Senior Labour figures have sent strong signals that the party will now be more willing to stand up for benefit claimants and attack the government welfare reforms that have damaged the lives of disabled people.The most high-profile example during this week’s party conference in Brighton (pictured) was from the party’s new shadow chancellor, John McDonnell, who began his speech by talking about the death of Michael O’Sullivan.O’Sullivan from north London, killed himself as a result of being found “fit for work”, a scandal that was uncovered last month by Disability News Service.McDonnell told Labour delegates: “The coroner concluded his death was a direct result of the decision in his case. I don’t believe Michael’s case stands alone.”McDonnell, the most prominent parliamentary supporter of the disabled people’s anti-cuts movement over the last five years, told delegates that a Labour government would “end this brutal treatment of disabled people”.But there was also strong support from the new shadow work and pensions secretary, Owen Smith, who said Labour would rebuild the solidarity “shaken” by “divisive Tory talk of ‘strivers versus scroungers’”.He said there was a need to “change the debate on social security in Britain”, and said: “We can’t let their divisive rhetoric of shirkers and workers stop us making the case for fair-minded reform of the system, with controls on costs, but compassion for all who need it.”He said there were “no votes to be won” by “aping Tory language” and he pledged not to do so himself.He added: “Britain’s social security system, like our NHS, should be something we are proud of, a national asset that is there for all of us if ever we need it.”Smith accused the government of “calling themselves compassionate while driving disabled people to the brink”, and promised that he would be “up and after” work and pensions secretary Iain Duncan Smith on issues such as the “scandalous impact of the work capability assessment”.He said Duncan Smith “deserves to be hounded for the way he has treated so many disabled people in our communities, with his demeaning fit for work tests, his cuts to mobility allowances – lifelines for so many – and his desperate, awful bedroom tax”.Smith won a standing ovation from delegates when he ended his speech by promising to oppose the government’s new welfare reform and work bill “line by cruel line”.His message was mirrored by Debbie Abrahams, the new shadow minister for disabled people, who criticised the “absolutely appalling” language used by the government around welfare reform.She told a fringe meeting that Labour would be “actively campaigning” on the issue, “taking it out to the country, describing why it is so important that we have a welfare system that enables and empowers people and the legislation that supports that”.
Two-fifths of local authorities in England have decided not to raise as much as they can through their powers to increase council tax, even though they face a “huge shortfall in funding” and rising demand for adult social care.The Association of Directors of Adult Social Services (ADASS) said yesterday (13 July) that its annual budget survey had found members needed to fill a gap of about £940 million “just to keep services operating at last year’s levels”.ADASS said the government’s decision to give local authorities the option to raise council tax by two per cent for extra social care funding would raise £380 million, although eight councils had decided not to take advantage of this precept.But ADASS failed to point out that its own survey showed that 40 per cent of local authorities had either decided to freeze their council tax (16 per cent) or increase it by less than 1.99 per cent (another 24 per cent of councils), the maximum that council tax can increase every year without triggering a local referendum.The £940 million shortfall is likely to lead to cuts in services, job losses, reductions in people’s personal budgets and a fall in the number of people receiving support.Only last week, Disability News Service reported that almost half of former recipients of the Independent Living Fund (ILF) in the London borough of Merton were facing cuts to their care packages, after their council rejected the chance to ask for more social care funds by raising council tax.Labour-run Merton council in south-west London had the chance to increase council tax by 1.7 per cent to pay for extra social care funding – it also rejected the extra 1.99 per cent increase in council tax – but turned down the opportunity because of an election promise not to increase taxes for four years.Of the 151 councils that were surveyed by ADASS, 70 reported that they had cut their adult social services budget, and 52 had had to cut services to balance their budget.Sue Bott, deputy chief executive of Disability Rights UK, said: “There can be no doubt that local authorities are facing enormous pressures in the provision of social care as a result of government funding restrictions.“However, a number of local authorities are making the situation even worse by refusing to raise council tax locally when they can to help fill the gap, and by refusing to adopt innovative ways of meeting support needs that give people genuine control. “In addition, many fail to see the connection between increasing poverty and increased need for social care support and make the situation worse by measures such as increasing charges for social care and not giving discretionary housing payments to disabled people facing the bedroom tax.”Professor Peter Beresford, co-chair of the user-led network Shaping Our Lives, declined to criticise local authorities.He said that councils were already “very hard pressed”, and that raising council tax was not the answer to the budget shortfall.He said: “For poorer local authorities it means increasing taxes on already hard-pressed communities, while the bucket still has a massive hole through the chronic and worsening under-funding of social care by central government.“It’s a nice way of government offloading its responsibility and trying to get the blame put on local councils.“The only solution has to be to give social care proper funding and political priority and bring it into line with the founding principles of the NHS.”He added: “We should be arguing for a return to more progressive central government taxation, which has to be fairer than inequalities between different areas and regions.“If we didn’t let rich people and companies off taxes, we wouldn’t have to raise ordinary people’s.”ADASS refused to comment on the suggestion that many councils were partly to blame for the social care shortfall by not raising as much through council tax as they could.ADASS president Harold Bodmer said in a press release: “We have been arguing for some time now that adult social care needs to be given the same protection and investment as the NHS.“We’re at a tipping point where social care is in jeopardy, and unless the government addresses the chronic underfunding of the sector, there will be worrying consequences for the NHS and, most importantly, older and disabled people, their families and carers.”
MPs have rejected Theresa May’s Brexit motion tonight, as well Labour’s demand for an early ‘meaningful vote’ on her deal.The defeat of the government’s motion arguably makes it harder for May to secure further concessions from Brussels – throwing even more confusion into the Brexit debate.Labour’s amendment would have imposed a deadline of 27th February for the government to hold a meaningful vote on their deal, or give MPs control over the Brexit process.The votes tonight reflected internal divisions within the Labour Party, with four Brexiteer Labour MPs backing the government’s Brexit motion and 41 rebels backing the SNP’s call for a year-long extension of Article 50.Just three motions were selected for debate by Speaker Bercow. See the full list of votes below.Amendment A: Meaningful vote by February 27thThe Labour leadership’s amendment to the PM’s Brexit statement would have forced a vote on the withdrawal deal by the 27th February. Failing that, parliament would have been able to determine what happened next.MPs rejected it by 322 votes to 306.There were no Labour rebels.Amendment i: Extending Article 50Amendment i, tabled by the SNP’s Westminster leader Ian Blackford, demanded that the government extend Article 50 to avoid ‘no deal’. The Lib Dems also backed the amendment.The amendment would have led to a significant delay to Brexit, requesting an extension of Article 50 to “no fewer than three months from 29 March 2019”.MPs rejected it by 315 votes to 93.It was backed by a significant number of Labour MPs.More Labour MPs voted for the SNP amendment to extend Article 50 than there are SNP MPs: pic.twitter.com/5hqgJMHfny— Faisal Islam (@faisalislam) February 14, 2019Full list of the 41 Labour rebels who backed the SNP amendment:Debbie AbrahamsTonia AntoniazziLuciana BergerBen BradshawKaren BuckRuth CadburyAnn ClwydAnn CoffeyNeil CoyleMary CreaghStella CreasyJanet DabyGeraint DaviesRosie DuffieldPaul FarrellyMike GapesKate GreenHelen HayesMeg HillierDame Margaret HodgeSusan Elan JonesGed KillenDavid LammyChris LeslieAnna McMorrinMadeleine MoonIan MurrayAlbert OwenBarry SheermanGavin ShukerAndy SlaughterAngela SmithOwen SmithJo StevensGareth ThomasChuka UmunnaKeith VazCatherine WestMartin WhitfieldDr Paul WilliamsDaniel ZeichnerAmendment E: Impact assessment motion (withdrawn)MPs were due to vote on Remainer Tory MP Anna Soubry’s motion demanding the government publish its no deal impact assessments. It had significant cross-party support.The amendment stated that, within seven days, the government must “publish in full the most recent official briefing document, relating to business and trade, on the implications of a no-deal Brexit presented to cabinet.”But the MP withdrew the motion, after Brexit minister Chris Heaton-Harris said he was happy to meet with her, find the information she was seeking and publish it.Anna Soubry welcomed the offer, noting that she could bring her demand back to parliament if the government did not make good on their offer.As reported earlier, if Soubry’s amendment had passed, the government would have avoided a fresh vote on its statement.Government’s Brexit motionThe government’s motion read: “That this House welcomes the Prime Minister’s statement of 12 February 2019; reiterates its support for the approach to leaving the EU expressed by this House on 29 January 2019 and notes that discussions between the UK and the EU on the Northern Ireland backstop are ongoing.”MPs rejected it by 303 votes to 258.It was defeated by a majority of 45, resulting in another resounding defeat for the government.Four Labour MPs backed the government’s Brexit motion:Ian AustinKevin BarronJim FitzpatrickJohn Mann14 Labour MPs broke the whip to reject the Labour leadership’s Brexit amendment on 29th January, including the four who rebelled on Thursday night.The PM’s 12th February statement was successfully amended by Labour to take no deal off the table – a move that was unacceptable for the Tory right.That meant the Tory European Research Group abstained this evening, clearing the way for the government’s defeat.Theresa May was not in the chamber to respond to the defeat. Jeremy Corbyn said: “It’s surprising that the Prime Minister is not even here to hear the result of the vote.”Shadow Brexit Secretary Keir Starmer said “parliament must decide what happens next”, avoiding mention of a fresh referendum:The Prime Minister’s Brexit strategy has once again been defeated. She can no longer claim to have a ‘substantial and sustainable majority’ in Parliament.We can’t go on like this. Parliament must decide what happens next. https://t.co/ts092D1MiT— Keir Starmer (@Keir_Starmer) February 14, 2019You can read the full list of amendments including their backers here.See the full list of Labour rebels from the Brexit votes on the 29th January.Josiah Mortimer is covering Sienna Rodgers while she is away.Tags:Tories /Theresa May /Labour /Brexit /Article 50 /amendments /Brexit vote /Corbyn amendment /
This means tenants hoping to live in a fully affordable housing unit cannot make more than that to qualify, and may often have to make less: Some projects, such as the upcoming 101-unit complex on Folsom Street, set aside a portion of their units for those making even less than the 60 percent standard including at-risk youth or the formerly homeless. But even if a tenant qualifies, applying is infamously arduous. “The process is to get onto the Mayor’s Office of Housing email list, check the Mayor’s Office of Housing waiting list, and when an individual project goes up, [apply for it],” said Sam Moss, the executive director of the non-profit housing developer Mission Housing. Each non-profit has its own application and waiting list, and though the Mayor’s Office of Housing may combine lists in the future, currently tenants must go to each organization individually and apply there, a scattered process.(As an example, there are four-bedroom apartments at 1738 Mission St. listed as the only currently open affordable housing units in the Mission District on the Mayor’s Office of Housing site. But applications go through the non-profit in charge, Asian Inc., which states that it is not accepting any offers at this time. The list promoted by the housing office is incomplete or contradictory in various ways.)Once on a waiting list, tenants wait for construction of a new unit to finish and or for an existing unit to open up. The candidates on a list are then entered into a highly competitive lottery: An affordable housing project at 474 Namona Street in SoMa, for instance, had 2,800 applicants for just 60 spots. If chosen, the potential tenant must prove his or her income level, usually with a pay stub or tax information, and the rest is comparatively smooth sailing. Many in housing lament the lack of a standardized process. Apps like One Home hope to do away with this mystification by presenting a single interface where those seeking affordable housing can enter their income level, family size, and geographic area of to find available units. “As a person looking for affordable housing, you can’t easily see what you’re eligible for,” said Rey Faustino. “People just apply for affordable housing without really understanding whether people are even eligible for affordable housing.”The city does have lists of affordable units currently available, but those simply route to the non-profits in charge, and interested tenants must still contact them to seek a unit.“They would have to go find these listings online or in person, pages and pages long, of just these Excel spreadsheet tables, and you would have to go in and look manually,” said Faustino. “It’s really complex.”There’s another type of affordable housing — technically called inclusionary housing — that’s required of private developers when they build market-rate units. These units are also reserved to renters making 60 percent of area median income or below. There’s an open lottery per project that the housing office lists on its site.Some units are set at higher income levels, from 120 to 150 percent of area median income — $85,600 to $107,050 for a single earner. These are usually the results of deals reached with developers to increase their density, like those for the 5M and Mission Rock projects. These units remain permanently affordable, just to middle-income rather than low-income earners.Then there’s public housing — sometimes known as Section 8 housing — which is similar to affordable housing but managed by the city rather than a non-profit. All public housing in San Francisco is in the process of being transferred to non-profit control, and the wait list for public housing units is currently closed.Tenants who cannot find any affordable units and do not have a rent-controlled apartment must hope that their current landlord does not raise the rent by an exorbitant amount, or they can attempt to find housing on the regular market — competing with those who can pay an average rent of $3,500 for a one-bedroom, or the few who can afford a three-bedroom for $29,950 a month. A common cry on all sides of the housing debate is to build more affordable housing and build it fast. But more often than not onlookers are left wondering just what affordable housing means — and how affordable is it.The Mission has seen hundreds of affordable housing units approved in the last few months. Some 434 units were slated for the neighborhood in the tail end of 2015, from the 165-unit complex on Mission Street to the recent 96 units of senior housing at 26th and Shotwell.These large-scale projects are capital-A affordable housing: projects built and maintained by non-profit developers that must rent their units to tenants making below 60 percent of the area’s median income. In San Francisco, that comes out to $42,800 for a single-person household and $61,150 for a family of four.Below is a list of the affordable housing units currently open in San Francisco. Subscribe to the housing office email alert system to stay up-to-date on new offers of housing. Tags: Affordable Housing • housing Share this: FacebookTwitterRedditemail,0% 0%
Some 60 protesters crowded the sidewalk outside the San Francisco headquarters of Immigration and Customs Enforcement on Wednesday morning to call attention to recent nationwide raids by the agency. Organizers said there have been no confirmed raids in San Francisco, and the immigration agency say there have been no arrests anywhere in California in connection with recent raids. Nonetheless, immigrants and their advocates are worried about enforcement activity.“They don’t care if when they deport you they leave your family, leave yours kids without [a father], they’re just doing their job,” said Ernesto Reinoso, an asylum-seeker who was detained for six months before winning his case. He was joined by a handful of other recent immigrants, most asylum-seekers from Central America who spoke to the dangers of being sent back to their home countries.“My family and I were threatened with our lives and now we are afraid of returning to our countries,” said Marvin Franco, an asylum-seeker from El Salvador. “I want to tell President Obama today to not deport us. If today I go to my country, tomorrow I will be killed.” The rally, organized by several immigrant and faith groups, was held on Three Kings’ Day, a Catholic holiday that celebrates the visit of the three wise men to Jesus after his birth. Between shouts in Spanish “Without papers, without fear” and “Not one more deportation,” some speakers compared the treatment of Jesus then to that of immigrants now. Share this: FacebookTwitterRedditemail,0% 0% “Today, ICE is our King Herod,” said Reverend Deborah Lee of the Interfaith Movement for Human Integrity, drawing parallels between the enforcement agency and the king who sought to kill Jesus. She was joined by Sheila Chung Hagen, an aide to Supervisor David Campos, who asked, “What would the three kings have given to these [immigrant] families?” “We’ve seen more than 1 million Syrian refugees received in Europe…and yet here we are today mourning the loss of so many families that were deported this weekend by the Obama administration,” Chung Hagen continued.The Washington Post reported just before Christmas that a new series of immigration raids targeting nearly 100,000 people would begin in the new year, aimed mostly at Central American immigrants with final deportation orders. According to the Post, some 121 people who had lost their asylum pleas were arrested over the weekend in the first of these raids, triggering condemnation from immigration advocates and some Democratic congressmen, as well as the rally Wednesday morning.Immigration and Customs Enforcement said no arrests were made in California in connection with these raids.“The operation that transpired last weekend in other parts of the country ended Sunday, and there were no arrests in California,” wrote an agency spokesperson via email. “There are no special enforcement actions currently underway in the Bay Area…We’re a law enforcement agency [and] we make criminal and administrative arrests every day.”Those at the rally, however, connected the raids to what they called a feeling of terror in the immigrant community of San Francisco. “Maybe they’re in other states, but that means there is terror in our streets, in San Francisco, in San Jose, in Los Angeles,” said Supervisor John Avalos, the representative of the Excelsior. He connected the recent wave of migrants from Central America to actions by the United States in the region in the 1980s, and said the same people affected then are now being targeted for deportation. “Now they want to deport the very people who have made a life here.” “I came here to denounce the Obama administration,” Avalos continued. “This is not moving the nation forward. This will only cause pain and suffering.”Supervisor John Avalos speaking at the rally against recent raids by Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Photo: Joe Rivano Barros / Mission Local.Supervisor David Campos, who was not at the rally but spoke to the issue over the phone, condemned the Obama administration for the raids and urged the administration to focus on passing “comprehensive immigration reform” instead of conducting a crackdown.“It’s pretty scary that something like this could go on, and that it’s Barack Obama of all people pushing for it,” Campos said. He said this action would only serve to “solidify Obama’s record as Deporter-in-Chief,” and said he hoped the immigration agency would not conduct raids in San Francisco or the Mission District. “We don’t need ICE to come into a neighborhood like the Mission and be as destructive as they have been in the past,” he said.Correction: A previous version of this article misattribute the King Herod quote to Niloufar Khonsari. It was said by Reverend Deborah Lee.
Suhr’s interim replacement, Chaplin, has been with the department for 26 years. The announcement followed an hour-long wait by reporters outside of Lee’s office, where Lee and Suhr were meeting earlier in the day. Suhr exited the office through a backdoor, according to reporters, and did not answer any questions.Outside City Hall, a group of some 30 activists gathered in anticipation of a vigil calling for the chief’s resignation — an event cut short by the sudden announcement. Maria Cristina Gutierrez, one of the five hunger strikers who fasted for 17 days to call for Suhr’s removal, said she was ecstatic about the news.“The unity of the people did this, nothing else,” she said. “I feel so good.”“It’s sad that it took two lives, but those lives are not in vain,” said Edwin Lindo, another hunger striker and a candidate for District 9 supervisor, referring to reports that the woman killed on Thursday may have been pregnant.But union organizer and activist Phelicia Jones announced that she and others will demand a meeting with Chaplin and will keep the pressure on for reform and a culture shift.“We have a victory, a small victory…but we still have work to do. Because we have to change a culture that exists in San Francisco Police Department.”Lindo, too, said the push for reform would not ease up with the change in command.“This shows the world that the power of the community is how you win. If anything, it shows that the momentum will keep growing.”Yayne Abeba, a spokesperson for the Frisco Five hunger strikers, released a statement saying that the group also demanded a meeting with the new chief, and calling for Lee’s resignation as well.“It is sad that it also took another life lost at the hands of SFPD,” she wrote. “We still stand firm that we demand the immediate resignation of Mayor Ed Lee, who allowed rampant police misconduct, terrorized the homeless and forced out the middle and lower income residents of our community to serve the interest of big business over the people of San Francisco.In his statements, Lee made a direct connection to the police shooting in the Bayview earlier in the day, saying he had previously expressed confidence “in Suhr’s ability to enact police reforms in the department.” The shooting, Lee said, had changed his mind, and he decided to ask for Suhr’s resignation.“Though the facts are still emerging, we know that this morning, a young woman of color was killed in an officer-involved shooting in the Bayview District,” he added. “This community is grieving, and I join them in that grief.”“Following this morning’s officer-involved shooting and the meeting with Chief Suhr, I have come to a different conclusion about how to move forward,” he added.Lee was flanked by Suzy Loftus, the president of the Police Commission, and Chaplin, who indicated last year at a panel discussion that he himself has had negative experiences with law enforcement. BREAKING—Mayor Ed Lee announces resignation of Police Chief Greg Suhr, to be replaced by homicide head Tony Chaplin. pic.twitter.com/bA4FaL0ECs— Mission Local (@MLNow) May 19, 2016 After insisting for weeks that he would refuse to do so, San Francisco Police Chief Greg Suhr has resigned from his post, apparently at the behest of Mayor Ed Lee. The announcement came on Thursday afternoon, just hours after police shot and killed a 27-year-old woman in the Bayview.Lee said Suhr would for now be replaced by Deputy Chief Toney Chaplin, the former head of the homicide division of the police department.Protests calling for the chief’s resignation have mounted in the months since the fatal police shooting of Mario Woods in the Bayview, just blocks from the fatal shooting Thursday morning, and included a 17-day hunger strike at Mission Police Station and a hundreds-strong march to City Hall.“The progress that we have made has been meaningful but it hasn’t been fast enough,” Lee said in his office on Thursday. “Not for me, and not for Greg. That’s why I have asked Chief Suhr for his resignation.” 0% #SFPD Interim Chief Toney Chaplin apparent victim of police brutality before joining PD. https://t.co/LPwQf1IuwQ pic.twitter.com/msfD9dmsT4— Ariel Dovas (@eviloars) May 20, 2016When asked whether Lee would begin a nationwide search for another chief to serve after Chaplin, Lee said that was a conversation he would have with the Police Commission.Four San Francisco supervisors called for the chief’s removal earlier this month, after a review panel released a scathing report calling the department out for racial bias and inappropriate hiring practices.Supervisor Jane Kim, the first legislator to call for Suhr’s resignation, thanked him for his years of service in a statement.“It’s time for the city to move on,” she said Thursday afternoon. “I would love to see a chief come from within the department, that would be my preference.”Supervisor David Campos, the second supervisor to make the demand, also underscored the need for further reform. Unlike Kim, he called for a nationwide search for a suitable permanent replacement for Suhr, adding that while he had heard only positive feedback about Chaplin, the interim chief would have to prove himself in order to be in the running for a permanent position.“The shooting was shocking and devastating, How many deaths does it take for something to happen?” Campos said. “I hope the mayor understands that it will take more than just his interim appointment” to change things, he said.Campos also said he would be introducing legislation in the coming days to reduce the mayor’s influence over the Office of Citizen Complaints, though he did not give specifics. Tags: police shooting • SFPD Share this: FacebookTwitterRedditemail,0%
SAINTS have announced their 19-man squad for Friday’s First Utility Super League Round Seven clash at Hull Kingston Rovers.Mark Flanagan comes in for Joe Greenwood who misses out with an elbow injury.Saints 17 will be chosen from:2. Tommy Makinson, 3. Jordan Turner, 4. Josh Jones, 5. Adam Swift, 6. Travis Burns, 8. Mose Masoe, 9. James Roby, 10. Kyle Amor, 11. Atelea Vea, 12. Jon Wilkin, 13. Louie McCarthy-Scarsbrook, 14. Alex Walmsley, 15. Mark Flanagan, 16. Lance Hohaia, 18. Luke Thompson, 19. Greg Richards, 22. Matty Dawson, 25. Andre Savelio. 28. Jack Ashworth.Chris Chester will select his Rovers side from:1. Kieran Dixon, 2. Ben Cockayne, 3. Darrell Goulding, 4. Josh Mantellato, 5. Ken Sio, 6. Maurice Blair, 7. Albert Kelly, 8. Adam Walker, 11. Kevin Larroyer, 12. Graeme Horne, 13. Tyrone McCarthy, 15. James Donaldson, 18. Liam Salter, 19. Kris Welham, 20. James Green, 21. Aaron Ollett, 23. Terry Campese, 24. John Boudebza, 31. Shaun Lunt.The game kicks off at 8pm and the referee will be James Child.For ticket details please click here.
James Roby and Alex Walmsley will be calling into the Totally Wicked Stadium from 5pm until 6pm.As with all our appearances this festive month, they will be on hand to sign autographs and pose for pictures.Why not pop down and say hello to the lads!The store will remain open until 7pm for all your Christmas gifts.On Saturday Justin Holbrook and Sean Long will be in store from 1pm-2pm!,James Roby and Alex Walmsley will be calling into the Totally Wicked Stadium from 5pm until 6pm.As with all our appearances this festive month, they will be on hand to sign autographs and pose for pictures.Why not pop down and say hello to the lads!The store will remain open until 7pm for all your Christmas gifts.On Saturday Justin Holbrook and Sean Long will be in store from 1pm-2pm!
It is something they have been preparing for since Wednesday night.They prepared more than 20 turkeys for anyone who was looking for a hot meal or company during the holiday.The corps officer said it was a busy day, but was happy to know those who came in were not alone for the holiday.Related Article: Thanksgiving comes early for Wilmington area homeless“The best thing about today is people learned that there’s people who care about them and there’s people who uplift them. One of the things at the Salvation Army is we want to be uplifting people. There’s enough going on in the world to push people down a bit and we want their experience here to be uplifting whether it’s we’re feeding them or just listening to them,” Wilmington Salvation Army Corps Officer Major Mark Craddock said.The Salvation Army partnered with Boy Scout Troop #212 who also prepared and served the food. WILMINGTON, NC (WWAY) — They feed people all year long but today was a little different as the Salvation Army celebrated Thanksgiving by inviting the community to stop by.The Salvation Army in Wilmington held their community Thanksgiving lunch earlier this afternoon.- Advertisement –
Proceeds will benefit the federation’s 50 Million Oyster Initiative, which aims to restore 50 million oysters to North Carolina waters by 2020. Last year, the federation restored more than 15 acres along the coast.“Wrightsville Beach Brewery is generously supporting our work for the second year in a row,” said Tracy Skrabal, coastal scientist and regional manager at the Wrightsville Beach office. “There’s not anything much better than drinking a beer while supporting oyster restoration work that keeps our coastal waters healthy.”Each month for an 11-month cycle, Wrightsville Beach Brewery will select a beer to pair with a local organization and donate 11 percent of the proceeds from the sale of that beer. In December, 11 percent of all proceeds will go to all of the selected nonprofits from throughout the year.Related Article: New law could affect craft breweries in the Cape FearThe brewery is located at 6201 Oleander Drive in Wilmington. More information on its donation program can be found at wbbeer.com.Details on the federation’s work can be found at nccoast.org. For more information, please contact Jessica Gray at 910-509-2838 or at email@example.com. Wrightsville Beach Brewery beers (Photo: WBBeers/Instagram) WRIGHTSVILLE BEACH, NC (Press Release) — Wrightsville Beach Brewery will be donating 11 percent of the proceeds from its March “give back” beer to the North Carolina Coastal Federation for the second year.The beer, called Oysterman’s Stout, pairs well with local oysters, which the brewery also serves. For each stout purchased during March, 11 percent of the proceeds will be donated to the federation’s oyster restoration work, which helps improve water quality and provide habitat for wildlife.- Advertisement –