Grand Forks-based Acme Tools recognized in national conference
Apr. 9—GRAND FORKS — A Grand Forks-based company has been recognized by the Evergreen Supply Network as a member of the year.
Acme Tools was recognized as a Tier 1 2024 Distributor Member of the Year. Also recognized were Darragh Company of Little Rock, Arkansas, (Tier 2), Carson's Nut-Bolt and Tool of Greenville, South Carolina, (Tier 3), Witehead Hardware Co., a division of Miller Hardware, of Valdosta, Georgia, (Tier 4), and Beerman Precision, Inc., of New Orleans (Tier 5).
The awards recognize top distributors and manufacturers, according to a release. Companies were distributed into tiers based on size, and within each tier companies were ranked on contribution to the group, growth, participation and member and supplier input.
Paul and Steve Kuhlman accepted the award on behalf of Acme Tools during the general session of Evergreen's conference held in Dallas, Texas, on March 25, the release said.
The Evergreen Supply Network is a member-owned cooperative founded in 1989 and made up of 40 distributors with more than 300 locations in North America. The group is "focused on driving growth and profitability of its members and preferred suppliers through an on-going program of training and education, business development and partnering," according to the release.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
40 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump considers extending TikTok deadline. Is third time a charm?
Will the third time be the charm for TikTok's future? With another extension deadline in two weeks, the social media platform's future lies in the hands of President Donald Trump. In January, TikTok went dark for 12 hours in the United States when China-based ByteDance failed to divest the app's U.S. assets, as required by law. Since coming into office on Jan. 20, Trump issued two executive orders to extend the ban's deadline, hoping to acquire the short-form video app used by 170 million Americans. But so far, a deal has yet to be struck. The next deadline is June 19. A plan had been in the works that would spin off TikTok's American operation into a new firm owned and operated by U.S. investors, but was put on hold, according to Reuters, after China would not approve it following Trump's announcements of steep tariffs on its goods. During an NBC News interview in May, Trump said he would extend the deadline a third time if a deal isn't made by the June 19 deadline. 'I'd like to see it done,' Trump said during the interview. The president added that he has a 'little sweet spot' in his heart for TikTok, which he claims helped him win votes during the 2024 presidential election. 'It'll be protected. It'll be very strongly protected. But if it needs an extension, I would be willing to give it an extension.' The White House declined to comment about a potential TikTok sale. It is unclear. If ByteDance does not divest TikTok by Thursday, June 19, the platform could be banned in the United States again. However, Trump has said that if the sale isn't finalized in time, he will extend the deadline again. This, too, is unclear. Under federal legislation that put the TikTok ban in place, the president can implement a 90-day extension on the deadline to sell. But Trump didn't take this route in January or April. Instead, he signed executive orders delaying the ban by 75 days. If Trump wishes to sign another executive order ahead of the June 19 deadline, he can. While it's within Trump's discretion to sign executive orders to delay the ban, there may be a time when Congress sees it fit to pass a law ordering a firm deadline, John Acevedo, Emory University School of Law professor, told Spectrum News in April. But just because the executive orders are within Trump's authority doesn't mean everyone is happy with his decisions. 'The deadline for Trump to follow the law passed 135 days ago. It is shocking that a bipartisan-backed law, signed by the former president and upheld by the Supreme Court, is being treated like a mere suggestion by the White House,' said Stephen Kent, Consumer Choice Center media director, in a news release. Former President Joe Biden signed federal legislation in 2024 that gave ByteDance until Jan. 19, 2025 to divest TikTok or face a ban in the U.S. Some politicians see TikTok as a national security threat, expressing concern that ByteDance may be sharing U.S. user data with the Chinese government. ByteDance has denied these claims, which remain unsubstantiated. However, ByteDance did not divest in time. In January, TikTok went dark for a little more than 12 hours in the U.S. after the app was effectively banned. U.S. internet hosting services made TikTok unavailable to access, and app stores removed the app for download. During the short-lived shutdown, Trump promised internet hosting services and app stores that they could restore TikTok and not face legal penalties. Under the federal legislation, companies could be fined $5,000 per user they help access TikTok. For companies like Google and Apple, this could mean a $5,000 fine for each user who downloads or updates TikTok. Internet hosting services like Oracle didn't waste time rebooting the app, but it wasn't until Feb. 13 that TikTok became available again in the Apple App Store and Google Play Store. Greta Cross is a national trending reporter at USA TODAY. Story idea? Email her at gcross@ This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Trump to decide Tiktok's fate no later than June 19
Yahoo
40 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Is TikTok getting banned? Trump says he'll 'probably' extend deadline again
President Donald Trump said on Tuesday that he will "probably" extend the TikTok ban deadline yet again before its expiration on Thursday, June 19. "We probably have to get China approval. I think we'll get it," Trump told reporters aboard Air Force One on Tuesday, June 17. "I think (Chinese) President Xi will ultimately approve it." TikTok, a short-form video app, went dark for about 12 hours in January when China-based ByteDance failed to divest the app's U.S. assets, as required by federal law. Since coming into office on Jan. 20, Trump has issued two executive orders to extend the ban's deadline. But so far, a deal has yet to be struck, and the next deadline is Thursday, June 19. When asked by reporters if he has the legal basis to extend the deadline again, Trump said, "Yes, I do." If ByteDance does not divest TikTok by Thursday, June 19, the platform could be banned in the U.S. again. However, Trump has repeatedly signaled he would extend the deadline if the sale isn't finalized in time. Under federal legislation that put the TikTok ban in place, the president can implement a 90-day extension on the deadline to sell. But Trump didn't take this route in January or April. Instead, he signed executive orders delaying the ban by 75 days. If Trump wishes to sign another executive order ahead of the June 19 deadline, he can. Former President Joe Biden signed federal legislation in 2024 that gave ByteDance until Jan. 19, 2025 to divest TikTok or face a ban in the U.S. Some politicians see TikTok as a national security threat, expressing concern that ByteDance may be sharing U.S. user data with the Chinese government. ByteDance has denied these claims, which remain unsubstantiated. However, ByteDance did not divest in time. In January, TikTok went dark for a little more than 12 hours in the U.S. after the app was effectively banned. U.S. internet hosting services made TikTok unavailable to access, and app stores removed the app for download. During the short-lived shutdown, Trump promised internet hosting services and app stores that they could restore TikTok and not face legal penalties. Under the federal legislation, companies could be fined $5,000 per user they help access TikTok. For companies like Google and Apple, this could mean a $5,000 fine for each user who downloads or updates TikTok. It wasn't until Feb. 13 that TikTok became available again in the Apple App Store and Google Play Store. This story will be updated. Greta Cross is a national trending reporter at USA TODAY. Story idea? Email her at gcross@ This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: TikTok ban: Trump says he'll 'probably' extend deadline again
Yahoo
43 minutes ago
- Yahoo
‘Luxury' apartments deceived low-income seniors, Washington attorney general alleges
PORTLAND, Ore. (KOIN) – Washington Attorney General Nick Brown filed a lawsuit against several apartment complexes, and their property management firms for allegedly 'deceiving' low-income seniors. Attorney General Brown filed the lawsuit Friday in Snohomish County Superior Court against the California-based property management company FPI Management and the owners of five apartments in Western Washington, including Vintage Housing Holdings and AMCAL multi-housing. The suit alleges that the property management firms engaged in 'unfair and deceptive practices,' impacting hundreds of senior tenants. Passenger in custody after alleged bomb threat on plane at Seattle-Tacoma airport According to the Attorney General's Office, FPI and the property owners advertised their apartments as 'low-income' units for tenants 55 and older. However, over the course of several years, FPI and the property owners failed to disclose to their low-income senior tenants that their rent would be calculated and increase in the future, while also misrepresenting the quality of the apartments, the availability and quality of apartment amenities such as pools and fitness areas along with safety at the properties. Now, Attorney General Brown argues these issues violate the Consumer Protection Act. 'No sense of safety': Portland man stranded in Tel Aviv amid Israel-Iran conflict 'Housing is particularly important for older Washingtonians, and it's hard for them to move once they've signed a lease,' Attorney General Brown said in a statement Friday. 'It's egregious to convince vulnerable populations they're getting quality living when in reality they are stuck with properties in disrepair that also end up costing more than they expected over time.' According to Brown, the property owners participate in the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit Program and receive tax credits in exchange for setting aside some apartment units for tenants below a certain income threshold. Under the tax credit program, the maximum rental rates are set every year by the United States Department of Housing Urban Development, based on the rise or fall of the area median income in the county of the property, the Attorney General's Office said, noting, 'This is unlike other forms of housing assistance, in which the amount of rent a tenant will pay is based on their own income, and not the income of other people in the area.' Close Thanks for signing up! Watch for us in your inbox. Subscribe Now Attorney General Brown claims that FPI and the property owners did not explain to prospective tenants that their rent will be calculated based on the area median income, which is 'often significantly more' than Social Security or pension incomes most seniors rely on. This leads to tenants often paying 'an unsustainable portion' of their income on rent with little living expenses for food, transportation or medical expenses, Brown's office explained. Additionally, the Attorney General alleges that the property owners misrepresented the quality of their buildings by marketing them as 'luxury' or 'resort style,' at complexes including Vintage at Everett, Mill Creek and Tacoma. Some tenants moved in to find dirty units with broken appliances, leaks, mold, worn carpets and torn flooring among other issues. Multnomah County DA Vasquez on final city budget, prosecuting protesters Other promises of quality amenities such as pools, fitness centers and computer rooms, either did not exist, were inoperable or permanently closed, the attorney general's office furthered. The apartment complexes were also not as secure as advertised, Brown's office alleges, noting many of the complexes had no one monitoring who was entering the sites, leading to trespassing and other crimes on site along with frequent prowling in parking lots. With this lawsuit, the attorney general seeks an injunction to stop the property owners from continuing their 'unlawful' practices, and to provide restitution to the impacted tenants along with a civil penalty of $12,500 for each Consumer Protection Act violation. KOIN 6 News reached out to FPI Management. This story will be updated if we receive a response. AMCAL declined to comment on the litigation. In a statement to KOIN 6 News, Vintage Housing Holdings said, 'Vintage Housing disputes the Attorney General's allegations and will address them in court. Vintage Housing has been a part of providing housing in Washington for over 25 years. We take seriously our role as providers of affordable housing to seniors and the communities we are part of. We will work with our property manager, FPI, to address any issues. We are unable to comment further on pending litigation.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
