors speculate that women policymakers are able to have an impact on corruption because they choose different policies from men. An extensive body of prior research shows that women politicians choose policies that are more closely related to the welfare of women, children, and family.The relationship is robust to the inclusion of a number of other control variables including economic, cultural, and institutional factors. The study also uses a statistical technique, known as the Instrumental Variable analysis, to account for the confounding factors and to establish causality in the relationship. After all it is possible that it is corruption that drives women’s participation in politics and not the other way around!The authors maintain that while the gender-corruption relationship has been studied before, the previous studies suffered from the critique that the relationship between women’s representation in government and corruption was not shown to be causal.Jha and Sarangi’s research is the most comprehensive study on this topic and looks at the implications of the presence of women in other occupations as including the shares of women in the labor force, clerical positions, and decision making positions such as the CEOs and other managerial positions. The study finds that women’s presence in these occupations is not significantly associated with corruption, suggesting that it is the policymaking role through which women are able to have an impact on corruption.Sometimes it is believed that the relationship between gender and corruption may disappear as women gain similarity in social status. This is presumably because as the status of women improves, they get access to the networks of corruption and at the same time learn the know-how of engaging in corrupt activities. The results of this study, however, indicate otherwise: the relationship between women’s representation in parliament and corruption is stronger for countries where women enjoy a greater equality of status. Once again, this finding further suggests that it’s policymaking through which women are able to impact corruption.Jha and Sarangi’s study warns that these results do not necessarily mean that women are inherently less corrupt. In fact, their findings suggest otherwise. If women are indeed less corrupt, then there should be a significant negative correlation between all these measures of female participation and corruption.The policy implications of the study point towards the need for promoting gender equality in general and promoting the presence of women in politics in particular. Previous research has established that a greater presence of women in government is associated with better education and health outcomes. Email Pinterest Share on Facebook A greater representation of women in the government is bad news for corruption, according to a new study published in the Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization by researchers Chandan Jha of Le Moyne College and Sudipta Sarangi of Virginia Tech.In a cross-country analysis of over 125 countries, this study finds that corruption is lower in countries where a greater share of parliamentarians are women. The study further finds that women’s representation in local politics is important too – the likelihood of having to bribe is lower in regions with a greater representation of women in local-level politics in Europe.“This research underscores the importance of women empowerment, their presence in leadership roles and their representation in government, said Sarangi, an economics professor and department head at Virginia Tech. “This is especially important in light of the fact that women remain underrepresented in politics in most countries including the United States.”center_img LinkedIn Share on Twitter Sharelast_img read more

Belize accepts chairmanship of AOSIS

first_imgThe following statement by Belize was delivered at a Ministerial Meeting of AOSIS during a short ceremony on the occasion of the 24th Conference of the Parties of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change to mark Belize’s acceptance of the chairmanship of AOSIS from the Maldives in January 2019. Belize will hold the chairmanship for two years to be followed by Antigua and Barbuda in 2021.H.E. Amb. Lois Young, Permanent Rep. of Belize to the UN; H.E. Hussain Rasheed Hassan, Min. of Environment, Maldives; Mr. Amjad Abdulla Dir.-Gen/ Chief Negotiator for AOSIS Climate Change Dept., Min. Environment & Energy“Good evening distinguishing delegates, colleagues. I am delivering this statement on behalf of the Vice Minister of Belize who had to leave early because of another pressing engagement.On this occasion I wish to extend sincere thanks to the Maldives for steering our group over the course of their Chairmanship, for their leadership and support. I extend congratulations from my Ministry and from the Government of Belize.Read more at: Caribbean ClimateShare this:PrintTwitterFacebookLinkedInLike this:Like Loading… CARICOM negotiating with ‘one voice’ in global climate change talksCARICOM Secretariat, Georgetown, Guyana – CARICOM entered the 24th Session of the UNFCCC COP 24 which opened Sunday in Poland with unified negotiating positions, conscious that global climate change not only threatens the environment but also has deleterious consequences to the Region’s economic development. The Caribbean Community (CARICOM) fine-tuned its…December 4, 2018In “CARICOM at Work”COMMUNIQUÉ – Twenty-Second Meeting of the Council for Foreign and Community Relations (COFCOR), St. George’s, Grenada, 13-14 May 2019The Twenty-Second Meeting of the Council for Foreign and Community Relations (COFCOR) of the Caribbean Community (CARICOM) convened in St. George’s, Grenada on the 13-14 May 2019, under the Chairmanship of the Honourable C. Peter David, Minister of Foreign Affairs and Labour of Grenada. The COFCOR was attended by the…May 14, 2019In “CARICOM”CARICOM eyes key outcomes from UN climate change talks(CARICOM Secretariat, Turkeyen, Greater Georgetown, Guyana) Mitigating climate risks and building resilience against extreme weather events underpin key areas of focus for the Caribbean Community (CARICOM) during the ongoing United Nations (UN) climate talks in Bonn, Germany. The Twenty Third Meeting of the Conference of Parties to the UN Framework…November 14, 2017In “Anguilla”Share this on WhatsApplast_img read more

Collapse of Long Island Amazon deal is bad news for New York City

first_imgBezos probably won’t change his mind. But Cuomo’s desperation – and that of business leaders who are also lobbying Bezos – reflects the body-blow that Amazon’s pullout landed to the city’s morale. Bezos quit allegedly as a result of unexpected public fury over $3bn in taxpayer incentives. “A handout to the world’s richest man” was the detractors’ common refrain.But it’s a false narrative. In fact, most of the supposed giveaway was available to Amazon – or any company willing to make such a large commitment – through long-existing tax-abatement programmes.The cratered Amazon deal has been called the worst economic portent for New York City since the 1987 Black Monday Wall Street crash. It isn’t, but it’s ugly nonetheless. It cost the city between 25,000 and 40,000 promised high-paying jobs. It pulled the plug on several big-bucks commercial leases and land sales that were contingent on the Amazon deal closing, among them a prospective 1m sq ft lease at soon-to-be-vacant One Court Square, the borough’s tallest tower.The breakdown also torpedoed a boom in local residential values, which had skyrocketed from the moment Amazon’s commitment was announced on 12 November 2018. It blunted New York’s momentum to overtake the San Francisco area as the tech capital of the US.Bezos shouldn’t be blamed for pulling out. Most of the blame lies squarely on Cuomo for guaranteeing Amazon a deal that had a loophole for unravellingAmazon could have done a better job with ‘community outreach’ and the state and city shouldn’t have agreed to let Amazon have a private heliport, a symbol of excess that ticked off even those who supported the plan. But Bezos shouldn’t be blamed for pulling out. Most of the blame lies squarely on Cuomo for guaranteeing Amazon a deal that had a loophole for unravelling.Bezos negotiated in good faith with state and city officials during a prolonged, reality-show-like process to choose a new US location for a second campus, which saw municipalities from coast to coast offer the company tax breaks and other incentives just short of the moon.Bezos had every reason to believe the Long Island City plan would proceed without a hitch. Cuomo is the state’s most powerful elected official. He overrode cumbersome city zoning and public-approval rules; and he persuaded New York City mayor Bill de Blasio, his long-time nemesis, to get on board, spurred by the promise of long-term tax benefits and local hiring.It looked like a slam dunk. Unlike other controversial projects, the Amazon campus (it also chose a site in Arlington, Virginia) didn’t require kicking anyone out because the East River waterfront site called Anable Basin is mostly empty, except for a medical company that was delighted to sell its land.Scuttled dealBut Cuomo took too much for granted. Polls showed that most state and city residents – including in Long Island City itself – wanted Amazon to move in. Yet despite claims of a ‘done deal’, part of the plan still required approval of the Public Authorities Control Board (PACB), comprising representatives of both state legislature houses. Although often called ‘obscure’, the same panel has previously scuttled major land-use initiatives – most famously former mayor Michael Bloomberg’s proposal for a sports stadium and convention centre in the West 30s.There was a vacant seat on the PACB. Cuomo didn’t count on a new leader of the State Senate who held a grudge against him appointing a Long Island City representative who vowed to block Amazon. (The PACB must vote unanimously to green-light any proposal.) Source: Shutterstock/ BrooklynScribeThe soon-to-be-vacant One Court Square, the tallest tower in QueensThe appointee was to be Michael Gianaris, whose selection was announced on 7 February. He opposed Amazon because of what mostly far-left critics called a ‘giveaway’ based on the incentives. In fact, the $3bn couldn’t be used instead to pay for schools or other services, as critics had claimed. The state wasn’t handing out a dime. Rather, Amazon would pay less in taxes over 25 years – but contingent on creating all the promised jobs.Less than one third of the incentives were discretionary – a $582m subsidy to Amazon for building a $3.6bn campus using only union construction labour. That was the only portion of the deal over which the PACB had veto rights, but it was enough to scuttle the deal.Seeing only trouble ahead, Bezos declared he was quitting on 14 February. “On Valentine’s Day, Amazon broke hearts all over New York City, dumping us like a boyfriend with cold feet,” a column in theNew York Post began.Bezos understandably was furious that he’d been sold a firm agreement that wasn’t firm. Despite Cuomo’s imploring, he’s unlikely to subject himself again to what would surely be a prolonged struggle to renegotiate termsGianaris was cowed by resistance from a retail employees union that hates Amazon for damaging bricks-and-mortar retailing. Most other unions supported the deal. He was also egged on by recently elected, socialist-leaning members of the legislature and the New York congressional delegation.The loudest voice belonged to Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, a former bartender who, at 29, is the youngest person ever elected to Congress. She’s promoted such loony ‘green’ strategies as banning plane travel. The Amazon site is not even in her district, but she generated enough heat to sway Gianaris.Bezos understandably was furious that he’d been sold a firm agreement that wasn’t firm. Despite Cuomo’s imploring, he’s unlikely to subject himself again to what would surely be a prolonged struggle to renegotiate terms.Gianaris and Ocasio-Cortez hailed the outcome as a triumph for the city. Gianaris is now seen as a villain. His appointment to the PACB was cancelled – but it came too late.Amazon’s complex in a wasted corner of Queens would have yielded untold billions of dollars over time through job creation and higher real estate taxes stimulated through neighbourhood investment. Instead, the land might lie fallow for years. There will be no new jobs and no long-term tax windfall. Savanna, the company that owns One Court Square, must start over to fill a million square feet. And great companies will think twice about moving to New York City.Steve Cuozzo is a real estate columnist and contributor to the New York Postlast_img read more

Saipem converts to Sonardyne’s autonomous monitoring transponder tech

first_imgInternational oil and gas turnkey contractor, Saipem, has extended the capability of its Sonardyne sixth generation (6G) acoustic positioning transponders, adding functionality that makes the equipment now suitable for a wide range of subsea autonomous monitoring tasks.Sonardyne stated on Monday that the work to convert the Compatt 6 instruments into Autonomous Monitoring Transponders (AMTs) was undertaken by engineers based at Sonardyne’s Brazilian headquarters in Rio das Ostras as part of a wider scope of work to inspect, service and re-calibrate Saipem’s inventory of Long BaseLine (LBL) acoustic technology located in the region.According to Sonardyne, the company’s AMT enables users to conduct long endurance, remote monitoring surveys without the need for a surface vessel and ROV to be present throughout the project. Applications for it range from a single instrument deployed to measure tidal variation, to a large, field-wide network capable of detecting subtle trends in structure movement, pipeline creep and seabed settlement, the company explained. The autonomous functionality built into every AMT enables it to operate for several years without operator intervention, the company claimed. Measurements from its suite of onboard sensors are logged in the unit’s memory and can be recovered at any time by an AUV, ROV or vessel-of-opportunity using high-speed wireless communications, Sonardyne further added. “The 6G technology platform on which both Compatt 6 and AMT are built is very versatile, and enables users to upgrade and switch capability as their operational needs grow and stretch,” commented Paul Smith, Operations Director of Sonardyne Brasil. He added, “The engineering and equipment testing facilities we have here in Rio das Ostras meant the work to service Saipem’s LBL hardware and convert some of their Compatts to AMTs, could be completed without the cost and delays associated with sending equipment out the country. For our customers, this means they can get back to work and keep their projects and budgets on schedule. Something that the entire offshore industry is focussed on at the moment.”last_img read more

Wangfoong rescue on track

first_imgMeasuring 25 m long and weighing 40 tons (36.3 tonnes) each, the trains had to be repositioned as a matter of urgency after coming off the tracks in the early hours of September 17.Wangfoong coordinated with the Road Management Office (RMO) of Hong Kong Police Force to arrange the necessary escorts to mobilise Liebherr 500-tonne capacity mobile cranes, as well as a number of trucks with crane attachments and rigging tools.The most challenging part of the project, according to Wangfoong, was the coordination with relevant authorities in order to obtain clearance for the work to commence in the short timeframe.Wangfoong provided a lifting method onsite and supervised the lifting operations, which required two 500-tonne capacity cranes working in tandem.Wangfoong is a member of the Worldwide Project Consortium (WWPC) in Hong Kong.www.wangfoong.com.hkwww.wwpc.eu.comlast_img read more

Judge rails at ‘festival of mendacity’ in case where truth was ‘lifestyle choice’

first_imgAn appeal in which every party was described as dishonest has been dismissed in the High Court – with the judge openly rebuking each person involved.Mr Justice Turner threw out the challenge from a claimant who wanted a share of profits from rental properties run by his brothers after their father’s death.The undisguised scorn of the judge has resulted in the judgment being widely shared online. Turner said His Honour Judge Davy QC, who heard Rashid v Munir & Ors  at first instance, bore witness to a ‘festival of mendacity’.Of the claimant, he remarked:  ‘I do not believe him on this or indeed any other material matter’. The first defendant’s evidence was ‘unhelpful’ and the second defendant was ‘as heroically dishonest as he is in his everyday life’. The third defendant was described as giving evidence in a ‘facetious manner’, which included winking at the claimant’s counsel and showing he regarded telling the truth as ‘simply no more than a lifestyle choice’.Turner added: ‘Attempting to establish the common but unstated intention of a group of individuals all giving honest but conflicting evidence is difficult enough. Where, as here, each witness is attempting to outdo the other in a rich display of competitive dishonesty, the task of the judge is unenviable.’The judge’s conclusion that the claimant was not entitled to claim a share of the commercial rents was ruled unassailable and the appeal dismissed. It was also confirmed that a transcript of the first judgment will be sent to the Director of Public Prosecutionslast_img read more

£30 Million 3 Year Budget Plan To Be Discussed For Region’s Infrastructure

first_imgAddThis Sharing ButtonsShare to FacebookFacebookFacebookShare to TwitterTwitterTwitterShare to LinkedInLinkedInLinkedInDumfries and Galloway Council’s Communities committee [17 September 2017] will consider a report on its Infrastructure Capital Programme 2019/20.The Council agreed its capital budget for 2019/20 to 2021/22 in February 2019, with an indicative 10-year Capital Investment Strategy. The agreed funding allocations for the Infrastructure Asset Class are:• 2019/20 £10.07m• 2020/21 ££9.5m• 2021/22 £9.5mAn additional £0.5m was allocated for planned structural overlays on roads for 2019/20 and 2020/21.The Infrastructure Capital Programme 2019/20 includes:• Carriageway surface dressing• Carriageway resurfacing• Carriageway strengthening• Carriageway drainage• Planned structural overlays [eliminating defects by surfacing short sections of carriageway, up to around 400m]• Footways• Forestry routes – this year, the Council was successful in 3 bids to the Strategic Timber Transport Fund resulting in £231,841 being awarded, enabling upgrades to local roads to accommodate increased forestry extraction.• Car Parks – including Lockerbie Station• Structures – including Carruthers Bridge [C61a], Langholm Suspension Footbridge, Wauchope Bridge [B7068a], Lamford Culvert [A713s]• Harbours – seeking European Maritime Fisheries Fund contribution for Port William Harbour and Kirkcudbright Marina• Coastal Infrastructure – Dyemill coastal protection, Drummore coastal road• Flood Risk Management – Spoutwells [Stranraer], Carsphairn• Street Lighting• Intelligent Transport Systems• Road Safety Programme• Speed Limits and Traffic Calming• Active Travel ProgrammeCouncillor Andy Ferguson, chair of the Communities committee, said: “Over the next 3 years our Council is committed to spending more than £30m on projects to improve and maintain the region’s infrastructure, including roads. This expenditure is vital for local people, local communities, and the local economy.”Councillor John Martin, vice-chair, said: “Improved travel links, roads maintenance, improved road safety, bridge repairs and appropriate parking facilities are key issues for this region if it is to be a place where people want to live, work and carry out business. Our capital programme for infrastructure is an essential contributor to this.”See report: https://dumfriesgalloway.moderngov.co.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=148&MId=4503last_img read more