The next morning, around 4:30 a.m., Stallings found a shopping cart in front of the door with every last stolen item. It had a note tucked inside.
“We had no idea what we were takeing. Here your stuff back we hope that you guys can continue to make a difference in peoples live. God bless,” the note read (complete with misspellings).
The gesture shocked Stallings and her co-workers. “You’ve got to be kidding me. I was in disbelief, I got chills, I got very emotional,” she told NBC.
One officer on the case, Lt. Paul Williams, said that during his entire career, no one has ever returned stolen property — let alone apologized.
Daily Archives: August 9, 2013
There’s a press release out announcing that Jenny Lawton, former Old Greenwich resident and owner of Just Books (purchased from the late Warren Casell) has been named president of MakerBot, a manufacturer of 3D printing machines. I really liked Jenny and she (and Warren before her) gave me great support in my writing efforts, but she was working within a doomed business model, and while I was sad to see her stores go down, I wasn’t surprised.
So it’s great to see that she has come back on top and is succeeding in a brand new industry. There’s hope for all us dinosaurs.
The roof at Greenwich High School is equipped with a 7.7-kilowatt solar system installed in November 2011. The system produces enough electricity to power a small home for a year, which is a very small percentage of the 2.2 million megawatts the high school uses annually.
“If you look at an aerial of Greenwich High School you see a real opportunity to perhaps have further expansion of that,” Tesei said.
He added, “It’s a start.”
Only if powering a small clothes dryer at a cost of $35,000 is “a start” – I think it should be an ending point, but if Peter and his friends want to expand this idiocy then at least turn the experience into a learning one by having the students figure out exactly how much solar energy actually costs.
Embarrassed by their idol’s confusing the locations of the Gulf of Mexico and the Atlantic Ocean the other night, the Associated Press took it upon itself to snip and tuck his words a bit, to “clarify” things. The AP wasn’t correcting a transcription error, mind you, it rewrote what the President said. And while it seems unimportant what a has-been organization like the Associated Press does, the collapse of the conventional newspaper business around the nation and the subsequent elimination of editors and real reporters means that the AP’s distortions are now the de facto source of most American’s news, and that’s a problem.
You can’t ban political signs. Manlius, New York, is about to discover that and pay some hefty legal fees for the lesson.
The trouble started back in 2006, when town officials asked Rubin to remove some signs from his lawn.
Rubin, who by the way teaches First Amendment law, cited Ladue v. Gilleo, a 1994 case which held that a ritzy suburb of St. Louis did not have the “compelling” interest required for a very broad ban on private property signage.
The law against free speech in Manlius allows private property owners to display campaign signs up to 30 days before an election (and for seven days after an election). The law also requires property owners to obtain a permit for their yard signs.
“Oh, I’ve got to get a form. I’ve got to fill it out. I’ve got to take it down to the town hall. I’ve got to wait; they are going to go through it,” Rubin told WSYR. “Why should I have to do all this?”
The regulation exists “in order to preserve aesthetics and ensure traffic safety,” according to the town code.
It’s basic constitutional law, yet every other year people complain (accurately) that the damn things are a blight on the landscape. We can’t ban them nor, I think, should we, because they offer a chance to give the dullest of our wannabe politicians something useless to do. I have it on good authority, for instance, that Dollar Bill would be an absolute pain-in-the-ass if he hung around Democrat headquarters, and without a job for him to do outdoors, the party would disintegrate into chaos.
It’s the price we pay for freedom. Sort of like shutting up when a guy strolls by with a pistol on his hip exercising his Second Amendment rights; get over it.
Safely on his way to the Vineyard, our leader knows that someone in his administration must look like they’re working so he reopens 18 embassies around the world.
50 Hidden Brook, Riverside, hit the market at $2.045 and sold via bidding war for $2.435 million. It’s a half acre in the R-12 zone, so the FAR here allows 6,860 sq.ft – huge for Riverside. This last sold in 2003, for $1.470. By way of comparing appreciation rates in different parts of town, consider the fate of
144 Pecksland Road, a 1939 house on a once-fasionable street that yesterday took another price cut to $3.995. This was sold in 1999 for $3.4 million and $4.1 in 2001. I’d guess it will eventually sell for somewhere between that 1999 price and $3.25 million. Riverside will turn out to be the better bet.
And staying on that street, 109 Pecksland, a 1755 house that was rendered unrecognizable as such long ago but still clings to three of the original acres, has chopped another $400,000 off its price and is now asking $3.295 million. David Ogilvy brought this on back in 2011 for $4.7 and after that failed, another agent picked it up, cut its price to $3.695 and added the information on its listing sheet that the property was owned by a “life balance guru”. That’s a term I certainly don’t recognize nor, judging from the lack of results, does anyone else. My guess is that this price cut will be more helpful in finding a buyer than pyramid power.
If it’s way up in Partridge Hollow, $1.6 million (4.3 acres, pond and wetlands included). Started at $2.9995 back in 2008, a price that proved to be a non-starter instead.
Nothing to see here, move along, move along.
22 Stanwich Lane, priced at $1.425 million last May, went to a bidding war immediately and closed yesterday for $1.550. This was a nifty house in a good location and despite not having been substantially upgraded since 1993 (that would be 20 years, Walt), plenty of people saw its value and bid it up. Perfectly understandable, given what little is out there in this price range. What isn’t understandable, to me, is the very similar house (though not as nice) on the same street, that started at $2 million + quite a while ago and is still stuck in the $1.8s. You’d think the owner of that one would look down the street, take note of how quickly this one went, and adjust his price accordingly.