Port Times Record

Pixabay photo

By Frank Artusa

Try asking your Alexa, Siri, Google Assistant or any smart home device a similar question and you will get some variation of response assuring you that your privacy is important and the queried device is most certainly not spying on you. But how do these supposedly omniscient household oracles know to respond to their respective “wake” words if they’re not indeed listening to every sound wave to grace their diabolically helpful little speakers?

One thing is clear, these devices are indeed monitoring their local environments for all ambient and discrete vocal communications. Manufacturers of these devices, however, have repeatedly stated that no information is collected aside from the user instructions after activation with a wake word or phrase. This is when the device enters an active listening state of operation. Even if only post-wake word data is captured, the question is; what exactly happens to that data on backend servers? 

In 2019, Amazon admitted to employing personnel to listen to customer’s voice commands, albeit to help train and improve the Echo device and algorithm. Amazon in particular has recently changed the way data is handled. Previously, users were given the option to process requests on the local device, but as of March 28, all collected data will be sent to Amazon’s cloud environment for processing. This represents a significant potential opportunity for abuse of private data.

Trusting personal data to these tech behemoths can be a challenge, especially when data collection and selling is so lucrative since the information can be used for targeted advertising and other uses. Data brokers, organizations that buy and sell personal data about individuals, are estimated to earn over 200 billion per year worldwide and the industry continues to grow markedly year after year. They not only leverage personal data to assist advertisers, but this data is also used by retailers, credit agencies, employers and political groups. A big part of the problem is the erosion of consent when agreeing to use these devices. Buyers are faced with a barrage of privacy policies and end user agreements that are usually agreed to with a quick mouse click or touch of a phone screen.

Now with the advent of Generative Artificial Intelligence (GAI) and Large Language Model technologies like ChatGPT, Google’s Gemini, Meta’s LLaMA and Apple’s expected enhancement to Siri, these devices will become even more robust and likely increasingly involved in day to day lives. One example is the significant growth in how GAI based tools are augmenting mental health services, particularly when individuals don’t have access to resources, funding, or health care coverage needed to visit an actual therapist. The adoption of this service and technology is a boon to individuals needing access to therapeutic services even if on a rudimentary level, but the privacy concerns associated with the capture of deeply personal and intimate information are significant.

Governments recognize the problem and have begun taking steps to mitigate the issue surrounding the exposure of personal digital information. Europe’s General Data Protection Regulation and California’s Consumer Privacy Act are two such examples of efforts being made to give control back to individuals. Ultimately, as society increasingly embraces smart technology and more sophisticated devices become available, individuals must weigh the benefits to quality of life against the potential exposure and misuse of sensitive information. 

Until privacy is the default and not the fine print, we’d all be wise to treat our smart assistants like strangers in the room.

Frank Artusa, a resident of Smithtown, is a current cybersecurity professional and retired FBI Special Agent.

SBU Graduation 2025. Photo by Isabel Epstein

On May 23, Stony Brook University celebrated the graduation of over 7,600 students, including those from bachelors, masters and doctoral programs at the 65th annual commencement ceremony. This year and every year we recognize and appreciate the effort and commitment required to finish degrees at one of the nation’s leading research institutions, with distinguished programs ranging from the biological sciences and engineering to creative writing and the fine arts. 

The way we define “success” in attending and finishing college is more than the common metric of leaving with straight A’s, awards, or the lucky problem of struggling to pose for a photo that captures each and every cord draped proudly about graduate  necks: it is also characterized by the new beginnings inspired by inspirations mined from hard work, passion and encouragement from our mentors and peers. Success is also defined by the barriers which students overcame including for those international, exchange or otherwise underrepresented student populations who have defied the odds. Their failures, shortcomings and mistakes are equally as important in the road to success as those colorful, exuberant representations of mastery are.

Stony Brook University’s reputation may appear intimidating, with a rigorous curriculum, a robust research enterprise and a productive doctoral degree program. Graduates from Stony Brook University in these trying and complex times require an exceptional level of determination and passion, as well as a curiosity undeterred by hostility towards academic institutions and the societal pressure to fit “in-the-box.” Whether this pressure comes from the media, family, peers or even themselves, students can and should rely on their curiosity and passion; it is just a matter of finding what greases the gears of each of their unique minds. 

Graduates this year overcame a pandemic, may have struggled financially, and may have honored fallen family members this past Memorial Day. Some may have immigrated or were the first members of their family to attend college, while others may have faced discrimination. Fueled by curiosity and grit, these graduates can tackle any problem. We thank Stony Brook’s 2025 graduates for their contributions to the school and to the community. We wish them well and hope they can reflect fondly on their time in our community as they prepare for the challenges of the future.

The New York State Police are warning the public about an ongoing phone spoofing scam in which scammers impersonate members of law enforcement or government agencies in an attempt to solicit sensitive personal information from individuals across New York State and beyond.

According to a press release on May 30, in recent days individuals have reported receiving phone calls from numbers that appear to be legitimate New York State Police phone lines,Callers falsely claiming to be law enforcement officials have demanded personal information such as Social Security numbers and have threatened punitive action against recipients who refuse to comply.

These calls are fraudulent. The New York State Police and other legitimate government agencies will never call individuals and demand sensitive information or threaten arrest or legal action over the phone.

Phone number spoofing is a tactic commonly used by scammers nationwide to make it appear as if calls are coming from trusted agencies. These scams are designed to create confusion and fear, often leading victims to comply with demands or share information that can be used to commit further fraud.

What You Should Do If You Receive a Suspicious Call:

  1. Do not provide any personal information.
  2. Do not send money or make payments under threat.
  3. Hang up immediately—even if the caller ID appears legitimate.
  4. Save any voicemails and record the phone number if possible.
  5. Verify the call by contacting the agency directly using a trusted number.

The New York State Police urge all residents to remain vigilant and to report any suspicious activity involving impersonation of law enforcement or government agencies.

 

Heather Lunch, professor in SBU’s Department of Ecology and Evolution, speaking at the May meeting of the League of Women Voters at Comsewogue Library. Photo by Sabrina Artusa

By Sabrina Artusa

For a research-focused doctoral university like Stony Brook University, federal cuts to grant funding creates uncertainty for research faculty relying on the money either for potential projects or current ones. 

As one of only 187 universities in the nation designated as having a very high research spending and doctorate production, according to Carnegie Classification, the university is highly active in academic research. 

Funding is commonly sponsored by federal departments like the Department of Defense, the National Institutes of Health, the National Science Foundation and NASA. Federal sponsors account for the majority of funding for research awards – over 50% of research and development in higher education fields was financed by the federal government according to 2021 NSF data. 

Salaries and staff

This money not only supports the faculty at R1 schools whose priority is research and are classified as having Very High Research Activity, but also the various other components of the project such as materials, postdoctorate students, graduate students and overhead. Stony Brook University Professor in the Department of Ecology and Evolution Heather Lynch likens research to “running a small business.” Indeed, principal investigators (PI) are usually responsible for the salaries of the research scientists and postdocs working below them. 

In a 2022 letter, Stony Brook University leadership revised the salary ranges for postdoc researchers. They write, “We understand that many postdoc and research scientist positions are supported by externally sponsored awards, which are typically fixed in their total amount, and therefore salary increases are subject to the availability of funds.”

Some faculty are paid by the university in 9- or 6-month appointments. These researchers are then responsible for supplementing their salary for the rest of the year through grant funding. Since research is the primary function of their position at R1 universities – teaching is secondary – Lynch said that she and other faculty are responsible for supplementing their salary through grants. “The PI is not out there necessarily wanting to take on more research, but you have a lot of employees working for you and you want to keep them employed, so you are constantly hustling,” Lynch said.

Researchers that are part of university faculty receive a base salary; however, it is typical that “soft money” staff, usually medical researchers who don’t do much teaching, do not receive any salary from the university they work for and have to pay themselves through grants. 

Due to the loss of funding, many researchers, postdocs and graduate students are considering leaving the U.S. to pursue their studies. According to a Nature  poll, around three-quarters of over the 1,500 postgraduates, grad students and scientists that answered were exploring international opportunities, as of March. 

Some grant programs were specifically intended for young researchers. Now, universities are limiting their acceptance of graduate students as they reorient resources to support current students amid the diminished indirect cost funding.

Impact of research

Grants usually take months to create; in addition to detailing the project plan, research strategy  and the equipment needed, the document can have broader impact sections, which usually includes the opportunities for engagement for underrepresented groups. With the expiring of DEI, “they changed the way broader impacts are defined,” Lynch said. Key DEI words relating to gender or words leading to blocks, even for research already in progress. 

The scrupulous application process includes eliminating any potential conflicts of interest, which includes anyone the principal investigator has worked with the previous 48 months. Then, a panel of experts meet to study and analyze the proposal. For a proposal Lynch created, she assembled a list amounting to over 180 conflicts of interest. The process is designed to prevent bias or corruption.

Lynch believes cuts were enabled by a societal misunderstanding of the value that lies in the research. Obscure to the less scientifically-versed, these projects aren’t often recognized for their discoveries, at least not in wide public spheres. 

Having been  a PI herself, Lynch has done environmental research on Antarctic penguins that won her a Golden Goose Award for federally funded and underrecognized research that had tremendous impact in scientific communities, potentially paving the way for further discoveries and innovations. Other Golden Goose winners include a team whose research led to artificial intelligence advancements. 

“These grants are not a gift, they are payments for services,“ Lynch said.

Indirect costs

Funding dedicated to operating the university and thereby enabling this research are factored into the proposal under facilities and administrative rates, otherwise known as indirect costs. Direct costs include salaries and equipment – costs that are necessary for the specific project. Indirect costs are specific to the university; therefore, each project that is associated with the school and is benefiting from its services must include an additional amount that goes back to the school.  

The rate was capped at 15% by the NIH, DOE and NSF. The NIH and DOE caps are enacted retroactively. The cap is universal across the country. Previously, indirect cost rates varied depending on the university. R1 universities, which typically have larger research facilities, had higher rates. Stony Brook had a rate of 56%, and previously applied for rate renewals with the Department of Health and Human Services. 

IDC limited the amount researchers can use while raising the overall grant request. Previously, researchers complained about this, but now, Lynch said “these IDC rates mean you are not going to have money to maintain equipment, you are going to have to reduce staff to core faculties, you will not be able to build new research faculties, you will have to fire people who do permits and lab safety.”

“These cuts can make it very hard for these PIs like myself to keep postdocs and graduate students paid, and these layoffs in the talent pipeline will create long-term damage to our scientific competitiveness,” Lynch said. She said she does not speak on behalf of the university. 

By Greg Catalano

Port Jefferson celebrates Memorial Day on May 26 with a ceremony at Port Jefferson Memorial Park at 10 a.m. 

Suffolk County Legislator Steve Englebright (D-Setauket), Village of Port Jefferson Mayor Lauren Sheprow, NYS Assemblywoman Rebecca Kassay (D-Port Jefferson) and Brookhaven Councilmember Jonathan Kornreich (D-Stony Brook) spoke of the many sacrifices given by those who served their country. 

Boy scouts laid wreaths at the memorial. Taps played to close out the ceremony, which was held by the American Legion Wilson Ritch Post 432. 

–Photos by Greg Catalano

By Sabrina Artusa

A time capsule from 1971 was unearthed after a Teacher’s Federal Credit Union in Port Jefferson Station off Route 112 was demolished. 

Members of the Suffolk County Federal Savings and Holdings company stood before the Port Jefferson Station Civic as they took a step back in time to 50 years ago. Yellowed newspapers, performance reports and pamphlets were tucked inside the capsule and passed around, reminding the former staff of the homey workplace that sparked lifelong careers in banking. 

Assistant manager Robert Walther said he was present when it was put together. “This was kind of like us giving back to the community. Our manager always thought that banking was for the community,” he said. 

The Suffolk County Federal Savings and Holdings company was the beginning of a long string of banks for most of these employees, many of whom stuck around for the several mergers that took place after it was acquired by Long Island Savings. 

Will Stowell, who worked in maintenance, heard that Staller Associates was going to demolish the building, which was a vacant Teacher’s Federal Credit Union, and remembered the time capsule hidden in the side of the building. He recounted the mason enclosing it. 

For staff members like Walther, Stowell, and Betsy Whitney, Suffolk County Federal Savings and Holdings was where they got their start in the industry. Whitney started working as a teller during summers off from college; when she graduated she enrolled in the management program. Stowell rose through the ranks of building maintenance. 

“Things have changed in the banking business since then,” said Walther. 

The staff would have Christmas parties and decoration contests with the other branches – which they often won. They would sit on floats and take part in parades. Pouring over old photos, Whitney remembered sitting in a float in New York City with her co-workers and seeing Luciano Pavarotti on a horse next to them. 

“They treated us so well,” she said. “We were like movie stars.” 

Stowell remembers the bank being like “a living room”; it was so comfortable. One civic member was a customer. “I can’t tell you how helpful they were when we first moved out here. I can’t talk highly enough about the employees that were there. [I was so upset] when they left us and turned us over to Astoria,” she said.

Unfortunately, the bank could not compete with higher interest rates. Managed by the Federal Savings and Loans Insurance Corporation, they couldn’t raise their mortgage rates due to state law. 

“We couldn’t offer any higher than 8.5% anymore because of state law and that put the bank in a financial position where we couldn’t survive,” said Walther. In the 1980s, before the bank was acquired by Long Island Savings, the 30-year fixed mortgage rate reached 18%. 

“We thought we were going to be there for years,” Walther said. 

The bank closed and many of the staff retired, but some still keep in touch. The community-based approach to banking has stayed with the employees for decadesQ, shaping their careers and lives.

Greg Balling, who was a locksmith for the bank, had fond memories of his time there. “We were like family,” he said. 

Pixabay photo

By Daniel Dunaief

Daniel Dunaief

Six degrees of separation could help us all.

We are only six people away from anyone in the world.

We probably don’t have to go that far to find people who live throughout the United States.

That means we have friends, relatives, professional colleagues, former classmates and others who can make a difference.

New Yorkers likely have the support of Senators Chuck Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand when it comes to critical funding for the National Institutes of Health and for the National Science Foundation, whose financial support is under severe threat from the current budget the senate is considering and that the house has already passed.

Cuts in these areas will have critical and irreversible consequences for us, our children, our families and our future.

The money that goes into science has paid enormous dividends over the decades. The United States is able to outcompete many other nations because it has attracted the world’s best researchers to cutting edge areas.

These people drive the future of innovation, provide medical expertise that saves lives, and start companies that provide numerous high paying jobs around the country.

Cutting back means retreating from the world stage, enabling other nations to develop treatments and cures for diseases that might cost us much more money or become less accessible to those who weren’t in on the ground floor.

It also will hurt our economy, as patents and processes lead to profits elsewhere.

Shutting off the valve of innovation will turn fertile fields of scientific exploration and innovation into barren deserts.

This is where those six degrees comes in. New Yorkers probably don’t need to urge our senators to commit to scientific budgets. But senators from other states, hoping to remain in favor with their party and to act in a unified way, might not be as comfortable supporting scientific research when they and their constituents might believe they don’t stand to gain as much from that investment in the short term. After all, not every state has leading research institutions such as Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Brookhaven National Laboratory and Stony Brook University, a top-rated research institution and a downstate flagship for the SUNY system.

You remember those relatives whose politics are different from your own and who often create a scene at Thanksgiving or the holidays? Well, it’s time to talk with them, not at them. Let them know how much you, they and, an argument that’s hard to ignore, their parents and their children stand to lose if they stop investing in science.

How about that annoying guy at the company retreat who is thrilled to talk about how sad the elites are these days?

Talk to him, too. Let him know that his parent with Alzheimer’s or his uncle with a debilitating condition could one day benefit from discoveries in labs that desperately need funding.

Indeed, his own hearing or vision might depend on continued investment into research about diseases that become more prevalent as he ages.

We all benefit from these discoveries and we all lose out when we stop investing or contributing.

As for his children, they might get jobs in companies that don’t yet exist but that will form as a result of the discovery of products or processes that arise out of research.

The United States is still the only nation to send people (and it’s only men so far) to the moon, allowing them to set foot on a place other than our incredible planet.

Those moments and achievements, even decades later, inspire people to want to become astronauts, to join NASA, to provide the kind of information and research that make future missions possible.

While we don’t need funding for everything, we benefit from ongoing efforts and discoveries in direct and indirect ways. Shutting down labs, reducing internships and graduate school offerings, and stopping the process of asking questions creates headwinds for innovation, the economy and medical discoveries.

Urge those outside of New York to write to their senators, to make the kind of choices that will support and enrich the country and to prevent a one-way road to a dead end. We don’t have to agree on everything, but it’s worth the effort to encourage people to let our elected officials know that their constituents understand what’s at stake.

A senator from Mississippi might not care what you, a New Yorker, thinks, but he’s more likely to pay attention to a resident in his district. We need science whisperers in every state. We can not and will not let the NIH budget decline without a fight. Take a jog, practice yoga, meditate. Then, go talk to those relatives and encourage them to support science and the future.

Pixaby

By Leah S. Dunaief

Leah Dunaief,
Publisher

Perhaps you have noticed that there is little to no national news in our newspapers and on our website? We assume you understand that it is not because we are unaware of what is happening in our country and in the world. Most of us here at the company start each day with the news via radio or television or cable and even with news flashes from different sources on our cellphones. We talk about those items in the office and listen or watch when we return home. 

In fact, that’s the problem.

We can’t seem to escape the plethora of upsetting news that fills our waking hours. But we strive to provide one retreat from the chaotic world in which we live: the hometown news.

That is not to say we report no bad news in our towns and villages. Of course we do. News is news. But one positive about local news: to a large extent, we can bask in the good events that occur and have some degree of control over what happens around us. We can take pride in our students’ achievements, we can make our voices heard in development plans if we know what is going on, we can get to know our interesting neighbors from their profiles, we can plan our weekends from the many offerings in the calendar. In short, local news is a mirror held up to our daily lives whose many details can’t be found anywhere else.

We strive to make local news an oasis amid a sea of distressing troubles.

That means, we regularly turn away letters and opinion pieces that protest against national and international politicians and policies unless what is happening affects us only locally. But if you want to express your strongly held views on a local matter, however minute, we provide a platform from which you can be heard. 

To get broader news, there are many sources. To get local news, there is only us, the hometown paper or website. We don’t want to be thought of as smaller versions of daily newspapers any more than children are to be considered smaller adults.

In that way, we have not changed.

However, gathering and disseminating the news has dramatically changed, even as computers and the internet started to alter the industry fifty years ago, right around the time our company began. 

Pixabay image

You are probably aware of the revolutionary switch from hot type associated with Ben Franklin’s day, to the cold type that referred to mainframe and then desktop computers half a century ago. Now, when you walk into a news building, if you can find one, you see that the offices are largely empty. Many staff members are working remotely.

What does that mean?

In some ways, it is a win. We can interview by FaceTime, cover meetings by zoom, write up our stories, sometimes in record time and send them into the office or post to the web via the internet. All of this can be accomplished while we are still in our pajamas, drinking our coffee, and without our having to pay a babysitter if we take turns with our spouse, who is also working remotely.

If the children have already grown up and left home, well then, we can put in a load of wash, go back to work, pause to change the load to the dryer, and resume where we left off. And if we move, we can still keep our jobs. 

In some ways, it’s a loss. Talking with each other digitally is not the same as talking together in the office, where we can bounce ideas around the room and watch each other’s body language. I believe we are more polite, stilted even, on a zoom gathering. Digital has sucked away the personal.

We at TBR News Media are functioning with four key positions filled remotely. Quality may not be suffering, but we certainly miss our staffers, their chatter and their random thoughts. 

File photo by Raymond Janis

We are frustrated!

Residents of the Three Villages and the Village of Head of the Harbor have planned a rally to focus on the still unrepaired Grist Mill Pond and Harbor Road. All are encouraged to participate on Saturday, May 31 from 12 to 2 p.m. We will meet on the corner of Harbor Road and Main Street.

As residents, we are frustrated! The dam, pond and roads were washed away during a catastrophic rain event last Aug. 18 and 19. Now, nine months later, we are still waiting for repairs to begin.

While the Town of Brookhaven and the Ward Melville Heritage Organization bicker between themselves over naming the responsible party, the road continues to disintegrate, the pond is a muddy mess, and the major route through the community is completely inaccessible. Add to that, fear of delayed critical response times for ambulances, fire trucks and first responders that now must use narrow, winding roads to enter the area.

We implore the Town of Brookhaven and the Ward Melville Heritage Organization to develop a plan to repair Harbor Road and restore Mill Pond. Enough is enough!

Dale Salzberg

Head of the Harbor

Cuts to Medicaid would be disastrous for our community

I find it shameful that my congressman, Nick LaLota [R, NY1], voted to slash important programs that his constituents depend upon, in order to provide massive tax cuts for the wealthy.  LaLota voted for devastating cuts to Medicaid.  The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has indicated that 8.6 million Americans will lose their health coverage because of this. 

LaLota voted for cuts that will cause 3 million to lose Food Stamps.  He voted to cut funding to combat climate change.  He voted to cut funding for Medicare.  He voted to cut funding for our public schools.  The bill LaLota voted for will increase the deficit by $3.8 trillion over the decade, requiring higher taxes and further cuts.  The Trump-imposed SALT cap was set to expire, but LaLota voted to extend it, just changing the size of the cap. 

All Long Island Democratic members of Congress called for eliminating the cap.  The top 0.1% of earners will see tax cuts of $390,000 per year each because of the bill that LaLota voted for. [By voting for the Big, Beautiful Bill, LaLota voted to support all the cuts on all these programs.]   Nick LaLota has sold out the poor, the middle class, our seniors and our environment in order to give massive tax cuts to the wealthy.

Robert Marcus

Setauket

On Port Jeff energy

The George Altemose letter, “Learning from Europe” [May, 22], certainly has it right. 

Electric energy generation is very hard to get right when demand fluctuates, battery and wind come online and must be balanced using peaker plants. Electric energy affects us all. It affects air quality and the environment, cost of living and even our tax revenues. 

LIPA has to plan wisely to keep the power running [24/7 365 days a year].  

Millions of dollars a year are provided to the Village o f Port Jefferson,  Town of  Brookhaven Town and Suffolk County that benefit these municipalities.  

This energy coordination takes wise leadership all around.  Port Jefferson Trustee Xena Ugrinsky and I meet regularly with Katrina Westerhof – National Grid’s hydrogen chief and their management regarding their plans for our power plant.

Mayor Lauren Sheprow has enabled this through her support of the Port Jefferson Power Plant committee that Ugrinsky chairs and I am on.

We are making really good progress in pursuing a cleaner, greener, less expensive energy future for central Long Island’s very uncertain energy course with the support of Sheprow, and this benefits both the residents, and to an even larger extent, the school district.

Help us continue enabling Port Jefferson to have a seat at the table with respect to what happens at the power plant.

Bruce Miller

Port Jefferson

WRITE TO US … AND KEEP IT LOCAL  

We welcome your letters, especially those responding to our local coverage, replying to other letter writers’ comments and speaking mainly to local themes. Letters should be no longer than 400 words and may be edited for length, libel, style, good taste and uncivil language. They will also be published on our website. We do not publish anonymous letters. Please include an address and phone number for confirmation. Email letters to: [email protected] or mail them to TBR News Media, P.O. Box 707, Setauket, NY 11733

 

Reviewed by Julianne Mosher

“Who wants to see that?” is the second song performed in Theatre Three’s latest mainstage production of Half Time. Well, after you read this review, you’ll definitely want to see it, too. Celebrating its New York premiere, the show tells the story of a group of nine senior citizens who audition, and get into, a hip-hop dance troupe for a New Jersey basketball team. 

Based on a true story documented in the 2008 film, Gotta Dance written, directed and produced by Dori Berinstein, the 2015 stage adaptation premiered at Chicago’s Bank of America Theatre and retitled itself in 2018 for its East Coast premiere at the Paper Mill Playhouse in New Jersey. With a book by Chad Beguelin and Bob Martin, music by Matthew Sklar and Marvin Hamlisch and lyrics by Nell Benjamin, audiences of all ages will fall in love with the story and its characters.

Directed by Jeffrey Sanzel, the show starts off with the ensemble as the New Jersey Cougars (Julia Albino, Will Logan, Melina Piervencenti, Isabella Scarpa, Michelle Shapiro, Katy Snair and Ryan van Nostrand) — which was loosely based on the NJ Nets basketball team. They’re young, they’re hip and they can dance. But then, the group opens up to feature nine sassy seniors who tried out for the team’s latest publicity stunt — a dance troupe called “Nifty Shades of Grey.”

Marci Bing (Muriel), Lisa Greene (Joanne), Mary Ellin Kurtz (Estelle), Denise Lardi (Fran), Phyllis March (Mae), Linda May (Bea), Candace McCready (Dorothy), Nikki Sislian (Camilla) and Jack Seabury (Ron), each bring humor and immense talent to the stage.

The senior troupe is coached by another aged out dancer, Tara (Tina Ann Aurora), who was fired by her boss, Alison (Colleen Britt) for being too old. Alison is also behind this PR stunt. She thinks it’s a joke and wants to humiliate the group because who would want to see a bunch of old folks dance to hip-hop? Tara believes in them, though, and with the help of Jenny (Cassidy Rose O’Brien) and Kendra (Anna Moceri) of the young Cougarettes, they transform the group into sizzling seniors who can pop, lock and drop it. 

What’s also fun about the show is we learn the backstories of each dancer. May does a great job playing Bea, who’s also Kendra’s grandmother. She’s spunky and opinionated, especially when it comes to Kendra’s relationship with one of the star players, Anthony (Yashaun Harris). They talk about this power dynamic during their car rides and in the song, “Princess.”

The seniors become friends with the younger troupe, too, especially when they are all invited to Hell, the local nightclub. There, we learn that Dorothy has an alter ego, Dottie, who is a confident hip-hop star and idolizes legends like Tupac and Biggie Smalls. McCready does a fantastic job playing the shy kindergarten teacher who ends up being one of the best break dancers on the team. 

But to counteract Hell, the old folks invite the youngins to a sock hop the following week to show them how they used to dance. Ron, who’s the only male member of the team, shows off his skills in “The Prince of Swing” and how he used to attract all the ladies in his youth. This fun number shows off Seabury’s great dancing as he partners with everyone on stage to show off his moves. 

We also learn about Mae’s personal life. One of the older members of the team, her husband is terminally ill and in an emotionally beautiful song, “The Water’s Rise,” she leaves the audience with tears in their eyes by the end.

Adding to the list of swing, tap and hip-hop dancing, Camilla’s “Como No?” brings salsa to the stage. In this number, Sislian lights up the room in her tight red dress singing about her half-her-age lover in an anthem that reminds everyone that age is only a number.

Other highlights include the costume design from Jason Allyn who strategically kept the color scheme of red and black prominent throughout the whole show and the bare set by Randall Parsons that allowed the actors to get their groove on with nothing in the way.

The show impressively closes the theatre’s 54th mainstage season with jokes that will have you laughing from start to finish. For a half-time show, there is a whole lot of talent, so don’t miss this one.

Theatre Three, 412 Main St., Port Jefferson presents Half Time through June 22. Tickets are $40 adults, $32 seniors and students, $25 children ages 5 to 12, $25 Wednesday matinees. 

After a brief hiatus, Theatre Three kicks off their 55th season with the family favorite musical Annie from Sept. 13 to Oct. 19. For more information or to order, call 631-928-9100 or visit www.theatrethree.com.