When we shop, we often bring our valuables, which total hundreds — if not thousands — of dollars, with us.
Cell phones, wallets, purses and credit cards represent valuable commodities. They can be stolen to score sweet profits. And throughout our community, that is happening right now.
On Aug. 8, Suffolk County Police Department 4th Precinct Inspector David Regina informed the Smithtown Town Board of a pernicious crime happening across Suffolk County retail spaces.
“Criminals and thieves take the opportunity when someone is shopping at Costco or any of these other stores, and they walk by an unsuspecting victim’s shopping cart,” he said. “What they’ll do is they’ll just take out the credit cards or the wallet.”
A criminal can be out the door with our credit cards in the few seconds we may step away from our shopping carts.
At first, victims of this kind of theft do not know they have been victimized. In the time it can take for victims to discover they were robbed and cancel their accounts, the damage has already been done. For law enforcement, Regina noted, this kind of theft is “a very hard crime to target.”
Fortunately, we can all take some simple steps to protect our possessions. We should always keep our valuables in sight and within reach when we shop.
We also encourage our readers to shop lightly, leaving their possessions inside their locked vehicles or — even better — leaving their valuables at home.
If one shops with a handbag or purse, ensure these bags have secure closures. For purse thieves, an open handbag in a public space invites theft.
At TBR News Media, we helped to pioneer the Neighborhood Watch program in Suffolk County. We now advocate for a similar crime watch program for retail centers. As the adage goes, “If you see something, say something.”
Tell a store manager or similar authority about the nefarious activities you witness. Failure to report these incidents of purse theft signals to criminals our tacit approval of these behaviors, incentivizing recidivism. If we wish to see larcenies begin to drop, we must do our part.
Aware of the risks, we can and should shop without fear. Please take care to ensure that shopping can be a safe experience.
Kornreich clashes with Good Energy reps during Town Board meeting
Brookhaven Town Hall. File photo from the town’s website
By Samantha Rutt
Members of the Manhattan-based energy firm Good Energy LLC, the Town of Brookhaven’s Community Choice Aggregation administrator, were recently met with questions and criticism from within the Town Board.
The CCA program was designed to help Brookhaven consumers save money on energy by pooling the bulk buying power of Brookhaven residents and businesses.
The CCA’s fixed rate, however, is $0.695 per therm, more than double the August rate offered by National Grid, which is $0.339 per therm.
During a TOB meeting Thursday, Aug. 17, Good Energy’s managing partner Javier Barrios and senior business development manager Edward Carey described the program as a “state initiative that allows municipalities to be empowered.”
The program’s primary aim, Barrios said, is to provide residents with greater control over their energy sources and present a more cost-effective alternative to default utility rates from National Grid, which fluctuate monthly.
Councilmember Jonathan Kornreich (D-Stony Brook) scrutinized these appeals, suggesting a lack of public outreach regarding the CCA.
“I have never met anybody who understood what it meant that we were starting a CCA,” Kornreich told Barrios.
The town handled preliminary outreach and education efforts before the program’s launch, according to Barrios, who added that there was a mandatory subsidy outreach and education initiative undertaken to ensure a clear understanding of the CCA program.
“I’ll just say that from where I’m sitting, it was not effective at all,” Kornreich responded. “I think that there’s been a lot of confusion.”
After the initial enrollment of all residents who use natual gas, the program makes residents responsible for opting in or out of the program. For Kornreich, residents must understand how the program works compared to the default energy supply.
“I think that to the extent that people understand it, [the residents] understand that, at the moment, they are overpaying for natural gas,” he added.
Barrios said the weather significantly affects the domestic natural gas market. In the temperate climate of the shoulder months, when the demand for natural gas is lower, Brookhaven residents should unenroll from the CCA’s program, paying only for their independent household’s usage at the market rate.
Kornreich also centered around resident complaints regarding issues with the program’s opt-out feature. Complaints were consistent with long delays, confusion with billing and the feature “simply not working,” he stated during the discourse.
“I would just like to urge [Good Energy] here in this public setting to honor those requests as quickly as possible,” Kornreich continued.
Since the rollout of the CCA in May, all Brookhaven residents have been automatically enrolled in this program. It still remains up to their discretion whether to opt in or out.
“I do support this initiative because I think that having this choice for consumers is going to, at some point, give us the ability to save money,” Kornreich concluded. “But our residents have to be educated, and we’re all trying to figure out how to do a better job.”
An alarming larceny trend is rising in Suffolk County as thieves swipe wallets and credit cards from shopping carts at retail stores.
Between May and August 2023, Suffolk County Police Department 4th Precinct Inspector David Regina commented on the countywide increase in larcenies during the Smithtown Town Board’s meeting on Aug. 8. He attributed the spike to thefts from shopping carts.
The inspector described how offenders usually only take the victims’ wallets or even credit cards. Regina maintained that this leads to a dangerous problem and quandary for law enforcement: Victims are not immediately aware they’ve been robbed.
“What they’ll do is they’ll just take out the credit cards or the wallet,” Regina told the Town Board, “The victims will not know [because] it’s not like the whole bag is gone.”
When the victims discover they no longer have their cards or wallet, the suspect has already used their cards numerous times, racking up a substantial balance.
After using the credit cards, suspects will discard the cards, making it a “very hard crime to target,” according to Regina.
“There are many people that go for these opportunities,” he said. “This has been a significant portion of our larcenies.”
‘Overwhelmingly, they get away with it.’
— David Shapiro
As of now, SCPD is still investigating six larcenies of this variety. These thefts were reported and occurred between March and August of 2023. In addition, the department has alerted all shoppers not to leave their bags in their shopping carts unattended to avoid becoming victims of these thefts.
In a phone interview, David Shapiro, a distinguished professor at John Jay College of Criminal Justice, offered how the thieves identify their target victims.
“The victims are usually vulnerable,” he said, adding that victims are “usually unaccompanied” and, in most cases, “there’s no guardian there.”
Shapiro noted the ease with which these crimes are carried out, describing it as a “low-tech” offense and “a crime of opportunity.” Another incentive for the offenders to choose these kinds of scenarios is the low clearance rate, according to Shapiro.
“In other words,” he stated, “Overwhelmingly, they get away with it.”
According to the Suffolk County Police Department’s public information office, in all of the ongoing larceny investigations of this kind between March to August 2023, the perpetrators have attempted to use the victims’ credit cards.
Shapiro emphasized how profitable stolen wallets have become for thieves due to the factor of credit cards.
Shapiro commented that these crimes provide perpetrators with “some time to exploit the vulnerability of the online system, where you can spend rather quickly,” he added.
Other than the apparent financial threat of larcenies, another arguably more dangerous factor comes into play with stolen wallets and cards: identity theft.
Shapiro remarked on the possible threat of it, pointing out that in today’s time, “You have a lot of personal identifying information that is separately valuable apart from the currency,” he said, adding that all this personal information inside wallets holds a “value that may exceed the actual currency.”
A pet peeve isn’t something you race out to the breeder, the pound or anywhere else to get because it’ll be a buddy for the rest of your life.
No, a pet peeve is some annoyance that routinely bothers you, like watching someone shake their leg in class or listening to someone blow away the four leaves that dare to fall on their driveway each day.
To that end, I’d like to share some of my own pet peeves, for no other reason than that it’s easier and, perhaps, more fun to focus on the smaller stuff than to worry about, say, global warming, the 2024 election, or the eventual burning out of the sun. Some of these are truly tiny, while others are considerably larger by comparison. If you find that annoying, add that to your own list.
—A perfect dive into a hotel or community pool: yes, it’s lovely and amazing, but people aren’t fish. We shouldn’t be able to enter the water without making a splash or a ripple. When we were teenagers, my brothers and I watched in amazement as a boy about our age perfectly pierced the water during a vacation at a pool in Quebec. Only later did we learn that he was the son of a national diving champion. He should have had his own pool and not unnerved the foolish Americans at a Holiday Inn.
— Endless, personal and vicious criticism at the end of articles: I can’t help laughing when someone writes about how stupid the idea of the article was. Often, someone else suggests that the person A. didn’t have to read the story and B. didn’t need to take the time to comment.
— The knees digging into my back on an airplane: do other passengers care that my back is on the other side of that thin fabric? Perhaps they want some attention or they are eager to share their physical discomfort with others.
— The overwhelming urge to tell me what my dog needs: one man, in particular, who seems to have moved into the neighborhood recently, tells me how my dog looks each day. Yes, it’s hot, and no, I’m not walking him so far that he’s in danger. By stopping me to share his unsolicited dog instructions, he’s extending the time my dog spends in the heat and he’s annoying me.
— The desire other parents have to tell me how to raise my children: news flash — everyone’s children aren’t the same and, oh, by the way, these aren’t your kids.
— The disconnect between the time our children spend on their phones with their friends and the difficulty in connecting by phone with them when they’re away: why are our children on their phones constantly when they’re with us, but they are unreachable by phone when we text them? They remind us that we tell them to “be where they are” when they’re not with us, but they’re not with us when they are with us.
— The people who listen so poorly that they say “oh, that’s nice” when I tell them my pet peeve died: enough said.
— People who tap me on the shoulder to get my attention while they are talking to me at a baseball game: yes, believe it or not, I can multi task. I’m capable of listening to someone else’s story and responding appropriately while watching every pitch and hoping for either a home run or a foul ball that comes my way.
— People who commit my mistakes to memory: I don’t expect perfection and readily admit that I err. If and when I share a thought about someone else’s mistakes, I sometimes receive something to the effect of, “well, you did that, too” or “what you did bothered me 17.28 years ago, too.” Okay, if it annoyed you, why didn’t you say something at the time, instead of waiting until now? Were you hoping I’d say something at some point so you could unburden yourself?
State and local officials rally outside the New York State Department of Motor Vehicles office in Port Jefferson Station on Tuesday, Aug. 22. From left, New York State Sen. Anthony Palumbo, state Assemblyman Ed Flood, Town of Brookhaven Deputy Supervisor Dan Panico, Brookhaven Councilmember Jonathan Kornreich and Brookhaven Councilwoman Jane Bonner. Photos by Raymond Janis
State and local officials are letting out a collective uproar over the planned closure of the New York State Department of Motor Vehicles Port Jefferson Station branch later this week.
The Port Jeff Station office serves most of northern Brookhaven and parts of Smithtown. The three nearest alternatives are DMV offices in Medford, Hauppauge or Riverhead.
With foot traffic constantly moving in and out of the DMV on Tuesday morning, Aug. 22, New York State legislators joined Brookhaven Town Board members for a press conference calling upon Gov. Kathy Hochul (D) to intervene.
Town of Brookhaven Supervisor Ed Romaine (R), who is running for Suffolk County executive against business leader Dave Calone (D), noted that while Suffolk is the fourth largest county by population in New York State, it tops the list in registered licensed drivers and registered vehicles.
“Closing this DMV office, which is used by so many people, is not the way to go,” he said.
New York State Sen. Anthony Palumbo (R-New Suffolk) highlighted the Town of Brookhaven’s considerable population, noting that the town has more residents than Miami, Florida.
“Could you imagine ignoring the residents of Miami when it comes to licensing drivers?” he asked. “Closing this DMV, unfortunately, is quite reckless, and I don’t think we’re really thinking about the citizens and the services they need.”
The state senator added that closing the Port Jefferson Station DMV would put greater strain on existing DMV locations in Suffolk County.
New York State Assemblyman Ed Flood (R-Port Jefferson) referred to the announced closure as a “disservice to the residents of this area.”
“It’s not in any way good government to close buildings or close facilities that are necessary,” the assemblyman said. “Right now, we have a need to expand our DMV operations instead of contract.”
Brookhaven Deputy Supervisor Dan Panico (R-Manorville), who is running for town supervisor against SUNY Old Westbury adjunct professor Lillian Clayman (D), attended Tuesday’s press event, condemning New York as “a state where people pay more and get less.”
“The overall theme and what we’re pointing out — what I’m pointing out — is that people on Long Island, specifically in Suffolk County and Brookhaven Town, are continually shortchanged by the State of New York,” he said.
Councilmember Jonathan Kornreich (D-Stony Brook), whose 1st District includes the hamlets and villages across northwestern Brookhaven, echoed Panico’s sentiments. He referred to the conflict over limited state resources as a “suburban versus urban dynamic,” with suburban areas often neglected.
“The closure of this office is going to add at a minimum 40 minutes of round-trip driving for our residents who use it,” he indicated. “This is something that impacts all our residents.”
Councilwoman Jane Bonner (R-Rocky Point), whose 2nd District encompasses the northeastern reaches of the township, said existing employees at the Port Jeff Station location do not wish to relocate.
She also suggested that the closure contradicts the spirit of Hochul’s environmental agenda.
“Our governor has a very lofty environmental initiative,” Bonner stated. “Putting people in cars for longer on our state roads — that are not well maintained — and emitting fossil fuels doesn’t go along with her environmental initiative.”
Officials encouraged residents to weigh in on the DMV closure through an online petition created by the town. Scan the QR code to fill out the survey.
Citizens have a right to know who they’re dealing with, whether it be in government or private enterprise. But that’s not the case when it comes to limited liability companies, or LLCs, which for example can own property, apply for grants, operate as landlords and donate to political campaigns. Holding government accountable for its actions demands a well-informed public. We need to know who, not what, is benefiting in order to do our jobs as citizens.
Discovering who’s behind the curtain isn’t easy. Cruise through your local property tax rolls or the state’s campaign finance disclosure database. You’ll see plenty of LLCs but you won’t see many names.
Anonymous shell companies have been a popular vehicle for money laundering, tax evasion, organized crime, terrorism and other forms of corruption for decades. Yet, as the proposed New York State bill notes, establishing an LLC requires less personal information than getting a library card.
That’s why it’s imperative for Gov. Kathy Hochul (D) to sign the LLC Transparency Act, passed in both the state Assembly and Senate, which would require these special kinds of business organizations to publicly identify the owners to the state and to the public registry run by the Department of State.
At the federal level, the Corporate Transparency Act, taking effect next year, seeks similar disclosures from businesses, including LLCs, but stops short of making the information publicly available. A wide variety of businesses, from pizza shops to mall developers and property buyers, use the LLCs as an organizing business structure.
The approach, sanctioned by state law, provides the owners some limits on liabilities the company could face. As a practical matter, LLCs also offer the people who actually own the company the ability to remain anonymous.
Under current reporting requirements, LLCs need only supply a company name, county of operation and a basic address where legal documents should be sent. Sometimes, the address is a P.O. Box, sometimes it’s an attorney’s office, sometimes it’s a registered agent.
For anyone interested in knowing more, the information provided is often frustratingly nondescript and consequently useless. We all have a well-established interest in this information, and the state Legislature should be commended for recognizing this by including solid public disclosure requirements.
The lack of transparency with campaign donations is just one of the reasons the LLC Transparency Act has the support of good government groups, such as Common Cause and the League of Women Voters. While a 2019 law change required LLCs making political donations to disclose their owners, many are ignoring the requirement, the groups say.
The Business Council of New York State opposes the law, saying it would violate the privacy of law-abiding businesses — including thousands of small businesses organized as LLCs — and put their security at risk. There are some provisions in the legislation for public disclosure to be waived when “a significant privacy interest exists.” The law’s efficacy will be determined in part in how waiver requests are handled.
Given the benefits state law confers upon LLCs, it’s not too much to ask that they at least let us know who they are. This is a good step toward much-needed transparency
Judy Patrick is vice president for editorial development of the New York Press Association, of which TBR News Media is a member.
Recognizing Kara Hahn’s efforts for the 5th District
I’d like to express my gratitude to outgoing Suffolk County Legislator Kara Hahn [D-Setauket] for her unwavering dedication to the residents of the 5th Legislative District. While we may have differing viewpoints on some issues, I truly appreciate her commitment to serve our district with utmost integrity.
Kara’s background as a social worker gave her unique insights into the harrowing reality of drug addiction — especially into Suffolk’s fentanyl crisis. She was instrumental in championing a law to provide our police with Narcan, a crucial measure that has saved numerous lives from drug overdoses. Moreover, her efforts in stewarding the allocation of funds from the opioid settlement to aid those battling addiction in Suffolk are commendable.
Kara understood the significance of preserving our county’s natural splendors. Her advocacy for funds to enhance parks and conserve open spaces in our district has left an indelible mark.
As a father with three young children, I resonate with the principle of prioritizing families over politics. Kara’s commitment to constituent service is a mantle I will carry close as we move to this next and exciting chapter in our community.
On a personal note, I’d like to wish Kara great success in her new endeavor as the Long Island deputy regional director for the New York State Parks Department. It’s a role that undoubtedly befits her expertise and passion.
Anthony M. Figliola
East Setauket
Constituent and Republican candidate for Suffolk County Legislature, District 5
DMV closure an unnecessary hardship for Northern Brookhaven
The DMV In the Three Roads Plaza will close its doors on Aug. 25. Photo by Heidi Sutton/TBR News Media
I was disappointed to read about the recently announced plans to close the local DMV Office in the Three Roads Plaza in Port Jefferson Station.
This facility not only provides important services to motorists around our region, it has served as an important anchor to the small businesses which surround the office that benefited from the additional “traffic” the DMV office created. Beyond that, the present location offered a reasonable and convenient alternative to the longer drive to Medford or Hauppauge where one would be met with mass confusion and interminable wait times when seeking out the many services one needs from the DMV.
Though a smaller facility, the PJS staff were always pleasant and professional and even when needing to be patient in waiting your turn, you knew when you were done you were close to home and even closer to a great slice of Colosseo’s pizza. These benefits have been important to many in the Northern Brookhaven area, and this announced change presents an unnecessary hardship to those of our hamlet and beyond.
There were attempts in the past to make this move which thankfully were quashed by our previous state Assemblyman [Steve Englebright (D-Setauket)]. I call upon our current state officials in the Assembly and Senate to show the same grit and intercede on our behalf and halt this diversion which will “drive” this hub of local activity from our midst.
Ira Paul Costell
Port Jefferson Station
Editor’s note: The writer is president of the Port Jefferson Station/Terryville Civic Association.
Discrepancies in Aug. 7 meeting coverage
I hope this message finds you well. I am writing as a concerned citizen to express my disappointment in the coverage of the recent village meeting held on Aug. 7.
It has come to my attention that there were significant omissions in your report on this event. Most notably, the tabling of warrants due to the mayor’s failure to review them, which resulted in checks being held and the accruement of late fees.
This is a significant matter that directly affects the fiscal health of our community and the fair disbursement of taxpayer funds. While it may be an uncomfortable subject to report, it is vital for maintaining transparency and public trust in our local government.
Additionally, I was surprised to learn that the settlement with Martin Burden was not included in your report. This settlement was a key reason for the meeting transitioning into an executive setting, a fact that was also omitted.
As a respected news source in our community, we depend on TBR News Media to provide accurate, comprehensive and timely information about key events and decisions that shape our village’s future. As the editorial staff stated in the March 23 issue, “we view one of our roles as the watchdog of local government for the people.” Selectively reporting on certain aspects while neglecting others can create a skewed perception of events and undermine the transparency necessary for a healthy, functioning democracy – the opposite of being a “watchdog for the people.”
I kindly ask you to address these omissions and provide your readers with the complete picture of the Aug. 7 meeting. It would be greatly appreciated if you could also elucidate your editorial policy when it comes to reporting on such matters. This will help your readers, including myself, understand the process and considerations that guide your reporting.
Thank you for your time and consideration. I look forward to your response and continued commitment to fair, comprehensive and transparent journalism.
Keith Ottendorfer
Port Jefferso
Battery storage proposal a bad idea
Photo from Wikimedia Commons
Due to the intermittent nature of renewable energy, no generation when the wind doesn’t blow and the sun doesn’t shine, battery backup/storage is presented as the solution.
Renewables have an output of about 20% of nameplate capacity. Disregarding the huge cost and the fact that lithium ion batteries are rated at only 4 hours discharge, many battery backup storage sites are being proposed.
One, Key Capture Energy of Albany, is on Pulaski Road west of Town Line Road, in Huntington, near residences. It is near a LIPA substation, so interconnection is not a problem. But the issues are concerning:
1. Lithium ion battery storage units unexpectedly and spontaneously explode and catch fire. This fire is self-fueling and inextinguishable. Fatal, toxic clouds of poisons are emitted and fire companies need sealed oxygen breathing apparatus to fight the fires. Residential areas near the fire must be evacuated.
2. The site is over a Suffolk County Sanitary Code Article 7 Deep Recharge Area — an aquifer protection zone. That means this is a designated area where our drinking water is recharged, and there must not be hazardous materials present to contaminate our water supply. Lithium poisonous runoff from a destructive battery storage fire goes into the ground to endanger our drinking water.
3. Gov. Kathy Hochul [D], recognizing this problem, has convened a panel to address the battery storage fire problem. There have been three battery storage fires in New York state and elsewhere, too.
4. The site is near the Huntington Landfill, laced with methane, also the Iroquois natural gas pipeline and the Huntington animal shelter.
5. With China, Russia, India and others opening many reliable, cost-effective and clean fossil-fueled and nuclear generators, all our efforts of renewable generation, with their negatives of high cost, unreliability, rare-earth needs from child labor and hostile countries, intermittency, huge land and seabed needs, destruction of sea life and flying birds like eagles, terns, bats and more, all our efforts of destroying our current, reliable generation are wasted and weaken us.
This is a revenue-generating plan that wants to cash in on taxpayer subsidies, ignores the life-or-death safety concerns of the nearby residents, potentially poisoning our sole source of drinking water and endangers firefighters. It is a Band-Aid for faulty, unreliable renewable electricity generation and endangers our health and safety. This proposal should be denied.
Mark Sertoff
East Northport
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. Scan the QR code above or email letters to [email protected] or mail them to TBR News Media, P.O. Box 707, Setauket, NY 11733
J. Robert Oppenheimer, right, and Albert Einstein in a posed photograph at the Institute for Advanced Study. Public domain photo
‘Now I am become death, the destroyer of worlds.’
— J. Robert Oppenheimer
J. Robert Oppenheimer was born in 1904 in New York City. During childhood, he studied minerals, physics, chemistry, Greek, Latin, French and German. After graduating high school as valedictorian, Oppenheimer fell seriously ill with dysentery. His family sent him westward to treat this medical condition in New Mexico, where he loved riding horses in the open terrain.
After graduating from Harvard University in three years with a degree in chemistry, he studied physics at Cambridge University in England. Earning his doctorate and studying with other specialists and Nobel Peace Prize recipients, Oppenheimer built relationships with some of the foremost physicists of the time. While in Germany, he observed widespread antisemitism fostered by Adolph Hitler’s Nazi regime. Many scientists in Germany were Jewish and later fled the Holocaust by immigrating to the United States. There, they used their talents to help defeat the Nazis.
During the Great Depression, Oppenheimer was an ardent critic of Spanish general, Francisco Franco, supporting the Spanish Republican government and opposing the fascists. While never formerly a member, Oppenheimer openly accepted the views of the American Communist Party.
During that time, the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation watched over his activities and those of his friends. He never hid his political beliefs. Oppenheimer was also deeply flawed, a womanizer who had an affair and a child with another man’s wife.
Manhattan Project
Before the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, Oppenheimer conducted extensive scientific research on possible military theories that piqued the government’s interest. Gen. Leslie Groves, an abrasive army officer who led the construction of the Pentagon, was touted for building complex government structures. The son of a Presbyterian Army chaplain, his superiors saw him as a motivated figure who succeeded at resolving challenging problems.
By 1942, the United States mobilized its citizens to fight, and its scientists to keep pace with the Germans to construct a nuclear bomb. Groves understood that Oppenheimer knew the rival German scientists, as he had worked alongside many of them during the 1930s.
Groves chose Oppenheimer to lead a group of America’s leading scientists, concentrating most of them at Los Alamos, New Mexico, in what was known as the Manhattan Project. Groves relied heavily upon Oppenheimer to mold these contrasting personalities, further pressured by an impending timetable, and create the most destructive weapon known to man — all before the Germans could do so themselves.
Under a cloud of secrecy, over the next two-and-a-half years, Groves prioritized resources, money and manpower for this endeavor. He spent some $2 billion to create this weapon.
Destroyer of worlds
After the death of President Franklin D. Roosevelt, Secretary of War Henry Stimson briefed President Harry S. Truman on April 24, 1945, about the status of the Manhattan Project.
After the Nazi surrender, Groves put pressure on Oppenheimer to ensure that America could use the weapon against the Japanese. During the Potsdam Conference, where the three leading Allies — the Soviets, the British and the Americans — met to plan the postwar peace, Truman learned of the successful Trinity Test on July 16, 1945.
American military leadership suspected the Japanese would fight to the last soldier. And so, 78 years ago this month, the United States dropped two atomic bombs on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. At first, Oppenheimer was pleased with his creation, though he later feared a future arms race would precipitate and that nuclear Armageddon could lead to the annihilation of humanity.
Fallout
And as the Cold War began, Americans at home were concerned about the spread of communism. Oppenheimer led the effort to create the atomic bomb, but his communist sympathies were again scrutinized during the Red Scare.
The Soviet Union quickly attained the atomic bomb. These were dangerous times for the United States.
In 1954, the Department of Energy revoked Oppenheimer’s security clearance due to fears that he could not be trusted with classified information.
Oppenheimer, a complex historical figure harboring beliefs that often ran contrary to those held by the government and most Americans, helped the Allies win World War II. He symbolized American scientific superiority, though he was a casualty of domestic Cold War stigma.
A scientist who created the worst weapon ever used in warfare, he also sought peaceful measures to ensure that an arms race and nuclear conflict would not recur.
Oppenheimer died on Feb. 18, 1967, at age 62.
Rich Acritelli is a social studies teacher at Rocky Point High School and an adjunct history professor at Suffolk County Community College.
The New York State Capitol building, located in Albany. Photo by formulanone from Wikimedia Commons
Limited liability companies, or LLCs, in New York state are staring down new public disclosure requirements.
The proposed LLC Transparency Act “aims to modernize disclosure laws for” LLCs. Along with public disclosure of beneficial owners, the bill would create a public database that includes the names of beneficial owners of NYS LLCs.
Under the “justification” section, the bill states, “anonymous corporate ownership has proliferated since the 1990s,” presenting “numerous problems.” Among these, the legislation cites tax evasion, money laundering, organized crime and drug trafficking, among other social ills, as byproducts of the existing voluntary disclosure scheme.
The bill passed in the state Assembly and Senate earlier this year, and is awaiting Gov. Kathy Hochul’s (D) signature. It would take effect one year after the governor signs it.
Several members of the Long Island delegation, including state Assemblyman Ed Flood (R-Port Jefferson) and Assemblywoman Jodi Giglio (R-Riverhead), voted down the measure.
In separate interviews with the two state legislators, they outlined their opposition.
Privacy
Giglio stated that her objections to the bill were grounded in privacy concerns for the LLC proprietors.
“As an owner of an LLC, I don’t think that your home address should be public, that your private information should be public,” she said.
Addressing the concerns outlined within the legislation, Giglio added that the state government maintains records on the personal information of LLC owners.
She suggested that LLC violations could be monitored and handled by the NYS Department of State instead of the public.
“The state should be doing that digging and not necessarily individual people who can find out somebody’s home address and camp out outside because they don’t like something,” the assemblywoman said.
Redundancy
Flood suggested the LLC Transparency Act was redundant, given that the federal Corporate Transparency Act — which includes similar provisions as the state statute — is set to take effect on Jan. 1, 2024.
“As a small business owner, I know it’s just more paperwork to do,” he said. “It just seemed unnecessary. I understand the purpose of it, but it’s duplicative of what they already do on a federal level.”
Enforcement
The LLC Transparency Act carries a $250 fine for those who fail to register with NYS Department of State. Flood suggested that this penalty isn’t nearly enough to incentivize LLC owners who wish to remain anonymous to disclose their ownership status.
“The bill itself doesn’t have any teeth to it,” Flood said, noting it would likely lead to a collection of fines from responsible business owners rather than rooting out irresponsible LLCs.
“It’s not going to do anything for its proposed purpose,” he added.
On top of the relatively painless fine for violators, Flood noted that the filing deadline is two years and 60 days after the bill takes effect.
“You get two years and two months before the state even steps in to do anything,” he said, adding, “It looks like this bill was done as a feel-good legislation that actually has no effect, which is not uncommon for what we do in Albany.”
Rather than placing public disclosure requirements upon existing LLC proprietors, Giglio recommended that the state conducts more thorough investigations of newly formed LLCs.
“Before the LLC is formed, the initial investigation should occur,” she advised. “And if someone has a history of illicit activities, then the LLC shouldn’t be allowed to be formed.”
Giglio contended that recent state laws have created an increasingly hostile regulatory environment for small businesses. She rooted her opposition to the proposed LLC legislation as countering these trends.
“It seems like it’s getting harder and harder to do business in New York state,” she said. “Any complaint can be investigated, and it’s New York State’s job to make sure that businesses, corporations and LLCs are keeping up to their promises.”
Former New York State Assemblyman Steve Englebright speaks during an environmental protest outside the William H. Rogers Legislature Building in Hauppauge on Tuesday, July 25. File photo by Raymond Janis
By Steve Englebright
Pure water is our most essential natural resource.
Suffolk’s economy is anchored by our two largest industries which are tourism and agriculture. Each of these forms of commerce needs clean water in order to remain viable. Polluted beaches and contaminated produce will not draw visitors from afar nor will they sustain farming. Public health needs, however, are more concerning. Living on top of our drinking water has proven to be very challenging because it is easily contaminated by our daily activities. The chemicals we continuously introduce into local ground and surface waters are what threatens the health of our families, communities and economy, each of which depends upon a generous supply of predictably pure drinking water.
‘How we manage this issue will guide the destiny of our county.’
— Steve Englebright
All of the water that we drink or use for everything from industry to personal hygiene is sourced from wells that tap Long Island’s aquifers which are natural water-bearing sediment horizons. Long Island’s aquifers are a reservoir of rain-absorbing sand and gravel that is everywhere below our feet. This fresh groundwater eventually seeps into the tidewaters that define our island’s edges. Virtually all of our fresh and salt waters are connected which is why pollution that enters the system on land eventually will contaminate our harbors and bays.
Scientific research has proven that the most widespread source of groundwater contamination in Suffolk is human waste, especially nitrate-rich urine, that is flushed into Suffolk’s more than 380,000 cesspools. Because cesspools do very little to cleanse the waste that enters into them they are a major source of nitrate contamination of our ground and surface waters. When any large amount of this chemical enters a body of surface water it may cause explosive plant growth. Seasonal decay of this overgrowth often causes ecological harm such as fish kills.
In recent years millions of state and county dollars have been invested into learning how to halt the progressive decline of water quality. This work led directly to a proposed referendum which is entitled the Suffolk County Water Quality Restoration Act. This legislation — which would require voter approval — economizes by consolidating numerous county-owned sewer districts and dedicating 1/8 of 1% of county sales tax toward installing both technologically advanced cesspool upgrades and new sewers for compact business districts. No property taxes are involved. Seventy-five percent of the sales tax that would be collected could be used to address the greatest need which is to provide grants to homeowners to cover most of the costs of installing advanced wastewater treatment technology within each cesspool.
If approved by Suffolk’s voters, money raised could be leveraged to attract matching federal and state dollars to further reduce local costs.
Because of the importance of protecting reserves of pure fresh water this issue has historically been a bipartisan legislative priority that has largely been off limits to red and blue bickering. Unfortunately, that wholesome tradition was compromised on July 25 when the Suffolk Legislature’s Republican majority voted unanimously to deny residents the opportunity to vote on the issue of pure water. By killing this highly anticipated public referendum, citizens have been blocked from directly weighing in on efforts to protect and improve ground and surface waters.
It has been widely reported that this outcome was insisted upon by political party operatives who want to believe that this environmental referendum would bring out so many Democrats to vote that it would disadvantage Republican candidates in the election on Nov. 7. As the voter-approved $4.2 billion New York State Environmental Bond Act recently demonstrated this is just plain wrong. That referendum passed easily last November even though there was a low Democratic turnout.
Tellingly, none of the Republican candidates for the many county offices that will be on the November ballot showed up at the hearing of July 25 to speak for passage of the referendum. Their absence made it clear that the county Republican Party has turned away from Suffolk’s most urgent environmental issue in an attempt to profit politically from a voter suppression scheme.
Cleaning up our water sources requires an informed and engaged citizenry. The county’s Water Quality Restoration Act referendum would enable vigorous public education on this subject to occur as voters of all political persuasions strive to inform themselves ahead of their vote. Unfortunately, by canceling the referendum county Republicans have lost their way; they should not have taken from Suffolk’s residents their constitutional right to say through their votes what the county’s future should be.
Trying to suppress voter turnout in Suffolk by blocking public participation in the single most important economic and environmental issue affecting the county’s future contradicts the bedrock premise and promise of our democracy. It was wrong to cancel every local voter’s sacred right to express their opinion in a public referendum.
How we manage this issue will guide the destiny of our county. Clearly, the people of Suffolk deserve to have a chance to vote either for or against clean water at the next opportunity which could be as soon as next year. This crisis demands that we again all work together.
Restoring direct voter participation to the most critical questions relating to our sole source of drinking water and related quality of life issues is the best way to protect and enhance the equity of our homes, the health of our loved ones and the viability of our regional economy.
Steve Englebright served as New York State assemblyman for the 4th District from 1992-2022. He is a Democratic candidate this November for the Suffolk County Legislature, running against Anthony Figliola (R-East Setauket) for the 5th Legislative District.
She also suggested that the closure contradicts the spirit of Hochul’s environmental agenda.
Prev
