Joel F. Klock, 94, of Ocean City passed away Monday, March 20, 2017 at The Shores At Wesley Manor in Ocean City, NJ. Mr. Klock was born January 5, 1923 in Philadelphia, PA to the late Joel Cleveland and Henrietta (Hoehle) Klock.Joel was a graduate of Olney High School class of 1942.He served in the Navy during World War II. He was the owner/operator of Klock’s Butcher Shop in Germantown, Pa. Before moving to Ocean City he worked as a salesman for John Hancock Life Insurance, Mays Landing, NJ for many years before his retirement in 1988.He is survived by his wife: Helen (O’Malley) Klock , his children: Cynthia Sheahan, Joel “Butch” (Ceil) Klock, Maryann (Gregory) Mangum, Patricia (John) D’Aquanno, Helene (Scott) McTigue, John (Lori) Klock, Tony (Marcia) Klock, Chris (Brenda) Klock, Caroline DeBottis, 17 grandchildren and 15 great grandchildren.Predeceased by his son in law, Gerald Sheahan, and sister, Jane Flint.A Mass of Christian Burial will be offered Tuesday, April 4, 2017 at 11 o’clock from St. Augustine’s R. C. Church Of St. Damien Parish, 13th Street At Wesley Avenue, Ocean City, NJ where friends may call from 9:30 until time of mass.A graveside service will follow in Calvary Cemetery, Conshohocken, Pa at 2 O’clock.Memorial contributions may be made to the Fellowship Fund of The Shores of Wesley Manor, 2201 Bay Avenue, Ocean City, NJ or American Legion Post Morvay-Miley Post # 564, PO Box 363, Ocean City, NJ 08226.Condolences may be left at godfreyfuneralhome.com.
Sand Sculpting contest will be held at Sixth Street Beach Thursday, July 11. By Maddy VitaleJenna Mazurowski, 8, may be a twin, but when it comes to creating a masterpiece out of sand, she prefers to work solo and let her sister, Ellie, showcase her artistic talents elsewhere – specifically a few yards away.The twins joined other families to create works of art, albeit very temporary ones, during a sand sculpting contest at the 6th Street Beach in Ocean City Thursday morning. Ocean City Special Events Director Michael Hartman and Junior Miss Ocean City Hope Aita judged the contest. All participants received ribbons. Special ribbons were awarded to the top sculptors. The categories were age 5 and under, ages 6-8, ages 9-11 and a family division. The top three in the family division were awarded cool trophies.Special Events Director Michael Hartman and Junior Miss Ocean City Hope Aita have fun judging the contest.“I think she wants her own ribbon,” joked Jenna’s mom, Marti Mazurowski.Jenna was crafting her “I Heart Ocean City” sand art and had little time to chat.“I like to play in the sand,” she said simply, before she fixed her hands in a heart shaped position to leave an imprint in the sand. Marti Mazurowski watches as her daughter Jenna, of Huntington, Pa., focuses on her masterpiece.She might get her competitive nature from her dad, Phil Mazurowski, who, along with sister, Ellie, and some cousins, were creating an interactive game in the sand called “OC Races.”“We just try to find things interesting to make in the sand,” Phil Mazurowski said with a smile. “We live in Huntington, Pa., so we have a four hour drive to think about what we are going to make. We come down to Ocean City for vacation every year. We love it.”Ellie was in charge of digging holes deep enough to catch the balls in the sand game. She had a little down time to watch, as family members tried their hand at the game. The idea was to roll a ball down each side of the large sand mass with an OC emblem in the middle. Whomever has the ball that rolls down the slope first, wins.An octopus catches the eye of the crowd.There was also a sand version of the popular Boardwalk arcade game “Skee-Ball.” Some other pieces that intrigued spectators included a bejeweled octopus, a cute frog, Sponge Bob, a sea creature, a hand on a baseball, and other imaginative sculptures. One particularly elaborate sculpture was done by father-daughter team Andrew and Lilly Kirkpatrick from Media, P.a. They crafted an ornate castle complete with a waterfall. “It’s pretty cool,” Lilly, 11, said.At the end of the contest the Kirkpatricks took first place in the family division for their sand sculpture wonder.Beth Quittman’s sons Max, 6, and Oliver, 8, were all prepared to make sand sculptures in the contest. They had their buckets and shovels. But after a few minutes, something happened.Beth Quittman and her sons Max, 6, (orange hat) and Oliver, 8, of Seattle, discuss what they plan to create.“It appears giant piles of sand aren’t going to go anywhere,” Quittman said with a laugh as Max seemed to abandon the project to head to the water’s edge within minutes of the start of the competition.When Oliver joined his younger brother, Quittman said, “Maybe it is a good time for some French fries.”Later the boys teamed up to make some sand creation and were awarded second place in their age group.While families enjoyed their time working together to make the momentary artforms, some of the adults in the solo category were a bit more serious.Nanette Hunsinger, of Pennsylvania, works on her hand and baseball.“I make quilts,” said Nanette Hunsinger, of Pennsylvania, who said despite her artistic talent, she isn’t a professional artist. “I’m a homemaker.”But she is very familiar with sand sculpting. “Every year I get better,” she said, while intently using a card to make lines in what would soon turn into a baseball. Hunsinger tied for second place.Kathy Nichols, Beesleys Point, adds finishing touches to her sculpture “Leap Frog.”Art teacher Kathy Nichols, of Beesley’s Point, had a bit of an advantage. She is an art teacher in North Wildwood. “I mostly do watercolors, but, as a teacher, I do other art forms,” Nichols said adding that sand art can be challenging. One of the frogs in Nichol’s sculpture is in full view and has a friendly face. The other frog is leaping, and you could only see its backside and legs. “I call it leap frog,” Nichols, who came in first in the adult division, said of her amphibians.Andre and Lilly Kirkpatrick are proud to take top prizein the family division.Jenna Mazurowski flashes a winning ribbon for her age group, as sister Ellie looks on smiling.Phil and Marti Mazurowski with their daughter Ellie and cousins, Megan and Billy Anderson, by “OC Races.”
The International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) has approved proposals from its interpretations committee to make two amendments to International Accounting Standard 19, Employee Benefits (IAS 19).The move came during a 22 January meeting of the board in London.Board members also voted to issue the two amendments for public comment as a single exposure draft.The amendments cover: the effect of actions by the trustees of a defined benefit (DB) pension scheme to limit a sponsor’s ability to recognise a plan surplus in its accounts; andhow a plan sponsor calculates current service cost and net interest costs following remeasurement of its net DB liability following a plan amendment or curtailment.The impact of the plan surplus amendment could be most keenly felt in the UK, staff acknowledged in a meeting paper presented to the board.Staff acknowledged that the amendment could be of interest in the UK, where trustees can enjoy “unilateral powers to buy annuities (without changing a pension promise)”.The accounting rules for DB pension obligations under International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) are set out in IAS 19.The first of the two amendments discussed by the IASB on 22 January concerns a document known as IFRIC 14, a guidance document that explains how DB sponsors should apply the so-called asset-ceiling under IAS 19.The document was originally published in 2007 by the IFRS Interpretations Committee’s predecessor, the International Financial Reporting Interpretations Committee, or IFRIC.At issue is paragraph 58 of IAS 19, which limits the measurement of a DB asset to the “present value of economic benefits available in the form” of refunds from the plan or reductions in future contributions to the plan.Interacting with this requirement in IAS 19, IFRIC 14 deals with the interaction between a minimum funding requirement and the restriction in paragraph 58 on the measurement of the DB asset or liability.When a DB plan sponsor applies IAS 19, it must first measure the DB obligation using the projected unit credit method, on the one hand, and fair value any plan assets on the other.This calculation will produce either a DB asset or liability at the balance sheet date.Where a plan is in surplus, the sponsor recognises the lower of any surplus and the IAS 19 asset ceiling – that is, the economic benefits available to the sponsoring entity from the surplus.However, a constituent has asked the committee to consider whether preparers should take account of events that might disrupt the plan unfolding in line with the IAS 19 assumptions when they apply IFRIC 14.An example would be the trustees of a DB scheme whose future actions could reduce the ability of a sponsor to recognise an asset.For example, the trustees of a plan might have the power to augment members’ benefits or wind up the plan and purchase annuities.The committee previously discussed the issue during its March, May, July and September meetings last year.As for the impact of the proposed amendment, staff noted in their meeting paper that if a plan is closed to accrual of future benefits, “the impact of this issue could be significant”.This is because, staff continued, the “economic benefits from reductions in future contributions are not available (i.e. economic benefits are available only from a refund of a surplus)”.Outreach conducted by staff on the likely impact of the changes has “implied that this issue could have significant impacts on some cases and that diversity in practice exists”.Separately during the meeting, the IASB also tentatively agreed with the recommendation from the IFRS IC to amend IAS 19 to clarify the treatment of plan amendments, curtailments and settlements.The board confirmed DB sponsors should determine current service cost and the net interest for the remaining period after a plan remeasurement has occurred using the assumptions arising in the remeasurement.In addition, the board agreed that a sponsor should base the calculation of the net interest charge for the rest of the reporting period on the remeasured net defined benefit liability or asset.It also clarified the treatment of current service cost arising either before or after a remeasurement.The board said service cost arising in the current reporting period before a plan remeasurement occurs remains a component of current service cost and not past service cost.Service cost under IAS 19 is the cost borne by an employer of providing a retirement plan.The net interest charge is calculated by multiplying the net DB asset or liability by the sponsor’s chosen discount rate.Subject to confirming that the board and the IFRS IC have complied with formal due process requirements, the board will issue the proposed amendments in a combined exposure draft for public comment.