Twins’ Zebby Matthews looks to find consistency, better execution

posted in: All news | 0

FORT MYERS, Fla. — The search for the “next man up,” has begun.

With news of Pablo López’s injury, which very well might wind up with the starter needing season-ending Tommy John surgery, the Twins suddenly are looking for someone to step up and fill an, unexpectedly, open rotation spot.

The Twins have touted their rotation depth from the start, and now they’ll get a chance to see it in action. Zebby Matthews will have his first in-game chance to make an impression on team’s decision-makers when he takes the ball on Friday in the Twins’ spring opener against the University of Minnesota, a game that is set for 5:05 p.m. Central at Hammond Stadium in Fort Myers, Fla.

“I’m going to do my best in spring to earn a rotation spot,” Matthews said. “If it works out, that’s awesome. If not, then I’ll be ready in Triple-A whenever they make the call and need me back up.”

Matthews spent the beginning of last season at Triple-A but was in the majors much of last season, making 16 starts sandwiched around a shoulder strain that kept him out for part of the summer.

His focus this offseason — and his continued focus as camp gets underway — is on his execution, particularly with his offspeed pitches.

“I’ve got the stuff. I’ve got the pitches. Just trying to fine tune and execute,” Matthews said. “If you look at some of the better starters in the league, you look at what they’re able to do locating their pitches, missing to their advantage, that sort of stuff. Big focus on that.”

Across 16 major league starts last season, Matthews had a 5.56 ERA, mixing in some clunkers with some stretches of dominance. In his second-to-last start of the season, he gave up nine runs in three innings. In his final outing, he went seven innings and gave up one run on four hits against the Texas Rangers.

Now, with major league experience in each of the past two seasons, he’s looking to find more consistency, as he has in the minors. What that looks like, manager Derek Shelton said, in this case, is making sure he’s “able to manipulate the plate and off the plate in specific counts.”

“We’ve seen over the time, he’s got really good stuff and flashes that,” Shelton said. “I think for a young pitcher, just to be more consistent is probably the main theme.”

Twins “hunt the good”

When Shelton first heard strength and conditioning coach Chuck Bradway drop the phrase “hunt the good,” during a staff retreat in Minneapolis last month, the new Twins manager knew he was going to steal it. Now, it’s written atop the Twins’ daily schedule that’s posted on the walls every day, and Shelton made sure to include the phrase in his speech to the group as camp begun.

“It was something that organically came up in a staff conversation about how we wanted our staff to relate to players and what we wanted them to feel because the game is based on so much negativity,” Shelton said.

To illustrate their point, they highlighted Hall of Famer Tony Oliva, a career .304 hitter. Along the way, that meant failing every seven of 10 times.

“Our game is based on failure,” Shelton said. “I want to make sure our coaches and our players focus back towards what the good thing about every day is.”

Briefly

The Twins’ game against the University of Minnesota will last seven innings. The Twins will have a couple of major leaguers play in Friday’s game, but Shelton said he expects most of the rest of them to play within the first couple games. … Joe Ryan will start Saturday’s game.

Related Articles


With Pablo López’s injury, what starters could step up for Twins?


After frustrating free agency, Andrew Chafin competes for spot in Twins’ bullpen


Bruce Meyer elevated to baseball players’ association interim executive director


Twins look for “next man up,” in wake of Pablo López injury news


Twins’ Pablo López likely to miss entire season

Minneapolis man, later shot by St. Paul cops, gets 86½ years for ‘brazen’ triple murder at homeless camp

posted in: All news | 0

A man who killed three people by opening fire at a Minneapolis homeless encampment and was shot the next day during an encounter with St. Paul police has been sentenced to 86½ years in prison.

Earl Bennett (Courtesy of the Hennepin County Sheriff’s Office)

Hennepin County District Judge Hilary Caligiuri gave Earl Bennett, 42, of Minneapolis, three consecutive prison terms on Wednesday after a jury in December found him guilty of three counts of second-degree murder in the shootings of Christopher Martell Washington, 38, Louis Mitchell Lemons Jr., 32, and Samantha Jo Moss, 35, in Minneapolis’ Hiawatha neighborhood on Oct. 27, 2024.

The judge followed a recommendation by a Hennepin County probation officer, who did a presentence investigation, and the urging of prosecutors to hand down the 1,038-month prison term.

Prosecutors said Bennett, wearing a balaclava-type mask, stepped into a tent at a small homeless encampment in the 4400 block of Snelling Avenue, behind railroad tracks and near Hiawatha Avenue, about 2:20 p.m. He asked for Washington, then started firing. Washington was shot in his neck and thigh. Lemons was hit in his neck and back of his head. Both men were pronounced dead at the scene. Moss was shot in the head, shoulder and hand, and died of her injuries six days later.

The killings were “intentional, brazen and violent, occurring in broad daylight near numerous witnesses,” a presentence investigation report said. “These victims had no warning or opportunity to protect themselves or flee before (Bennett) executed all three.”

Video showed Bennett “casually leave the encampment and ride his e-bike away from the scene,” prosecutors wrote last week in a sentencing memo to the judge. “(Bennett) gave no thought to the people he just murdered or their friends who would inevitably find victims’ lifeless bodies.”

A day after the triple shooting, at about 5:15 p.m., police responded to reports that a resident at a Minneapolis sober living house had shot another resident in the neck. Two people said Bennett was the shooter.

Less than three hours later, at 7:45 p.m., St. Paul police officers responding to a shots-fired call at Snelling and University avenues encountered a shirtless man, later identified as Bennett, walking and holding a handgun, which police say he wouldn’t drop, despite commands to do so and non-lethal rounds fired at him.

Bennett held the gun to his own head and pointed it at officers, according to city surveillance camera footage released by police. Four officers responded by firing a total of 31 rounds at Bennett, 15 of which struck him. He was treated at Regions Hospital for injuries that resulted in the amputation of one of his legs.

Related Articles


Barbara McQuade: How to safeguard the DOJ against the next Trump


St. Paul man gets probation for copper wire thefts that cost the city $200K in repairs


Report: Young offenders more likely to stay out of trouble under new Ramsey County initiative


Local journalist and activist plead not guilty in St. Paul church protest


Burnsville woman admits to fatally shooting 70-year-old, trying to cover up killing

The Ramsey County Attorney’s Office determined that the four officers were justified in their actions.

The Sig Sauer 9mm handgun that Bennett dropped after he was shot was reported stolen from a truck in Apple Valley two days earlier. It was a match to casings found at the encampment and sober house shootings.

Bennett still faces first-degree attempted murder in connection with the sober house shooting, and second-degree assault and possession of a firearm by a person convicted of a crime of violence for his encounter with St. Paul police.

Bennett was prohibited from having a gun because of felony robbery convictions in St. Louis, Mo., in 2003. He was sentenced to 12 years prison and moved to Minnesota after his release. He then had an encounter with law enforcement in 2015 that nearly led to him being shot by a Ramsey County sheriff’s deputy after attempting to disarm another deputy at Regions Hospital. He received a four-year prison term.

HUD proposes rule that would force noncitizens from public housing

posted in: All news | 0

By MICHAEL CASEY

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development on Thursday proposed a rule that would limit public housing mostly to citizens, which advocates fear could lead to tens of thousands of people being evicted.

Related Articles


Federal judge accuses Trump administration of ‘terror’ against immigrants in scathing ruling


Lawmaker says the US deported a baby with bronchitis, while authorities say the child was medically cleared


New Trump administration order could lead to the detention of thousands of legal refugees


Justice Dept. lawyer is found in contempt by federal judge in Minnesota


Minnesota Capitol rally calls for state aid following immigration crackdown

The rule, published in the Federal Register, calls for limiting funding for those in public housing and other HUD-related housing to citizens and eligible noncitizens. The rule would require every resident in HUD-funded housing to show proof of citizenship or eligible status, including those 62 years and older who previously only had to show proof of age.

The measure would effectively bar mixed status families —- where some household members are eligible for help — from housing and is part of the government’s immigration crackdown. A similar rule was proposed but never finalized during the first Trump administration and is mentioned as a policy priority in the conservative blueprint Project 2025,

“Under President Trump’s leadership, the days of illegal aliens, ineligibles, and fraudsters gaming the system and riding the coattails of American taxpayers are over,” HUD Secretary Scott Turner said in a statement.. “HUD’s proposed rule will guarantee that all residents in HUD-funded housing are eligible tenants. We have zero tolerance for pushing aside hardworking U.S. citizens while enabling others to exploit decades-old loopholes.”

The proposed rule will be made official when it’s published in the Federal Register on Friday. HUD did not answer how long it may take before the rule takes effect.

Housing advocates were quick to criticize the move.

“Our country can ensure that every one of us, no matter where we come from or what language we speak, has a safe home,” Shamus Roller, the executive director of the National Housing Law Project said in a statement. “Instead, Trump is trying to evict immigrant families, citizen and non-citizen, from HUD housing.

In December, the left-leaning Center on Budget and Policy Priorities estimated that up to 20,000 families or as many as 80,000 people could lose assistance due to changes in eligibility that would overturn a rule that has been in place for decades.

The impact of the rule could affect many more people who struggle to provide proper documentation. About 3.8 million adults with citizenship lack any form of documentation proving their citizenship, and another 17.5 million cannot easily get the documents.

“Everyone deserves an affordable home, including our neighbors, friends, and coworkers who are immigrants,” said Sonya Acosta, a senior policy analyst with the Center. “This rule would force 20,000 families with mixed immigration statuses to make the agonizing choice between losing the assistance that helps them pay rent every month or separating their family. People without a documented immigration status have never been eligible for rental assistance.”

Trump’s New Wall Will Destroy Irreplaceable Border Treasures—Unless Congress Acts

posted in: All news | 0

The procession of more than a thousand people walked from Our Lady of Guadalupe church in Mission to the grounds of La Lomita chapel, the historic riverside mission which gave the border town its name. It was August 2017, early in Donald Trump’s first term, and the marchers carrying signs that read “Salvar La Lomita” and “Save Our River” knew that the new president planned to turn a dirt levee, running about 100 feet north of the modest white house of worship, into a border wall—30 feet tall and consisting of a concrete slab surmounted by steel posts, topped with floodlights and cameras, with a patrol road and a 150-foot-wide “enforcement zone” extending from its base and encompassing the chapel. 

The next day, the people brought their protest to the Santa Ana National Wildlife Refuge. News had leaked that Santa Ana, set aside as habitat for the migratory birds that fill South Texas’ skies every autumn and spring and for the endangered ocelots that move silently through a wildlife corridor alongside the Rio Grande, was slated for the first new stretch of wall. The Trump administration would ultimately condemn the property of hundreds of landowners along the planned wall’s path, but those court proceedings would take time. The wildlife refuge was federally owned, so the conversion of the levee that ran between the visitors center and the trails could start right away. Those who cared about the refuge joined hands, forming a line nearly a mile long on the levee and denouncing its planned replacement with a barrier that would devastate the refuge. 

These protests and the many that followed repeated the same refrain: “No Border Wall.” Some politicians took notice.

Protesters form a human chain on the levee at the Santa Ana refuge in 2017 (Eugenio del Bosque Gomez)

At the La Lomita rally, U.S. Representative Vicente Gonzalez spoke against the walls that would hit his constituents, and his colleague Filemon Vela, whose district included Santa Ana, spoke at a protest at the refuge. 

Congressman Henry Cuellar, whose district then included La Lomita, eventually inserted a provision into the appropriations bills that paid for wall construction which prohibited the use of those funds in places where protests had made the news: Santa Ana and La Lomita, Bentsen State Park, the National Butterfly Center, historic cemeteries, and wildlife refuges around the SpaceX launch site. 

In doing so, Cuellar and his congressional colleagues missed the larger message of the protests—No Border Wall—a demand that was not restricted to a few select locations. But at least these places would be spared from the destruction that subsequently ripped apart so much of the border.

Then, last July, Congress passed the so-called One Big Beautiful Bill, a budget reconciliation act that, among other onerous provisions, gave the Trump administration $46.5 billion for border barrier construction (more money, based on prior costs, than would be needed to wall off the entire U.S. Mexico divide). Dozens of federal laws have already been waived, and billions of dollars worth of contracts have already been awarded, to build 629 miles of new border wall and install 536 miles of river buoys. 

Crucially, the One Big Beautiful Bill did not include the provision that spared La Lomita, Santa Ana, or any other sensitive location—meaning this new tranche of funding is not explicitly subject to the restrictions that previously shielded these places—and a map posted by U.S. Customs and Border Protection indicates that Trump’s new walls will tear through them.

The La Lomita chapel in 2018 (Gus Bova)

The Trump administration claims that border walls and river buoys will halt the cross-border movement of people, but both academic and government studies, not to mention the ladders one can find left alongside walls for the past decade, show that a desperate or determined person will not be so easily stopped. Walls do, on the other hand, block terrestrial animals. Habitat loss is the primary reason that ocelots are endangered, and while they have no problem walking up and over a gently sloping levee, they cannot build a ladder to climb a 30-foot-tall vertical wall. Walls through Santa Ana, Bentsen State Park, and the National Butterfly Center would restrict animal movement, bottling up wild creatures in bits of forest that are too small to support them.

The Lower Rio Grande Valley is also periodically lashed by hurricanes, something that is sure to happen with greater frequency and ferocity as climate change intensifies. When a 2010 hurricane caused the Rio Grande to swell, inundating for months the land between the river and some stretches of levee that had been converted to border walls under Barack Obama, animals that encountered sheer concrete and steel barriers instead of sloping earthen levees were trapped. After the water receded, U.S. Fish and Wildlife staff found the remains of hundreds of animals that drowned. Border walls had turned wildlife refuges into death traps for the animals they were meant to protect. This will happen again and again if Santa Ana, Bentsen, and the National Butterfly Center are walled off.

The candles that flicker on La Lomita’s altar testify to its continued place in the religious lives of the faithful. Though historic, it is not a museum; it is a house of worship. The chapel would be in a no-man’s-land between the new border wall and the river, and just as with the nature preserves there is no word on how, or if, anyone will be able to reach it. It is possible there will be nothing left to reach, as the chapel sits within the enforcement zone projected to extend out from the wall. If the Trump administration does not alter its design, the chapel may be leveled.

When word got out early this month that the coming border walls could desecrate the chapel and devastate the nature preserves, people once again gathered at Santa Ana. They called upon elected officials to protect these places—and all of the threatened border communities and borderlands—from these mindlessly destructive (and staggeringly expensive) monstrosities. 

So far, politicians have not gotten the message.

Inside La Lomita in February (Scott Nicol)

If Representatives Gonzalez and Cuellar, or other Congress members who care about the Texas border, don’t act soon to explicitly reapply the protections during the ongoing Department of Homeland Security funding fight, there’s no reason to think the Trump administration will respect the Valley’s treasured spaces. Democrats may bemoan their lack of a majority in the U.S. House—but they should realize that they need to give their constituents, including those on the border, a reason to give them one. (Meanwhile, walls could be headed for the remote Big Bend region too, an area even many Republicans traditionally believed had no need for a barrier.)

Santa Ana and La Lomita are now in the gerrymandered district held by Republican Representative Monica De La Cruz, who has not uttered a word in their defense. She voted for the One Big Beautiful Bill and trumpeted its border wall funding, forgetting that she was sent to Washington, D.C., to work on behalf of South Texans, including her constituents whose farms and businesses are set to be condemned and walled off. Senators Ted Cruz and John Cornyn likewise voted to fund the destruction of the southern border of the state they represent.

For them, the border wall is just politics. 

But their actions or inactions, and their votes, have real-world impacts, because the concrete damage inflicted by border walls and river buoys will be permanent. If border walls destroy La Lomita, Santa Ana, Bentsen State Park, and the National Butterfly Center, they will not be magically resurrected when the White House has a less malignant occupant. Once walls are built, history shows that administrations of either party will maintain and even expand them.

The levee running through the National Butterfly Center in 2018 (Gus Bova)

Representatives Cuellar, Gonzalez, and De la Cruz, and Senators Cornyn and Cruz, need to start working for the border residents who sent them to Washington and fight to reinstate protections for these special places. Beyond that, they need to stop viewing the demolition of the borderlands as a political game, and redirect the $46.5 billion set to be wasted on walls toward beneficial federal projects. Saving Santa Ana, La Lomita, and other sensitive sites in and beyond the Valley is an important first step.

In a statement to the Texas Observer, Congressman Henry Cuellar said the following: “I secured these site protections during the first Trump administration through the appropriations process, and they were enacted into law. They remain the law today. Congress deliberately adopted exemptions to protect historic, environmental, and community sites in South Texas, including La Lomita Historical Park and the National Butterfly Center, from federally funded wall construction. I’m also working to protect sensitive sites in Webb and Zapata counties.”

Cuellar’s office also provided a copy of  appropriations language, which passed the U.S. House last month but not the Senate, that applied the site protections to that appropriations bill but did not explicitly do so for the earlier reconciliation act.

The congressman added: “As new funding proposals move forward—including provisions in the so-called One Big Beautiful Bill—I’m working to ensure those same legal protections continue to apply and these sites remain protected. You cannot circumvent established appropriations law. It’s not how the power of the purse works.”

The Observer contacted the offices of Congress members Vicente Gonzalez and Monica De La Cruz, but they did not provide comment. 

The post Trump’s New Wall Will Destroy Irreplaceable Border Treasures—Unless Congress Acts appeared first on The Texas Observer.