Boating can be one of the most joyous parts of summer, especially on Long Island.
There is truly nothing like the breeze running through our hair as we relax with family and friends, soaking up the natural beauty and the overwhelming landscape.
But it’s important to remember that boating is a privilege, not a right. Despite the fact that a night on the water could create lifelong memories, you don’t need a boat to get to work, the doctor or the grocery store.
This makes it even more imperative to be safe and considerate while on the water. It also makes it even more senseless when tragedies occur. Even the most experienced of boaters, like James Jaronczyk, of Massapequa, who died in the Great South Bay earlier this month, clearly can succumb to the dangers of the water. Sadly, these stories are not unique.
According to the United States Coast Guard, there were 636 boating fatalities nationwide in 2022, a 3.3% decrease from the 658 deaths in 2021. The most devastating aspect of the statistics is that several of the deaths were preventable.
Of the total fatalities 88 deaths, or 16%, involved alcohol. “Operator inattention, operator inexperience, improper lookout, excessive speed and machinery failure,” were other contributing factors, according to the Coast Guard report. Of the victims 75% drowned, and of those drowning victims, 85% were not wearing a life jacket.
As the Coast Guard advises, boaters must stay sober, check the weather, carry an Emergency Position Indicating Radio Beacon — which signals if you get into trouble — and have VHF-FM radio on hand in case cell service drops.
Also always let someone who is staying onshore know your float plan, which breaks down where you are going, how long you will be gone, a description of your boat and the safety equipment you have on board. Boating is not a time to take risks or explore coves and inlets you have not been to before, if you do not know what you are doing.
Most importantly, boaters should register for a boating safety course as they can never be too experienced to refresh their knowledge or learn something new. They have an obligation to themselves and those on board to practice responsible boating habits and return home safely.
We at TBR News Media wish you a happy, fun and safe summer on the water with your families and friends.
The executive board of the Port Jefferson Station/Terryville Civic Association, above. Photo by Raymond Janis
The Port Jefferson Station/Terryville Civic Association met at Comsewogue Public Library on Tuesday, May 23, expanding upon the priorities set forth by its newly installed executive board last month.
Civic vice president Carolyn Sagliocca, chair of the Land Use Committee, updated the body on a proposed zoning change for a 1.3-acre parcel located on Cherub Lane in Port Jefferson Station between Port Jeff Bowl and 7-11.
Sagliocca said those familiar with the proposed zone changes are “looking to change the zone to J-6,” a Main Street Business District classification under Brookhaven town code. She added, “They’re looking to put possibly a mixed-use — apartments, with possibly retail underneath.”
Given the space restrictions, the civic vice president noted developers are limited in densifying the lot, estimating the space could realistically accommodate only 10 to 20 units.
Just across the street from the Cherub Lane parcel, the proposed redevelopment at Jefferson Plaza — owned by Staller Associates — remained a central talking point for civic leaders, who reiterated concerns about density.
“We already know about the density that we’re talking about at the Staller project,” civic president Ira Costell said. “To add even more of that right across the street is something we’re concerned about.”
Casey Berry, COPE officer for Suffolk County Police Department, delivered the report on public safety. Berry said crime throughout Port Jeff Station/Terryville had been down, noting that call volume from the area has fallen as well.
Comsewogue High School students Kylie and Max each delivered reports from the school district. Kylie said local Boy Scout Pack 354 had posted bins at schools throughout the school district for American flags to be retired.
The high school’s CCC Club recently took a field trip to Calverton National Cemetery, where club members helped clean graves and learned about the cemetery’s history, Kylie added.
Max reported on the recent successes of Comsewogue’s varsity athletic teams, with boys tennis and lacrosse and girls lacrosse all punching tickets to the postseason.
Lou Antoniello updated the body on the ongoing work within the civic’s Bylaws Committee, which has started reviewing the bylaws and exploring potential changes. Once the committee has reviewed all the bylaws, Antoniello said the committee would post the proposed changes on the civic’s website and present them at a later meeting to be voted on by the membership.
He emphasized that the bylaws would be a collaborative effort among members over several months.
“It’s not as if we have a committee that’s making changes to the bylaws, and nobody else has input,” he said. “Everybody will have input. Everybody will have the chance to read them, and then we’ll have 30 days before a final vote.”
The civic will not meet next month. The next meeting is on Tuesday, July 25.
Conceptual plans for the 126-acre Lawrence Aviation Superfund site in Port Jefferson Station. Graphic from Suffolk County Landbank
Breon Peace, United States attorney for the Eastern District of New York, announced this week the federal government settled upon terms for the future of the Lawrence Aviation Industries Superfund site, ending years of litigation. This agreement will enable the sale of about two-thirds of the 126-acre Port Jefferson Station property by a subsidiary of Suffolk County Landbank.
A 2019 trial had found Lawrence Aviation, with its former CEO and owner Gerald Cohen, in violation of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 and liable to the Environmental Protection Agency, among other claimants, for over $48 million.
‘This settlement will enable a previously contaminated property to be put to uses that will benefit Port Jefferson [Station] and the greater Suffolk County community.’
— Breon Peace
This week’s announcement resolved the last unsettled question on the priority of claims against the property by New York State, Suffolk County and other agencies.
In a statement, Peace said the U.S. District Court approved a consent decree that allows for the sale and redevelopment of the Superfund site.
“This settlement will enable a previously contaminated property to be put to uses that will benefit Port Jefferson [Station] and the greater Suffolk County community,” the U.S. attorney said. “In the process, the EPA will recover at least some of the enormous costs expended in remediating the LAI Superfund site and protecting our environment from hazardous substances.”
Suffolk County Legislator Kara Hahn (D-Setauket), whose 5th Legislative District includes Port Jefferson Station, has been involved in the deliberations over the site. Reached by phone, she confirmed plans are ahead for demolishing the remaining derelict buildings on the property, an initiative subsidized by the federal government. [See story, “Schumer announces $450K to help demolish buildings at Lawrence Aviation,” Jan. 9, TBR News Media.]
“The first real step we’re going to see is the demolition of the buildings,” she said. “That is long overdue.”
The county legislator regarded the recent developments as a victory for Suffolk County taxpayers who “have been shouldering the burden of the taxes for the property for decades,” she said.
Hahn indicated that, under the plans, the site would be partitioned into three sectors — a third designated for a railyard to facilitate operations for the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, another third for an industrial solar farm and the final third for open space. The county legislator added that cleanup efforts, which include two pumping and filtration systems, will likely linger on for decades.
She tied plans for the Lawrence Aviation property to the decades-long proposal to electrify the Port Jefferson Branch of the Long Island Rail Road, referring to the combined efforts for the two projects as “transformational for the region.”
“This is a very early step in the process for electrification,” Hahn said, adding, “The full-scale electrification of the branch is at least a decade away, but it would never happen if we weren’t able to rehabilitate this Superfund site.”
New proposed EPA regulations may affect the Port Jefferson Power Station, pictured above. File photo by Lee Lutz
By Aidan Johnson
The Biden administration and the Environmental Protection Agency announced proposed regulations requiring most power plants fired by fossil fuels to cut their greenhouse gas emissions by 90 percent between 2035 and 2040, or shut down.
This climate rule would likely affect the Port Jefferson and Northport power stations, since they are both fossil-burning plants.
Under consideration for the new standards are carbon capture and storage, or CCS, a method of capturing and storing greenhouse gas emissions from power plants, though this is still not widely practiced.
“CCS has not reached a widespread commercialization stage,” Gang He, an assistant professor in the Department of Technology and Society at Stony Brook University, said in an email. “According to the Global Status of CCS 2022 report by Global CCS Institute, there are only 30 operational projects with a total capture capacity of 42.56 million metric tons — about 0.1% of the total carbon emission in 2022.”
As the global climate crisis continues, the World Meteorological Organization announced May 17 that world temperatures are “now more likely than not” to cross the 1.5 degrees Celsius threshold, recommending policymakers act promptly to reduce carbon emissions and help mitigate the mounting concerns.
Another proposal being explored is hydrogen, a low-emission fuel source which produces power through a process called electrolysis that could move Long Island’s toward a greener future, according to former Port Jeff Village trustee Bruce Miller.
Miller said hydrogen could play a major role in reshaping Long Island’s economic and energy futures as some companies have already started acquiring and selling hydrogen.
“It is hoped [hydrogen] will be an important part of our economy in the near future, and there’s a lot of money being allocated for that,” Miller told TBR News Media in an interview. “I believe that National Grid has the capacity to do this in Port Jefferson.”
National Grid did not respond to a request for comment.
Miller said local plant operators would probably need to modernize the existing power stations to accommodate hydrogen in the future.
Also factoring into this hydrogen equation would be energy demand. While a lot of energy is expected to be received from the Atlantic, where offshore wind turbines are currently being developed, these represent intermittent energy sources, Miller indicated.
Given Port Jeff Harbor’s deepwater port, Miller suggested that hydrogen could be feasibly captured, pumped and stored along existing maritime commercial routes and transported via cargo ships.
While decisions over local power stations remain ongoing, National Grid needs to determine whether it would be worth it to use hydrogen, or whether the electricity generated in the Atlantic would be enough. The municipalities would also need to be on board with repowering the plants.
“We call ourselves a welcoming community,” Miller said. “If that’s the direction that National Grid would want to go in, the village [should] support that.”
While there is a market to extract and sell hydrogen, it needs to be at an affordable price. Although the amount that hydrogen will play in creating a sustainable future is unknown, questions over local plants remain ongoing with the subsequent detrimental effects on the Port Jefferson and Northport tax bases.
Veterans for Peace Golden Rule sailing into Port Jeff Harbor
The Golden Rule, above, will enter Port Jefferson Harbor tomorrow, May 26, at 6 p.m. Photo courtesy Myrna Gordon
Veterans for Peace Golden Rule will be sailing into Port Jefferson Harbor on Friday, May 26, at approximately 6 p.m. and will be docked at Harborfront Park from May 26-28.
This historic small ship is currently on a journey along the Atlantic coast for educational conversations about peace, nuclear disarmament, clean water and collective consciousness for our environment.
In 1958, as atmospheric nuclear testing heightened the stakes in the arms race between the United States and the Soviet Union, the Golden Rule sailed toward the Marshall Islands aspiring to stop early atmospheric testing.
The Golden Rule was the first sailing vessel in American history to practice nonviolent activism on the high seas 65 years ago and was the forerunner for today’s better-known Greenpeace ships, as well as the template for every kayak, canoe and outboard motorboat that’s peacefully protested anything in the nearly seven decades since.
The Golden Rule helped ignite a worldwide movement to end nuclear testing and led to the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty signed by President John F. Kennedy [D] in October 1963, some five years after the initial action.
The boat has a significant connection to Long Island as its first crew included William Huntington, a Quaker from St. James. In homage to him, a true trailblazer, the Society of Friends, Conscience Bay Quakers Meeting will join members of the Setalcott Nation, the original stewards of our waterfront community, and many other peace and justice organizations in meeting the boat and welcoming its captain and crew.
North Country Peace Group with South Country Peace Group are the sponsors of this event with a special acknowledgment to the Conscience Bay Quakers. We hope everyone can join us.
Myrna Gordon
Port Jefferson
Words matter in immigration dialogue
One of the most beautiful elements of America is diversity. The immigrants who live in our communities contribute to our economy, our culture and our public life. We are a better nation for it.
We have seen a vilification of those seeking asylum at our southern border. This past Sunday, local, state, and federal Suffolk County Republicans held a press conference, announcing a plan to hire legal counsel to block asylum seekers from entering Suffolk County.
Though seeking asylum is legal, county Legislature Presiding Officer Kevin McCaffrey [R-Lindenhurst] said, “We don’t know who’s coming over.” In doing so, McCaffrey implies that asylum seekers are a danger to us.
U.S. Congressman Nick LaLota [R-NY1] differentiated between documented and undocumented immigrants. Both ignore a basic truth: Asylum seekers are fleeing their countries because of climate change, poverty and political violence. They are not seeking to do us harm. Our federal government must provide assistance and address these root causes in our foreign policy. That is the direction we must take, rather than demonizing and “othering” asylum seekers.
Today’s asylum seekers remind me of my paternal grandfather. As a teenager, he fled Odessa [now in Ukraine] after his father, a practicing rabbi, was murdered in Siberia. My grandfather didn’t consider paperwork — he fled to survive. My grandfather may have had a different religion and skin color than the migrants at the border, but their stories and their humanity are quite similar. As a Jew who has had branches of my family tree cut off by political violence, I know that “Never Again” applies to every one of us, including asylum seekers.
Words matter. When our politicians use xenophobic rhetoric like the county Republicans are, it makes all of us less safe. Will the base they have riled up distinguish between which of their neighbors are documented or undocumented? Did the teenager who murdered Marcelo Lucero in Patchogue in 2008 check his immigration status before ending his life? Rather than learning from our history, the county Republicans seem intent on repeating that harm, all in the name of firing up their base for the November elections.
We cannot accept this in Suffolk. We must seek solutions that bring us all together, rather than divide us up. We must expect more from our elected leaders. If they cannot deliver, we must vote them out and replace them with moral leaders who can.
Shoshana Hershkowitz
South Setauket
Concerns about proposedMaryhaven development
The 19 units in Canyon Creek, which were completed in 1999, are directly impacted by any activities on the former Maryhaven Center of Hope site on Myrtle Avenue.
All four Port Jefferson Village trustees have met with several of the Canyon Creek Home Owners Association members on-site, and we expressed to them our overall concerns about the proposed development of the site by Beechwood Homes.
Our biggest concern is the proposed nearly 200 units, on the 10-acre site, to be priced at approximately $1 million each, in buildings that would be allowed to be three stories in height, plus the requirement for two parking spaces per unit.
Canyon Creek is located on close to 10 acres and has 19 units. We would hope that the village Board of Trustees would change the zoning to include a requirement of an equal density in the adjoining property. Our quiet and peaceful neighborhood will be detrimentally impacted with the proposal now before the board.
The proposed development plan calls for preserving the old building on the former Maryhaven site, but Beechwood is seeking concessions from Port Jefferson Village to change the zoning code to allow for increased density of residences on the site. The consensus among the homeowners is that while there are positive considerations for preserving the historic building and converting it for residential and recreational use, as proposed by Beechwood, the allowance of an incentive of increased units and taller structures as a tradeoff is absolutely detrimental to the Canyon Creek community.
There are numerous serious adverse impacts on our community from such a development so close to our backyards: loss of privacy, noise, change in ambience of the surrounding area, increased traffic, water runoff into properties and many more.
We as a community are very concerned that there appears to be a rush to change the code to allow the development of a property that would be inconsistent with the surrounding area without submitting an environmental and traffic study for full public review and comment.
We recognize that the board’s only role is to alter the zoning code, and we hope that they will take into consideration how all of Port Jefferson will be impacted, as well as the devastating impact it will have on Canyon Creek.
Maybe it’s the mayor and school board that lack that vision and understanding. The community wants answers. Port Jefferson currently spends over $50,000 per student, well above other districts. Our enrollment is declining, with graduating classes projected to drop to near 60 students by 2031.
Taxes are already projected in the school district’s current financial plan to increase 34% by the 2027-28 school year. After the LIPA glide path expires in 2028, taxes would double if the plant is closed. Mayor Garant said “The norm is like another 10-year glide path to give you a chance to settle into another loss of revenue.” [“Powering down?” May 18, TBR News Media]. Really, another glide path — what norm?
Over 10 years, Shoreham saw its LIPA taxes — which represented 90% of its budget — drop 10% per year. There was no further assistance. If the mayor knows where Port Jeff would get yet another glide path, please let us know the source, and have their representatives confirm it. And will this white knight also provide additional benefits for Northport and Glenwood Landing, which are on similar glide paths to Port Jefferson?
As an alternative to hoping for a magical rescue, let’s plan appropriately and realistically, with every option considered before we are asked to commit to another long-term bond that would effectively remove several options from consideration. Let’s find out if other districts would be interested in a merger or tuitioning our students. Let’s have an impartial consultant analyze the numbers and determine what our taxes would be with LIPA gone if we continue alone, or with a merger or some combination.
Also, let’s discuss whether the opportunities for our projected 60-student per grade high school enrollment would be greater, and at less expense, in a merged or tuitioned district.
And will the mayor and school board please stop discounting the feasibility of a merger based on our current school tax rate being so much lower than neighboring districts. That projected rate is 190.11%, according to PJSD’s Summary of Estimated Revenues in the 2023-24 Draft Budget, an increase from 178.46%. Take out LIPA’s assessed value and by my calculations the rate jumps to 330.37% which is equal to or greater than surrounding districts.
Our vision and understanding needs answers.
Robert J. Nicols
Port Jefferson
The reality of closing local generating plants
Your editorial and lead article [TBR News Media, May 18] both address the Environmental Protection Agency’s proposed stringent limitations on power plants’ emission of greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide that cause the climate change we already see here.
The EPA’s proposal is consistent with the existing state Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act that mandates similar reductions in New York state of fossil fuel generation and its replacement with renewably generated electricity.
Both TBR pieces recognize that the Northport and the Port Jefferson plants cannot continue for too many more years to be powered by natural gas.
Your editorial correctly challenges local governments and school districts that have been subsidized by tens of millions of dollars annually that are indirectly paid by other Long Island residents through the taxes on these greatly overassessed properties to start “imagining a future in which those subsidies no longer exist.” These entities should certainly seek state aid to ease this transition, but that is not a long-term solution.
There could be other uses for these sites that are robustly connected to the grid, such as for landing power cables from offshore wind farms, or massive batteries to store electrical energy during times of low renewable generation.
Bruce Miller, former Port Jefferson Village trustee, suggested two possibilities for continued onsite electrical generation. One would be continuing to burn natural gas, while adding equipment to capture the resulting carbon dioxide. This possibility ignores the known substantial leakage of methane — a powerful greenhouse gas — at the well, and all the way to the generating plant. Such carbon dioxide removal equipment does not now exist at scale, and would be rather expensive.
He also suggests burning hydrogen to produce electricity when renewable generation cannot meet demand. Such “green” hydrogen would be produced during the summer from water using renewably generated electricity, stored in large quantities, transported here by pipelines that could not leak even small amounts of climate-changing hydrogen, and burned to produce electricity. The main combustion product would be harmless water. However, the oxides of nitrogen and other polluting combustion products would have to be removed before being released, adding to the cost of the electricity generated.
There are no certain answers to continued use of these sites for electrical purposes to replace lost tax revenues. Just the opposite is true: The higher the taxes on any new facilities, the more expensive will be their operation and less likely they would be built here.
Peter Gollon
Huntington
Editor’s note: The writer was a LIPA trustee from 2016-21.
EPA power plant standards are cost prohibitive
The EPA’s proposed rules for cutting emissions are so onerous that older generators, like Northport and Port Jefferson as well as hundreds around the country, will be shut down because the expense to upgrade would be prohibitive.
These power stations have operated since the 1960s with incredible reliability and cost-effectiveness. They have blessed Long Island and the communities that host them with tax income and life-sustaining, consistent energy. The developed world survives on this.
A main difference between our society and the third world is their lack of affordable, reliable energy. It is also a matter of survival. One can broil in the heat and freeze in the cold. One can starve for lack of food and water. One can die from inadequate health care facilities and resources.
Note well that these power plants have operated within EPA pollution regulations. Now the EPA is moving the goalposts. Companies, towns and cities that have relied on the energy for our civilization will be in mortal danger.
It is extremely difficult, costly and lengthy to site, plan, permit and build a new power station. The real estate is gone. The possibility of rebuilding an old power station to new standards, repowering, may not be cost-effective, especially if there are the preferential power purchase agreements that put wind and solar electricity ahead of fossil fuel generation.
Another consideration is China, Russia, India and the Global South in general are building fossil-fueled power plants, including coal, at a breathtaking rate — hundreds a year. Decarbonization of New York state and the U.S. power plant emissions will have no effect.
Furthermore, wind and solar power operate on average about 20% of the nameplate capacity of generation. Spinning reserves are mandatory. Battery backup, aside from the huge expense, child labor and devastation to the environment in obtaining rare earths, may work for a few hours. Where is that coming from if Northport, Port Jeff and other power stations are closed?
Planet Earth, throughout its billions of years, experienced much higher temperatures and CO2. In fact, the Holocene period, with the greatest explosion of flora and fauna in history, flourished with way higher temperatures and CO2. Life adapted and thrived. In fact, thousands of scientists confirm there is no CO2 crisis.
Buy some candles if this goes through.
Mark Sertoff
East Northport
Have you seen my wife?
If you live in the village of Port Jeff, I’m sure you have.
The kids and I, however … not so much. Since my wife, Kathianne Snaden, became village trustee in 2019 and deputy mayor in 2021, I sometimes think village residents get to see her more than we do.
When I get home from work, my first question to the kids is, “Where’s Mom?” Their answer in that typical teenage voice is usually, “At a meetinggggg… .”
It seems like my wife is always at a meeting. Board meetings, trustee work sessions, union negotiations, meetings with business owners, meetings with residents, meetings with Suffolk County Police Department brass, and on and on the list goes. When what she does as deputy mayor comes up in conversation and she explains all that she actually does here in the village most residents respond with some variation of “wow, I didn’t realize that you did so much.” All the nice flowers you see planted this week … Kathianne personally worked with the garden center and the parks department to make that happen and so much more.
Kathianne makes so many positive safety and quality-of-life improvements here in the village it would be difficult to list them all in under 400 words.
On top of all that, I think one of the things that really sets Kathianne apart is her willingness to meet with people, be approachable and be open to any inquiry from residents. On more than one occasion, Kathianne and I have been out in the village and she will post online where we are and anyone who wants to talk can come down and sit with us, whether we are at the Farmers Market, watching our kids play at Rocketship Park or even out to dinner. Kathianne makes herself available to everyone.
As a business owner, I recognize the drive and positive spirit my wife has to get anything done that she sets her mind to, and I’ve seen her do it. As a Port Jeff resident, I’m thankful for the great ideas, programs and initiatives she has brought to the village that benefit us all.
As a husband I’m so proud — she impresses me every day. And while it means I (and the kids) still won’t see her that much at home, I urge everyone to vote for Kathianne Snaden for mayor so she can continue to excel for us here in Port Jeff.
William Snaden
Port Jefferson
Sheprow will put residents first
It’s time for a change of direction in Port Jefferson. That’s why I’m proud to endorse my long-time friend, Lauren Sheprow, for mayor.
I’ve known Lauren since our days at Scraggy Hill Elementary. She’s always been bright, dedicated, focused and, most importantly, a great friend. As a single mom, she raised three wonderful children while pursuing a career that ultimately led to her becoming chief media relations officer at Stony Brook University.
I know running for mayor wasn’t in Lauren’s plan. But when she became a village trustee, she saw major decisions being made without any input from residents. So she did what Lauren always does — started asking the tough questions. The concerns she raised, however, even when they identified a potential conflict of interest or a question of ethics, were frequently met with denial or simply ignored. That’s part of the reason she decided to run.
With deep roots in Port Jeff, Lauren has a vision that’s focused on putting residents first. She wants to bring best business practices back, increase transparency and put an end to closed-door decision-making. Lauren is a communications professional and as mayor will work to improve our relationships with the business community — as well as our town, county and state governments — to ensure we’re making the most of all our resources.
She’ll also put an end to wasteful spending. On day one, Lauren will seek board consensus to enlist the expertise of a forensic accountant and an administrative consultant to help bring fiscal responsibility and operational excellence to Port Jefferson.
If, like me, you’re ready for new leadership and a fresh start for the village, I urge you to vote for Lauren Sheprow as our next mayor.
April Quiggle
Port Jefferson
Exploiting bail reformis not a solution
In response to my letter on bail reform [“Eliminating bail reduces recidivism,” TBR News Media, May 4], Jim Soviero takes exception to my use of the term “crocodile tears” [“Local crime exposes bail reform dangers,” May 18] to describe his professed concern for “minorities” that “tragically . . . continue to suffer disproportionately from violent crime.”
This was not an attack on his person or behavior, or an attempt to question the sincerity of his political beliefs. My point was that it seems a trifle presumptuous for Soviero, who is white, to proffer ending bail reform as a cure for the suffering of “minorities” when they themselves overwhelmingly disagree.
The larger point is that exploiting bail reform to excite fear and division for political gain is the worst possible way to actually address the underlying issues behind violent crime. Bail reform isn’t something that was just dreamed up by “leftist think tanks” as Soviero puts it. It was to address a very real problem he ignores, namely, the inequity of a system that condemns people who have not been convicted to days, weeks or even months in jails such as Rikers Island, for, in effect, the crime of being poor. As I noted in my May 4 letter, it is overwhelmingly supported in the minority community. If it’s so harmful to them there’s a very simple remedy— they can vote out their representatives who support it.
Soviero scoffs at the data presented by the John Jay College of Criminal Justice study I cited, surrounding the word “data” with scare quotes. Naturally, since the data doesn’t support his contention that bail reform is terrible, he would much rather rely on anecdotal evidence that seems to. And for every horror story he could cite where someone was harmed by a person arraigned and released without bail, I could cite a horror story of someone who committed suicide or whose life was damaged beyond repair by being held in jail for days or weeks without being convicted. The point is, this is no way to formulate criminal justice policy. If we don’t use data, what do we use? Who can cite the most sensationalized anecdotes?
New York City Mayor Eric Adams [D], whom Soviero approvingly cited in his original letter denouncing bail reform, recently termed fixing it a “bumper sticker slogan.” Adams is right. Instead of politicians weaponizing this issue for political gain what we need is reasoned discussion of underlying issues. The problems with the criminal justice system are much deeper and more entrenched beyond the obsession with this one issue.
David Friedman
St. James
Editor’s note: This correspondence on bail reform is now closed.
Ryan Nolin and Andrew Boza in a scene from 'Something Rotten!' Photo by Ana McCasland/Theatre Three Productions, Inc.
Jim Sluder and Ruan Nolin in a scene from 'Something Rotten!' Photo by Ana McCasland/Theatre Three Productions, Inc.
Jae Hughes and Company in a scene from 'Something Rotten!' Photo by Ana McCasland/Theatre Three Productions, Inc.
Andrew Boza and Ryan Nolin in a scene from 'Something Rotten!' Photo by Ana McCasland/Theatre Three Productions, Inc.
Ryan Nolin and Dennis Settudacati and Company in a scene from 'Something Rotten!' Photo by Ana McCasland/Theatre Three Productions, Inc.
Evan Teich as Shakespeare in a scene from 'Something Rotten!' Photo by Ana McCasland/Theatre Three Productions, Inc.
Dennis Setteducati and Ryan Nolin in a scene from 'Something Rotten!' Photo by Ana McCasland/Theatre Three Productions, Inc.
Andrew Boza and Danielle Pafundi in a scene from 'Something Rotten!' Photo by Ana McCasland/Theatre Three Productions, Inc.
Andrew Boza and Ryan Nolin in a scene from 'Something Rotten!' Photo by Ana McCasland/Theatre Three Productions, Inc.
Evan Teich and Company in a scene from 'Something Rotten!' Photo by Ana McCasland/Theatre Three Productions, Inc.
Andrew Boza and Ryan Nolin in a scene from 'Something Rotten!' Photo by Ana McCasland/Theatre Three Productions, Inc.
The cast of 'Something Rotten!' Photo by Ana McCasland/Theatre Three Productions, Inc.
By Rita J. Egan
It was Theatre Three’s opening night of Something Rotten! on Saturday, May 20, and the audience was treated to an entertaining and energetic night full of laughter.
With book by John O’Farrell and Karey Kirkpatrick and music and lyrics by Karey and Wayne Kirkpatrick, Something Rotten! takes audience members back in time to the late 16th century where William Shakespeare is so adored that he’s treated like a modern-day rock star. Struggling writers Nick and Nigel Bottom, who head up a theater troupe, dream of the same success but can’t seem to create a play that will capture people’s attention until Nick consults with a soothsayer named Nostradamus.
The soothsayer looks into the future and finds that something called a musical will be popular one day. A later encounter finds Nick asking Nostradamus what Shakespeare’s future successes will be so that the Bottom brothers can use the ideas in the present. The result is Nick creating Omelette: The Musical despite his brother’s objections.
The Broadway musical opened on the Great White Way in 2015 and ran until early 2017. The production was nominated for 10 Tony Awards, including Best Musical, and Christian Borle won the Best Featured Actor in a Musical award for his portrayal of William Shakespeare.
Theatre Three’s Something Rotten! proves that there are no small parts as well as the importance of talented actors in each role, including the ensemble. Throughout the musical, it was apparent that everyone involved was giving it their all, creating a night of sensational entertainment. Director Jeffrey Sanzel has chosen a talented cast and masterfully directs the more than two dozen actors.
The production is filled with a few upbeat tunes, but the showstopping number is “A Musical.” Featured in Act I, the whole cast appears on stage singing and dancing. The number cleverly pokes fun at musicals and includes nods to Les Miserables, Annie, A Chorus Line and more. At the end of the song, the applause on opening night seemed to go on for more than a minute, and rightfully so, as each and every person involved in Something Rotten! deserved the accolades.
Heading up the cast is Ryan Nolin, a convincing Nick Bottom at the end of his rope trying to provide for his family and create a hit. He and Dennis Setteducati, who plays Nostradamus, sound fantastic on their leads during “A Musical” and play up the clever lines to the hilt.
Andrew Boza, as the naive Nigel Bottom, captures the sweetness of the young poet and writer. He and Danielle Pafundi, delightful as Portia, are the perfect match to play star-crossed lovers, especially during the song “I Love the Way.”
Christine Boehm as Nick’s wife, Bea, is a treat to watch as the character has her mind set on proving, even with mishaps, that a woman is more than capable of doing whatever a man does. Her rendition of “Right Hand Man” is also a highlight of the show.
Evan Teich, as Shakespeare, captures the cockiness of the celebrated star while still delivering the right amount of silliness. Jim Sluder as Brother Jeremiah and Angelo DiBiase as Shylock seamlessly add to the jokes and hijinks.
Choreographers Sari Feldman and Josie McSwane have created high-energy dances. The cast members look like they are having so much fun that audience members may want to join them onstage. The use of tap dancing and a kickline in “A Musical,” as well as a few other numbers, is absolutely delightful.
Theatre Three’s orchestra led by Jeffrey Hoffman sounded fantastic as always, and the costumes by Chakira Doherty perfectly captured the time period.
During the song “A Musical,” the line “What could be more amazing than a musical with song and dance and sweet romance,” is sung. The cast and crew of Theatre Three’s Something Rotten! understand this and embrace every aspect of this genre. Audience members on opening night enjoyed a fun evening out on the town, and the standing ovation at the end of the production was well deserved.
Theatre Three, 412 Main St., Port Jefferson presents Something Rotten! through June 24. Tickets are $35, $28 seniors and students, $20 children ages 5 to 12. For tickets or more information, call 631-928-9100 or visit www.theatrethree.com.
Immigration advocates during a May 23 press conference at the William H. Rogers Legislature Building in Hauppauge. Photo by Raymond Janis
A nationwide debate over immigration, coupled with the end of Title 42, is sending shockwaves through Suffolk County.
Title 42, a COVID-19 pandemic-era federal immigration policy that expired earlier this month, enabled U.S. Border Control agents to swiftly expel asylum seekers on public health grounds. The end of the procedure has led to a spike in new migrants entering the country, with many directed toward New York City and, possibly, Long Island.
Gov. Kathy Hochul (D) has identified three SUNY campuses, including Stony Brook University, for migrant housing, Spectrum News NY1 reported on Tuesday.
NYC received more than 900 migrants daily over several days, Mayor Eric Adams (D) told CBS News “Face the Nation,” Sunday, May 21. It is an influx, the mayor suggested, that has overburdened the city’s budget and facilities. Adams called upon Hochul and counties throughout the state to assist his city, referring to the requested relief as a statewide “decompression strategy.”
“New York City is the economic engine of the state and the country,” he said. “We believe the entire state should participate in a decompression strategy, and it’s unfortunate that there have been some lawmakers and counties that are not carrying on their role of ensuring that this is a decompression strategy throughout the state.”
Tensions swelled on the same Sunday morning during a press conference at the William H. Rogers Legislature Building where immigration advocates clashed with Republican lawmakers.
Suffolk County Legislature Presiding Officer Kevin McCaffrey, at podium, with Republican officials during a press conference at the William H. Rogers Legislature Building on Sunday, May 21. Photo by Raymond Janis
Suffolk County Legislature Presiding Officer Kevin McCaffrey (R-Lindenhurst), standing alongside U.S. Congressman Nick LaLota (R-NY1) and Republicans from across levels of government, criticized the city’s policies, affirming that Suffolk County is not open to new asylum seekers.
“New York City made a conscious decision to call itself a sanctuary city. Suffolk County did not,” McCaffrey said.
U.S. Congressman Nick LaLota during the May 21 press conference. Photo by Raymond Janis
He added, “The residents of Suffolk County have already dealt with the financial costs of the pandemic and the historic inflation because of the failed policies of the state and federal government. We cannot stand by and allow the residents of Suffolk County to further burden the failed policies of the Biden, Hochul and Adams [Democratic] administrations in dealing with this crisis.”
McCaffrey stated the federal government’s vetting process is inadequate, so “we do not know who’s being sent into this county,” noting the potential strain upon law enforcement is still undetermined.
He described the expected cost of food, shelter and related medical and school expenses as “daunting,” saying that financial assistance from the federal and state governments would be “a mere drop in the bucket compared to what it would actually cost” to accommodate these requests.
“We cannot allow the federal [government] and state to pass on these costs to the residents of Suffolk County,” McCaffrey added.
LaLota criticized New York City’s sanctuary city designation, tying the influx of asylum seekers to unresolved issues at the U.S.-Mexico border.
“We here in Suffolk County are 2,000 miles from the southern border, but we are to become a border county because of the Biden administration’s failed border policies and the sanctuary city policies of New York City,” the congressman said.
Protesters storm a press conference at the William H. Rogers Legislature Building in Hauppauge on Sunday, May 21. Photo by Raymond Janis
Throughout the Sunday morning press conference, the speakers heard steady chants from the gallery opposing their efforts. “No hate. No fear. Immigrants are welcome here,” the protesters cried in unison.
Two days later, at the same county complex in Hauppauge, the immigration advocates held their own press conference Tuesday morning.
“For far too long, Suffolk Republicans have denied Long Island families — particularly those seeking asylum — the freedom to thrive,” said Elmer Flores, advisory board member of the Long Island Immigration Clinic. “People seeking asylum are individuals, children and families that deserve to live in peace and live free from danger, which is why exercising their human and legal right to seek safety in the U.S. should be protected.”
Minerva Perez, executive director at OLA [Organización Latino Americana] of Eastern Long Island, during a May 23 press conference in Hauppauge. Photo by Raymond JanisMinerva Perez, executive director at OLA [Organización Latino Americana] of Eastern Long Island, suggested the vetting process for asylum seekers is adequate, noting the possible regional economic benefits of expanding the workforce.
“Asylum seekers can work — they are given work permits,” Perez said. “If anyone’s noticed, there’s also a labor shortage in Suffolk County. Do the math.”
Ivan Larios, manager of organizing and strategy for the Long Island branch of the New York Immigration Coalition, appealed for the acceptance of new asylum requests on humanitarian grounds, noting the harsh conditions from which many are fleeing.
“Immigrants are already a part of our community and make Long Island richer and better because of their economic, social and cultural contributions,” he said. “People seeking asylum are individuals, children and families fleeing danger and persecution in exercising their human right, a legal right to seek safety in the United States.”
Despite these appeals, the county Legislature introduced a procedural motion on May 23 to appoint a special counsel “to pursue any and all legal options available to protect the unfunded location of any asylum seekers in Suffolk County,” McCaffrey said.
A vote on the motion is expected during the Legislature’s June 6 meeting.
While for now, the pandemic is officially in the rearview mirror, according to the World Health Organization, it’s worth considering what we can and can’t blame on COVID-19. For starters, here are a few things that aren’t the fault of the pandemic.
— A favorite sports team’s defeat. Every team had to deal with COVID-19. The pandemic didn’t affect my team’s best athletes any more than any other team’s stars.
— The weather. It’s going to rain, and it’s going to be too hot and too cold. That happened before the pandemic, and it’s going to happen afterward. Global warming, if anything, might have slowed slightly as more people stayed home each day.
— Unrequited love. Authors throughout history have found this topic particularly appealing. A would-be romantic goes out into the world with a proverbial heart filled with affection and admiration. Cupid hits that person with an arrow, creating a wellspring of dedication and devotion toward someone who doesn’t return the favor. The pandemic might have made it harder to know where we stood with each other, but unrequited love will continue to cause problems and lead to sad-but-relatable romantic comedies.
— Bad grades. We all have moments when we don’t study enough, the right way, or even the right material. The pandemic might have made it harder to focus or to care about theorems or memorizing dates, but it’s not the fault of the virus. It might have been tougher to concentrate in those early days, with dogs barking, parents yelling into Zoom calls, and people dropping off food at our front door.
— Anger in Washington. This is one of the easiest to dispel. Did you pay any attention to the vitriol coming out of the nation’s capital before 2019? It’s not as if the parties suddenly decided fighting each other was more valuable than getting anything done or compromising. The words under the Washington DC license plate shouldn’t read “taxation without representation,” which refers to the fact that residents pay taxes but don’t have federal representation. Instead, it should read: “Grrrrrrrrrrr!”
— Biased journalism. As a member of the media, I understand the frustration with the written and spoken words on TV and in print. The left hates Trump; the right hates Biden and ne’er the ‘twain shall meet. The pandemic didn’t pour gasoline on that dumpster fire. Media organizations staked out their territory prior to the pandemic and have remained more faithful to their talking points than many people do to their own marriage vows.
Okay, now, what about the things we can blame on the pandemic.
— Mental health strain. While the pandemic may be gone, we haven’t wrapped our arms around the mental health impact. We spent way too much time on our phones, making us feel simultaneously connected and disconnected while the pool of frustration continues to get deeper.
— Educational gaps. Students will never get back those days and the lessons they missed during the pandemic. Classes condensed their syllabi, lowering requirements and expectations for each class and for graduation. Students of all ages missed lessons and assignments that might have inspired them and that would have helped them reach previous educational requirements.
— Social graces. A first-grade teacher recently told me that their school still can’t bring all the first-grade classes together. When they do, the students argue about resources and space. Prior to the pandemic, students from several classes could easily play together. Hopefully, that will change as the students age and fill in gaps in their ability to interact.
Even as we hope to move past the pandemic, we can’t ignore the difficult reality, forcing parents, teachers, children and members of society to relearn lessons about acting and interacting. No, we can’t take cues from Washington, but maybe we can overcome deficiencies exacerbated by the pandemic.
This past weekend was both fabulous and exhausting. We drove nine hours down to Virginia to celebrate with my granddaughter as she graduated from college, and with my son and daughter-in-law, her parents, who helped make it happen. Both sides of the family were represented, and we were all in, cheering, laughing, eating, strolling and talking, talking, talking for two days straight, not counting our travel days.
We were certainly not alone enjoying this milestone. I never saw so much traffic on the roads between here and Virginia, both going and coming, and we theorized it was all those families and all those graduates driving the highways on this college graduation weekend in May.
The joy of a graduation from college spans generations. Those who seemed to feel the accomplishment most, perhaps, were the families of first-generation graduates, whose members would often boast to anyone listening, “She’s the first to graduate.” We all cheered, clapped, and if we could, whistled during those 30 seconds when our loved one crossed the stage, was handed the diploma, smiled for the camera, then returned to his or her seat.
Predictably, we heard lots of speeches. Those who received honorary doctorates, the president of the college, the chancellor, the student representative, the keynote speaker, all addressed the graduating class and their guests with words of wisdom that, as I recall from my graduation, were promptly ignored. For us then, the tone, however, was hopeful and positive.
This time, though, there were two differences that I heard. The first was a recognition that the world for these young people had changed, both physically and societally. The country was sadly divided, and climate change was altering the globe. People were not listening to each other. That they might enjoy better lives than their parents because their future was bright was never mentioned.
These graduates had their lives and their studies interrupted by the pandemic and were captive of their computers for part of theirlearning. The message was that they had lost out in their four years, lost the easy camaraderie of uninterrupted campus life and the person-to-person contact with their classmates and professors. There was some reference to overcoming challenges and resilience, but on the whole, there was none of the usual comments as to how this next generation was going to make the world a better place. It seemed the goal was just to cope.
The other difference from the educators was, to me, defensive. Stressed was the need and importance of education. Of course, they were preaching to the choir. But still, the comment rang out, “When you have forgotten all [the facts] that you have learned, what you will have left is education.” More than once, the reference was to having learned how to think analytically as being the major benefit of their college years.
I did get a kick out of one dean, who referred in her talk to the various world events that had occurred during the past four years. We listened attentively because we all experienced them. And when she was concluding, she confessed that almost the whole speech had been written by ChatGPT. We laughed but not without a tinge of concern for future college students.
As always, at graduations, it is a happy and also a sad time for the graduates. There is a lot of “goodbye.” They are leaving behind those they had come to know and places that had become as familiar to them as their dorm rooms: where they shopped for food, where they retreated to study, where they played volleyball, where they enjoyed their “midnight snacks” that were probably well beyond midnight.
Our granddaughter keenly felt the yin and yang of moving on. She tried to spend time with us even as she was drawn to the gatherings and parties on campus of her friends and roommates. I wanted to tell her that this time was a beginning, more than an end, and that she would be taking the best with her into the next chapter.
But I didn’t. She had already heard enough speeches.
Port Jefferson Village trustee Stan Loucks on his bid for reelection. Sketch by Kyle Horne: @kylehorneart • kylehorneart.com
If reelected, what would be your top priority during the coming term?
I want to go forward successfully with a plan to capture water — not only to give us more water at the golf course but to protect the environment.
The water now that’s running rampant, a lot of it is dumping right into the Long Island Sound. We have a large spillway that goes right alongside our golf course. All that water we’re going to try to collect, putting it in ponds on the golf course.
The water we collect will be purified before we put it on the golf course. We’re going to have a system to sanitize the water.
The one pond we have now is filled with turtles, fish and wildlife. I’d like nothing better than to see more water on our golf course.
How do you intend to help guide ongoing bluff stabilization efforts at East Beach and maximize the potential of the village-owned Port Jefferson Country Club?
The lower wall is basically complete. The bluff itself — except directly underneath the clubhouse — has been stabilized.
It’s all been raked out, leveled out and covered with a heavy-duty burlap. And both the east and west portions of the bluff project are fairly complete. Now we’re waiting for [the Federal Emergency Management Administration] to come through with the money to begin phase II of the bluff project — an upper wall.
Our goal at this point in time is to save that structure, our clubhouse up there now. Prior to FEMA, maybe my thoughts would be different. But that [$3.75] million we’re getting from FEMA is a game changer for the taxpayers and the village.
What is the proper role of the Board of Trustees in overseeing new developments and redevelopment of village parcels?
We’re running out of space for further development, barring, for example, uptown. Many developers have come in there and bought out a lot of the businesses.
Beyond the master plan, a lot of that development came in as a way to replace revenue lost from [the Long Island Power Authority glide path settlement]. Unfortunately, the Town of Brookhaven controls the [Industrial Development Agency] tax situation.
When those developers come in and get a tax break, that’s not on us. That’s very unfortunate because, in the first two or three years, they pay a very small percentage of what they should be paying.
The village has probably reached its max in development. Maryhaven is kind of a foggy area for me right now. I was not involved in any of the discussions leading up to the [May 1] public hearing. I think some of the board members were a little surprised.
I have some great ideas, but I’m not so sure that, moneywise, the village can afford my great ideas. We have some major [flooding] problems with the fire department, Village Hall and all of Theatre Three. The village is built in a bowl, and as we keep developing more buildings and more blacktops, water has nowhere to go. Things are going to deteriorate and get worse downtown.
If I had a magic wand, Maryhaven would be a village possession. Village Hall, the parks department, the fire department — everything can go on that property. But I don’t think that’s going to happen. I definitely would not want and would not vote for any kind of apartment complex to go in there — we have enough of that.
Would I like to see more homes in the village and more green space? Absolutely. But I think we’ve reached the point of density that we want to be at in terms of building in the village.
How can the village alleviate its parking capacity challenges while balancing the competing parking interests of residents, businesses and tourists?
The only solution I see is a parking facility — a parking garage.
It would not be a subsurface parking garage because of the water table in Port Jefferson. Where I would put it, I don’t know, but that’s the only solution I can see — a two-story, maybe three-story parking garage somewhere in the village.
We do have some vacant land that the village owns. It’s the location, the acceptance or rejection of that location and the concept. Some people don’t like parking garages, but I can’t see a solution beyond that.
Would you support resurrecting the parking committee?
I think a parking committee should be in place. The more people you can get ideas from, the better off you are.
What is your preferred method for engaging the public?
It’s about time that we’ve got a [civic] organization that’s going to take an interest in what’s going on in our village.
I have spent eight years as a trustee, and it was always amazing to me — I’d go to a board meeting and see eight people sitting in the audience. Yet you have all these major problems — parking, flooding, code enforcement.
I come from a small village upstate where their civic association was half the village’s population. It’s a valuable organization — to get information from the people who live there.
I was very pleased the other night with that whole scenario [during the May 1 public hearing]. People were sincere, they were civil and they gave a lot of good feedback. I hope the [Port Jefferson] Civic Association stays active, and I hope they stay in the direction that they’re going in.
When they talk about zoning, I don’t think that’s negative. That’s a sincere concern. The board can listen to the public more, and it’d be nice if even the Planning Board exposed themselves more to the public. I like hearing from the public, and I think that’s important.
What is your professional background, and how does it apply to the duties of a trustee?
My professional background is in education. A graduate of [SUNY] Cortland, I started as a phys ed teacher. At that time, I immediately started my education at Hofstra University, receiving a master’s degree in secondary school administration, then continued my education and got a master’s degree in districtwide administration.
I moved from a physical education teacher to the local athletic director. Throughout my career, I coached girls tennis, boys golf, boys basketball and varsity football. After 34 years in Plainview, I retired in 1995.
One year after the village purchased the [Port Jefferson] Country Club, I got involved in tennis, belonging to the tennis membership up at the country club. I got involved on the tennis board and became chairman, then moved over to the golf side when it became reasonably priced. I got involved with the board of governors, became president and was later appointed to the [Country Club Management Advisory Committee].
In 2013, [Mayor] Margot [Garant] asked me to run for trustee. At that point in time, I was not interested. In 2015, I did relent and ran for trustee and was elected. I was elected again in 2017, 2019 and 2021, and I’m running again now.
I am involved in the recreation and parks in the village. And, of course, the country club is my main goal. Right now, we have a lot of projects going on up there.
My entire career, my goal has been to work for people and work with students of all ages and backgrounds. My main interest right now is to continue working in pretty much the same direction I have been going in. I’m interested in serving the public, continuing what I did for 34 years [in education].
Note to our readers
We intend to interview each of the declared candidates for village office, starting with those running for trustee, then mayor. In keeping with past practice, we first interview incumbents seeking reelection, followed by nonincumbents, selected alphabetically.
Prev
