Wednesday, January 31, 2007


Joint venture: an organization that results from a contractual arrangement and that is owned, operated or governed by two or more participants as a separate and specific activity subject to joint control in which the participants retain an ongoing financial intrest or responsibility.

That is right out of the City of Great Falls Notes to Financial Statements June 20, 2006. So, my interpretation of the City's statement is that a joint venture requires a contract of some sort. But apparently, they now do not feel that a joint venture needs a contract. Hmm.

Another thing I noted in the same document. "During the fiscal year 2004, the City entered into a joint venture with SME G&T..."

Now I could link to document after document here, documents stating that The City and SME are partners, ECP and SME are partners, some statements of which predate there even being an ECP, or an Ordinance allowing the city to operate an electric utility. I can show, with documents off the City website, that it has been stated that The City operated an electric utility as far back as Aug 2003, when in fact the ordinance to create it was not passed until October 2003. And then they had to do it again. Ordinance 2925 was adopted by the City Commission in November of 2005. That set it up as a non-profit, and apparently, took away our right to vote on spending money on HGS.
I can show, with documents off the City website, that the City has made statements referring to SME as a partner, or ECP as a member of SME, without any apparent documentation that a partnership exists. The SME website states the City/ECP is a member.

Is the City of Great Falls, through it's Municipal Utility, Electric City Power, a partner in a joint venture with SME G&T?

If we are to take Exibit A of Resolution 9537 to hold as an actual commitment to be a Joint Venture then how can we make the statement that we have not committed to annexing HGS? Exhibit A clearly states "5(e) an annexation agreement..."

Section 3 of that same document, Exhibit A, states "SME will permit the City as Co-owner of the Station to participate fully in the decision making process relating to the development of the Station..."
The financial statement from the city States "This Joint Venture does not meet the criteria for inclusion in the City's Finance Report since the City does not exercise administrative control."

What is administrative control?

Here is a little statement from our Fiscal Manager. April 2005.
"Electric City Power: Coleen Balzarini stated that Electric City Power was building its customer base with the goal to sell 65 mega watts of power. She added that the City requested the Public Service Commission transfer the license from the City to Electric City Power. They denied the request without prejudice and Staff was working on a re-submittal. Additionally, Staff was working on a pilot program for small customer supply. Mrs. Balzarini reported that the City was the first entity to apply the new statute providing for this so the PSC was treating it as a contested case. The goal for the City was to give consumers a choice."

Wait! Hold on! They want to give us a choice!
It's all good now, don't listen to him.


Why is it that those little voices in the night are never saying Daddy...
Daddy's miss out on so much. Like cleaning up red jello, that is no longer tolerated in the child's little tummy.
at midnight.
and 2.
Mommy...I'm hungry. at 3.
And no, I don't believe for one minute that Dad is really sleeping.
He wasn't really sleeping when the babies needed feeding in the middle of the night, either.
Mommy...I had a bad dream...Mommy...I hear a noise...mommy

Saturday, January 27, 2007

and furthermore...

Concerning the Joint Venture agreement between SME and ECP- I found an outline (Basic Terms and Provisions of the Development Agreement between the City of Great Falls and Southern Montana Electric Generation & Transmission Cooperative) of what it would, could, should be.
Exhibit A of Resolution 9537 states that "ECP would own a 25% undivided ownership interest in the Highwood Generating Station, including all common facilities, transmission facilities and rights and other interests which are part of the Highwood Generating Station." This agreement will also address the parties’ ability to mortgage or encumber their respective ownership interest for financing purposes and to dispose of their ownership interests. (Sounds like something that needs to be set in stone before we start building and financing this project. Oops, to late.)
It also says,
"5. The City and SME agree to negotiate in good faith to develop mutually agreeable and definitive forms of all other agreements necessary in connection with the ownership and operation of the station, including:"

"5(c) A resource integration agreement under which SME will provide specified services for the City to support its ownership interest in the Station, and the parties will agree to make available to one another any surplus output to their respective ownership interest in the Station."

5(d) A raw water supply agreement under which the city will supply all non-culinary water necessary for Station operations, and will take all actions necessary, including obtaining any needed regulatory approvals to provide this water supply.
I haven’t heard, has this been discussed with the Army Corp of Engineers? Does it need to be?

Let’s go back to Resolution 9537 for a minute.

“WHEREAS, the City commission has previously adopted Ordinance 2925, which authorized and approved the creation of Electric City Power, Inc., a Montana nonprofit corporation, (the “Corporation”) in order to secure and provide reliable and economic supplies of power to the City of Great Falls (the “City”), its residents and other electric consumers served by the City."

I believe that stated, with absolutely no hedging, that ECP wishes to supply power to the RESIDENTS of the City. Let’s read a bit further, shall we.

"WHEREAS the Project is reasonably expected to provide firm and reliable supplies of electricity at stable cost-based rates for the benefit of the City, its residents and the electric consumers served by the City and the Corporation, and the City expects to derive other substantial benefits from the Station as described herein; and "

Here’s the “herein”

"(a) The continued growth, economic development and prosperity of the City and its residents requires the availability of secure, reliable and economical supplies of electricity at stable economical and cost-based rates for all residential, commercial, industrial and other electric consumers within the City; "

There is that RESIDENTS word again. Now, does that mean if they cannot sell to all the consumers, and that includes 56,000 RESIDENTS the City will NOT have growth, economic development and prosperity? I think it is pretty plain that the city has always intended to attempt to sell power to the residents of the City, and any claims to the contrary are in direct contradiction to the stated purpose and intent of Electric City Power Inc.

Now let’s skip down a bit.
Section 2, Development of the Project
"(b) the City Manager is further authorized and directed to engage in all discussions and negotiations with SME that are necessary or desirable in connection with the Highwood Generating Station and the Project, including the preparation of a development agreement between the City or the Corporation and SME (the “Development Agreement”). It is the intention that the Development Agreement shall be substantially consistent with the terms and provisions attached hereto as Exhibit A. Upon the completion of such negotiations, the City Manager shall present a substantially final form to the Development Agreement to the City Commission for final approval."

Resolution 9537 was passed by the City Commission on Dec 6 2005

In the minutes of the March 6 2006 ECP Minutes “The Board briefly discussed a draft of the Development Agreement between the City and SME. Executive Director Balzarini explained the purpose of and need for such an agreement and noted that City staff and The City’s bond counsel would be discussing the agreement with SME officials on March 13th. Balzarini briefly discussed the cogeneration facility before detailing for the board two upcoming meetings with SME:
The SME annual meeting in Billings on March 13th
The March project update meeting and Meeting of the SME Board of Directors on March 16-17, 2006.”

So, where is that Development Agreement? I want to know how much we are actually going to be spending, and have it in writing somewhere. We all know prices of things can change in a short period of time. Like in December of 2005, this coal plant only cost 300,000,000. (section 1.04) (holy crap. did you see what else that said right there? 1.03. "in place of the current default supply of electricity" did it really say that?)
Seems like that Agreement should be showing up at a Commission Meeting soon.

Concerning the missing Feasibility Study of November 4th, 2003.
I question that it even exists.
I would welcome any attempts to prove me wrong. In April of 2005 this document shows up to justify money requested from the City. There are several studies on there, but I see nothing that could be considered a feasibility study aimed at our specific, local, economic benefit.

Regarding the statement by our Mayor on the GreaterFalls Coal Plant post. I had a friend contact the Tribune. They have little knowledge of documents relating to the managerial or financial aspects of ECP. The extent of documentation they have been “given full access to” is promised access to the EIS and Engineering Reports that will be coming out “Soon” and anything else that would be considered public record, that anyone else can get. (Page 5, section 7.01)
I would guess we will all have access to those two documents, and many of us can write about them as competently as a newspaper reporter.

I also cruised over to the State site, and looked up Nonprofit Corporation Act, since that is what ECP states it is, a nonprofit corporation.

I will leave you with this, I have bolded pertinent parts:

(5) A corporation shall keep a copy of the following records at its principal office or a location from which the records may be recovered within 2 business days:
(a) its articles or restated articles of incorporation and all amendments to them currently in effect;
(b) its bylaws or restated bylaws and all amendments to them currently in effect;
(c) resolutions adopted by its board of directors relating to the characteristics, qualifications, rights, limitations, and obligations of members or any class or category of members;
(d) the minutes of all meetings of members and the records of all actions approved by the members for the past 3 years;
(e) the financial statements available to members for the past 3 years under 35-2-911;
(f) a list of the names and business or home addresses of its current directors and officers; and
(g) its most recent annual report delivered to the secretary of state under 35-2-904.

Our future...

So I had a comment in my e-mail. Intelligent fellow, I think, I'm actually not quite sure if he was questioning my writing ability or his own intelligence....but anyhow, he said I should write as a mom so here goes.
Standard keepmyassoutoftrouble statement-no insult real or imagined intended for anyone as long as you have a certain level of morals and class. If you don't, consider yourself insulted.

So. What are we teaching our kids. Brittney Spears, Lindsey Lohan, Paris Hilton, Etc. What are these women thinking. So you make some money, your face is on the front page, that gives you the right to be a... What is the word? Who the hell goes out and conducts themselves in a manner that photographs of certain parts can be taken? Ohh, I'm a celebrity, how about I get plastered and get my picture on the Enquirer-Hey, look at me, I'm fucked up!! Good times.

My Mother always said If you are going to wear a dress, you will act like a lady. There was no wiggle room there.

My little girl is learning the same thing. You chose to wear the dress, you will learn how to behave. Makeup? on a 5 year old? Hell no. There will be no high heels, there will be no spaghetti straps, who the hell is that woman on my TV showing her bra to the viewing public. No belly buttons shown, no piercings, you live in my house you will follow my rules. Who are these people that put their kids in beauty pagents, dress them up to parade around in costumes that scream sex, don't they grow up fast enough?

Modesty. Where did it go?

What is going on in our country that some of the most well known people seem to get married and divorced on a whim. Yeah, shot a movie together, true love, divorce and marrige in less than a year. Sorry, That was infatuation the next one will last longer. Hey honey, he cheated on her with you, ya really think he won't cheat on you? Disposable relationships.

Damn. I do not have words to express my disgust for some of the things I see in our world. Sadly, many of them are invited into our living rooms. TV shows that talk about casual sex as if it is a part of everday life-oh, wait, it is! The morning after pill. Should it be legal? Don't go screw around, er, have unprotected sex, you won't need to worry about if you can get the damn pill!

And if any one feels this post is sexist, aimed at females conducting themselves poorly - it is. Guess what, that is the way it is. There is a difference. Women need to conduct themselves differently than men do. Been that way for forever. Deal.

Who do you want your daughter to be?

Wednesday, January 24, 2007


A friend asked yesterday why I didn’t write a piece questioning Dona’s presence, and absence, on these blogs. I thought about it and this is what I came up with. I am not trying to be confrontational, rude or disrespectful. These are honest concerns, and I do not believe I am the only one who wants answers. So, with all due respect:

Dona Stebbins, Mayor of Great Falls

The people on these sites are citizens of this city, and we supported you when you ran for political office. We cheered when you criticized the same things we did, you were a voice among us, with many of the same issues and concerns we had. We celebrated when you were elected, and looked forward to changes in this City.

On October 7th in a Greater Falls thread concerning Explore! The Big Sky, you stated “I do think the city has a responsibility to promote events like this, but the City’s responsibility to the taxpayers MUST take precedence. Let’s hope everyone learned to PAY ATTENTION!”

On October 31st I said “I have no impact on the outcome of this election except my single vote on election day.”
On November 2nd you replied “That single vote has great power! Put enough of them together, and change happens. It is my belief that our elected officials have forgotten where the true power lies. It is not really theirs - it belongs to all of us, and only theirs on loan. Government derives its’ power from the consent of the governed.”

On November 14th, after winning the election you stated “My allegiance is to the people of Great Falls.” You went on to say “To those who supported my candidacy, thank you all. I will do my best to represent you fairly. You know that I will listen and answer your questions.”

These are things you said, and I agree with wholeheartedly. But there have been issues brought up, and questions that need answers. Not so much about the coal plant, but about the City’s involvement, financial responsibility and managerial abilities in the electrical utility. We just want to know what our City is doing, and who will be left with the debt if, somehow, this is not as beautiful and perfect as we are being told.

Who is listening now. GeeGuy has been relentless in his search for answers. He has questioned on his blog, written to the Tribune, written to Colleen Balzarini. Where are the answers?

“The City’s responsibility to the taxpayers MUST take precedence. Let’s hope everyone learned to PAY ATTENTION!”

We have.

Tuesday, January 23, 2007

Coal Plant vs Electric City Power

So there is a lot going on with these issues.
There are the environmental pro's and con's, we have treehuggers demanding that we not pollute our air and water with emissions from a coal plant. We have industry experts, this is safe, it will not harm you!

We have warnings about eating to many locally caught fish because of existing high mercury levels in our water, and bald eagles testing positive for mercury posioning.

We have dire predictions about our source of power in the next few years.

We have a fantastic outlook for jobs building the plant, and dire predictons that they will not be filled by local workers.

We have a place to build the plant, with an alleged adequate water supply, out of town, ready to go. Except for the lawsuits over land use and zoning changes.

We have a group of people with experience owning and operating power supply and generation facilities. 5 electrical Co-op's who formed SME. Shortly after, the City of Great Falls joined. These are a couple of things I noticed on the SME website. All emphasis is mine.

"These providers of public power and related services have embarked on a course of action to ensure that their members/consumers – approximately 120,000 Montanans – will have a locally-owned and controlled supply of electric energy."
So they are including the citizens of Great Falls, as members/consumers. But we do not have a right to vote on spending the money to build it.

"The five member cooperatives serve approximately 65,000 Montanans, and the City of Great Falls has a population of 57,000."
That's where they get the 120,000. Us and them. But our City leaders are not sure, at this time, if they are going to sell to us little citizens. If they even can.

"Southern Montana Electric G&T’s HGS will meet wholesale energy needs of the five member cooperatives and the City of Great Falls. HGS will use Montana coal and Montana limestone to generate approximately 250 MW of power that will be earmarked to meet electrical energy needs of approximately 120,000 Montana energy consumers at “cost-based” rates. HGS will be wholly owned by Montana energy consumers."
Again, we have 120,000 consumers who will own this plant we do not get to vote on. And lets look at that closely. At 25% owner, the City will get 25% of the power, right? We have almost half of the people used to justify this project, why only 25%? 25% of the power is 62.5 mW. Right now, the City has contracts to sell 16-20 mW. What we gonna do with all that extra power when we ain't selling it to the 57,000 energy consumers who paid to build the plant. (That would be every Tom, Dick and Harry who pays taxes in the City I believe. Maybe a Paul and couple Joes too. And don't forget Jane.) Do we get dividend checks when the City sells that power to someone else? It's member owned, right?

"Southern Montana Electric G&T will work with the U.S. Department of Agriculture Rural Utility Services (RUS) for any project financial needs. "
Now, here is one of my problems. This is misleading. ECP is a member of SMEG&T. Right? However, ECP is not getting any money from RUS. The 5 co-ops are getting money from RUS. But we are a member of SME. But we cannot get RUS money because ECP is not a Co-op. So how are we a member of SME when we are removed at will so they can get money ECP has to go to the City for? RUS will not finance the 25% that ECP is funding. The City has, in fact, paid for parts of the studies that will allow SME, but not ECP to get money from RUS. But isn't ECP part of SME?

"The EIS is funded by Southern Montana Electric G&T, and administered by RUS, and will evaluate the environmental impact of the proposed project."
Here we go again. Funded by SME and their dirty little stepson, ECP. Because ECP is a member when we have 57,000 people who need power, but not when we go ask the govt. for $$$

Well, that's enough for now. My head is spinning from all the acronyms, and I think I'd best stop before this gets too long. Believe it or not, this is only the tip of the things I can think of to write about. There is the EIS statement. Water Rights. Did you know right now Fort Peck is within inches of being at it's lowest level ever, and the gambling boats on the lower Missouri are terrified we might stop letting out water, because they cannot allow gambling when they are anchored. They must be in the channel, and they need water for that. And do you know how many endangered species of fish, or species of concern are listed in the draft EIS for the area below Morony? Know how many your fishing regs identify? Know how much coal cars cost, and how long it takes to get them? Know how much the cost of construction materials has gone up in the last year, and may in the next year? Is Electric City Power actually a corporation since they were involantarily dissolved? Why are they still holding meetings? And spending money? Why can I not find how much money they have actually spent so far? Don't they keep books? Credit, debit, how hard is that? Where do I find how much money the 5 Co-op's have spent?? Where are the Articles of Incorporation for ECP? (Are they filed right beside that acct ledger?) Where is some kind of agreement between SME and ECP saying We spend This, We own This. Are these not standard questions for a project of this magnitude?
What is our City thinking?

Wednesday, January 17, 2007


Well, I've been reading things again. Was over on the City website, nosing about, (Dec minutes of ECP are up) read the SME report again. You know what gets me about that report? No? Hmm.

Had to go read up on the Tribune coverage and comments and all. I might have to start commenting more over there. Sometimes I like to argue with people. Well, not really argue, more like debate. However, after David and I's short lived takeover of their little blog, I don't know, ...

Ok, fine, I'll tell ya what gets me about that report. Electric City Power, ie the City of Great Falls, is inserted and removed as a factor at will. Sometimes our participation, our presence in the overall, is important, but sometimes we are not a consideration.

SME is separate from ECP when it comes down to it. I think I have more faith in SME than I do in ECP to be honest. But neither one really does me much good. EIS says all good. Hmm, do I trust them?

We (the population) are used a justification for parts of it, but there is no reason, right now, to believe that the citizens of Great Falls will be able to purchase power from ECP. ECP sells, right now, 16-20 mW. But they will be responsible for three times that. So what is the City going to do with their additional power? They can't sell it to the 54,000 residents of Great Falls. Ohh, wait, or will they try?

Well, they aint sure yet.

And I am unsure of a lot of things.

Saturday, January 13, 2007

Ohh, look

River pictures!

& I think these guys forgot something when they left.

Mom, can we please get some Flome for me?

Flome is a potentially dangerous product, with characteristics similar to PlayDough, another potentially dangerous product. However, they are only dangerous if actually purchased and brought into the home, where the containers can be opened and the product released into the environment, creating scattered pockets of hard colored material, which, when ingested by the stupid dog, return to a more moist state, and may cause alarm when viewed upon egress from said dog, who never learns not to eat stuff like that, it upsets the tummy.

This would not need to be addressed, except that the Saturday Morning Cartoon shows repetitively air commercials aimed at the consumer set that comes running out saying things like “Mom, can we please get some Flome for me?” Creating a society that believes you need things like Flome to be happy, when generations of children have been perfectly satisfied playing with mud pies instead.

And what is it with makeup for little girls? Do we really need to start promoting girls wearing makup by putting a 5 year olds favorite characters on it? And the Bratz dolls. They are little hussies! I don’t want my girl thinking showing her bellybutton and wearing makeup make her cool. And I pray “Bling” is never part of her vocabulary. I can only imagine the scene if she walked out wearing hip huggers and halter tops. Her Dad would explode.

But. Companies have a right to sell a product to those who will buy it. TV stations have a right to air any commercial that is paid for and allowed by those one people who regulate things. Because we need regulation, to make sure people don’t swear on TV, go ahead and show commercials for Viagra, Cialis, Trojan, Summers Eve, Kotex, frickin’ herpes medicine! etc. “Mom, what’s a douche?” “Why is that ribbed for her pleasure?” “What’s an erection, and why do you need to call the doctor if it lasts for more than four hours?”
“How many Trojans does it take for one Viagra?”

And why do people think you are obligated to answer the damn phone? Yes, I have call waiting on my cell. No, I do not answer it, unless it is my son. Often I don’t even look to see who it is. Because I am already talking to someone! (Ok, sometimes I do, just to get off of it with the first person.)
People call just to chat, when they know you are busy.

“whatcha doin’?”
“I’m getting gas, and I was bored, so I thought I would call you”
your not supposed to talk on the phone while your pumping gas
“Did you hear what (insert name and meaningless action here) did?”
you know, static electricity can cause sparks to ignite gas vapors, and that cell phone won’t do much good when the gas goes poof
“and I just wanted to tell you about…”
and you ignite like a marshmallow in the campfire
“and she said she liked my hair better before”
and run screaming around the parking lot clutching your melting cell phone
“can you believe she was wearing white shoes with that dress,”
and end up in the trauma unit getting skin from your butt grafted on to your face
“Well, I’ve gotta go, it was good talking to ya!”
I have so many subjects percolating in my little brain, and little time or opportunity to get them out. Here is a start.

I started reading bills in the Legislature the other day. It started out simply enough, I just wanted to see what the fuss was about with this. Then I find all sorts of things. Like this. And this. (actually, this one kinda surprised me-I thought it was already a law.) Oh, this one is gonna press some people's hot button! And of course, I'm all for this one.

I've got my little peepers on a few more, expect to be updated as the session progresses.

Sunday, January 07, 2007

Fifty-one years ago, Herman James, a North Carolina mountain man, was drafted by the U.S. Army.

On his first day in basic training, the Army issued him a comb.
That afternoon, the Army barber sheared off all his hair.

On his second day, the Army issued Herman a toothbrush.
That afternoon, the Army dentist yanked seven of his teeth.

On the third day, the Army issued him an athletic supporter.

The Army has been looking for Herman for 51 years.

Friday, January 05, 2007

Very little time....

to blog lately. Christmas was good, the New Year is starting out well. A new direction in my life, which I am really liking so far. Hopefully, I can do it well, and continue with it down the road. Maybe my alleged attitude problem won't be an issue, I dunno, the boss can be a real hardass, but I'm optimistic he will put up with it...
Rather vague, I know, but y'all will have to deal with that, because there is nothing you can do about it! Ha ha!

But one thing about this new direction-I have to dress nice. And I am not the girliest girl out there by any means, and have been told by many I am not very good at coordinating, and accessorizing and color coding and such like. And have I mentioned I hate shopping for clothes? And shoes. Oh, the horror. And now I have to!

My girl loves clothes and shoes. I think they switched her in the hospital. And, she is kinda a smartass, NOTHING like me, yeah, they switched her.

Anywhoo, Santa, that coolest old rotund guy, brought me Guns N Roses Greatest Hits which includes a remake of... drum roll...Sympathy for the Devil! As loud as my crappy little computer room stereo will play it right now. Absolutely awesome CD, but it is G' N' R so that is to be expected.

Well, I'm off to read others more exciting than I, so see ya around.

Wednesday, January 03, 2007

That's a lot of water.

Pulled from the river:
2,500 gallons per minute
150,000 gallons per hour
1,200,000 gallons in 8 hours
3,600,000 gallons in 24 hours

Returned to the river:
180 gallons per minute
10,800 gallons per hour
66,400 in 8 hours
259,200 in 24 hours

total water permanently removed from the river system
2,320 gallons per minute
139,200 gallons per hour
1,113,600 gallons in 8 hours
3,340,800 gallons in 24 hours

And a couple quotes from the Tribune outdoors section.

It's easy enough to take the Missouri River for granted. Anything so close at hand and so accessible — so "there" all the time — might fade from the forefront of our thoughts as we race through our busy days, even where the pace is, well, like the pace here in Great Falls.
It just takes a day on the river though, or a conversation with someone intimately familiar with the river to remind us what a treasure the river really is.

To our benefit, others are realizing that the Missouri constitutes a special resource for us: PPL Montana continues to reimburse those of us who live around the Missouri for the impacts of its seven dams on the Missouri and its two hydro facilities on the Madison. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission requires that.

And, it is ours all the way from its headwaters in the Centennial Mountains of southwestern Montana through the Beaverhead, Big Hole, Gallatin, Jefferson and Madison rivers to the North Dakota border and its union with the Yellowstone.

Monday, January 01, 2007

I see the Tribune has a story up on some of the things that happened locally in 2006.

Fastest public career changer
Justice of the Peace Sam Harris appeared to be firmly ensconced in his position as a Cascade County judge.
Then the public learned Harris had been making injudicial remarks about various groups — even about people for whom he performed marriage ceremonies — on an Internet chat room for years.
The Electric City Weblog raised the issue on its Web site, and the Tribune broke the news story. Harris eventually resigned, effective the end of 2006.

I seem to remember it a little different.

I remember a few people none of whom were newspaper reporters, doing a fair amount of work, researching and writing an informative series of articles, spread out over a week of posts. I remember digging through old newspaper articles, sifting through internet chat rooms full of disagreeable, and at times insulting, comments. I remember questioning what we were doing, if it was worth the possible repercussions and negative response from the public.

I remember GeeGuy working very hard to put the information in context, so it was seen as more than just words and comments, but as the character of the man.

I remember putting up the Gore posts simultaneously, on a Friday evening, fielding questions and comments all weekend, and on Monday morning learning all the Gore comments had been removed. And then, hours later, the Tribune reporter contacting us for information, because they needed proof to write their story. The Tribune continuing to insist they needed to publish our names to lend credibility to their story after Harris had confirmed he made the Gore comments.

But A History Lesson only raised the issues.
The Tribune broke the story.