Connect with us

Nebraska

Judge fines rural Nebraska junkyard owner after neighbors’ lawsuit

Published

on

Judge fines rural Nebraska junkyard owner after neighbors’ lawsuit


FORT CALHOUN, Neb. (WOWT) – An eyesore in the wooded countryside north of the Omaha metro forced frustrated neighbors to take legal action. They ordered a court order for cleanup and the property owner got called before a judge.

More than a year ago, that judge ordered the owner of the Washington County junkyard to remove all parts and vehicles from his property. Neighbors who haven’t seen enough progress hope a civil contempt of court will jumpstart a cleanup once and for all.

“Everyone is disgusted with the sight of it and the sounds of it,” said nearby resident Chris Ostranic. “Something needs to be done.”

Six months ago, Chris and several other neighbors told 6 news about the lawsuit they filed to force a cleanup of the junkyard. After several missed deadlines, the neighbors say it’s time for the court to take a tougher stance and send a message that this mess should not be tolerated on the wooded acreage.

Advertisement

Junkyard owner Michael Pick, acting as his own lawyer, argued that he’s worked hard to cleanup his property. He claims 62 loads of scrap, 7,000 batteries and 150 vehicles have been hauled away. But Pick told the judge he ran out of time to get more done.

“If he’s working as hard as he says he is on this property, it should have been cleaned up,” Ostranic said.

District court judge Bryan Meismer ordered Pick to pay $9,600. Part of the amount for a fine, and the other $3,5000 to cover the neighbors’ legal expenses for their lawyers.

“Our client’s goal is to just get the property cleared and we’re hopeful that this is a step in what has been a long process for them, and to eventually get this junkyard removed from the property,” said the neighbors’ attorney, Brad Entwistle.

After the hearing ended, Pick declined to comment to 6 News; his sister stepping in the way. The two of them then left out a back door, but Pick can’t avoid the judge’s order to pay the contempt fine in 60 days and in the meantime, the niehgbors hope that means they’ll see a significant cleanup fo the property.

Advertisement

“I Just hope Mr. Pick realizes that this is a situation that is well out of hand and he need to abide,” Ostranic said. “He needs to comply.”

Pick told the judge that he will have trouble paying the entire contempt fine before the deadline, but he will be allowed to make payments over time.



Source link

Advertisement

Nebraska

Newly reelected Nebraska Farmers Union president says current farm policy is ‘not working’

Published

on

Newly reelected Nebraska Farmers Union president says current farm policy is ‘not working’


John Hansen, president of the Nebraska Farmers Union, will serve another two years at the helm after members re-elected him this month. He’s seen a lot of change in agriculture since 1990, but some things have stayed relatively the same, such as the price of a bushel of corn. Nebraska Public Media’s Jackie Ourada spoke with Hansen on “All Things Considered” about the state of agriculture, starting with how farmers are feeling about President Trump’s new $12 billion relief package that aims to offset damage done by tariffs.

Hansen: It plays to real mixed reviews for the folks who know how much money they lost in the first place thanks to the tariffs, which is somewhere, the Farm Bureau estimates, between $34 billion and $44 billion. We think $40 billion is a pretty good number. So, if you just lost $40 billion when you are already struggling financially, and you are already having to restructure your your farm loans to try to come up with more equity to replace the cash flow that didn’t work, and you already had done all that … So you lose $40 billion worth of value, and you get $12 billion paid back in some sort of fashion — not yet clear, who gets that. That $11 billion actually goes to the 20 crops, and then an additional $1 billion goes to specialty crops, so we’re certainly not going to be made whole. It’s better than a jab in the eye with a sharp stick, but not as good as being made whole.

Ourada: Farmers are, in Nebraska for the most part, going to, according to some of the economic surveys, benefit quite a lot from government payouts this year. So, I guess it’s difficult for me to hear that you guys have had a lot of calls about farmers being upside down, when the overall picture is that farmers are going to end up with a lot of economic benefits from the payouts from the government.

Hansen: So when you have commodity prices that are this low, and the reason you’re getting additional economic disaster assistance is because if you look at those prices, it’s a train wreck, a complete train wreck. So you’re helping try to offset that through some sort of federal economic assistance. But when you add that amount of assistance with the amount of shortfall that exists in commodity prices that tells you how far out of whack our farm policy and our trade policy is. We’re, unfortunately, in a situation where we’re forced to accept that those additional payments, although all farmers would rather get paid in the marketplace rather than through the mailbox with assistance from their tax-paying cousins and friends and brothers and sisters. And so we need to rethink about what we’re doing when we’re the world’s largest food producing nation, and we have a domestic farm policy and trade policy that puts family farmers and ranchers out of business, and that’s what we’re doing right now. Then it’s time to say, you know, big picture here, this is not working. The lack of stability is really difficult to navigate for somebody who’s on the receiving end of prices.

Advertisement

Ourada: What specifically would you like to see changed?

Hansen: Well, the whole structure. We don’t have really stability. We don’t have dependability. We don’t have any way to begin to cover cost of production. The cost of production that we have, just continues to go up and up and up every year. And yet, commodity prices are not tied to anything that reflects our cost of production. You can’t [say to] General Motors or Ford or or any major manufacturer, ”We want you guys to go out there and incur additional costs of operating every year. But we want you to sell your your end finished product for about the same thing that you know folks were buying it for 3030, years ago or more.” Their cost to the customer has to reflect their cost of production. And in the case of agriculture, farmers are price takers. We’re not price makers. We don’t set the price of what we produce, which is why the private, public partnership between agriculture and Congress needs to be rethought.

Ourada: I have a few friends who farm. They’re around my age, 30, and they are constantly griping, I would say is a good word about dad or grandpa not handing over the farm keys to them. And I’m thinking as you you’ve been with the Farmers Union now since 1990. What does your succession plan look like to the Farmers Union? What does the Farmers Union look like after John Hansen steps down?

Hansen: Well, that’s a great question. It’s one that’s an active discussion. Relative to farmers union, I made it clear at last this last year’s convention held a couple weeks ago, that we’re certainly looking for new folks to pick up the reins if they want to. And there’s a lifetime of opportunity and and in serving agriculture, I happen to think I have the best job in the state. So give me a call.

This interview has been edited for length.

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading

Nebraska

FAFSA participation increases among Nebraska high school seniors

Published

on

FAFSA participation increases among Nebraska high school seniors


New data shows Nebraska high school seniors are completing the FAFSA at higher rates following a new state requirement. Education leaders say the increase could help more students access financial aid and plan for life after graduation.



Source link

Continue Reading

Nebraska

Nebraska Court of Appeals upholds conviction of Grand Island man in sexual assault case

Published

on

Nebraska Court of Appeals upholds conviction of Grand Island man in sexual assault case


The Nebraska Court of Appeals has affirmed the conviction and sentencing of a Grand Island man charged with sexually assaulting a minor.

Cory Gilmore was sentenced in June to 36 to 48 years in prison on two counts of first-degree sexual assault. Court records said he was initially charged with first-degree sexual assault of a child, first-degree sexual assault and third-degree sexual assault of a child, but pleaded no contest to the two sexual assault counts as part of a plea deal.

According to an arrest affidavit, a report of a possible sexual assault came into the child abuse hotline that Gilmore sexually assaulted a minor girl when he was intoxicated.

A Grand Island police officer later interviewed the girl – who is younger than 19 years old – who said she was sexually assaulted by Gilmore from early 2021 to December 2023.

Advertisement

In his appeal, Gilmore claimed the District Court abused its discretion by imposing an excessive sentence. He also claimed his trial counsel was ineffective in failing to take the deposition of the alleged victim and failing to move to withdraw Gilmore’s plea before sentencing.

In its ruling, the Court of Appeals denied Gilmore’s claim of ineffective trial counsel. In his appeal, Gilmore said that at sentencing, he notified his counsel that he wished to withdraw his no-contest plea as he didn’t want to plead guilty or to say he did something he didn’t do.

The Court of Appeals said that at no point did Gilmore inform the District Court that he wished to withdraw his plea and that the District Court asked him if he made his plea “knowingly and voluntarily.”

The Court of Appeals also said in its order that at Gilmore’s sentencing hearing, the District Court looked at Gilmore’s risk to reoffend, his criminal history and the fact that he “showed no remorse for the trauma he has inflicted” in imposing its sentencing. The Court of Appeals said this was appropriate and that his sentencing was not excessive.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending