text:
Meg Shields
Double Take: Is Rob Zombie's 'Halloween II' Secretly a Masterpiece?
Rob Zombie's 'Halloween II' is a masterpiece to some, and a piece of garbage to others. Let's settle this with a re-appraisal.
Double Take is a series in which Anna Swanson and Meg Shields sit down and yell at each other about the controversial, uncomfortable, and contentious corners of cinema. There are many reasons this series started, but the catalyst for having a long conversation to work through dicey topics was a comment made by FSR's own Rob Hunter. Upon discovering Anna's deep and sincere love for Rob Zombie's much-maligned 'Halloween II,' Rob remarked that this is an opinion so gobsmacking it must be unpacked. So that's exactly what we're doing.
For our first Triple Take, we got Rob on the horn to offer a counterpoint to Anna's praise for the film. Together, the three of us aimed to work through what makes the film so problematic for some and so beloved for others. Boasting a 21% rating on Rotten Tomatoes, the sequel/remake is a gnarly rampage with all the tact that one would expect from a Zombie film. It is more belligerent than Zombie's 2007 Halloween (which even Anna agrees isn't a good movie). The sequel tracks the return of Michael Myers (Tyler Mane) and follows Laurie Strode's (Scout Taylor-Compton) traumatic response to the events of the first film. Halloween II is a film that we all agreed goes for it. The question we were left with was if it's a gamble that pays off.
Halloween II celebrated its 10th anniversary earlier this year, and with a bit of perspective afforded through time, Meg, Anna, and Rob sat down to unpack this deeply divisive movie. This is the conversation that followed:
MS: I'm not gonna tell you what I think about Halloween II and it is your job to convince me that it is either good or bad.
RH: Why do you assume that I think it's bad?
AS: That's why we're here! That's how this came about! Because you hate it!
RH: Yeah, ok, no it's terrible. So no worries about that.
MS: Anna to kick things off can you relay to Rob what happened during our viewing?
AS: Ok, so I tried to show Meg Halloween II
MS: Not correct. You made me watch both of Rob Zombie's Halloweens, back-to-back.
AS: You needed the context. But what happened was, I hadn't seen the director's cut before, only theatrical. I didn't realize until too late that the director's cut has a different ending and I was showing her that one. In the director's cut, Laurie is shot at the end.
RH: Best part of the movie.
AS: [deep sigh]
MS: Rob, is there any part of it that you think is redeemable?
RH: Oh boy…I mean I like when Laurie gets shot. But that aside… give me a minute…
MS: I wrote some down. Brad Dourif is in it, and that's good because we like it when he gets work. Ummm… I think Scout Taylor Compton is doing something.
RH: Generous, but go on.
MS: I'll reveal my hand: I think my overall take, and the reason I think it's such a point of contention, is that it wants to be something that it isn't. It's fighting its own genetics. It wants to be something banana pants like The Beyond, just like: total chaos. But Zombie actually thinks he's delivering realism. If you listen to interviews with him, he thought he was really getting down to it and not producing a wild, nightmare logic fantasy.
AS: I think there's realism too.
MS: You think this film is realistic?!?
AS: There are moments, but say what you were gonna say.
MS: To me, in all his work, Zombie is hyper-stylized. That's part of his charm. I can see how if him fighting the zaniness of it all would result in something a little messy.
RH: Are you drawing a line between the beats of the movie that are bad but grounded in "realism" and the bad parts that are fucking Zombie's wife on a horse? The movie only exists because 1) the first movie turned a profit, and 2) he wanted to give his wife some work. There's no reason for that character in the film. I should also say I've seen all of Zombie's movies and I'm a fan of one of them: Lords of Salem. The rest of them I either dislike or actively dislike.
MS: I don't hate Zombie. I'm on record loving House of 1000 Corpses, which I like because I think it actually knows that its bonkers. It's not so serious. I think Halloween II is very serious, Anna.
RH: The movie is serious as hell, and it falls in line with the first film. I think this is my problem with both films: Zombie is so in love with his killers, his killer in this case, and he so despises the people that Michael Myers is killing. That comes across frame-by-frame. The second one is so serious, it's devoid of oxygen, of air. There's no fun or entertainment. There's no impact.
MS: I've seen some people give it credit for being a remake that goes in its own direction, but, uh, Zombie is just doing Halloween IV. All the cool weird parts: the psychic link she has, the genetic component of serial killing–that's in Halloween IV.
RH: Can I jump ahead and point out that this film is devoid of gory setpieces? There are a face stomp and stabbings…it's not creative.
AS: I mean…. He has a knife. That's what he does.
MS: Michael Myers has impaled people with guns, he can be creative.
RH: This is Zombie, he does gory, bloody stuff in his movies. If I'm coming at this looking at the potential for this to be a worthwhile movie, one of the things that you can take away from a horror movie is a memorable kill. There's nothing in this movie that stands out.
MS: One thing that, Anna did sell me on was the Dr. Loomis angle and the idea of him being a scummy opportunist. You argued that as a good addition and I think you're right.
AS: Yeah, so, first of all, if you're gonna get Malcolm McDowell you gotta put him to work. And, I like that it lampoons the true-crime thing of profiting off of tragedy. I like that it shows Loomis as exploitative…
MS: And you can't replicate Donald Pleasance. I think regardless of whether it's executed well or not, doing a different thing was the right move.
RH: Removed from the movie, I love McDowell. But Zombie has no grasp on tone, so you move from deadly serious brutality to fucking slapstick with McDowell and the two bits do not go together. He's comic relief for so much of the movie. It's designed for laughter and when you smash that up against the rest of the movie, you're left with two things that don't go together.
AS: I don't think it's slapstick and I don't think it's as sharp of a pivot. I think what you're describing is exactly what happens in Halloween (2018). Sorry: Hallow2018. That's what it does: it pulls those sharp turns from trying to be horror to trying to be comedy. I think Halloween II maybe has some comedic beats, but they're not as disruptive of the film's overall tone.
RH: I should ask before we move forward, do words mean the same in Canadian as they do in American?
AS: [Sighs] Ok, I want to point out regarding the death scenes, one that comes to mind is the scene in the strip club where the dude is strung up by the lights. That's fun. That's a good use of a set-piece. But back to Loomis. I like that the jokes are at his expense!
MS: I liked the first sequence in the hospital before the "it was all a dream" rug pull.
RH: It's an extended dream sequence. That was the first time I said "fuck you" aloud at the screen.
AS: I like the fake-out hospital because it really highlights how much he's aware of the other films and he knows our familiarity with it but then he's going in a completely different direction.
MS: But he's still just doing Halloween IV! Zombie missed the boat on picking up at the beginning of II instead of the end of IV.
AS: Wait, what? In what way do you want that?
MS: I want a small child…being murderous. Look, Anna. Defend your movie.
AS: Ok, alright, I like how fresh it is, it does something new. I do think there's a tension between the surrealist fantasy and the brutal realism but that works. There are killings that feel very real. When Annie is being murdered and she's just saying "ow" over and over again, it's for-real upsetting. It's not this shrieking horror movie yelling, it's real fucking pain.
RH: I had that in my notes. Annie is the only character in either film that I, as a viewer, feel anything towards. But, that said, they turn around in this movie and treat her the same way: she's brutalized and left naked on the floor. Cutting away from the video and just having the audio, I do think is effective, I'll grant it that. I just feel like it doesn't work in this movie because you wait a few minutes and you're laughing along with Loomis, "hyuh hyuh hyuh." If Zombie had kept it a brutal slasher I would respect it a lot more. But these beats, I don't care about the Annie stuff with everything else.
AS: I think we do care about Annie, partly because we see how much she's all Laurie has. And speaking of Laurie—
RH: Let me just say: I'm not a fan of Halloween (2018), and I did appreciate that Zombie — poorly and shittily — made an effort to explore the trauma. To a degree, I was down for that. The problem is that he makes a traumatized person into a character who won't stop screaming, who is obnoxious. And again, I can't judge her because she's been through trauma, but we're still stuck for 110 minutes with this person and nothing to latch onto. I appreciate the attempt, but it gets lost in the execution. It's better than what they did with Halloween (2018) and the handling of trauma.
AS: Yeah, that's exactly what I was gonna say. I like how much Halloween II is about trauma and how much it commits to bleakness. There's no real way out of this. There's no happy ending. It's a big commitment to make a film that's kinda mean and upsetting. I really respect that it doesn't pretend she's gonna find a real solution. By making her so erratic, we know she won't end this film on a positive note — no fucking way. I like that Zombie makes us sit with that knowledge.
MS: Right but like: Zombie wants to be Michael Myers, or likes him a lot. I think that gets in the way of what you're saying…
RH: He absolutely sympathizes with him. If you go back to 80s horror movies, a lot of them are built on the idea that the person who ends up being the killer was bullied or had some prank committed against him. But this is something that's dealt with in the first few minutes and then it doesn't get touched on because it's not important. Zombie just focuses on that and wants to keep reminding us of that. He's clearly in Michael's corner. He's more interested in that character. As a film, it ends up being an experience where, as much as people criticize later Elm Streets or other Halloween movies for how they allow you to root for the killer, Zombie takes that, removes all of the fun and says, "Yes, that's what we're gonna do, we're gonna support the killer." He's brutalizing people left and right, but that's ok because of the shit from his past. So, for there to be no happy ending for Laurie, it's because Zombie looks at her pain as "this is what this family is. This is reality and there is no escape." I don't mind movies that end on a complete downer, but if from the beginning it feels like this is gonna be shitty for everyone involved, there's no entertainment value. There's no suspense. There's no emotional connection. I don't know what I'm left with.
AS: The fact that I view Laurie as doomed doesn't remove an emotional connection for me. I think Zombie does spend time with Michael, but because it's not fun. I don't think we're supposed to enjoy it. If it was more fun to watch him kill people then I would be on board with criticizing how much Zombie likes Michael. I don't think just because the film expands on his backstory that is the same thing as supporting or sympathizing. To me, it's about understanding what Laurie is experiencing through this connection to him.
RH: Huh. I mean, I disagree obviously. But, to that connection, do we agree that the vision of his mother is not supernatural shenanigans, but a mental vision? There's a later scene where they both react to the same vision. This vision of his mother, and it's not really her character. Going back to the first movie, she was compassionate towards her son. She was taken aback by his actions. So this vision is not one based on memory. It's there to support Michael's psychopathic agenda. It's imagined. My point is that this supports the idea that Zombie just wants to give Michael excuses. The vision is supporting him. It's another thing telling him he's right to be doing this.
AS: Exactly. That's not a real person supporting him. The vision is part of his psychosis. It's him inventing reasons. This is about how disturbed Michael is–not about someone else giving him the green light or to detract from the fact that he wants to do this.
MS: But it's not Michael inventing an excuse, it's Rob Zombie inventing an excuse for Michael. I think it would be better if the movie just went full-on buck wild rather than try to be serious. It wants to have its cake and eat it too.
AS: But there's a method to the madness because what is actually happening is brutal and visceral and upsetting and real. But as Laurie is losing her mind, her experiences are becoming increasingly messy and surreal. It's how she is perceiving events not how they actually are.
MS: You don't think the psychic link exists?
AS: I think Laurie thinks it is real. Laurie is losing it, she's feeling this inability to move past Michael, and that's informing her mentality. She feels that there's a reason she is so tied to Michael. Maybe there is, maybe there isn't. But that's how she's experiencing it.
MS: [exacerbated] You're contradicting yourself.
AS: No, what I'm saying is that there is a realism and there is a fantasy. The actual real events are done in a very brutal way, the violence is honest and real. And then Laurie's mental space is being filled with fantasy and surrealism because she can't process what's going on in the real world, so she turns inward. She's having a psychotic break. It doesn't change the world around her. When she sees a horse, there isn't really a horse. But when Annie is killed, it is real and upsetting.
MS: I still feel like you, like Zombie, are trying to have it both ways. Can we talk about the party? The big party that Zombie clearly wanted to throw for all his friends?
RH: I thought it was a wrap party and they were just shooting extra footage. It's this weird-ass little town where you can have an ambulance crash into a cow, and then you have this huge-ass Hollywood party.
MS: See, I like that. It's stupid. It's like a Fulci movie; a small town but then there's a ballroom down the street for some reason.
RH: Yeah but in a Fulci movie it never also tries to be real.
MS: That's correct…
RH: So in Halloween II, it stands out because it's supposed to be hardcore and real but now here's this gibberish. Also, do you think Zombie is supporting a nature over nurture hypothesis?
MS: I'm glad we got to this point. It's gotta be nature.
RH: I think that's what he's saying, especially with the fact that she's having these shared visions and is connected to Michael.
AS: But she's having these visions after enduring the trauma, so that's kinda nurture.
[Rob and Meg make confused noises]
AS: I think in terms of Laurie going full fucking fantasty, that happens after the trauma of the events of the first movie.
MS: Right but Annie didn't go off the deep end and she experienced quite similar trauma.
RH: As the film kept reminding us.
AS: Different strokes for different folks! People respond to trauma differently. There's no one size fits all! Annie has a great dad! That helped her!
MS: So…nature?
AS: Well no. It's the support that Annie's had.
RH: [giggling]
AS: I mean, I do think that there is an element of nature over nurture, but I don't think it's like, a hard and fast one hundred percent.
MS: But canonically it is right. [laughing] That's the whole point of Halloween IV.
RH: But so we agree on this: that at the end of the film when she [Laurie] goes to stab Loomis–I guess you could argue that that's strictly because he wrote the book–but still that's a homicidal act. She's not going to stab Michael who's killed all her friends, which clearly she doesn't care that much about as she does her reputation.
AS: In the theatrical cut she does stab Michael.
RH: So, is the director's cut ending supposed to suggest that she survives the shooting? Because much like the nature element, that her brother Michael can survive multiple bullet wounds, she also has inherited that ability since at the end of the film she's in an abnormally long psych ward. Is that what we're supposed to buy?
AS: I think she's in her own mind. I don't think what we're seeing exists in the real world at all at that point. I read the end scene of her in the hospital room as a complete fantasy happening as she's dying, imagining moving on to the next world by reuniting with her family.
RH: I can see that. Again, that room is obviously not real-size. It's clearly a dream room. But I'd also argue that filmmakers with these kinds of movies are always going to make sure that they're ending allows the possibility of a follow up. So you've got to keep the person alive. But it makes more sense to me that she's dead and this is just a mental snapshot.
MS: Rob Zombie's Halloween III when?
AS: [visibly excited] I would love that. I would prefer that over more David Gordon Green movies.
RH: I would happily pass on both.
AS: Rob, if you had to pick if you were to get another Rob Zombie Halloween or another David Gordon Green Halloween, which would it be? One is going to exist, which is it?
RH: [struggling] I would, uh, I feel like this is going to underscore everything I've just said, but I would take the Zombie one. From beginning to end, Halloween II clearly shows a filmmaker with an artistic intent and, to a degree, an ability.
MS: You can accuse Zombie of a lot of things, but not of not making choices. That man makes choices.
RH: They're just in service of a shitty, shitty script.
AS: I will concede that I think he could have pulled back on some of the comedy with Loomis. That wouldn't have hurt the film at all.
RH: [presumably raising his hands up in celebration like an inflatable tube man] Score!
AS: But I do think that what he is doing for the most part with the Loomis character, of showing him as someone exploitative, is good. I like how much he goes after Loomis for that.
MS: I agree. I think Zombie's take on the Loomis character that holds water.
RH: I would agree as well, I just don't think that the execution works or comes together well enough in this movie. I think that he's a smart target to go after, but I would have loved to have seen all of those sequences played straight with him being fucking criticized, lambasted, given shit, for what he's doing. The closest we get is the dad who shows up at the book signing with a picture of his dead daughter from the first movie. Everything else with Loomis is comical. It's played for laughs, through both his performance and the beats. Weird Al Yankovic…
MS: I forgot about the Weird Al part. [groaning]
RH: Yeah. That whole scene reminds me, in one of the Nightmare on Elm Street films there's a talk show sequence. I can't remember which one–
MS and AS, simultaneously: Are you thinking of Joker?
RH: No. Anyway, all that Loomis stuff is so comical it loses a lot of the bite that it deserves. It loses its punch because it's like "woop-de-doo look at this little funny bit over here." It doesn't land as well as it should.
MS: I haven't seen the new Halloween.
AS: Don't.
RH: It's so bland.
MS: Does it bring anything new to the table that can hold a candle to the wacky shit in the Zombie films? LIke does Hallo2018 have anything new to say, and if so, are any of the new twists as bold as what Zombie did?
AS: No.
RH: I would agree. No.
AS: There's one idea in it that I'm especially annoyed it squandered. There's a true-crime podcast about the Myers murders. And when I saw that I was like "oh, there's potential there." Like this is of the moment in the horror world and you could do something interesting with it. And then it's not at all. In any shape or form.
RH: I don't hate the 2018 remake but I do find it kind of harmless and safe. It does have some good kills using some fun practical effects, so it has that going for it. And I know everyone lost their shit over the grief and trauma angle, but it's not that at all.
AS: It's very simplified.
MS: There are so many horror remakes that I constantly forget exist. I think that even the people who really don't like Halloween II would never accuse it of being non-existent or forgettable.
AS: Yeah like the Nightmare on Elm Street remake with Rooney Mara.
MS: Or like, remember when they remade Poltergeist in 2015?
AS: No I don't.
MS: No one does! I think for all of it's sins, Halloween II is doing something.
RH: I think that's the definite take-away because even though I don't like either of Zombie's Halloween films, they're not like the vast majority of these "safe" remakes, that don't try anything new or stick too close to the original.
MS: Or try and please everyone.
RH: Right. Like fan service and that kind of stuff. At least Zombie is like: I have the basic structure down. Now I'm going to do my own thing. With the second film more so than one. I don't like it, but I can give it some begrudging respect I guess.
AS: Rob, do you like Zombie's Halloween II more than his first Halloween movie?
RH: I don't like either one of them.
MS: That wasn't the question.
RH: Two is the [groaning] more ambitious film.
MS: That's like a parent being like "you looked like you were having a lot of fun up there."
RH: Halloween II is still bad. But it's got elements that are still worthy of discussion.
MS: Now I'm just thinking of all the "not safe" directors I wish were given blank checks to fuck with properties the way Zombie was. I'd prefer that timeline over the mayonnaise we're getting from most studios. I'd love to see someone fuck with Child's Play in a way people had to have an opinion about. The remake has come out, allegedly. No one's talking about it. It's a nothing movie. It doesn't exist.
AS: I'd rather hate something than be completely apathetic.
RH: Absolutely. The fact that I had any kind of feeling whatsoever, even though its negative, is impressive. Child's Play, you go in you go out. Even the Pet Sematary remake I was just like okay. There were changes but they weren't bold like the ones Zombie has made. I do think it's interesting, cause a lot of people, especially with Zombie's last few movies, keep talking about how it's so unfortunate that he's not getting a big budget, and for both Halloween films he had 15 million bucks each. It shows. The money is on screen.
MS: Yeah he blew it on that party in Halloween II and then he was like: "Michael, take my wardrobe."
RH: Exactly. But I think it shows that he, as much as I prefer the bold choice timeline, had the chance, and it was this.
AS: Yeah, and god bless. He did a great job.
RH: Do you actually think that this is a great movie? Halloween II?
AS: Yep.
RH: Okay but real talk. Meg's gone, she's getting popcorn and Columbo VHS tapes, is this a great movie?
AS: Yeah. It's a four-star movie.
RH: Out of how many?
AS: Five.
RH: This is an interesting movie for someone to say is great. For any movie, you've got to be on its wavelength and find things that appeal to you…I don't feel like I fully understand why you think it's great.
MS: If I may, Anna, is the thing that makes this film "good for you" the way the film takes Laurie's trauma so seriously?
AS: Yes. And I like that, whether it's well-executed or not, I like the ambition of it, I like that Zombie wants to do something completely different way.
RH: So you like Halloween III.
AS: Love Halloween III. But yeah I like the way this film is more interested in Laurie's experience than just using it as fodder to make the film "about something."
[Authors' note: Rob was giggling throughout this]
RH: I don't get the empathy side of Halloween II. Maybe it's because I'm just an asshole, but I don't see the effort made. I appreciate what it tries to do with the trauma, and it's definitely better than Halloween (2018), but I feel like it puts it out there and essentially says: look we're acknowledging that she's fucked up. And that's the end of it. I don't think it does anything else with her on that subject. Especially with the back half shifting to the dream stuff.
AS: I think if it tried to do more than what it's already doing with Laurie's trauma, it would pretend that there's an answer, and I don't think there always is.
MS: I don't think we're saying that the film needs to fix her trauma. But after she gets past the tipping point, there's no variation. Do you know what I mean? If the film is dealing with female pain, the lack of emotional payoff is a big problem to the point where it could be read as objectifying her or her trauma.
RH: I don't think the movie has sympathy for Laurie. I think that it uses her and her trauma the same way it uses Annie and Annie's trauma. The same way it uses women who are consistently naked in the movie. Not just as sexy beats of women being naked, but as being naked, in their worst moment, and fucking brutalizing them. I don't need a fix, but the film presents Laurie at her most shrill and says: "Ok, this is just the status quo now." There are no additional gains there. Instead, it's just Zombie saying: I'm going to take full advantage, and exploit these characters at this moment, for my cheap thrills because, again, I wish I was Michael Myers.
AS: I can't disagree with how you read this movie — I read it differently!
MS: This is the truest Double Take. Every other time Anna and I have talked we've either come to an agreement or it's been us against the world. This is the first stalemate we've had. I'm excited we're finally fighting. This is what we wanted.
RH: But what do you guys think about, what I would argue, is the pure exploitation Zombie takes towards his mostly female characters. To me, it's fine if you're going for a straight, serious horror film, but that's not what this is.
MS: Zombie's entire career is trying to make The Texas Chainsaw Massacre II again. That's his purpose on this earth. I think the way that he treats women in his films is of a very grindhouse sensibility: maniacs brutalizing shrieking women. I can see the connective tissue between Zombie's work and his inspiration from the 70s.
RH: But with something like Werewolf Women of the SS, I would love for him to make that full feature movie. That kind of exploitation, Nazisploitation, whatever camp over the top ridiculousness would work. But here, where I take umbrage–
AS: Great David Fincher word.
RH: Nice. Where I take umbrage is Zombie applying that aesthetic, that women are best served naked, bloodied, and terrorized, and pairing it with straight, horrifying, intentional brutality. It's not like the My Bloody Valentine remake where you've got the naked lady running around being chased because that movie is purely silly.
MS: What you're talking about is self-awareness. Maybe Zombie was too close to Halloween II to have the perspective to see what the film needed. He spends way more time pathologizing Michael than Laurie because, at the end of the day, he's way more interested in absolving Michael Myers.
AS: I think there's a difference between understanding and excusing.
RH: It's explaining.
AS: The fact that Michael Myers thinks he has reasons doesn't mean that those reasons are good. And I don't think we need to give Laurie reasons for what she's doing in the sense that like, we want to empathize with her actions because I don't think that what she's doing is wrong in that way. She's the victim here, right?
MS: I don't know about Zombie's lack of care for Laurie being intentional. I don't think that's true. And you and I give a lot of fucks about directorial intention so be careful how you proceed.
AS: I buy that there's a problem with how Zombie presents the brutality against women. I'm not defending it. But I will say that I would rather have something straight-up uncomfortable over something that pretends Laurie's trauma can be put into a neat box.
MS: You're using the same move we made in our discussion about The House That Jack Built: that violence against women shouldn't be treated with kid-gloves and to some degree, should be hard to watch. But that move is only goin if we're not on the side of the villain. Which is true of Jack in a way that is absolutely not true of Halloween II.
AS: Yeah. And I don't think this movie is as good as The House That Jack Built! But I don't think we're supposed to sympathize with Michael.
MS: I dis-a-fuckin-gree.
AS: What?
MS: This film is in love with Michael Myers!
RH: A comparison for me is something like Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer. It's brutal, straightforward, it's played serious. There's obviously a little bit of levity in it, depending on your tastes. Henry does give points over to his circumstance to explain where he's coming from. But at no point does it belittle what's happening, either through funny shenanigans or fantasy beats, it just lets it be, so you get the seriousness of it. It never feels like it's trivializing any of it if that makes sense.
AS: Do we read Halloween II as "trivializing?"
RH: That's my point about the tone. I think if it stuck with the "horror elements," not the Loomis stuff or the dreams, I'd be closer to your side of the argument. Because when it wants to be brutal it's brutal. The problem is that whenever I felt the least bit heightened, going back to the Annie beat, I feel like its deflated shortly after that by jumping back to McDowell or having Sheri Moon Zombie show up with her horse. It immediately says: nevermind, there's also this shit going on. It doesn't allow you to wallow in the seriousness of it because it keeps reminding you that it's "a fucking glory project for my wife."
MS: Oh no. This is a glory project for Rob Zombie.
RH: Yeah, either way.
AS: I see what you're saying. My experience of the film is different.
MS: "I FEEL."
AS: I don't find the tonal shifts as jarring! But that's subjective and I can't argue with your subjective experience.
MS: [laughing] Anna, you can't show up to this dog fight and then be like: "it's all subjective!"
AS: No, just that specific thing! I've made my case on the other stuff.
RH: I'm not sure you've made your case, but you have spoken it.
MS: [laughing]
AS: I've pled my case how about that?
MS: Do you think in the way A24 has a pit where they keep their waifs, Rob Zombie has a pit with like his wife and Bill Moseley?
AS: A wife pit?
MS: His two wives: Bill Moseley and Sheri Moon.
RH: At least he lets Bill Moseley out once and awhile.
AS: I've thought of something.
MS: Ok.
AS: I want to see Rob Zombie make a Cat People movie.
MS: Oh.
RH: [groans]
Tags:double takeHalloween IIHorrorRob Zombie
Meg Shields(Senior contributor)
Three toddlers in a trenchcoat. Currently running The Queue, How'd They Do That?, and Horrorscope.


Organizations both large and small are struggling to maintain levels of quality while reducing operating costs to remain competitive.
Also, outsourcers and ICT Integrators need to deliver cost benefits to their customers. And as TEM addresses the short-term requirements to wring costs from corporate expenditure and addresses long-term requirements to include telecommunications within improved governance structures across ICT, TEM is becoming part of the outsourcing solution.
And Convergence understands the requirements of ICT Integrators and Outsourcers and provides technology and services to help them deliver on the customer requirements.
By using or custom branding our TEMPOR or TEMPOR Enterprise delivered TEM Technology, supported by our services, outsourcers and ICT Integrators can add a TEM service to their portfolio and realize dramatic savings and process optimizations for their customers.
TEM significantly eliminates the unnecessary costs related to inefficient enterprise telecom processes and reduces total costs through intelligent, strategic sourcing of services and ongoing inventory management and invoice validation. Additionally, TEM provides analysis and reporting abilities to provide cost transparency in support of optimization of customer telecommunications expenses.
Convergence's Telecom Expense Management (TEM) technology and services manages and optimizes a client's telecom inventory, improves billing accuracy, and provides critical management reporting to eliminate unnecessary costs and improve the balance sheet. By combining the world's leading TEM application and Convergence's internationalization and TEM Business Intelligence software with experienced telecommunication professionals and solid methodology, Convergence TEM brings integrity your customer's telecom expense management system, driving out costs while preserving service levels and improving productivity.
Convergence TEM includes call accounting, auditing, usage reporting, cost centre allocations, rebilling, spend analysis, process analysis, inventory analysis, requirement analysis, sourcing, contract compliance, and supplier performance measurement.
By providing services for your customer's fixed or mobile expenses that span the full TEM lifecycle - assessment and audit consulting services, planning, design, integration, deployment and ongoing management – you can help your customers transform their telecommunications environment by reducing complexity and automating processes to reduce costs.
Telecom Expense Management Consulting Services: consulting includes assessment, historical audit and savings analysis to identify optimization opportunities in your customer's fixed, mobile and data communications telecom environment.
Secure credits from telecommunication providers through automated monthly electronic invoice acquisition, validation and identification of billing errors.
Fixed Voice Telecom Expense Management Services: for fixed communications includes standard, enhanced and premium offerings for managing fixed voice, data, conferencing, video and networking equipment charges.
Mobile Voice and Mobile Data Telecom Expense Management Services: provides mobile expense management, mobile device management, integration services, managed services to support the growing pain of budgeting and containing your customer's mobile services and device expenses.
Telecom environment management: manage and reduce costs through automation of ordering, billing, invoice validation and cost allocation of voice, data and mobile services, simplify the environment and reduce staff complexity. With Convergence's TEM experience, skills and standardized service processes you support your customer with improved expense visibility and quickly realize cost savings.
Provide control with proactive management of voice, data and mobile services. Through centralization and standardization of telecom ordering and provisioning, invoicing and inventory management into a single process and financial control system, Telecom Expense Management Services help you to eliminate your customer's excessive cost of distributed toolsets. Through Total Telecom Service Lifecycle Management, including ordering and invoice management, our technologies and services are designed to provide your customers with an accurate view of their telecom inventory and expenses, allowing you to immediately pinpoint telecom cost saving opportunities. Benefits derived from our TEM solutions and services include improved control over the entire voice, data, mobile and equipment telecom costs by centralizing and standardizing environment and invoice data and reporting across multiple providers, contracts, TEM related data sources and business processes.
Enhance visibility and control over your customer's global telecommunications expenses. Through business intelligence reporting and dashboard monitoring, end-to-end Telecom Expense Management Services allows you to gain the visibility and control needed to optimize your customer's voice, data and mobile infrastructure. Business metrics reporting on telecom orders, invoices, inventory and cost recovery gives you the opportunity to plan and apply telecom budget and data networking assets. Improved visibility of inventory and infrastructure and expense trends helps to improve forecasting and enables more effective allocation of financial and staff resources to global business opportunities.
Convergence TEM software is available for on-premise deployment, as a managed service and in a hybrid configuration.
Contact us to learn more about our telecom expense management software and services fit to support ICT Integrators and Outsourcers.


Harsh environment applications, including mining, petrochem, aviation, oil & gas, port, seafront promenade, industrial plant and marine surveillance applications, all require a ruggedized CCTV surveillance camera able to deliver reliable operation under adverse, harsh environment conditions.
Ruggedized CCTV cameras for harsh environments such as the rugged Predator stainless steel from 360 Vision Technology, are designed to deliver ultimate day and night performance and extended product life across all rugged CCTV camera applications.
The stainless steel, IP68 rated rugged Predator Steel harsh environment camera brings a compact stainless steel CCTV PTZ camera solution to installers and end-users at a very competitive price. The rugged Predator stainless steel is ideal for all rugged cctv camera surveillance applications within a wide range of harsh / hazardous environments.


It was night just like this one in Chernobyl. Stars on the sky, some people sleeping, others talking to their mates, rest sitting in bar drinking.
Pretty quiet, but still filled with people. At UAF Outpost soldiers were guarding, rest sitting in their barracks... if they even have 'em.
That was just a short term of time, since someone yelled over radio for help on Global Frequency and those were soldiers, which were armed to their teeth, 5 of them.
"We do not know what we will meet there and sure we will. Might be huge pack of rodents, maybe chimera or controller. So be ready."
Location was given through their last words. It was the big, white building on the left in sight when quitting city from Red Tech laboratories.
As soon as they got there they met figure, looking fully human, standing back to the team facing ground, holding a combat knife in left hand.
It was male, had long down to shoulders, pure white colored skin, black hair, white blooded, but beside that fact not dirty hoodie, brown jeans with leather belt and black trainers.
He then started chuckling without an end. Upon turning around most of soldiers got terrified because of look on its face.
He or rather it had carved out smile reaching for cheeks, lacked eyelids, which looked like were also taken out using knife, blood on chin coming from mouth.
The eyes, which had no iris and looked like could barely see anything, laid vision upon soldiers.
Chuckle turned into maniac laugh. Thing took another steps in their direction. All of the privates, and those were 4, loosened their grip on weapons now.
At this point thing began running. Everyone fired.
But noone could hit it.
Every shot fired was missed. Thing waved its arm to left and right slaying everyone, 1 by 1 in the exact same count as they came for patroll.
Last one was Commander. He dropped his weapon onto ground reaching for his combat knife. Thing slowed down the pace moving around in circle with the last man standing, just like 2 animals.
It licked blood off the chin still laughing, flipping knife in the air. Commander didn't say a thing, just tilted his head.
"I always leave the best for the last."
"How come. I never spare the last living."
It took another run at the man, but got stopped, as Commander took it by the neck and lifted it into air. Ready to snap the neck, he got cut on his left eye, dropping the killer.
He then began repeadetly puncing it on the face, as it couldn't defend the might of exo suit. They were both attacking each other. With the last bits of energy he knocked it out, falling onto knees and fainting.
"Nice tale you got there, Gunter." Man with face covered by gasmask and voice changer spoke sitting next to German.
"Tale? I am no tale teller. This is story of what happened to left eye of current UAF commander." Gunter Azealman responded looking at 5 people sitting around before taking last sip of beer.


text:
Rethinking Food Production
Features - Sustainability
We must rethink how we produce our food — quickly — to avoid devastating impacts.
Lisa Lupo
©RHJ | adobe stock
The food system, as it is structured today, both contributes to and is imperiled by climate change. As discussed in the recently released Special Report: Climate Change and Land from the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the food system — from food production through to retail — is responsible for up to a third of the global greenhouse gas emissions. Thus, every step of the global supply chain holds responsibility for reducing both the causes and the associated risks. "The report is a wake-up call for all of us," said Earth Day Network (EDN) Director of the Food and Environment Program Michelle Pawliger. "Our food systems' contribution to climate change is on par with the energy and transportation sectors. It has never been more clear that everyone within our food system: producers, processors, manufacturers, and consumers need to do their part to protect our invaluable resources and to ensure there is healthy, low-carbon food for all."
With a key focus on land use, the IPCC report demonstrates that the intensification of land use over the last 50 years is contributing to climate change, volatile growing seasons, increased cereal prices, and water degradation, all of which will lead to increased food insecurity and hunger. For food processors and manufacturers, this translates to a need to reduce energy use, choose environmentally friendly supply chains and products, and reduce food waste every step of the way.
The insights from Pawliger follow the submission of an op-ed on the report by EDN President Kathleen Rogers and International Food Policy Research Institute Director General Shenggen Fan. Stating that "the food industry is an enormous driver of climate change, and our current global food system is pushing our natural world to the breaking point," the authors said, "We must rethink how we produce our food — and quickly — to avoid the most devastating impacts of global food production, including massive deforestation, staggering biodiversity loss and accelerating climate change." One area specifically addressed was that of animal agriculture, stating that:
If every American reduced their meat consumption by 10% (about six ounces per week), it would save about 7.8 trillion gallons of water and 49 billion pounds of carbon dioxide every year.
Nearly 1/3 of all food produced globally ends up in landfills; with $1 trillion worth of food thrown away every year.
"If food waste were a country, it would be the world's third-largest carbon emitter after the U.S. and China," the authors said.
©Earth Day Network
What It Means to You
QA asked U.S. Co-Author and Rutgers Associate Professor Pamela McElwee what the IPCC Special Report: Climate Change and Land means to food processors and manufacturers. Her response:
"The IPCC Climate Change and Land report lays out the threats to our global food system from climate change. We know that this will create impacts for food processors and manufacturers, such as reduced yields, disruptions to food storage and transport networks (such as those that arise from extreme events), and reduced food quality affecting availability (e.g., food spoilage and loss from mycotoxins that we will see with temperature increases).
"The good news is that there are a lot of potential mitigation and adaptation options across all food system activities, not just in production. Potential innovations in food processing, packaging, transport, storage, and trade can play important roles here. On the mitigation side, we estimate that greenhouse gas emissions from food supply chain activities past the farm gate (storage, processing, transport, and retail) account for 5% to 10% of total global emissions. Enhancing efficiency in food processing and transportation can help minimize food loss, contribute to food security, and reduce GHG emissions all at the same time. We are in need of particular energy savings in wet milling of maize, which requires 15% of total U.S. food industry energy; processing of sugar and oils also requires large amounts of energy. These are key areas for innovation.
"In terms of adaptation to existing climate changes, food processors and manufacturers can take more advantage of sustainable sourcing schemes, such as certification, supply chain traceability, and other standards. These provide potential benefits for adaptation by reducing drivers of unsustainable land management, and by diversifying and increasing flexibility in the food system to climate stressors and shocks. Sustainable sourcing can lower expenditures for food processors and retailers by reducing losses and adding value, potentially extending a producer's marketing season and providing unique opportunities to capture niche markets, thereby increasing the producers' adaptive capacity to climate change."
MAKING CHANGES. A key statement by IPCC in Section B6.2 of the report notes that "Diversification in the food system (e.g., implementation of integrated production systems, broad-based genetic resources, and diets) can reduce risks from climate change."
What does this mean to food processors? "Just as farmers can hedge against risks of climate change by diversifying their farms, processors can do the same," said Pamela McElwee, a U.S. co-author of the report and Rutgers associate professor. We need new and innovative ways to process and package foods, particularly fruits, vegetables, meats, seafood, dairy, and egg products; and to store and transport new varieties and crops that farmers may experiment with. "There is a great need for new technologies to inactivate pathogenic, spoilage microorganisms and enzymes with little or no effects on the nutritional and sensory quality of foods," she said. "These will be very much needed as temperatures increase."
The IPCC also noted that balanced diets, with plant-based food and animal-sourced food produced in resilient, sustainable, and low-GHG emission systems, present major opportunities for adaptation and mitigation while generating significant co-benefits in terms of human health. Additionally, technical options (such as improved harvesting techniques, on-farm storage, infrastructure, transport, packaging, retail, and education) can reduce food loss and waste across the supply chain. IPCC also makes recommendations for the near-term including "actions to build individual and institutional capacity, accelerate knowledge transfer, enhance technology transfer and deployment, enable financial mechanisms, implement early warning systems, undertake risk management and address gaps in implementation and upscaling."
As such, Pawliger said, "Food processors and manufacturers have a unique opportunity to be a part of fixing our food systems and combating climate change." With the report noting that improved food processing and retailing could benefit 500 million people worldwide through improved efficiency and sustainable processing practices, companies must stand out as leaders if the results needed to mitigate climate change are to be seen. "To lead, food processors and manufacturers should adopt emission-accounting tools, use eco-innovation practices, and support efforts to educate consumers through sustainability labeling practices," she said.
While it focuses accelerated knowledge transfer and enhanced technologies on food production, these actions also relate to food processing and manufacturing, Pawliger said. "Leaders in these fields should be raising industry-wide awareness of sustainable practices, supporting policies that incentivize sustainable products, and help share advances in climate-friendly processing technologies."
Combined food loss and waste amounts to a third of global food production, McElwee said, and food processors and manufacturers can play a key role in reducing that through research and investment for shelf life, processing, packaging, cold storage, and adoption of harvest and post-harvest technologies that minimize food waste. Additionally, she said, "Engaging with consumers to find ways to better help them avoid food waste should be a high priority for all processors, manufacturers, and retailers."
The IPCC report acknowledges that co-benefits and trade-offs when designing land and food policies can overcome barriers to implementation. Thus, the panel recommends "strengthened multilevel, hybrid and cross-sectoral governance, as well as policies developed and adopted in an iterative, coherent, adaptive, and flexible manner" to maximize co-benefits and minimize trade-offs. This is particularly essential when it is considered that land management decisions are made from farm level to national scales, and both climate and land policies often range across multiple sectors, departments and agencies.
PLANT-BASED FOODS. A key area of focus for Pawliger, Rogers, and Fan was that of plant-based foods. (See The Impossible Burger, page 16 for a current success story in this area.)
For more infographics from Earth Day Network, visit foodprints.earthday.org/infographics.
Because food waste and animal agriculture are the two biggest emitters of greenhouse gases within the agriculture sector, food processors and manufacturers should work to reduce waste and incorporate more low-carbon, plant-based foods into their products, Pawliger said. Citing the Plant Based Food Association, she said the market value of these foods is $4.5 billion and has grown significantly more than the total U.S. retail food market (11% compared to 2%), which demonstrates the viability of increasing these options into consumer products.
Recommendations along these same lines from Rogers and Fan include:
The U.S. and other developed countries must encourage food companies to produce more sustainable food, including more plant-based options, and educate consumers and retailers about healthy and sustainable diets.
Developed countries also should support and incentivize emerging innovative technologies in plant-based foods, and carbon-neutral or low-carbon meat production.
While a number of recommendations were proposed by the IPCC as well as Pawliger, Rogers, and Fan, "there is no one silver-bullet solution," Pawliger said. Policies are needed that incent more sustainable practices at every level of the supply chain and in consumers' homes, she said. "The window to act is closing, but as the report shows, if we all take big actions today, we can curb climate change."
The food industry will face increased risks under future climate scenarios, McElwee said. "They need to be ready for these risks by proactively seeking out new knowledge and technologies rather than waiting until higher temperature thresholds are hit, and explore new risk management options, like insurance and other schemes, to help them prepare."
The author is Editor of QA magazine. She can be reached at llupo@gie.net.
Vetting Your Allergen Control Plan
Features - allergen control
The Key: Maintain internal and supply chain vigilance
©New Africa | adobestock
More than 170 foods are known to cause averse or allergic reactions in some people, but only eight are included in the World Health Organization (WHO) list of foods and ingredients known to cause hypersensitivity that shall always be declared on a food label. Developed by WHO's Codex Alimentarius Commission Committee on Food Labeling, the list is included in section 4.2.1.4 of General Standards for the Labeling of Prepackaged Foods.
Of the 10 major countries with allergen labeling requirements, only the U.S. and Brazil require labeling of those same eight foods and ingredients. Japan requires the fewest, with labeling mandated for only four (eggs, milk, peanut, and crustaceans), while Australia/New Zealand require the most, adding sesame, shellfish/mollusk, lupin, bee pollens, and royal jelly to their list for a total of 14 regulated allergens. (See Regulated Allergens Around the World, page 66, for allergens regulated by two or more countries; visit Kerry Health and Nutrition, https://bit.ly/2lDOmQ4, for the full list.)
With undeclared allergens being the #1 cause of food recalls for both USDA and FDA during the second quarter of 2019 — the eighth successive quarter that it is the top cause of FDA food recalls, and causing more than half all USDA recalls — avoidance of allergenic cross-contact is a critical issue for the food industry.
Additionally, while allergen controls were previously recommended by FDA as Good Manufacturing Practices (GMPs), controls are now mandated by FSMA. As stated in CFR 117.135(c)(2) Food Allergen Control: "Food allergen controls must include those procedures, practices, and processes employed for (i) Ensuring protection of food from allergen cross-contact, including during storage, handling, and use; and (ii) Labeling the finished food, including ensuring that the finished food is not misbranded under section 403(w) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act."
ALLERGEN CONTROL PLAN. As such, an allergen control plan — which includes identification of allergenic foods and ingredients in the product and facility, and procedures for storage, handling, processing, packaging, and labeling — is an essential component of your food safety program.
Your plan should include information about how suppliers are vetted, the facility is kept clean, methods are proven effective, and internal testing is used, along with "if-then" statements, said Emport LLC President Emily Kaufman. For example, "If a supplier doesn't provide XYZ documentation, then we will reject the item. If we test five spots on the line for environmental allergen residue and one test is positive, then we will take ABC steps to ensure the entire line is clean. And so on," she said.
©mimadeo | adobestock
Having a plan enables efficient, effective response should an issue occur. "Positive test results and consumer complaints are high stress situations; time is of the essence and emotions run high," Kaufman said, explaining that a written allergen control plan has two main benefits:
It provides a set of next steps, so you can take action quickly and confidently and avoid making decisions under pressure.
As a documented framework of day-to-day activities, it provides written records to help trace product through the facility and supply chain to identify the source.
The allergen control plan also must be continually implemented, assessed, and updated. As discussed in "Components of an Effective Allergen Control Plan: A Framework for Food Processors" from the Food Allergy Research and Resource Program (FARRP) at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, "Every time you make a change in a process or a product, assess your plan and update as needed. Every time you hire a new employee or change the responsibilities of an employee, make certain they understand their role in the allergen control plan through documented training. Every time you begin working with a new supplier, evaluate their Allergen Control plan and change yours as needed. If you change or add locations, a new allergen control plan should be developed specifically for that location."
A "Food for Thought" video series from Food Allergy Research and Education (FARE) takes a hard, honest look at food allergy issues and their impact on lives.
In Ellie's Food for Thought, six-year-old Ellie has life-threatening anaphylactic allergies to egg, peanut, tree nuts, and sesame. She is careful about what she eats "every meal, every snack, every day," but she always carries her epinephrine with her because: "What if I make a mistake and eat the wrong thing? What if my 'safe' food somehow touches something unsafe?" That is exactly what happened when an allergen contacted her supposedly non-allergenic food ... (Watch here: https://bit.ly/2zoa40A.)
Life is no easier for the parents who try to do everything they can to protect their children. As various parents stated in another FARE video, "This is one disease that's silent and can be possibly deadly and life threatening, and our children are at risk." ... "We worry every day, every second, every hour when our son leaves our sight." ... "It's one of those things that you can't really control, you just have to monitor and make sure you keep someone who has a terrible allergy away from something that could set off or trigger a reaction." ... "I'm hoping ... that there's something that will allow her to live differently than she's living now and more freely."
FARE is a food allergy advocacy organization and private research funder, with a mission to improve the quality of life and the health of individuals with food allergies, and to provide them hope through the promise of new treatments. For more information, visit www.foodallergy.org.
Included in the FARRP publication are a number of recommendations for reducing the chance of cross contact when formulating products and sourcing suppliers. These include:
Avoid using allergenic ingredients in such low amounts that they have no or minimal functional effect in the finished product. There is not enough known about the specific amount or concentration of an allergenic protein that will elicit adverse reactions, said 3M Global Technical Service Specialist Gabriela Lopez Velasco. Because it is difficult to correlate threshold doses to allergen risk and safety levels, companies are more often applying precautionary allergen labeling statements out of an abundance of caution. But this may confuse consumers about the difference between a product that may, but likely doesn't, contain a trace amount of an allergen from a residue on the production line to those that intentionally contain low levels of allergen in formulation. So, she said, "If a company can substitute other ingredients for allergens with little negative consequences, they minimize the possibility of adverse health consequences for their consumers and product recalls."
Only add allergens to new products when they make a discernable difference in the taste or functionality of the product, and question ingredient suppliers on the functionality and necessity of allergens in their formulations. "Every allergen you introduce brings a new level of complexity to your allergen control plan," Kaufman said. "It doesn't matter whether the allergen is an afterthought or a main ingredient, it's still a hazard and requires serious attention."
Understand the existing allergens or lack of allergens in the manufacturing facilities when formulating new products, and create a process to review allergens in new products with the manufacturing facility prior to ordering ingredients. The introduction of a new allergen in the facility will require a reevaluation of the entire plan, additional monitoring of storage and cleaning protocols, and the incorporation of new testing. "So," Kaufman said, "You'll want to ask yourself: Is it worth it?"
VETTING SUPPLIERS. FARRP also recommends that suppliers be required to have a documented allergen control plan, and:
Letters that guarantee the ingredients do not contain undeclared allergens.
Notification of any changes to the allergen status of the ingredients they supply prior to any changes.
Sanitation cleaning procedures that are validated on a regular basis and whenever a change may affect the allergen status of the line (i.e., new or changed product, ingredient, equipment, etc.).
All allergenic ingredients in clearly marked, sealed, undamaged containers.
Velasco agreed that manufacturers should require suppliers to guarantee against undeclared allergens, adding, "They should routinely audit the facilities and demand that they be alerted immediately to any changes to the allergen status of the ingredients they supply and handle as well as any important modifications to the allergen control plan."
The audit should assess the implementation and effectiveness of the allergen control plan; range of allergenic products produced, especially on shared equipment; cleaning program and protocols; and training records. "It's not enough for a supplier to tell you that they test for allergens," Kaufman said. "Find out more: How often do they test? How do they collect their samples? Do they test in-house, externally, or both? What do they do if they get a positive result?" It's also important to know if they knowingly work or come into contact with any other allergens and to ensure you have allergen control information from all further upstream suppliers.
"Food safety starts at the beginning of the chain — you want to make sure that you understand the state of the ingredients your company receives, before they enter your facilities," Velasco said. "Suppliers must clearly declare allergens, but they must also have implemented controls to ensure that there is not unintentional contamination with undeclared allergens."
Cross-Contact vs. Cross-Contamination
In FSMA's Preventive Controls Rule FDA discusses the use of the term "cross-contact" rather than contamination in relation to allergens: In the past, inadvertent incorporation of an allergen into a food was referred to as "contamination" or "cross-contamination." However, because an allergen is a normal component of food, and not itself a contaminant, there has been a shift in scientific literature to the term "cross-contact" with respect to unintentional transfer of allergenic proteins from a food containing the proteins to one that does not. Given that, FDA has shifted to the use of "cross-contact" as well.
Thus, she said, food manufacturers should have a robust supplier verification program that includes the need for suppliers to have allergen control plans that consider risk assessment, risk verification, and risk communication:
Risk assessment involves a hazard analysis by a multifunctional team to identify potential sources of food allergens and map their path through each step of the manufacturing process. Once the path is identified, controls can be put in place in target areas. "It is important to periodically review and reassess the risk assessment as new products, formulation changes, or vendor changes may change production conditions," she said.
Risk management is the development of work instructions and procedures to control the possibility of unintentional allergen contamination. "Risk management strategies implemented to control allergens must be constantly monitored and verified," Velasco said. "In reality this is the only way to make sure that these strategies work and are effective."
Risk communication ensures that information about potential allergen contamination is adequately communicated on the product label in compliance with applicable regulations.
©khumthong | adobestock
"It is the duty of every food manufacturing facility to verify that their suppliers have a solid allergen control plan and that the plan complies with the risk management strategies implemented by their company to prevent unintended allergen contamination and to provide adequate risk communication — labeling — in your final product," she said.
"Hold your suppliers to the same high standards you hold yourself," Kaufman said. "If they don't have an allergen control plan of their own, if they can't tell you in great detail how they are keeping you safe, you'll have to assume that they are putting you at risk."
Training. Even with comprehensive supplier and labeling requirements and initiatives, the success of your program will be dependent on worker understanding and application of in-plant procedures. Thus, ongoing training should include:
Line personnel training on techniques for ensuring product labels are switched appropriately at product changeover.
General training on allergen awareness and control, handwashing and attire requirements, for employees at all levels.
Specific documented training as dictated by their job responsibilities, such as cleaning equipment, product formulation, and segregation activities.
Training for all employees on the reasons that protocols are required and the potential consequences of the plan not being followed.
"The human aspect of allergen control cannot be understated," Velasco said. "Continuous training and education to raise awareness about food allergy and food safety are critical." And training should be appropriate for each group. For example, she said, "Food processors are wise to take into consideration such factors as the level of technical skills to understand specific terminology, the applicability of hands-on training versus classroom-style and the workers' language skills."
It is critical that all employees understand the impact that an error in any step of the manufacturing process will have on an allergic consumer. "The most effective allergen control plan in the world won't be effective if the people on the floor tracking supplies, making the product, and testing the facility are not following the established protocols," Velasco said. "The presence of undeclared allergens is one of the most common causes for recalls, and if employees understand how their role relates to this issue, they are more likely to follow the protocol to a T."
Knockin' at the Farmstead Door
Features - regulation and response
What FDA is finding in its recently initiated PSR inspections.
©wolterke | adobe stock
In the spring of 2019, FDA began routine Produce Safety Rule (PSR) inspections of larger farms and orchards, with small farm inspections to begin in the spring of 2020. To determine what these food producers should expect when FDA comes knocking on the farmstead door, what the agency is seeing thus far, and how it all impacts the downstream food chain, including food processors and manufacturers, QA asked FDA Commissioner of Food Policy & Response Frank Yiannas about his farm-visit experiences and impressions. Following are his responses:
1. This spring, you began Produce Safety Rule inspections of larger farms and orchards. In general, what are you finding — both positive practices and continuing opportunities?
FDA and our state partners began routine inspections this year at large farms. Routine inspections for sprout operations began prior to that time. FDA has started conducting routine inspections of foreign farms while the vast majority of domestic Produce Safety Rule (PSR) inspections are conducted by our state partners under the State Cooperative Agreement Program (CAPs). Some routine state and FDA inspections are only just beginning because the produce harvest season for those farms only just started. While it's too soon to provide trends because of the limited pool of inspectional data that FDA and state partners have collected so far, we're off to a good start doing work that has never been done before.
FDA Commissioner of Food Policy & Response Frank Yiannas (left, gesturing) observes and discusses agricultural water treatment on a California farm.
Photo courtesy frank Yiannas
2. FDA has said its initial goal in PSR inspections is to be educational and collaborative, while still ensuring compliance and food safety. What does this mean?
At FDA, we're committed to prevention. Our inspection teams are trained to help farmers understand the PSR requirements and provide them with reference materials to facilitate that understanding. The collaborative mindset also means that our inspection teams will engage with the farmers to understand the farm operations and will evaluate the overall food safety impacts of the farm practices, taking a big-picture approach that considers how different parts of the operation intersect and impact each other. While collaboration and education are important, when we see a condition or practice that could introduce hazards into produce, we will take appropriate action to help ensure the condition or practice is addressed.
We delayed the start of routine large-farm inspections until this spring in part because more time was needed to help ensure that produce farmers have the training and information they needed to comply with the Produce Safety Rule. During that time, we worked to help provide access to training; we published a draft guidance; and we collaborated with the National Association of State Departments of Agriculture on the development of On-Farm Readiness Reviews. These voluntary reviews help farmers assess how ready they are to comply with the rule.
Just as with the first round of routine inspections for other rules established by the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act, such as the Preventive Controls for Human Food, the Preventive Controls for Animal Food, and the Foreign Supplier Verification Program, we understand that this may be new territory for food producers. That is why we continue to focus on education and technical assistance during these initial inspections.
3. You have noted that treatment of surface water used for irrigation is catching on. Can you discuss what you've seen?
On a recent trip to California, we had an opportunity to observe treatment of agricultural water used for overhead sprinkler irrigation of leafy greens to meet a new requirement of the California Leafy Greens Marketing Agreement (LGMA). On this visit to an organic farm we watched agricultural water being treated in accordance with LGMA requirements for overhead sprinkler irrigation for leafy greens seed germination. We also observed the irrigation crews carefully verifying treatment parameters at the terminus of the irrigation system, to help ensure that the treatment is delivered in an effective manner throughout the overhead sprinkler irrigation system. In addition, we saw similar water treatment equipment on other fields and farms.
© akepong | adobe stock
Sampling Results Clear Yuma Romaine Lettuce
In December 2018, shortly after the start of the winter harvest season in Yuma, Ariz., FDA began collecting romaine lettuce samples in the region. The samples were tested for Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli (STEC) and Salmonella spp. to help determine whether romaine lettuce from this region continued to pose a public health concern.
The results, released in August 2019, showed no detection of Salmonella in any of the samples. In a single sample, Shiga toxin-producing E. coli (STEC) was detected, however further analysis determined that the bacteria was not pathogenic.
The sampling was conducted following the Spring 2018 outbreak of E. coli O157:H7 linked to romaine lettuce from the Yuma growing region which involved 210 people in 36 states and resulted in 96 hospitalizations, 27 cases of hemolytic uremic syndrome, and five deaths. Since 2012, there have been five suspected or confirmed multistate outbreaks of foodborne illness linked to produce harvested in the Yuma growing region, which provides the majority of U.S. leafy greens during the winter months.
FDA chose to sample romaine lettuce at commercial coolers and cold-storage facilities where field heat is removed from harvested romaine and product is cold-stored before shipment. This enabled them to collect samples from multiple farms at the same time from centralized locations, while easily identifying the farms from which each sample originated. With the assistance of the Arizona Department of Agriculture and the Arizona Department of Health Services, FDA field staff visited 26 commercial coolers and cold-storage facilities and collected and tested 118 samples for each pathogen.
The findings suggested that there were no widespread STEC or Salmonella spp. contamination of romaine lettuce from the Yuma growing region during the period when the sampling occurred.
FDA is continuing to work with leafy green stakeholders in the Yuma region to consider a longer-term environmental study to identify and control risks to prevent future outbreaks, with the ultimate goal of protecting consumers.
For the complete report, see the Microbiological Surveillance Sampling Report (https://bit.ly/2kp7D7p).
4. Following those observations, you stated, "If more firms take measures like this, we will make surface water even safer." Please explain.
Observing firsthand how growers are using a risk-based approach to evaluate, monitor, and control for contamination in agricultural water to prevent contamination of their fruit and vegetable crops is a game-changer. We have observed a variety of different approaches on farms, and FDA has long said that growers have a range of viable options to consider when addressing agricultural water safety issues, based on the practices and conditions specific to their farms. In some circumstances other options, such as changing the timing or manner of water application, may be more feasible than the option to treat water.
Whatever option they choose, farmers are increasingly taking proactive measures like these to help further strengthen food safety culture on their farms, which is ultimately a win for consumers.
5. How are your on-farm and industry group visits being used in FDA's continuing look at the microbial water quality and testing standards of the rule? Any updates on this?
During the period of the agricultural water compliance date extension for covered produce other than sprouts, FDA has been pursuing a rigorous stakeholder engagement plan. One aspect of that plan has been more than 200 educational farm visits since 2017, which have helped to further refine our understanding of the myriad of variations in agricultural water sources and uses. The farm tours have included representatives from government agencies, academia, and the produce industry, along with farmers whose farms are covered by the PSR. We also have engaged with technical experts from both the public and private sectors on matters such as water microbiology and water systems. These experiences help to inform our work on the produce rule's agricultural water provisions as we diligently pursue solutions to further reduce the regulatory burden or increase flexibility while continuing to protect public health.
Growers have a range of viable options when addressing agricultural water safety issues, based on the practices and conditions of their farms.
© Bits and Splits | adobestock
6. How does all this impact food processors and manufacturers; i.e., what should be required of their produce suppliers, and what will FDA be looking for in produce supplies when inspecting these facilities?
Under the FSMA preventive controls and foreign supplier verification rules, processors and importers have the responsibility to assess their supply chain, unless a future step in the manufacturing process will apply necessary controls. When evaluating processors and importers, FDA will review the supply chain controls to determine that the processors and importers are meeting their requirements and have the necessary programs in place. Since produce is often processed without a cook step, having supply chain or importer controls in place is very important to ensure the safety of processed or imported produce.
7. What else is important for the food industry to understand in this area?
It's important for the food industry to understand that FDA is committed to the partnership that has grown and evolved since FSMA was first signed into law. FDA leaders have visited farms and facilities all over the country, and we have all been impressed with the dedication we've seen among farmers to the nation's rich tradition of farming and to the health and well-being of the customers who trust them to provide safe foods.
In the speeches I've given since joining FDA, I always close with this thought: "I've learned from working with FDA from the other side of the fence that there's a lot industry can do to advance food safety. And there's a lot government can do to advance food safety. But what is crystal clear to me, having now been on both sides of that fence with some influential organizations, is that there's so much more we can do together.
"Whether you're in the private or public sector, whether you're at the state or Federal level, we're all working for the same boss — consumers — so let's work together to keep their food safe. They're counting on us to do so."
More PSR Inspection Information
NASDA On-Farm Readiness Reviews (https://bit.ly/2CigKwj)
Produce Safety Rule Inspections Begin in Spring (https://bit.ly/2luXshO)
Audits and Inspections are Different (https://bit.ly/2kgGNyr)
FDA Adds Resources to Support Compliance with the Produce Safety Rule (https://bit.ly/2krOx0j)
FDA Launches FSMA Produce Safety Rule Webpages (https://bit.ly/2k1Ri8E)
FDA Produce Safety Network (https://bit.ly/2jXhtNA)
AI Evolution
Departments - Research & Trends Report
Optical lace may give robots a softer touch.
For the optical lace project, a flexible, porous lattice structure was manufactured from 3D-printed polyurethane; its core was threaded with stretchable optical fibers containing more than a dozen mechanosensors; then an LED light was attached to illuminate the fiber.
©Cornell University
A new synthetic material that creates a linked sensory network similar to a biological nervous system would enable robots to sense how they interact with their environment and adjust their actions accordingly. Robots fitted with the material, developed by Cornell University Ph.D. student Patricia Xu through the Organic Robotics Lab, would be well suited for manufacturing and the health care industry.
"We want to have a way to measure stresses and strains for highly deformable objects, and we want to do it using the hardware itself, not vision," said lab director Rob Shepherd, associate professor of mechanical and aerospace engineering and the senior author of the lab's paper, "Optical Lace for Synthetic Afferent Neural Networks," (Science Robotics, September 11, 2019). "A good way to think about it is from a biological perspective. A person can still feel their environment with their eyes closed, because they have sensors in their fingers that deform when their finger deforms. Robots can't do that right now."
Shepherd's lab previously created sensory foams that used optical fibers to detect such deformations. For the optical lace project, Xu used a flexible, porous lattice structure manufactured from 3D-printed polyurethane; she threaded its core with stretchable optical fibers containing more than a dozen mechanosensors, then attached an LED light to illuminate the fiber.
When she pressed the lattice structure at various points, the sensors were able to pinpoint changes in the photon flow. "When the structure deforms, you have contact between the input line and the output lines, and the light jumps into these output loops in the structure, so you can tell where the contact is happening," Xu said. "The intensity of this determines the intensity of the deformation itself."
The optical lace, which also is washable, would not be used as a skin coating for robots, Shepherd said, it would be more like the flesh itself. A robot would need to know its own shape in order to touch and hold and assist in manufacturing without damaging parts or product. "If they can feel what they're touching, then that will improve their accuracy," Shepherd said.
While the optical lace does not have as much sensitivity as, say, a human fingertip that is jam-packed with nerve receptors, the material is more sensitive to touch than is the human back.
The researchers also plan to explore the potential of incorporating machine learning to detect more complex deformations, like bending and twisting. "I make models to calculate where the structure is being touched, and how much is being touched," Xu said. "But in the future, when you have 30 times more sensors and they're spread randomly throughout, that will be a lot harder to do. Machine learning will do it much faster."
Even as robots become more aware of how they interact with the environment, humans still have a distinct advantage. "We don't know our own bodies as well as some robots know parts of their limbs and joints and fingers," Shepherd said. "But we can still perform better than robots generally because we can deal with uncertainty through mechanical design, as well as neural architecture."
The paper was co-authored by postdoctoral researcher Anand Kumar Mishra; students Lillia Bai and Cameron Aubin; and Letizia Zullo from the Center for Synaptic Neuroscience and Technology, Istituto Italiano di Tecnologia. The research was supported by grants from the Air Force Office of Scientific Research and the National Institutes of Health.
Source: Cornell University
In California, if a product tests 10% or more above the labeled amount — then the entire batch must be destroyed.
© Peter | stock.adobe.com
Chocolate Clouds THC Testing
Chocolate components may interfere with cannabis potency testing, causing inaccurate results.
Manufacturers add cannabis to a wide variety of foods, and the composition of these products, (the matrix) can affect potency testing results. In an investigation focused on potency testing for cannabis-infused chocolates, David Dawson, the project's principal investigator, and his colleagues at CW Analytical Laboratories noticed some "weird potency variations" depending on how the chocolate samples were prepared for testing.
So the team decided to study the effects of altering sample prep conditions, such as the amounts of chocolate and solvent, pH, and type of chocolate, on the concentration of ?9-tetrahydrocannabinol (?9-THC), the major psychoactive constituent of cannabis, measured by high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC).
"When we had less cannabis-infused chocolate in the sample vial, say one gram, we got higher THC potencies and more precise values than when we had two grams of the same infused chocolate in the vial," Dawson said.
Not only does this go against what he would consider to be basic statistical representation of samples, where one would assume that the more sample you have, the more representative it is of the whole, but, he said, "Simply changing how much sample is in the vial could determine whether a sample passes or fails, which could have a huge impact on the producer of the chocolate bars, as well as the customer who might be under- or overdosing because of this weird quirk of matrix effects."
It also has critical regulatory implications. "If an edible cannabis product tests 10% below the amount on the label, California law states that is must be relabeled, with considerable time and expense," Dawson said. "But it's even worse if a product tests 10% or more above the labeled amount — then the entire batch must be destroyed."
The results suggested that some other component of the chocolate — a matrix effect — was suppressing the signal for ?9-THC. So Dawson is trying to figure out which ingredient of chocolate is responsible for the matrix effects. He has tried spiking a standard solution of ?9-THC with varying amounts of chocolate bar, cocoa powder, baker's chocolate, and white chocolate, all of which have different components, and observing how the HPLC signal changes. "Our best lead right now is that it has something to do with the fats, which makes sense considering that ?9-THC is fat-soluble," Dawson says.
The team would like to extend their analyses to other cannabinoids, such as CBD, and they plan to investigate other food matrices, such as chocolate chip cookies. Dawson said he hopes the research will contribute toward developing standard methods for cannabis potency testing in a variety of edibles.
The research was presented at the American Chemical Society (ACS) Fall 2019 National Meeting & Exposition.
Source: American Chemical Society (ACS)
© Scanrail | stock.adobe.com
From Plastic to 3D Ink
A Russian University student develops a way to turn plastic waste into 3D ink.
Gokma Sahat Tua, a bachelor's student at Tomsk State University (TSU) in Siberia, Russia, has developed a way to recycle plastic waste into ink for 3D printing. The student from Indonesia developed his project as part of the curriculum of TSU and the University of Maastricht in The Netherlands.
The TSU Tomsk International Science Program (TISP) is an international bachelor's degree program in the natural sciences, physics, and mathematics areas presented in English, developed jointly with the University of Maastricht. The program is problem-practice oriented, that is, it involves students in solving real problems. One of these was undertaken by Tua.
"We have developed an extruder for recycling plastic waste into 3D printing ink," Tua explained. "The machine is assembled in parts, which can be ordered online. The total cost will not exceed 10,000 rubles ($155 U.S.). That is, this is very cheap equipment that a group of students can afford."
The extruder utilizes raw plastic material that is not accepted even for standard processing. "If you don't go into technical specifications, the extruder transforms polyethylene and other types of plastic into 3D printing materials," he said. "You load the resulting thread into a printer and can print anything — watches, chairs, or any designer items and models."
Currently, the project team has developed a website with information on waste recycling, its standards, and the possibilities for the second life of plastic. A mobile application also is planned. "From an environmental point of view, plastic is a dangerous, toxic, and useless material with a specific odor," Tua said. "But for design, it is a supermaterial that can be used everywhere and saves money."
Source: Tomsk State University
Departments - My Story
Tressa with Lisa Lupo
Tressa (front, right) and twins Chloe and Luke (back) survived a Listeria strain that kills 30% of those stricken with it.
Photo Courtesy Tressa
It was early fall of 1999 and my husband, Paul, and I were eagerly anticipating the birth of our twins. Despite some low-iron issues that had put me on bed rest, it should have been a fairly easy, typical delivery. But, without warning, the birth of Luke and Chloe became everything but that when the twins were born with Apgar scores so low, no one knew if they would live.
Apgar scores measure a newborn's breathing effort, heart rate, muscle tone, reflexes, and skin color; 10 is best. With Luke scoring a 1 — with a slight temperature being the only sign of life — and Chloe, a little better at 4 but having a high level of infection, the two were immediately rushed to the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU). Suffering with a temperature that dropped so low my organs were shutting down, I, too, was taken to ICU where I was alert and aware that my children were dying, but was unable to see them for the first days of their lives. It was at this point, my husband later said, "I realized everybody in my family was extremely sick." So sick, in fact, that we asked a priest to give Luke last rites.
Because none of us presented with normal foodborne-illness symptoms, numerous tests were run and medications attempted. So many that Chloe's feet were bruised from all the injections and Luke underwent central line heart surgery to receive medications straight to his heart — as they could no longer find veins in which to inject medications.
At one point, while I was still in ICU, my husband brought me a photo of Luke, in which his tiny arm was raised above his head, "See, he's waving hi to us!" Paul said. It was a comforting thought, until we learned that it was because he was having a seizure.
Not being able to be with my babies when they were so ill — with silent cries and voices hoarse from intubation, projectile vomiting, diarrhea, trying to keep medications down when everything wanted to come up — was pure hell. When I did finally get to see them, Luke had two IV needles coming out of his forehead.
It wasn't until one of the nurses who had seen victims of a previous outbreak suspected Listeria poisoning. When the tests came back positive, Chloe and I were put on antibiotics, but Luke, who had ingested the Listeria-infected meconium while in the womb, faced more complications and had to be intubated.
It didn't help my frame of mind to know that it was a meat product that I had eaten the month before that caused such suffering for us all. Having been put on bed rest due to low iron counts, the meat product my sister brought me was supposed to have been a help. But it became the vector that nearly cost my husband his entire family.
Altogether, I spent three days in ICU and five more in the maternity ward; Chloe spent 10 days in NICU; and Luke was in NICU for three weeks. It took several months — of diarrhea, severe acid reflux, and projectile vomiting for the twins; diarrhea, inability to breastfeed and excessive weight loss for me; and a slow, precarious process of weaning Luke off the phenobarbital that had helped mitigate his seizures — before we could even begin to say we were on the road to health.
Today, we are extremely careful with everything we eat. We heat supposedly ready-to-eat meat (which was the initial cause of the infection); we cook all meat to well done; we receive email alerts on food recalls; we go above and beyond to keep everything clean and sanitized.
We wonder why it still happens two decades later; we wonder if we will ever forget. But, most of all, we wonder how — but are so thankful that — we all three survived when the Listeria strain that affected us kills 30% of those stricken with it. We continue to advocate for food safety and tell our story wherever we can — asking that you, who process and prepare consumers' food, think about the people in your family and others you love, and how food contaminated with Listeria could affect them. Then do everything you can to prevent it.
Stop Foodborne Illness
Behind every foodborne illness outbreak are people who suffer horrible consequences due to food being contaminated somewhere along the chain from farm to plate. Everyone is susceptible to foodborne illness, everyone. It is up to each of us to handle food safely to save lives. - Stop Foodborne Illness
Stop Foodborne Illness is a national nonprofit, public health organization dedicated to the prevention of illness and death from foodborne pathogens. Read more stories at StopFoodborneIllness.com/stories.
Consumer Perspective

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


Stylish Wood Grain Stand Design - Take your wireless charging experience to the next level with this unique wood grain charging stand! Charge your phone vertically or horizontally, and still enjoy movies and music, making calls or sending messages without interrupting charging.
Fast Charging - This charger is 1.5 times faster than the standard wireless charger. This fast wireless charger only needs a couple hours to juice up your phone battery to the max.
Phone Protection - Built-in over-voltage, under voltage, and short-circuit protection provides ultimate safety for your smartphone.


text:
Millions will have to wait for free bus pass as rules set to change
The rules are different in England from the rest of the UK
Sign up for our Daily Newsletter for the latest local news straight to your inbox
People in England look set to miss out on a free bus pass after they retire as the rules are to change.
At present anyone in Scotland, Northern Ireland, or Wales can get a pass to use local buses for free when they reach 60.
In England the rule is that you can get a bus pass at the state pension age for women - which now stands at 66.
But in the years ahead the state pension age is set to be increased - meaning younger pensioners and retirees will not be able to get a bus pass in England, reports The Express.
The state pension age, for both men and women, will reach 67 between 2026 and 2028 under the Government's current schedule, and will rise to 68 by 2046.
To find out if you qualify for a bus pass, go to the Government's website and put in your postcode.
You will be given contact details for your local council, who will provide you with the claiming details.
As well as the bus pass, pensioners are entitled to up to £179.60 a week in state pension, if you have made contributions for at least 35 years.
Serco to run Covid test centres for another year in £322million deal
Who are the cast of Love Island 2021
State pensions can be claimed up to four months in advance of reaching the state pension age.
State pensions are not paid out automatically, they will need to be claimed. The Government will send out letters to eligible recipients no later than two months before they reach state pension age, telling them what to do.
State pensions can be claimed even if a person keeps working, potentially boosting income during a person's later years.
Initial state pension payments should arrive within five weeks of reaching state pension age, so long as they've been claimed.
Beyond this, payments will come through every four weeks.
The actual payment day a person will receive their income will depend on their National Insurance number.
The final two digits of the number will determine what day of the week the money will come through, as detailed below:
Monday - 00 to 19
Tuesday - 20 to 39
Wednesday - 40 to 59
Thursday - 60 to 79
Friday - 80 to 99
Yoga teacher who can't walk after falling off bike told boyfriend to leave her
Mum of three died of blood clots after having Covid vaccine


How far in advance should one shadow a dentist before applying to DS? I suppose it doesn't really matter, but I've read in several threads about asking the dentist for a letter of recommendation. I won't be applying until 2012, but I have some time on my hands and figured I'd like to get started with shadowing now. Assuming I finish most of my shadowing in the next few months, would it be strange to ask for a letter of recommendation two years before I even apply to DS?
You need to start shadowing early and carry it through your entire undergrad career. If you break this out over 4 years, it's really not bad at all. I would recommend spending a day with a dentist every few months. Make sure to shadow different dentists in different specialties and in different situations (military vs civilian). You'll grow close relationships with a couple of these dentists through the years. If you keep the relationship going, it would be best to wait until you apply to ask for the letter. That way they can talk about how they've known you for X years and how you've grown and how they're sure you're going to be a great dentist, etc.


text:
Compton Faces Possible Government Shutdown Over Budget
Compton is facing an untenable situation. Twice it has voted down a budget that would have included layoffs, but now it appears that if no budget passes Tuesday night, the city would be forced to shut down, involuntarily furloughing its entire staff, excluding essential employees and public safety officials.
Should the council approve a budget with layoffs, the city's unions have already announced they would sue.
But after three years of deficits, the city is facing a liquidity problem and ended last year with $23 million in debts, or about 40% of the general fund.
The unions have proposed a series of concessions as an option other than layoffs, including early retirement benefits, furloughs, forfeiting vacation time, and new health benefits.
From the Los Angeles Times:
Compton's financially struggling City Hall may have to shut down if the City Council doesn't approve a new budget Tuesday night.
The council in recent weeks has twice voted down a budget that would lay off dozens of employees, including several department heads.Those voting in the majority said they wanted to see alternatives to layoffs.
City officials including City Manager Willie Norfleet and Mayor Eric Perrodin said last week that without a budget, a government shutdown could be imminent, with all city employees involuntarily furloughed except for public safety workers and other essential staff. City Treasurer Douglas Sanders said that he would not issue city paychecks this week if there was no budget appropriating the funds. City employees received notices weeks ago warning that their paychecks might be delayed.
PublicCEO2011-07-20T08:00:00-07:00July 20, 2011|Local Governments - PublicCEO Exclusive|