5:32 am, Friday, 10 October 2025
BREAKING NEWS
Reviving the Rural Economy: $100 Million ADB–Bangladesh Agreement The Journey Begins for Cox’s Bazar’s First Plastic Recycling Plant Why the world’s biggest food company is stepping back Nestlé has withdrawn from a high-profile international alliance to cut methane from dairy supply chains, a move that instantly sharpened debate over how fast and by what methods the sector should decarbonize; the company says it will keep pursuing on-farm emissions cuts through its own programs while reassessing the group’s approach and governance, but the exit deprives the coalition of its most recognizable member and risks slowing peer benchmarking, shared pilot data, and pooled purchasing that can bring down costs for farmers. Methane from cattle is a potent, short-lived climate pollutant, and many governments have leaned on voluntary industry compacts to accelerate adoption of feed additives, manure management, and breeding strategies; critics of Nestlé’s decision warn that a fragmentation of efforts could reduce transparency and make it harder for buyers, lenders, and regulators to compare progress across brands, whereas supporters counter that company-led projects tied to local agronomy and subsidies often deliver faster, measurable gains than broad global charters. The policy backdrop is shifting as well: several markets are moving from pure carrots to a mix of incentives and performance-based conditions on grants and export supports, and that pivot raises stakes for how milk processors document emissions baselines and third-party verification, because the credibility of Scope 3 targets rests on comparable methodologies rather than marketing claims alone. Practically, much of the abatement economics hinge on who pays for early-stage inputs like methane-reducing feed supplements and slurry lids; with farm margins tight, a coordinated model—blending buyer premiums, public cost-shares, and green-finance instruments—is usually needed to avoid penalizing smaller producers, and Nestlé’s departure complicates the coalition’s ability to aggregate demand and negotiate lower unit costs at scale. What changes on the farm, for financiers, and across supply chains For producers, the near-term signal is mixed: one major buyer is still funding on-farm pilots but no longer inside the alliance’s shared roadmap, which could slow knowledge transfer between regions that differ on climate, feed, and herd structure, even as individual Nestlé programs continue to trial seaweed-based additives, nitrification inhibitors, covered lagoons with biogas capture, and pasture rotations to improve enteric and manure outcomes; in parallel, veterinarians and breeders stress that fertility and animal health gains can cut emissions intensity without shrinking output, though activists argue absolute reductions are needed if national targets are to be met. Financiers and insurers will keep pressing for comparable disclosures because the cost of capital increasingly reflects climate-risk metrics: banks baking “sustainability-linked” terms into dairy loans need clear, auditable KPIs, and exporters eyeing tariff-free access to markets with carbon-border rules will face tougher paperwork if standards splinter, which is why industry groups are urging a minimum common MRV (measurement-reporting-verification) framework even when brand strategies differ. For consumers—and for downstream brands in chocolate, infant formula, and ice cream—the implications will show up more in labels and price architecture than in the taste of products: if buyers pay farmers for verified methane abatement while feed and equipment remain pricey, some costs may pass through, but over time biogas revenue, fertilizer substitution, and efficiency gains can offset outlays and stabilize retail pricing. The political risk is that today’s corporate exit becomes tomorrow’s cultural flashpoint, especially in countries where farmer protests have already shaped election cycles; to avoid backlash, climate policy designers are experimenting with “pay for performance” that rewards measured reductions rather than prescribing a single technology path. The bottom line is not that dairy decarbonization stalls, but that governance gets messier: Nestlé’s solo track keeps momentum on pilots yet raises coordination costs for everyone else, and the outcome to watch is whether competing alliances converge on interoperable data, verification, and crediting rules so that farmers can sell a ton of avoided methane once—and get recognized for it across buyers, banks, and border regimes. SOFTBANK BUYS ABB’S ROBOTICS UNIT FOR $5.4B, BETTING ON A NEW WAVE OF FACTORY AUTOMATION Nurul Majid Humayun’s Death and the Placement of Prisons under the International Red Cross IEA TRIMS U.S. RENEWABLES OUTLOOK AS FEDERAL POLICIES SHIFT; GLOBAL SOLAR STILL SURGES GAZA TALKS ENTER DAY THREE IN EGYPT AS MEDIATORS TEST PATH TO FULL CEASE-FIRE OCTOBER PRIME DAY 2025: THE TECH DEALS THAT ARE ACTUALLY WORTH YOUR MONEY PRIME DAY, AGAIN: WIRED’S BIG LIST SHOWS HOW TO SHOP SMART AND SKIP THE DUDS TIMOTHÉE CHALAMET TEASES ‘MARTY SUPREME’ AFTER NYFF PREMIERE, KEEPING PLOT UNDER WRAPS

University of Tokyo to raise fees 20%

sarakhon desk

University of Tokyo to raise fees 20%

Japan Times,

The University of Tokyo, Japan’s top public university, plans to raise its tuition fees by 20% from 2025 — its first increase in 20 years — while expanding its current financial aid eligibility for domestic students.

Under the proposal, its current tuition of ¥535,800 ($3,800) per year will be raised to ¥642,960, an increase of more than a ¥100,000. This will apply to domestic and international students newly enrolling in undergraduate programs beginning in fiscal 2025 and graduate programs from fiscal 2029. The rates for doctoral and law programs will be unaffected.

University of Tokyo President Teruo Fujii said Tuesday that while the university has made efforts to secure greater funding and government subsidies, intensified global competition in higher education has made the proposed increase necessary.

“We believe that improving the educational and learning environment for our students is an urgent necessity,” he said in a briefing to reporters. “In this context, we aim to establish a solid foundation for the continuous improvement of our educational environment and to ensure that we can provide world-class education.”

The university will not raise the tuition fees for current students as a “transitional measure to mitigate sudden changes.”

Additionally, the introduction of the hikes for graduate students in fiscal 2029 will ensure that current students who wish to pursue a higher degree receive a “cohesive academic experience” under the same tuition rates.

Meanwhile, newly enrolled domestic students with a family income of ¥6 million a year or less will be exempted from all tuition fees under the proposal. Currently, exemptions are granted to undergraduates with a family income of up to ¥4 million a year, and on a case-by-case basis for students enrolled in graduate programs.

The university said it will consider students with a family income of between ¥6 million and ¥9 million a year for a partial exemption of tuition fees.

Financial aid eligibility for international students will stay the same, though the suniversity clarified that foreign national students who are permanent residents in Japan are considered domestic students.

The proposed plan will go through several internal processes before taking effect. The

university expects to make the changes official by the end of September, barring unforeseen issues.

The education ministry sets a standard tuition rate for national universities, which is ¥535,800 for undergraduate and most graduate programs. However, it allows universities to raise this amount by up to 20% under “special circumstances,” which the University of Tokyo is invoking for its proposal.

The university estimates an increase in revenue of ¥1.35 billion from the higher tuition fees by the end of fiscal year 2028, which will be used to update the university’s online systems, maintain its facilities, enhance working conditions for teaching assistants and bolster student resources for mental health and opportunities to study abroad, among other areas.

Several other national universities, such as Chiba University and Tokyo Institute of Technology, have already raised their tuition fees in recent years.

Students at the University of Tokyo have been protesting against the proposed increases since they were first reported in May. Fujii said the reports had appeared abruptly during the initial stage of discussions, which made it difficult for the university to communicate the proposal properly to its students.

“This is something on which we deeply reflect, and, in that sense, we are now considering how we can handle such matters more carefully in the future,” he said.

PH growth now seen hitting target

The Manila Times,

The economy is on track to grow near potential, the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP) said, and growth is now expected to hit the 6.0- to 7.0-percent target this year.

“The outlook in domestic economic activity remains firm,” the central bank said in its latest Monetary Policy Report, with latest baseline forecasts pointing to within-target growth for 2024 and misses for 2025 and 2026.

The goals for both years are 6.57.5 percent and 6.5-8.0 percent, respectively.

A 6.3-percent expansion in the second quarter brought first-half growth to 6.0 percent, at the bottom end of the 2024 target.

“Growth prospects are relatively stable for the rest of the year,” the BSP said in the August policy report, “driven by robust construction spending and the timely implementation and expanded coverage of various government programs.”

Three months earlier, the BSP had said that while the outlook remained “intact,” the economy would “operate slightly below potential” and that growth could fall below the 2024 and 2025 targets.

In the latest report that was released on Monday, it said that the output gap — the difference between actual and potential economic output — would “remain slightly negative in 2024 and 2025 but will close in 2026.”

“Higher consumption, driven by higher real wages and stable overseas Filipino remittances, could offset the negative impact of previous policy interest rate adjustments on demand,” it added.

“This will bring domestic output closer to its potential over the policy horizon.”

Labor market improvements and continued investment growth are also expected to buoy potential output, which could be accelerated by key reforms aimed at promoting investments and business activity.

The BSP’s policymaking Monetary Board began easing last month, ordering a 25-basis-point cut that brought the policy rate down to 6.25 percent.

Further reductions are expected to be announced well into next year, possibly even in 2026, to bring the rate back to or near where it was — 2.0 percent — before tightening began in May 2022 when inflation started surging.

Consumer price growth is estimated to fall within the 2.0- to 4.0-percent target this year with both the baseline and risk-adjusted forecasts trimmed to 3.4 percent and 3.3 percent, respectively, from 3.5 percent and 3.8 percent in the May policy report.

“The balance of risks to the inflation outlook now leans toward the downside for 2024 and 2025, with a slight tilt toward the upside for 2026,” the BSP said.

Higher fares and power rates were tagged as upside risks and assigned probabilities of “medium” and “high,” respectively.

Lower rice prices due to a reduction in the import duty, meanwhile, was identified as the primary downside risk.

Dairy farm manager fined $52k

Te Puke Times ,

Pongakawa dairy farm manager has been convicted and fined $52,500 for illegally discharging effluent from a farm storage pond which ended up flowing into the Waih¯ı Estuary.

Wayne Rutland pleaded guilty in the Environment Court at Tauranga to a charge of unlawfully discharging dairy effluent on to or into land at a farm property in Old Coach Rd which entered the Wharere Canal. The canal flows into the Waih¯ı Estuary, which is between Maketu¯ and Pukehina,

The Bay of Plenty Regional Council prosecution relates to Rutland allowing effluent to be illegally discharged from a storage pond on a farm property in Old Coach Rd, Pongakawa, owned by Scott Farms (Pongakawa) Ltd on December 22, 2022. The maximum penalty for this offence is two years in prison or a fine of $300,000.

The farm is about 16km southeast of Te Puke and 12km south of Maketu¯ .

Wharere Canal is a habitat for whitebait, eels and other species and a food source for local iwi and fishers.

The council’s summary of facts described Waih¯ı Estuary as a “natural taonga” and said because of the declining water quality during recent decades, there were fewer shellfish, crabs and worms in the estuary and extra efforts were being taken to improve its ecological health.

Judge Sheena Tepania’s recent sentencing decision, which included the council’s summary of facts, was released to the Bay of Plenty Times.

The summary said at the time of illegal discharge, Rutland had worked as the farm manager at Scott Farms for more than 16 years and was responsible for the farm’s day-to-day operations, including the irrigation system.

In March 2020, the farm owner was granted resource consent by the council allowing the discharge of dairy effluent and dairy sludge to land at the farm, subject to conditions including no effluent “reaching surface waters by an overflow or direct discharge” and keeping effluent irrigation records.

The prosecution stems from a council officer’s routine compliance inspection on November 22, 2022, and a follow-up visit by two officers on December 22, 2022.

During the first visit, the officer saw discoloured liquid discharging from the side of the effluent pond and an outlet pipe with a tap on it, and

effluent appeared to be flowing from a 100mm wide hole in the pond wall, the summary said.

The officer told Rutland and a farm director the discharge must stop immediately and the hole in the pond wall and the outlet pipe and tap must be blocked.

On December 22, 2022, when two council officers visited the farm to inspect the repairs, they saw effluent flowing from the same outlet pipe and no irrigation equipment nearby.

Council officers followed the effluent flow path to a drain that contained flowing water that then flowed through a culvert into an adjoining paddock.

The “affected drain” then flowed through a culvert under Old Coach Rd and on to the neighbouring property — about 4km beyond the Old Coach Rd culvert, the drain flows into the Wharere Canal, and ultimately into Waih¯ı Estuary, the summary said.

Laboratory testing of effluent samples downstream from the discharge point found elevated levels of faecal material and ammonia concentrations.

The council’s lawyer, Hayley Sheridan, told Judge Tepania the appropriate starting point for the fine was $80,000, given the “relatively large volume” of effluent discharged over two days, with moderately serious environmental effects.

She said this was not a system failure but Rutland either deliberately allowed the discharge from the unsupervised outlet tap or was “reckless” to the possibility.

Rutland’s lawyer Lana Burkhardt argued for a fine starting point of $40,000 given there was no evidence her client deliberately left the outlet pipe tap on and described his conduct as “highly careless or even negligent”.

Burkhardt said Rutland accepted he was fully responsible for the discharge and urged Judge Tepania to accept this was a “one-off incident”.

Judge Tepania said a $52,500 fine was appropriate.

Rutland was ordered to pay court costs of $130 and solicitor costs of $113.

02:00:47 pm, Thursday, 12 September 2024

Why the world’s biggest food company is stepping back Nestlé has withdrawn from a high-profile international alliance to cut methane from dairy supply chains, a move that instantly sharpened debate over how fast and by what methods the sector should decarbonize; the company says it will keep pursuing on-farm emissions cuts through its own programs while reassessing the group’s approach and governance, but the exit deprives the coalition of its most recognizable member and risks slowing peer benchmarking, shared pilot data, and pooled purchasing that can bring down costs for farmers. Methane from cattle is a potent, short-lived climate pollutant, and many governments have leaned on voluntary industry compacts to accelerate adoption of feed additives, manure management, and breeding strategies; critics of Nestlé’s decision warn that a fragmentation of efforts could reduce transparency and make it harder for buyers, lenders, and regulators to compare progress across brands, whereas supporters counter that company-led projects tied to local agronomy and subsidies often deliver faster, measurable gains than broad global charters. The policy backdrop is shifting as well: several markets are moving from pure carrots to a mix of incentives and performance-based conditions on grants and export supports, and that pivot raises stakes for how milk processors document emissions baselines and third-party verification, because the credibility of Scope 3 targets rests on comparable methodologies rather than marketing claims alone. Practically, much of the abatement economics hinge on who pays for early-stage inputs like methane-reducing feed supplements and slurry lids; with farm margins tight, a coordinated model—blending buyer premiums, public cost-shares, and green-finance instruments—is usually needed to avoid penalizing smaller producers, and Nestlé’s departure complicates the coalition’s ability to aggregate demand and negotiate lower unit costs at scale. What changes on the farm, for financiers, and across supply chains For producers, the near-term signal is mixed: one major buyer is still funding on-farm pilots but no longer inside the alliance’s shared roadmap, which could slow knowledge transfer between regions that differ on climate, feed, and herd structure, even as individual Nestlé programs continue to trial seaweed-based additives, nitrification inhibitors, covered lagoons with biogas capture, and pasture rotations to improve enteric and manure outcomes; in parallel, veterinarians and breeders stress that fertility and animal health gains can cut emissions intensity without shrinking output, though activists argue absolute reductions are needed if national targets are to be met. Financiers and insurers will keep pressing for comparable disclosures because the cost of capital increasingly reflects climate-risk metrics: banks baking “sustainability-linked” terms into dairy loans need clear, auditable KPIs, and exporters eyeing tariff-free access to markets with carbon-border rules will face tougher paperwork if standards splinter, which is why industry groups are urging a minimum common MRV (measurement-reporting-verification) framework even when brand strategies differ. For consumers—and for downstream brands in chocolate, infant formula, and ice cream—the implications will show up more in labels and price architecture than in the taste of products: if buyers pay farmers for verified methane abatement while feed and equipment remain pricey, some costs may pass through, but over time biogas revenue, fertilizer substitution, and efficiency gains can offset outlays and stabilize retail pricing. The political risk is that today’s corporate exit becomes tomorrow’s cultural flashpoint, especially in countries where farmer protests have already shaped election cycles; to avoid backlash, climate policy designers are experimenting with “pay for performance” that rewards measured reductions rather than prescribing a single technology path. The bottom line is not that dairy decarbonization stalls, but that governance gets messier: Nestlé’s solo track keeps momentum on pilots yet raises coordination costs for everyone else, and the outcome to watch is whether competing alliances converge on interoperable data, verification, and crediting rules so that farmers can sell a ton of avoided methane once—and get recognized for it across buyers, banks, and border regimes.

University of Tokyo to raise fees 20%

02:00:47 pm, Thursday, 12 September 2024

University of Tokyo to raise fees 20%

Japan Times,

The University of Tokyo, Japan’s top public university, plans to raise its tuition fees by 20% from 2025 — its first increase in 20 years — while expanding its current financial aid eligibility for domestic students.

Under the proposal, its current tuition of ¥535,800 ($3,800) per year will be raised to ¥642,960, an increase of more than a ¥100,000. This will apply to domestic and international students newly enrolling in undergraduate programs beginning in fiscal 2025 and graduate programs from fiscal 2029. The rates for doctoral and law programs will be unaffected.

University of Tokyo President Teruo Fujii said Tuesday that while the university has made efforts to secure greater funding and government subsidies, intensified global competition in higher education has made the proposed increase necessary.

“We believe that improving the educational and learning environment for our students is an urgent necessity,” he said in a briefing to reporters. “In this context, we aim to establish a solid foundation for the continuous improvement of our educational environment and to ensure that we can provide world-class education.”

The university will not raise the tuition fees for current students as a “transitional measure to mitigate sudden changes.”

Additionally, the introduction of the hikes for graduate students in fiscal 2029 will ensure that current students who wish to pursue a higher degree receive a “cohesive academic experience” under the same tuition rates.

Meanwhile, newly enrolled domestic students with a family income of ¥6 million a year or less will be exempted from all tuition fees under the proposal. Currently, exemptions are granted to undergraduates with a family income of up to ¥4 million a year, and on a case-by-case basis for students enrolled in graduate programs.

The university said it will consider students with a family income of between ¥6 million and ¥9 million a year for a partial exemption of tuition fees.

Financial aid eligibility for international students will stay the same, though the suniversity clarified that foreign national students who are permanent residents in Japan are considered domestic students.

The proposed plan will go through several internal processes before taking effect. The

university expects to make the changes official by the end of September, barring unforeseen issues.

The education ministry sets a standard tuition rate for national universities, which is ¥535,800 for undergraduate and most graduate programs. However, it allows universities to raise this amount by up to 20% under “special circumstances,” which the University of Tokyo is invoking for its proposal.

The university estimates an increase in revenue of ¥1.35 billion from the higher tuition fees by the end of fiscal year 2028, which will be used to update the university’s online systems, maintain its facilities, enhance working conditions for teaching assistants and bolster student resources for mental health and opportunities to study abroad, among other areas.

Several other national universities, such as Chiba University and Tokyo Institute of Technology, have already raised their tuition fees in recent years.

Students at the University of Tokyo have been protesting against the proposed increases since they were first reported in May. Fujii said the reports had appeared abruptly during the initial stage of discussions, which made it difficult for the university to communicate the proposal properly to its students.

“This is something on which we deeply reflect, and, in that sense, we are now considering how we can handle such matters more carefully in the future,” he said.

PH growth now seen hitting target

The Manila Times,

The economy is on track to grow near potential, the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP) said, and growth is now expected to hit the 6.0- to 7.0-percent target this year.

“The outlook in domestic economic activity remains firm,” the central bank said in its latest Monetary Policy Report, with latest baseline forecasts pointing to within-target growth for 2024 and misses for 2025 and 2026.

The goals for both years are 6.57.5 percent and 6.5-8.0 percent, respectively.

A 6.3-percent expansion in the second quarter brought first-half growth to 6.0 percent, at the bottom end of the 2024 target.

“Growth prospects are relatively stable for the rest of the year,” the BSP said in the August policy report, “driven by robust construction spending and the timely implementation and expanded coverage of various government programs.”

Three months earlier, the BSP had said that while the outlook remained “intact,” the economy would “operate slightly below potential” and that growth could fall below the 2024 and 2025 targets.

In the latest report that was released on Monday, it said that the output gap — the difference between actual and potential economic output — would “remain slightly negative in 2024 and 2025 but will close in 2026.”

“Higher consumption, driven by higher real wages and stable overseas Filipino remittances, could offset the negative impact of previous policy interest rate adjustments on demand,” it added.

“This will bring domestic output closer to its potential over the policy horizon.”

Labor market improvements and continued investment growth are also expected to buoy potential output, which could be accelerated by key reforms aimed at promoting investments and business activity.

The BSP’s policymaking Monetary Board began easing last month, ordering a 25-basis-point cut that brought the policy rate down to 6.25 percent.

Further reductions are expected to be announced well into next year, possibly even in 2026, to bring the rate back to or near where it was — 2.0 percent — before tightening began in May 2022 when inflation started surging.

Consumer price growth is estimated to fall within the 2.0- to 4.0-percent target this year with both the baseline and risk-adjusted forecasts trimmed to 3.4 percent and 3.3 percent, respectively, from 3.5 percent and 3.8 percent in the May policy report.

“The balance of risks to the inflation outlook now leans toward the downside for 2024 and 2025, with a slight tilt toward the upside for 2026,” the BSP said.

Higher fares and power rates were tagged as upside risks and assigned probabilities of “medium” and “high,” respectively.

Lower rice prices due to a reduction in the import duty, meanwhile, was identified as the primary downside risk.

Dairy farm manager fined $52k

Te Puke Times ,

Pongakawa dairy farm manager has been convicted and fined $52,500 for illegally discharging effluent from a farm storage pond which ended up flowing into the Waih¯ı Estuary.

Wayne Rutland pleaded guilty in the Environment Court at Tauranga to a charge of unlawfully discharging dairy effluent on to or into land at a farm property in Old Coach Rd which entered the Wharere Canal. The canal flows into the Waih¯ı Estuary, which is between Maketu¯ and Pukehina,

The Bay of Plenty Regional Council prosecution relates to Rutland allowing effluent to be illegally discharged from a storage pond on a farm property in Old Coach Rd, Pongakawa, owned by Scott Farms (Pongakawa) Ltd on December 22, 2022. The maximum penalty for this offence is two years in prison or a fine of $300,000.

The farm is about 16km southeast of Te Puke and 12km south of Maketu¯ .

Wharere Canal is a habitat for whitebait, eels and other species and a food source for local iwi and fishers.

The council’s summary of facts described Waih¯ı Estuary as a “natural taonga” and said because of the declining water quality during recent decades, there were fewer shellfish, crabs and worms in the estuary and extra efforts were being taken to improve its ecological health.

Judge Sheena Tepania’s recent sentencing decision, which included the council’s summary of facts, was released to the Bay of Plenty Times.

The summary said at the time of illegal discharge, Rutland had worked as the farm manager at Scott Farms for more than 16 years and was responsible for the farm’s day-to-day operations, including the irrigation system.

In March 2020, the farm owner was granted resource consent by the council allowing the discharge of dairy effluent and dairy sludge to land at the farm, subject to conditions including no effluent “reaching surface waters by an overflow or direct discharge” and keeping effluent irrigation records.

The prosecution stems from a council officer’s routine compliance inspection on November 22, 2022, and a follow-up visit by two officers on December 22, 2022.

During the first visit, the officer saw discoloured liquid discharging from the side of the effluent pond and an outlet pipe with a tap on it, and

effluent appeared to be flowing from a 100mm wide hole in the pond wall, the summary said.

The officer told Rutland and a farm director the discharge must stop immediately and the hole in the pond wall and the outlet pipe and tap must be blocked.

On December 22, 2022, when two council officers visited the farm to inspect the repairs, they saw effluent flowing from the same outlet pipe and no irrigation equipment nearby.

Council officers followed the effluent flow path to a drain that contained flowing water that then flowed through a culvert into an adjoining paddock.

The “affected drain” then flowed through a culvert under Old Coach Rd and on to the neighbouring property — about 4km beyond the Old Coach Rd culvert, the drain flows into the Wharere Canal, and ultimately into Waih¯ı Estuary, the summary said.

Laboratory testing of effluent samples downstream from the discharge point found elevated levels of faecal material and ammonia concentrations.

The council’s lawyer, Hayley Sheridan, told Judge Tepania the appropriate starting point for the fine was $80,000, given the “relatively large volume” of effluent discharged over two days, with moderately serious environmental effects.

She said this was not a system failure but Rutland either deliberately allowed the discharge from the unsupervised outlet tap or was “reckless” to the possibility.

Rutland’s lawyer Lana Burkhardt argued for a fine starting point of $40,000 given there was no evidence her client deliberately left the outlet pipe tap on and described his conduct as “highly careless or even negligent”.

Burkhardt said Rutland accepted he was fully responsible for the discharge and urged Judge Tepania to accept this was a “one-off incident”.

Judge Tepania said a $52,500 fine was appropriate.

Rutland was ordered to pay court costs of $130 and solicitor costs of $113.