[14:07] Test, test, test one, two.

[30:05] I am going to call the meeting to order and ask legislator to rigidly wait and to lead us in the Pledge of Allegiance.

[30:11] Please rise, everyone.

[30:34] Thank you very much.

[30:35] Mike, could you call the roll, please?

[30:38] Thank you, Presiding Officer. Roll call.

[30:43] Deputy Presiding Officer, Howard Coppell.

[30:46] Here.

[30:47] Thank you, alternate Deputy Presiding Officer, Denise Ford.

[30:52] Legislator C. Lafinoe.

[30:57] Legislator Carrier-Salage.

[31:00] Here.

[31:01] Thank you. Legislator Debra Muley. Legislator C. William Gaylord III. Legislator John Gervray.

[31:11] Here.

[31:12] Legislator Masi Palit.

[31:15] Here.

[31:16] Legislator Dillya Derigy-Witton. Legislator James Kennedy.

[31:25] Legislative Thomas McKevitt. Legislative Laura Schaefer. Legislative John Ferretti. Legislative

[31:35] Arnold Drucker. Legislative Rose Marie Walker. Legislative Joshua Lafazanne. Here. Thank

[31:44] you. Legislative Stephen Rhodes. Minority Leader Kavanaugh Abraham's. Uh, presiding

[31:52] officer Richard Nicolello. We have a quorum, sir.

[31:56] Okay, thank you very much. As is custom, our first order of business is going to be presentations

[32:03] to the top cops. If the public comment will follow the presentations to top cops, if you

[32:09] intend to make a comment, please submit a slip to the clerk's office at the table

[32:16] in the front and you'll be called when we do call the public comment portion to

[32:20] So to start things off with the top-cap presentations, I'd like to invite the PBA President Tom Shevill.

[32:43] Good

[32:49] afternoon everybody. Thank you for having us. I hope everybody's having a great day.

[32:55] On March 11, 2022, at approximately 3 p.m.,

[33:00] Police officer Ryan Patterson of the first precinct was driving off duty on Hicksville

[33:06] Road in Massapequa when he observed a two-car auto accident.

[33:10] One of the vehicles, a white Ford sedan, immediately ignited and within moments the

[33:16] front end was engulfed in fire.

[33:20] Officer Patterson stopped to render assistance.

[33:24] Upon approaching the burning vehicle, he observed that the driver was still inside.

[33:29] Officer Patterson, with complete disregard for his own personal safety and well-being,

[33:35] gained entry to the front driver's side door where the occupant was located.

[33:41] He then engaged the occupant, who was conscious but disoriented.

[33:46] It quickly became apparent that the driver was not able to get out of the vehicle on his own.

[33:51] At this time, the fire that had engulfed the front was now spreading to the cabin.

[33:57] Officer Patterson knew he had seconds to act before the fire consumed the interior of the vehicle with the driver inside.

[34:06] After multiple attempts, he was able to pull the driver from the vehicle and to safety.

[34:13] The driver was treated at the scene by Nassau County police medics and transported to NUMC for further medical treatment.

[34:22] For his courage, swift action and dedication to serving others, the PBA is proud to honor

[34:30] Ryan Patterson, legislative top cop for April 2022.

[34:42] Before Ryan speaks, I just wanted to point out the fact that this shows everybody that

[34:48] we are police officers 24-7.

[34:52] Ryan is off duty and pulls over to help another citizen, the community member. He risks his

[35:00] own life, even when he's not getting paid. That's what we're all about. We are police officers

[35:06] and we risk our lives every day on duty and off duty for all of you, our community and our

[35:13] neighbors. Thank you.

[35:20] My family and I would just like to thank you for this prestigious

[35:22] award for recognizing my actions as well as all my fellow brothers and sisters on

[35:26] the job. Thank you.

[35:35] Officer to Walker.

[35:40] Officer Patterson, I just want to thank you

[35:42] and congratulate you on doing this and saving one of our residents when like

[35:50] you said it was said that you were off-duty and you saw an emergency

[35:53] situation and that is just what's in your mind. You're a police officer 24

[35:58] hours a day and you know we want to say that that other residents might

[36:02] stop and help too might not be a police officer but for you this is just part of what you do

[36:07] day in and day out 365 days a year 24 hours a day so and I look at you and to me you're a young

[36:15] a very young officer and and I think to to have that that strength and to have that that

[36:23] knowledge of what you should do all the time it's there in your heart and that's what you're

[36:28] to do. So I thank you so much for saying you saved this man's life and you you know

[36:33] sometimes we put things we say oh no you know I was there I did this I could I

[36:37] could get him out but literally if you did not do that within minutes that car

[36:41] was totally engulfed and you know if if he was able to to still get out of that

[36:47] car the disaster that would have been to that to that man so thank you so

[36:52] much for doing this for saving this man's life and we have a citation

[36:57] here for you, signed by all of us on the legislature. And again, thank you to all our officers because

[37:02] I know that that's what you are. Officers 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. God bless

[37:08] you all.

[37:15] I just wanted to mention that he is the proud son of our recently retired First Vice President

[37:21] of the PBA, Peter Patterson.

[37:24] I

[37:31] just wanted to add one thing. I think most of us are fearful of fire. And in

[37:38] in particular that situation where it's encroaching on you, coming towards you.

[37:43] And the fact that you had the courage to insert yourself and to continue to do what you had to do

[37:49] to get him out as the fire came closer and closer is truly astonishing.

[37:53] So, it's just a wonderful job.

[37:55] And Pete, you've got to be very proud of your son there.

[37:59] So congratulations guys.

[38:00] So what we'll do is we'll do the presentation for the DIA and SOA next

[38:03] and then we'll call you up for the citation.

[38:05] Thank you.

[38:06] All right, thanks.

[38:10] Superior Officers Association, President Rick Facetti.

[38:33] Good afternoon.

[38:35] I am Ricky Facetti, President of the National County Police

[38:37] Department and Superior Officers Association.

[38:40] Resorting Officer Nicolallo, legislators,

[38:43] thank you for taking the time to honor our top cops today.

[38:47] I have to say it's a real fitting day

[38:49] to follow the PBA and President Shevlin

[38:52] because our incident also involves an off-duty incident.

[38:56] So, as you realize, the SOA does not present every month as we are supervisors, and our

[39:03] job is to do just that supervise.

[39:06] But this month is extraordinary.

[39:09] We are here to honor Sergeant Jimmy Lee, a 28-year veteran of the NYPD and National

[39:17] County Police Department.

[39:18] On March 23rd, at approximately 2.30 in the afternoon, Sergeant Lee was off duty, walking

[39:27] on the boardwalk in Rockaway Beach, Queens.

[39:30] Sergeant Lee observed a subject firing a gun towards the beach.

[39:35] Sergeant Lee then immediately called 9-1-1, giving a detailed description of the subject

[39:41] and what the subject was wearing and his location, while continuing to follow the

[39:46] subject at a safe distance. And while all the while keeping 911 operator updated on the

[39:54] continuous location of the subject. The subject continued to fire numerous times toward the

[40:00] beach. Unfortunately, the police cars passed by and responded to the wrong location. At

[40:08] one point, the 911 operator tells Sergeant Lee that she's going to hang up. And Sergeant

[40:13] Sergeant Lee tells him orders are not to hang up and

[40:20] stay in the line with him.

[40:23] Sergeant Lee then directs the operator to have the police cars respond to specific locations

[40:29] past us so they could surround the subject and trap him in.

[40:34] At this point, Sergeant Lee now observes a pedestrian walking on the beach as well as

[40:39] one riding a bike on the boardwalk.

[40:43] and the Sergeant Lee then observes the subject firing again.

[40:46] It is then Sergeant Lee realizes that the civilians are in danger

[40:51] and makes the decision to put himself between the civilians and the subject.

[40:56] He then decides he has to take action to make sure these civilians are safe.

[41:04] Sergeant Lee, with his shield out and his gun drawn,

[41:09] yells, please don't move just as we are trained to do.

[41:13] The subject then comes towards Sergeant Lee in an aggressive manner.

[41:18] Sergeant Lee then, with one hand, takes the subject and puts him against the boardwalk railing, trying to control the subject.

[41:27] While all the while knowing that the subject has a gun,

[41:32] the subject at one point places his right hand in his pocket,

[41:37] and Sergeant Lee was certain that's where the gun was.

[41:42] The subject then pulls out the gun, and thank God decides to toss it away.

[41:49] The struggle continues, and the subject then breaks free, and a few moments later, the NYPD shows up.

[41:57] And after a brief foot pursuit, they place the subject in custody.

[42:02] And while that's happening, Sergeant Lee picks up the telephone that he was on

[42:07] and tells a normal one operator to make sure that the officers know that the gun was thrown

[42:14] away, that there could be no accidental shooting. To have the mindset to do that just is unbelievable.

[42:23] This whole incident lasted about seven minutes. One minute is an eternity. Seven minutes.

[42:32] I can't imagine what seven minutes is like when you're fighting with somebody struggling

[42:37] with someone that has a gun.

[42:40] I want to commend Sergeant Lee for his brave actions while off

[42:43] duty and his unbelievable restraint. When I spoke to Sergeant Lee numerous times, I asked

[42:49] him, how did he restrain from shooting? I've been a police officer a long time. There's

[42:55] no doubt in my mind, I probably would have fired my weapon. Unfortunately, in today's

[43:00] day and times, Sergeant Lee's comments to me, but he didn't want to be Monday morning

[43:07] quarterback or second guess, Sergeant Lee was in all the rights to shoot this subject

[43:14] when he pulled out that gun. And he didn't. And I still cannot believe that he was able

[43:19] to do that. One split second, and things could have turned out very different.

[43:27] A half

[43:28] of it, not even a tenth of a second, this subject could have shot Sergeant Lee,

[43:37] and

[43:38] It is unbelievable how he did this, and in my mind, it's mind boggling.

[43:45] I would just like to note that Sergeant Lee was injured during this struggle, but is back

[43:49] to work full duty, and Sergeant Lee is also a first responder that spent many days and

[43:56] hours at the ground's arrow.

[43:59] Thank you very much for taking the time.

[44:12] First, I'd like to say thank you.

[44:14] Thank you for this prestigious honor for myself and the President of my family.

[44:20] Thank you to the members of the legislature for presenting me with this honor.

[44:27] I also want to say thank you to God that things worked out the way they did.

[44:32] Thank you again to the SLA, the police commissioner, and thank you again.

[44:38] Okay.

[44:45] Legislative Ford, then Legislative Salash.

[44:49] Good afternoon, President Fosetti.

[44:52] You said it best.

[44:54] You know, it is a very sobering moment and thought about what you went through that.

[45:00] The fact that you were able to size up a situation with somebody with a gun and to be able to follow

[45:09] yourself through with a phone call to 911 to be able to get the police to come back all the

[45:15] while just keeping your eye on this person and then to make that split-second decision

[45:20] when you saw pedestrians or other, you know, private citizens coming your way and to make

[45:27] that choice, that you're going to put yourself in harm's way to protect them. And it just

[45:33] is really, there are no words to say. I mean, you truly, truly are a hero. Somebody who

[45:42] has lived by, I guess, this mantra that you knew as a police officer what your duty

[45:46] would be. So you are like basically that ultimate type of guy, I guess, that you

[45:53] really, you know, you just underscore the professionalism, the dedication, and just so many wonderful

[46:00] attributes and qualities that a police officer actually has. So I thank you very much for

[46:05] what you did and how you helped save people from, you know, maybe even themselves losing

[46:13] it. I can't even, I'm just so emotional because I could just only imagine. And you're

[46:19] Right, you know, I remember one time sitting in something and waiting 30 seconds for something

[46:24] to happen and, you know, you get so nervous, so I can't imagine what seven minutes had

[46:28] been like when you were like in this type of situation.

[46:32] You know, and the fact is that you yourself as well as Officer Pete Patterson did this

[46:38] on your day off, you know, so it is, it just goes to show you that our offices are

[46:43] always on.

[46:44] There is never a time when you, when you aren't.

[46:47] And, you know, presiding officer Nicolalo said it's something about to take a look at

[46:51] fire and, like, you approach a situation which your officer Patterson did, but for you then

[46:56] to know to see somebody with a gun, not knowing the mindset of that person, what they were

[47:01] going to do, how they would respond to you, really is just a testimony to the quality

[47:07] and the type of person that you are.

[47:08] And I thank you very much for all that you do.

[47:12] And yes, let us thank God, you know, that it all worked out well.

[47:15] and I'm sure that your family is very happy. I can only imagine Polly afterwards that Polly

[47:20] said to you, what were you, crazy? And I'm very, very happy that it all turned out well.

[47:26] And I thank you for your service, and I continue many, many good saviors for you. Thank you

[47:31] very much.

[47:38] The legislative salage is on remote.

[47:44] No, I just want to echo the status by a legislative forward. I thank them for their

[47:48] bravery. Thank you.

[47:53] I mean, one thing I just took note of is obviously the incredible courage that you showed, but

[47:58] to be able to manage that situation while on the phone with the NYPD, while keeping track

[48:05] of the suspects, while restraining yourself and making sure that the civilians weren't

[48:09] home, I mean, it's just extraordinary.

[48:12] It's truly a heroic act, so congratulations.

[48:14] We're all proud to honor you today.

[48:17] And

[48:22] Arnie Drucker, legislator Drucker.

[48:24] Yeah, thank you for that. I just want to say one thing.

[48:27] You know, what resonates with me, obviously the heroism is amazing,

[48:32] but what resonates with me is your instincts are different than ours.

[48:38] I like to think that we're all good persons and we value human life

[48:41] and we would do whatever we can to help people,

[48:43] but your instincts to run into danger, as if without a second thought,

[48:49] But it's what amazes me because I don't think I have that instinct or many of us have that

[48:53] instinct but you do and thank God you do because you keep us all safe.

[48:57] Every one of you has law enforcement and when you're trained you get these instincts that

[49:03] never leave you and that resonates with me and I'm so proud and so fortunate on behalf

[49:09] of all of us to have you protect us each and every day.

[49:12] Thank you so much.

[49:18] Thank you very much and we'll have you come up in a couple of moments to take

[49:21] a photo.

[49:21] Thank you.

[49:22] Thank you again.

[49:22] Thank you, sir. One last, the one other presentation we have is from the Detectives Association Inc.

[49:30] We have Mike Maloney from the D.A.R.

[49:44] Thank you, Presiding Officer Nicolello, Minority Leader Abraham,

[49:48] and the full legislative body for honoring Detective Lieutenant Brian Kohlmeyer,

[49:53] Detective Sean Burns, and Detective Christopher Smith.

[49:57] On Tuesday, March 15, 2022, at 09.20 hours,

[50:01] Detective Burns and Smith were inside the 4th Squad monitoring the police radio while working on their cases.

[50:08] At that time, the Communications Bureau dispatched an assignment for an 80-case possible cardiac person

[50:13] not breathing a grand park located at 1625 Broadway in Hewlett directly adjacent to the 4th Precent Station House.

[50:21] After hearing the notification of the assignment, Detective Lieutenant Cole Meyer, Burns and Smith

[50:27] quickly gathered medical PPE and a portable radio and the AED and proceeded

[50:32] to Grand Park on foot. Upon arrival at the scene, the AED, a 73-year-old male, was

[50:38] lying on his back not breathing with no pulse. Detective Smith began CPR

[50:42] performing chest compressions on the AED. Detective Burns worked with arriving

[50:46] police officers to apply the AED to the AED. The AED was shot once on scene

[50:50] while detectives and officers were performing CPR. Detective Lieutenant

[50:53] a coalmire assisted by interviewing witnesses and gathering information on the circumstances

[50:58] of the aided prior to his collapse, including obtaining his pedigree and medical history.

[51:04] After the arrival of the police ambulance, detectives assisted patrol with securing the

[51:09] aided to the stretcher, lifting the stretcher into the ambulance. The aided was transported

[51:12] to the South Nessau Hospital for further treatment. Upon arrival at the hospital

[51:16] with the turn of the aided, regained a normal heart rhythm and was able to

[51:20] breathe on his own. Due to their alertness and monitoring the patrol assignments over

[51:24] the police radio and immediate actions, including quickly rendering CPR to the ADD, Detective

[51:29] Burns, Detective Smith, Detective Lieutenant Coleman using their training to save a life,

[51:34] and the ADD is extremely grateful for their purpose, and I'm happy to say he is doing

[51:38] very well still today. Thank you.

[51:48] On behalf of myself and the two detectives with me, we'd like to thank you and we

[51:52] appreciate being honored today.

[52:00] I really appreciate this award. Thank you very much.

[52:02] It makes a lot to myself, my family, and I wish all the well to all the best to the

[52:06] individual and his family. Yes,

[52:13] it's great honor to be here. So thank you very

[52:14] much. And we have a great outcome and we are pleased to hear that the

[52:18] gentleman is doing just fine. Thank you.

[52:24] Legislative Galar. Thank you,

[52:25] Presiding Officer. Wow. There's a man who's alive today that wouldn't be

[52:31] alive without the heroic actions of three of our detectives is a family who

[52:36] who has a man who's alive is grateful.

[52:39] Because the community in Nassau County,

[52:43] grateful knowing that our police officers run to armsway,

[52:49] run to where they need to be to protect all of us.

[52:53] Situational awareness, outstanding, okay?

[52:56] To hear the call come in through the precinct,

[52:59] to grab the gear, to run, and it's no short distance,

[53:03] it's gotta be a quarter mile, a half mile,

[53:05] whatever it is to run to the scene come upon a man who's for all intense

[53:10] purposes dead and bring him back to life that's heroic so the county owes you a

[53:17] debt of gratitude and we're grateful for your actions you definitely are as well

[53:23] as Officer Patterson and Sardly dedicated public servants who put your

[53:28] lives above at risk in order to protect all of ours so I thank you your

[53:34] of actions, save somebody, and we won't forget that.

[53:39] You guys will truly hear us. Thank you again.

[53:45] All right, we would like to invite all the honorees to come up for a presentation.

[1:00:11] Please

[1:01:29] return now to the seats, please.

[1:02:17] We'll do things a little bit out of order now.

[1:02:27] We will have the public comment in a moment,

[1:02:28] but first, we are going to consider a motion to suspend the rules.

[1:02:34] Why are we suspending the rules? Several items were filed within 17 days of the legislature,

[1:02:41] so in order to consider those items today, we need to suspend the rules of the legislature.

[1:02:46] The three arms in particular are two appointments to Nassau Community College and a home rule

[1:02:53] message on behalf of the fire marshals. So, I'm going to ask for a motion to suspend the

[1:03:00] rules ruled by legislator Walker, seconded by legislator Gaylord. Any debate or discussion

[1:03:08] on suspending the rules? Hearing none, all in favor signify by saying aye.

[1:03:16] As opposed, carries unanimously.

[1:03:20] All right, the rules are suspended.

[1:03:22] Then we'll go back to public comment.

[1:03:24] First slip I have is from Pat Boyle,

[1:03:27] Coalition of Youth Service Agencies.

[1:03:33] Hi, everyone.

[1:03:36] I have to say it because I'm feeling it.

[1:03:39] I know you kind of see me coming back up here again

[1:03:41] and again, month after month,

[1:03:43] and you must be saying here he is

[1:03:45] to whine again about money.

[1:03:47] You know, the reason why I do it

[1:03:49] is because I kind of feel that the legislature is an important cog in the wheel of government

[1:03:53] in Nassau County. And I really want you to know what's going on. I'm going to try to

[1:03:59] get younger people to come here. I'm going to try to get other faces to pop up, but

[1:04:04] we'll worry about that down the road a little bit. Let me give you a little bit of a timeline

[1:04:09] about ARPA money. We were told in May of 2021 that ARPA money was going to be

[1:04:15] coming into the county and that it would be distributed amongst different persons.

[1:04:22] We were told, as far as youth service agencies were concerned, that we would receive a request

[1:04:29] for that funding and we did in June of 2021 and that decisions would be made.

[1:04:37] The request was at 20 percent of our contracts, which for some of us is a very substantial

[1:04:44] amount of money and we were very happy to be able to get that because our

[1:04:48] expenses had risen through COVID so high. I could just give you one example of

[1:04:53] what happened to us was that we went to a virtual homework assistance program

[1:04:59] that had other things going on with it, but we saw what was happening in the

[1:05:03] schools when they had classrooms of 20 kids and one teacher trying to teach

[1:05:08] the 20 kids. It was extremely difficult. They really couldn't do it. So

[1:05:13] So what we did was we did it individually or with two kids at a time, which meant hiring

[1:05:18] more workers to do it and there was an expense involved.

[1:05:21] So we were very happy to hear about this offer money that was coming down because it was perfect.

[1:05:27] It was COVID related.

[1:05:28] It was all there in the beginning of June.

[1:05:32] The requests were put in and this was supposed to be emergency money.

[1:05:36] It was supposed to move quickly, but you all know that.

[1:05:40] So we were supposed to then, after we got it, we were supposed to receive the money in September of 2021.

[1:05:49] We did not receive the money in September of 2021.

[1:05:53] And October went by, November went by, and December went by.

[1:05:58] We kind of knew that that was going to happen with the change of administration.

[1:06:01] Now we're in a new administration and the time is, you know, going still ticking and we still haven't seen any of that money.

[1:06:10] And now we were told last week by both the executive director of the youth services and also by people within county government

[1:06:17] that all of our agencies had to be, all of our youth service agencies had to be vetted first to find out whether or not they should get this money.

[1:06:28] Now, I know my agency has had a contract with the county for 40 years.

[1:06:33] I think we're doing what we're supposed to be doing.

[1:06:36] We've been, you know, people have come out to look at it and do that.

[1:06:40] And the ARPA money that we were going to receive was really kind of replacing any increase

[1:06:45] that would come out of the budget.

[1:06:47] I'm sorry about the time.

[1:06:50] I'll end with it in saying that we really need this money and it's not moving and the

[1:06:57] vetting process now to us is just kind of a waste of time.

[1:07:02] You know, I mean, we're doing what we're supposed to be doing.

[1:07:04] We've had people come to our agencies and look at our agencies and see that we're

[1:07:09] doing what we're supposed to be doing.

[1:07:12] So if there's anything that you can do to get this ARPA money moving, the controller's

[1:07:18] office said they'll send it out as soon as they get the opportunity to, but they're being

[1:07:22] told to hold it right now by the administration. We do have a meeting with the Deputy County

[1:07:27] Executive for Health and Human Services scheduled for May 3rd, so we're hoping that we can

[1:07:33] get some more clarity there, but I really do think that, you know, the legislature

[1:07:38] could push a little.

[1:07:40] We have been pushing, we have been pushing on this, and we have been following up,

[1:07:44] We're looking for the same answers that you're looking for, so May 3rd is next week, so we

[1:07:50] will be pushing on our end to get that funding released and get it into your hands as soon

[1:07:55] as possible.

[1:07:56] I appreciate that.

[1:07:57] And I'll let John Jafferri know what goes on with regard to the meeting with the Deputy

[1:08:03] County Executive so that he can pass it along to you.

[1:08:06] Okay.

[1:08:07] Thanks very much.

[1:08:08] Appreciate that.

[1:08:08] Thank you.

[1:08:10] Thomas Watson from Wanto.

[1:08:20] Hi, everybody.

[1:08:21] Yeah.

[1:08:21] I'm Tom Watson from Wantoor, and I'm here to voice my opposition to the Mount Sinai Medical Center

[1:08:29] coming to the Wantoor Avenue location. A lot of people in Wantoor don't think it's the right location

[1:08:35] for such a large medical center. I think to date I think there's about 700 people who have signed

[1:08:41] an online petition against it. I personally think a proper location would be something like

[1:08:48] The Sunrise Mall, which is closing, that would be the right location for something so large.

[1:08:58] I'm looking forward to seeing the Nassau County Planning Commission, I think, is supposed to write a report on this issue.

[1:09:07] And I think it'll be a very important report.

[1:09:10] Because such a report was very valuable, I'd say, about 10 years ago when Wanto was fighting a condo development.

[1:09:18] So this Nassau County Planning Commission report is going to be very important to us.

[1:09:24] So a lot of people in Toronto are really looking forward to seeing it.

[1:09:27] And I don't see how the town of Hempstead could be making any decisions on this until this report is available.

[1:09:38] I know that Lauren Curran is now on the Mount Sinai board.

[1:09:45] And I would think that somebody could reach out to her and tell her that a lot of people in Wanto are against this,

[1:09:53] and see if she could nix this from her position on the board.

[1:09:59] I know this issue of Mount Sinai coming to the Wanto Avenue location has been bubbling for about five years,

[1:10:05] So Laura Karin was on this board, you know, when, you know, this has been bubbling.

[1:10:11] So she obviously knows it from now to perspectives.

[1:10:14] She was on this board and now she's on the Mount Sinai board.

[1:10:18] So I know she knows Wanto, she's been to Wanto many times

[1:10:23] and I think she probably knows it's not the right location.

[1:10:27] So I hope she can use her influence on the board also to nix this.

[1:10:32] so I'm hoping somebody up here can give her a call.

[1:10:40] I just want to end that Wantoa is not,

[1:10:45] it's incorporated, so we don't have a mayor.

[1:10:48] So our basically mayors are you and the town of Hempstead.

[1:10:54] So we do really rely on the county government

[1:10:58] and on the town of Hempstead government

[1:11:00] to sort of do right by Wantoa

[1:11:02] and that's what I'm asking.

[1:11:04] So I really appreciate your attention.

[1:11:13] A lot of times we don't get the opportunity to hear about local zoning issues, certainly

[1:11:22] not ones of the importance of the Mount Sinai project, which has been bubbling since it

[1:11:28] was South Nassau at their predecessor.

[1:11:31] I share your concerns and I've voiced those concerns as well.

[1:11:38] It's a project that while we would love to see a medical facility and there certainly is a need for it,

[1:11:44] anytime you have development like this it has to be done with respect to and in conjunction with the community that surrounds it.

[1:11:52] It's not that it's a bad project.

[1:11:55] It's just not a good project at this particular location given the scope and size of it.

[1:12:01] And so I want to thank you for coming here, regardless of what side of the issue you were on,

[1:12:06] but I would still thank you for coming here and voicing those concerns, Tom,

[1:12:09] but the concerns of the community need to be given voice,

[1:12:15] and I appreciate you coming down here to make sure that that happens.

[1:12:20] Because legislator Rhodes, I think the more I talk to people about it and explain both sides, I think from a fair perspective, I think I'm a fair person, when people know the facts, then they're against it.

[1:12:35] When you just talk to somebody who doesn't know the facts, yeah, oh, a medical center, wouldn't that be great?

[1:12:40] But when you explain everything to them and they have all the facts again both sides they usually come out

[1:12:47] This is not the right thing

[1:12:50] Not not at this location location exactly

[1:12:53] Thank you. Thanks a lot. Thank you everyone. Thank you

[1:12:58] Let's Richard clollery

[1:13:21] To the members of the legislature first of all I would like to say thank you for all

[1:13:24] We did get on the nice bus mailing list because of this

[1:13:27] I was able to attend the TAC meeting online that they were hosting.

[1:13:31] For this I am grateful to the legislature, even though in the eyes of certain party members,

[1:13:35] it could be a pain in the rear because of the issues that they bring up every month.

[1:13:40] For when I live at the meeting, the state will theoretically

[1:13:44] will help nice with making current bus service to the state budget process

[1:13:48] to a certain extent, along with whatever you give to them tonight.

[1:13:55] They also talk about something called the nice many bus service, which to the app or

[1:13:59] a new one, a person can call for a small bus in areas that have had their bus lines cut

[1:14:05] and allow them to go to areas where there are bus service.

[1:14:08] However, right now it's going through an experimental phase, not unlike similar one

[1:14:13] under Lord Kern's other service that Lord Kern advertised one day.

[1:14:26] However, it's being used in an area that I don't live in, which to me is not fair.

[1:14:35] We as a community right now are dealing with high gas prices.

[1:14:38] We need to find a way to help increase funding for the buses

[1:14:41] so that other people can go to places where they need or want to be in.

[1:14:45] We also need to find a way to increase the number of areas in a nice bus

[1:14:48] bus service can operate in special long routes that were cut including which

[1:14:53] includes the N-40 and N-50 corridor and the N-303 and N-74 corridor along

[1:14:58] Cootsman Avenue, yo.

[1:15:07] Okay,

[1:15:09] thank you, Richard. Any questions? No, we're good.

[1:15:18] I have two other slips, both of

[1:15:20] which relate to the LIPA settlement, so I'll, unless you, Richard, Sharon, and Jessica Cohen

[1:15:27] have to leave early, I'll wait to call these when we do the settlement. Is that all right

[1:15:32] Okay.

[1:15:38] We have, we'll do the Consent Calendar.

[1:15:41] We're going to call the nominations after the Consent Calendar.

[1:15:43] The Consent Calendar is the items that went through committees two weeks ago,

[1:15:46] and the minority and majority have agreed that no further debate or discussion is needed at this time on these items.

[1:15:54] Item 1, I'm sorry, Item 3, Ordnance 23, 4, Ordnance 24.

[1:16:01] Item 24, Item 5, Ordinance 25.

[1:16:04] Item 6, Ordinance 26.

[1:16:07] Item 7, Ordinance 27.

[1:16:10] Item 11, Resolution 55.

[1:16:13] 12, Resolution 56.

[1:16:15] 13, Resolution 57.

[1:16:18] 14, Resolution 58.

[1:16:20] 15, Resolution 59.

[1:16:22] 16, Resolution 60.

[1:16:24] 17, Resolution 61.

[1:16:26] 18, Resolution 62.

[1:16:28] 19, Resolution 63.

[1:16:30] Resolution 63, 20 Resolution 64, 21 Resolution 65, 22 Resolution 66, 23 Resolution 67,

[1:16:46] 38

[1:16:46] Resolution 82, 39 Resolution 83, 40 Resolution 84, 41 Resolution 85, 42 Resolution 86, 43

[1:16:58] Resolution 87.

[1:17:01] Those items are moved by Minority Leader Abraham, is moved seconded by Legislator Ford.

[1:17:07] I need to debate a discussion.

[1:17:09] Hearing none, all in favor signify by saying aye.

[1:17:11] Aye.

[1:17:12] Those opposed, they all carry unanimously.

[1:17:27] We're going to the nominations portion of the meeting at this point.

[1:17:32] So we're going to call items 27, 28, 29, and 30 together.

[1:17:38] These are Resolutions to Confirm the County Executive's Appointment of Florestano Girardi

[1:17:44] to the Assessment Review Commission, Laura Manfilletto to the Assessment Review Commission,

[1:17:49] Mark Stone to the Assessment Review Commission, and Rocco Tortino to the Assessment Review Commission.

[1:17:56] They're moved by Legislator Jouffray, seconded by Legislator Gaylor.

[1:18:00] that puts those items before us so I would like to invite up Mr. Girardi, Ms.

[1:18:12] Monfiletto,

[1:18:13] Mr. Stone, and Mr. Totino.

[1:18:24] Hi, Crystal Moyn from the administration. Mr. Totino is running a few minutes behind

[1:18:28] so he's hoping to get here as soon as possible. So, sorry about that.

[1:18:32] Okay. We'll hold him. We'll take over later when he comes in.

[1:18:35] Thank you.

[1:18:38] Good afternoon to the county legislator. I would like to first thank Mr. Stone

[1:18:47] I would like to thank County Executive Blakeman and the Legislative for considering me for

[1:18:53] appointment for the Assessment Review Commission.

[1:18:57] I was born in Queens, raised in Oceanside, I have tried to keep it brief, I have to graduate

[1:19:04] in high school, Oceanside High School, I went to work with my father's dry cleaning plant,

[1:19:09] we had two plants at the time, one in Elmont, one in Queens and St. Altman's.

[1:19:12] From there in 1978, I opened a plant in Guantanamo.

[1:19:16] When my father retired back in 84, I took over the plant in Alamante.

[1:19:20] At my peak, I had a total of between part-time and full-time 60 employees.

[1:19:26] At that time, I started to divest into real estate.

[1:19:30] Over the years, I owned various commercial properties from multifamily,

[1:19:36] office, industrial, and retail establishments.

[1:19:44] Being a landlord, in the landlord business, the properties have various assessed value,

[1:19:52] various assessed rate of taxes, so I have a little background in property taxes.

[1:20:01] For the last six years I've been in the town of Hempstead, IDA.

[1:20:06] I've been a member there.

[1:20:07] I have been the chairman for the last three years and as we all know, you know, granting

[1:20:13] pilots, it gives me some experience in tax abatements between sales tax, property tax,

[1:20:23] to various pilots that we've granted.

[1:20:29] Other than that, you know, my wife, I've been married for 32 years, I have four children

[1:20:34] And if there's any questions, if anybody has a question that I can't answer, I'll be more than happy to bluff.

[1:20:44] Any questions for Mr. Terrade?

[1:20:52] Okay, thank you.

[1:20:53] Thank you.

[1:20:56] Next is Ms. Montfaletto.

[1:20:59] Good afternoon. I'm Laura Montfaletto.

[1:21:01] Thank you for the opportunity today to the legislature and the county executive, Blakeman.

[1:21:06] I grew up in Elmont, New York.

[1:21:08] I went to Salonika High School, where in my senior year,

[1:21:12] my mom who also worked in the guidance office

[1:21:15] got a phone call from an alumni

[1:21:18] and said, looking for a young student to come

[1:21:22] work for a title insurance company as a report typist.

[1:21:25] My mother said, I have just the person for you.

[1:21:28] And I started my senior year in high school

[1:21:32] typing title reports for a title insurance company.

[1:21:35] At that point, I didn't know what title insurance was and I worked through my two years at NASA

[1:21:42] Community College and wound up working there for another four years.

[1:21:49] The vice president of the company then decided to open his own company and asked me to go with him.

[1:21:57] I've been there since, so I have 31 years experience in title insurance.

[1:22:03] I've learned every aspect of the business. Starting off as a typist, I learned how to read titles, policies, closings,

[1:22:15] some estate work.

[1:22:16] So I'm very familiar with taxes, which is a big portion of the title insurance.

[1:22:24] I have two children, one son that goes to Kelleberg, he's a freshman, and my daughter is a junior in Oceanside High School.

[1:22:35] I live in Oceanside High School, I live in Oceanside, and that's about it.

[1:22:41] Thank you for the opportunity today, I really appreciate it.

[1:22:45] If you have any questions.

[1:22:47] Any questions?

[1:22:49] Good, thank you.

[1:22:50] Thank you very much.

[1:22:52] Good afternoon, how are you everybody?

[1:22:57] My background, I live now in Merrick, I grew up in Valley Stream.

[1:23:02] My background is I owned a mortgage banking company for over 20 years out on Long Island.

[1:23:09] I grew it to have over 200 employees through numerous states, 18 states throughout the country.

[1:23:16] I'm very, very familiar with the appraisal system dealing with Fannie Mae and Freddie

[1:23:22] Mac and also selling loans to the FHA and other governments and other banks such as Chase

[1:23:29] and Citi.

[1:23:30] So the most important thing, besides the person qualifying, clearly is the collateral

[1:23:37] that we take in, especially with FHA loans where we give, you know, borrow puts down

[1:23:44] with little as three and a half percent. So we are very, very critical of appraisals to make sure

[1:23:50] they're not overblown, overvalued. I think it's very important to recognize that the appraisal

[1:23:59] process right now, and I'm still in the mortgage banking business, you could have a house in my

[1:24:07] situation house to my right was sold for $700,000 the house to the left was sold

[1:24:14] for $975,000 the $700,000 had no work done the other one was new but yet the

[1:24:24] one to the right was paying over $8,000 more in taxes than the one that was

[1:24:30] this built out. So the appraisal issue, the value issue, that's the experience I

[1:24:39] could bring as well as I was president of the Empire State Mortgage Bankers

[1:24:43] Association and dealt with many of the centers up in Albany as well as this

[1:24:49] Roll the Rickets from the New York Department of Financial Services. So

[1:24:54] So I just think it's time to look into this and see if we can correct what I believe is

[1:25:03] unfairness.

[1:25:04] Any questions?

[1:25:09] Okay.

[1:25:10] Thank you, Mr. Stone.

[1:25:12] Thank you.

[1:25:14] I'll take a motion to table the resolution nominating Mr. Totino at this time.

[1:25:19] Please don't move.

[1:25:20] Move by legislative Ferretti.

[1:25:21] Second by legislative Schaefer.

[1:25:23] All in favor of tabling that nomination signified by saying aye.

[1:25:26] Aye.

[1:25:26] I suppose. Okay, that's that's tabled. I need debate or discussion on the three nominees that are before us.

[1:25:48] If I could. Oh, thank you. Thank you.

[1:25:53] First, I want to I want to thank all three of you for for willing to participate in the process and be here today.

[1:26:02] I think, you know, obviously, whenever we have a time of when individuals like yourselves

[1:26:06] that want, I'm sorry, I'm talking, I know it's a little crazy when we're in a mask, but

[1:26:11] whenever we have individuals like yourselves that want to participate in the process, that's

[1:26:15] always welcoming.

[1:26:18] Unfortunately, our side is not going to be able to affirm your confirmation today.

[1:26:23] It has nothing to do with you in particular.

[1:26:25] It has everything to do with the county executive not presenting to us a reassessment

[1:26:28] plan.

[1:26:28] In a utopia, a perfect world, or even close to one, we would like to see a reassessment

[1:26:34] plan and hear your philosophical beliefs on reassessment and be able to make a better

[1:26:42] decision.

[1:26:43] The county executive has not presented us a reassessment plan to date.

[1:26:46] Also in the assessor side of things, not where you are when the Assessment Review Commission,

[1:26:52] Robert Laban, who is the term as acting assessor, expired on April 11th.

[1:26:58] So it then feeds into the perception, unfortunately, the reality that this administration either

[1:27:10] has a plan and is not being forthright with it because it was presented to the legislature

[1:27:14] or doesn't have a plan at all.

[1:27:16] And I would think that it would be more prudent to be able to have a plan, review the plan,

[1:27:24] hear from distinguished individuals like yourselves, and then be able to see how we want to vote on your particular appointment.

[1:27:32] To this date, the County Executive has not presented any plan.

[1:27:36] And the fact, as I said before, Ms. Laidman's term as County Executive, County Assessor, which is on another side,

[1:27:42] but addresses the issue of assessment, has expired.

[1:27:45] So we're concerned about the direction of transparency and how this particular administration wants to move forward.

[1:27:52] And from that standpoint, we're not going to be able to support your confirmation.

[1:27:56] If the county executive was to present the plan to us and we had a chance to review it and sit back and look into your resumes a little bit in greater detail

[1:28:06] and understand your philosophical beliefs on how you would execute your duties as assessment review commissioners, that's the more important way to do it.

[1:28:13] So I don't want you to think that our no vote is input and I'm sorry

[1:28:17] I'll vote 90 your confirmation is indicative of your of you personally. It's more addressing the county executives

[1:28:25] Lack of issue to address the reassessment plan holistically for the county, but thank you

[1:28:33] Okay, any other debate of discussion?

[1:28:36] You're not in all in favor signify by saying hi. Hi those opposed

[1:28:43] Passes by a vote of 11 to 7

[1:28:47] So, congratulations to all three of you.

[1:28:49] I look forward to your service and assessment review.

[1:28:52] Thank you.

[1:28:58] Legislator Kennedy was here before, and then he's not no longer participating.

[1:29:03] Yes?

[1:29:18] I think that's a pretty good bet.

[1:29:21] Okay, thank you.

[1:29:23] Next items are NASA Community College.

[1:29:27] These are items 24 and 25 and 33 and 34,

[1:29:34] which are actually two separate resolutions for each of these nominees,

[1:29:38] appointing them to the NASA Community College Board of Trustees.

[1:29:42] But they are 24 as a resolution, 24 and

[1:29:55] 34 are resolutions confirming the

[1:30:00] The appointment of Ronald Rosenberg as a member of the Nessau County College Board of Trustees,

[1:30:05] 25 and 33 are resolutions confirming the appointment of William Striss as a member of the Nessau

[1:30:11] County College Board of Trustees, motion by legislator McKenzie, seconded by legislator

[1:30:22] I'm dating myself, a legislator McCavitt, seconded by a legislator Pillar.

[1:30:29] So those nominations are now before us and Mr. Rosenberg was distressed when he joined

[1:30:34] us at the podium.

[1:30:42] All right, first of all, you have to tell us what happened.

[1:30:46] You should see me as a guy.

[1:30:49] I apologize for the way I look, I just got out of the hospital, I had a bad fall,

[1:30:52] but I'm okay. That's good news to some bad news to others. I'm a lifelong

[1:30:59] resident of Nassau County. I love Nassau County. I was born here in South Nassau

[1:31:06] Communities Hospital. I grew up on the North Shore. I've had the practice of

[1:31:10] law for the past 43 years. I brought up three children and I have five

[1:31:16] grandchildren. I can tell you if I knew the grandchildren were this good I

[1:31:22] I paid for three college educations, two law school educations, and I'm very involved

[1:31:30] in community affairs in Nassau County in particular, and I'm honored that the county

[1:31:36] executive has bestowed this appointment nomination on me, and I hope to have your approval.

[1:31:45] Any questions for Mr. Rosamund?

[1:31:48] Let's say, Drucker.

[1:31:50] Thank you, Presiding Officer. Mr. Rosenberg, thank you for coming down today. You know,

[1:31:55] your reputation as an attorney precedes you, and I'm very impressed. But as a former trustee

[1:32:02] on the Board of Trustees of NASA Community College, that institution holds a special

[1:32:07] place for me. I have real concerns about its current state of affairs and what's going

[1:32:14] going on there, and just in fact, over the past three or four days I've received a couple

[1:32:19] of phone calls, more than a couple, from board members, from administrators, from union

[1:32:27] people, all decrying a movement there that is a foot to dismantle the entire board

[1:32:38] and replace them entirely with one that is more politically aligned.

[1:32:45] And that concerns me a great deal because I've been in touch with the college now for a while,

[1:32:51] trying to come up with initiatives to address the declining enrollment,

[1:32:55] the problems they have in retention, their economic difficulties.

[1:32:59] So I feel like the college might be sliding backwards now.

[1:33:03] We have a person in charge, no president right now.

[1:33:08] Now, it's in a state of flux, and I'm concerned that members, new members of the board, are

[1:33:18] going to present themselves with an apolitical agenda that's only bent on improving and

[1:33:25] trying to get this college to survive the obstacles that it's facing right now.

[1:33:33] And that really concerns me.

[1:33:35] When I was on the board, we were on probation with middle states.

[1:33:39] We were in jeopardy of losing our accreditation.

[1:33:42] And one of the foremost criticisms that middle states had of NASA Community College in those days

[1:33:48] was political intrusion.

[1:33:51] Political intrusion was something that disturbed SUNY, it disturbed middle states,

[1:33:56] and it seems to be permeating the school again.

[1:33:59] And that concerns me a great deal.

[1:34:02] So number one, I'd like to be assured, Mr. Rosenberg, that you are going in there with the expectation and skill set that is going to allow you to serve in that capacity in an apolitical fashion.

[1:34:18] Can you assure us of that?

[1:34:19] I can assure you, when I did leave out of my presentation, I represent Five Towns College

[1:34:25] who had a similar situation with the leadership of Five Towns College in the middle states evaluation.

[1:34:32] I successfully represented them through that evaluation, and they got nothing but high approval since then.

[1:34:39] So I've been through it once before, I've been through it successfully, and I see no reason why I can't do it again.

[1:34:45] whatever I will do will do to the best of my ability without partisanship are you

[1:34:52] are you aware mr. Rosenberg that the strategic plan at the college expired

[1:34:58] on the 1231 21 I did not I was not aware of that no so the strategic plan that

[1:35:04] they had expired so right now the college is without a strategic plan I'd

[1:35:09] like to know what you plan how would you how would you advance a strategic

[1:35:14] a huge plan with the college concerning the problems they have in retention and recruitment,

[1:35:20] diversity and inclusion. Can you talk about that a little bit?

[1:35:25] Sure. Obviously, I'm not prepared to discuss something I have not been briefed on.

[1:35:30] I have not been appointed. I am not familiar with it.

[1:35:34] But it's like any other case that I handle, any other matter that I litigate or transaction that I handle,

[1:35:40] I will get all the relevant information together, get all the right people assembled, and I will address the problem like I did, as I mentioned before, at Five Towns College, and I have no doubt that I will be successful in that endeavor.

[1:35:53] Do you have any ideas right now on how you want to improve retention and recruitment and diversity?

[1:35:59] I do not have any biases going into it. I have to first get all the facts.

[1:36:05] I don't act both in my practice of law and myself personally.

[1:36:09] I don't act on half knowledge or incomplete knowledge.

[1:36:13] I first must get a grasp of all the facts and knowledge of the entire situation

[1:36:18] before I can start to make an assessment of how I think it should be addressed

[1:36:22] and the attempt to do so now would be pure guesswork.

[1:36:25] And I would not do that as a matter of course.

[1:36:29] So do you believe that politics has no position on the Board of Trustees?

[1:36:36] Correct.

[1:36:37] So you would not be vulnerable to any political pressures that might be placed upon you?

[1:36:43] Never have in the 43 years of practicing law have I allowed politics to affect my judgment.

[1:36:49] I do the best of my clients and this time my client will be the college

[1:36:53] and I'll do my best for the college without any partisanship or any influence from outside forces.

[1:36:59] I like that answer. What do you believe is the most important duty of a trustee?

[1:37:05] To do his best job, to promote the college, to improve the college,

[1:37:10] and to get the best education that college can afford to our students.

[1:37:18] Okay, that's all I have. Thank you very much, Mr. Rosenberg.

[1:37:22] My pleasure. Anyone else?

[1:37:23] Any other questions?

[1:37:25] Mr. Rosenberg.

[1:37:26] Okay, thank you.

[1:37:26] Thank you again for this honor.

[1:37:28] Mr. Striss.

[1:37:30] My

[1:37:34] name is Bill Striss.

[1:37:35] I spent my public career in teaching.

[1:37:39] My wife is also a teacher.

[1:37:41] We're retired.

[1:37:43] I live in Valley Stream.

[1:37:44] I have been a board member for 30 years.

[1:37:50] It's an honor to be a long trustee.

[1:37:57] I have the honor of being shaping the Nassau Community College.

[1:38:03] I thank you for this.

[1:38:06] Any questions?

[1:38:07] Thank you, Mr. Smith.

[1:38:08] Any questions?

[1:38:11] Good afternoon and welcome.

[1:38:13] All right.

[1:38:13] And thank you very much for wanting to take on this position.

[1:38:17] And Mr. Rosenberg, you as well.

[1:38:19] And just stay sitting because I hope you feel better because very brave to come from that to here.

[1:38:25] So, I too, I do love NASA Community College and I had the opportunity, along with the

[1:38:33] presiding officer and some of our other fellow legislators, to take a tour of the, you know,

[1:38:39] one element of the school, which is the theater and live production and all that.

[1:38:43] And I have to say that the college is very blessed with a very vibrant and engaged faculty.

[1:38:50] They understand their needs and they're willing to fight for it, they're willing to advocate

[1:38:54] for it. And they have found partners with many of us here on the Legislature. So I look

[1:39:00] forward to working with both of you and looking to see what we can do to help Nassar County

[1:39:06] continue to stay in existence and even to thrive. We know that enrollment is down,

[1:39:13] so I'm sure that if we all put our collective minds together, we may come up with some

[1:39:18] pretty good ideas on maybe changing some things, the way that maybe some of the

[1:39:22] courses are given, but I just want to make sure that this fine institution continues to

[1:39:30] be able to provide good quality education. My daughter and my son both had the opportunity

[1:39:36] to attend. My son decided to spend four years there only because he needed college credit.

[1:39:43] He knew he was going into civil service, but he found that the environment and the

[1:39:50] classes, just everything about NASA Community College satisfied him. He was very happy there.

[1:39:56] My daughter spent a year preparing to go away to a private school. So it is a great place

[1:40:02] and I look forward to working with you and to making sure that NASA Community College

[1:40:09] will be the premier college throughout the United States. Thank you.

[1:40:12] Thank you.

[1:40:13] I just want to echo what Lucida Ford just said.

[1:40:16] We did have a tour about ten days ago and obviously the college is something that we

[1:40:21] in the county have been very proud of for many, many years.

[1:40:24] It just offers an education, a phenomenal education to so many students who might not

[1:40:30] get that education otherwise and it is a great competition to these four-year schools

[1:40:35] if someone is interested.

[1:40:36] But what it was was eye-opening in terms of some of the facilities and some of the programmatic needs

[1:40:44] and the faculty needs that exist at the college.

[1:40:48] So we're looking to have some new ideas, some energy, some fresh blood in there

[1:40:53] to hopefully shake things up a little bit and get us moving in the right direction.

[1:40:58] My understanding is that recently there was a no-confidence vote

[1:41:03] by the entire academic session Senate in a couple of the board members so I mean

[1:41:11] when you have a unanimous vote then there's something wrong there so we need to

[1:41:15] really go in and preserve the school it's been said in that in that presentation

[1:41:19] that we had many times it really is a gem in there so as we had to preserve it

[1:41:36] I'll do my best to participate as part of that tour as well.

[1:41:40] And I've got to tell you that the passion among the students and the passion among the faculty

[1:41:45] for that institution is outstanding and I found it interesting that as part of that

[1:41:50] tour it was the faculty and it was the students, it was not a single member of the administration

[1:41:56] actually came out to meet our delegation from the legislature.

[1:42:01] And I found that to be very strange.

[1:42:05] You know, we just heard today that it's an institution without a president,

[1:42:10] that it's an institution without a strategic plan,

[1:42:13] it's an institution with declining enrollment,

[1:42:16] it's an institution with concerns about its, as voiced by the faculty,

[1:42:20] with concerns that we may be heading back to a period where its accreditation

[1:42:25] may be in jeopardy, you know, if members of the legislature are receiving calls from the existing board

[1:42:33] that they're concerned they might be changed, what sounds as though there should be change on that board.

[1:42:41] And I'm hoping that both of you will be proactive, passionate advocates for the college

[1:42:48] that will help to be architects of that change because this is an institution that deserves saving.

[1:42:54] This is an institution that serves, that should have at its focus, at every turn, the students

[1:43:03] of Nassau County that we serve.

[1:43:05] And I know from both of your presentations, one is an accomplished litigator and board

[1:43:13] member of Five Towns College and yourself as an educator, have that passion.

[1:43:19] And, you know, I do share my colleagues'

[1:43:24] concerns that politics should never be a part of the

[1:43:27] running of that institution.

[1:43:29] And I know that both of you will keep at your focus the success of the institution and the

[1:43:35] students that we serve.

[1:43:36] And I'm looking forward to working with you.

[1:43:38] Just once slight correction, we did have, before you joined us, let's set a road

[1:43:43] on a tour.

[1:43:43] Edwin Kerrigan from the administration was there, and then I wonder if somebody from

[1:43:46] building the grounds.

[1:43:48] Yes, sir?

[1:43:48] I just want to correct from the record, I was not a board member of Five Fence College,

[1:43:54] I was the attorney.

[1:43:55] Right.

[1:43:56] Thank you.

[1:43:57] Let's set up your leg.

[1:43:59] Thank you, Presiding Officer.

[1:44:02] I certainly echo all of my colleagues' concerns and wishes for the Niesa Community College.

[1:44:10] This comment really is not towards the candidates.

[1:44:14] I keep hearing about this tour and I do not believe that anyone from our side was invited

[1:44:20] to a tour and so I'd like to put it on the record that if something like this happens

[1:44:25] in the future that we at least receive an invitation.

[1:44:29] Thank you.

[1:44:30] It was arranged by the faculty and actually they invited me and then a couple of legislators

[1:44:35] joined in but I would reach out to the president and she would be thrilled to have as many

[1:44:40] legislators as possible going on that tour.

[1:44:41] So whenever you have the time, they'll bring you over and see exactly what we saw.

[1:44:48] Okay, thank you.

[1:44:50] I guess it's just a general comment just to make sure that we receive invitations that are gone out.

[1:44:57] Okay, thank you.

[1:44:59] All right, let's do it.

[1:45:00] Yeah, just a couple things, Mr. Spitz. Thank you for being here, too. I'm not going to make

[1:45:05] you answer all of the tough questions. I asked Mr. Rosenberg what I'm hoping that you have

[1:45:08] similar answers. You know, just to comment briefly, quickly on Legislative Ford's comment,

[1:45:16] the college has a tremendous course handbook. The variety of courses that they offer is

[1:45:23] outstanding. The problem that they have is purely economic and they don't have enough

[1:45:28] faculty, and they're scrambling to have faculty members teach these courses, aside from the

[1:45:35] declining enrollment and retention problems. So I'm hoping that you have fresh ideas, as

[1:45:41] Legislator Rhodes said, we welcome fresh ideas, but it has to be ideas that are geared

[1:45:48] towards the sustainability of this college, because when I'm hearing the pathway that

[1:45:54] the colleges on now does not bode well for its ability to stay open and I'm concerned

[1:46:01] about that and I hope you appreciate that as well. In your career so far in education

[1:46:06] you were on the board is that it at Valley Stream? Yes I was in Valley Stream and in all

[1:46:12] of your years in the board of Valley Stream did you feel any sort of political pressure

[1:46:19] at times? Yes. And how did you respond to that? I did my best. I explained what my position

[1:46:28] was and I set to it. So what would you describe what type of political pressure you received?

[1:46:36] Oh,

[1:46:41] people wanted jobs in the school system, so I referred them to the superintendent, and

[1:46:55] that was it.

[1:46:56] So you mean they tried to use your influence to obtain employment?

[1:47:01] That's right.

[1:47:03] And you have any particular ideas on how you think the college should be heading right now?

[1:47:09] No, I don't have any idea. I will listen.

[1:47:14] I will listen to my fellow trustees and come up with a plan.

[1:47:21] Thank you.

[1:47:23] Let's start at 30-way.

[1:47:25] Hi. I also want to thank both of you for trying to help with this college that we all do care about.

[1:47:33] And I agree with my colleagues that the number one issue we have has been money.

[1:47:39] And I think, you know, or you'll find out that there's a formula

[1:47:42] and the county is supposed to give a certain percentage.

[1:47:45] And unfortunately, the county has up until very recently been very strapped financially.

[1:47:51] But right now we're sort of in good position.

[1:47:54] So I think it might behoove you to take a look at that formula

[1:47:59] and put pressure on the county to give a little bit more than they have to this

[1:48:05] point because the money is available. So that's my two cents.

[1:48:13] All right, well thank you Mr. Stris. Appreciate it. Thank you Mr. Roseburg.

[1:48:19] Any further debate or discussion of the two nominations?

[1:48:23] If not, all in favor signify by saying aye.

[1:48:26] Aye. Those opposed?

[1:48:29] Okay, so it passes by 11 votes in the affirmative and 7 abstentions.

[1:48:38] Congratulations, guys.

[1:48:42] Now we have, actually, we're going to go back to Wednesday,

[1:48:44] Mr. Tortino is here, so we're going to ask for a motion to untable

[1:48:49] by the legislative roads, seconded by the legislative fray,

[1:48:54] all in favor of untabling that nomination signify by saying aye.

[1:48:58] Aye.

[1:48:58] Those opposed?

[1:48:59] So now that's before us, and Mr. Tautini, you want to come up?

[1:49:08] Get well, be well.

[1:49:09] Good

[1:49:12] afternoon, Presiding Officer Nicolelo, members of the County Legislator.

[1:49:16] I just want to first say I apologize for my tardiness.

[1:49:19] I appreciate you temporarily tabling this resolution.

[1:49:23] I had a deposition that went a lot longer than it should have gone.

[1:49:28] That being said...

[1:49:28] It wasn't with Mr. Rhodes, because I know he's here, so...

[1:49:33] I hope that being said, as you all are aware, I've been appointed by our county executive

[1:49:41] to the Nassau County Assessment Review Commission pending your confirmation, which I hopefully

[1:49:47] hopefully get today.

[1:49:49] Just wanted to come in, introduce myself, give you a little background, and answer any

[1:49:54] questions you may have.

[1:49:55] First things first, I'm a lifelong Nassau County resident, originally from Glencove,

[1:50:01] the good City of Glencove, where I still currently reside and am a homeowner. I am a trial attorney

[1:50:08] by trade. I work for Geico staff council that also our offices are in Nassau County. I've

[1:50:16] been a trial attorney for about six years now. On the side, I do dabble in land use

[1:50:20] law and residential closings as well. Also, in the past couple of years, I've been

[1:50:27] on the city zoning board for about two years

[1:50:29] and also became a city councilman for two years

[1:50:31] shortly thereafter.

[1:50:34] I'm excited for the opportunity

[1:50:35] to be helping the County of Nassau

[1:50:37] with the assessment review commission.

[1:50:39] I look forward to making a contribution to ARC

[1:50:41] and yeah, that's it.

[1:50:43] If you have any questions,

[1:50:44] I'll be happy to answer them.

[1:50:46] Any questions?

[1:50:49] Let's say it to Richie Witt.

[1:50:50] I just want to say thank you.

[1:50:51] I was expecting a question from the County of Nassau.

[1:50:52] I have a few questions, yeah.

[1:50:55] I just want to say that I've had the pleasure

[1:50:58] I have complete respect for him. He's a straight up person. He'll tell you if he agrees with you,

[1:51:04] he'll tell you if he doesn't agree with you, and you left out that you just got engaged.

[1:51:08] I did. I apologize for that, and I just got engaged.

[1:51:10] Three weeks ago. But anyway, Rocco, this is a challenge, but I have faith in you that you're going to address it,

[1:51:20] and I look forward to working with you.

[1:51:22] Thank you. Thank you so much. Thank you to everybody on the Legislature. I appreciate it.

[1:51:26] Thank you. Any other questions?

[1:51:29] So it's a great discussion.

[1:51:31] Hearing none, all in favor signify by saying aye.

[1:51:34] Aye.

[1:51:35] Those opposed?

[1:51:37] Okay.

[1:51:37] Yeah?

[1:51:38] Yeah.

[1:51:39] All right.

[1:51:40] So that it passes by a vote of 12 votes in the affirmative and 6 votes in the negative.

[1:51:46] All right.

[1:51:46] Congratulations.

[1:51:47] Thank you.

[1:51:48] Thank you.

[1:51:49] Thank you.

[1:51:50] All right.

[1:52:01] All right, so that's six votes, 12 votes in the affirmative,

[1:52:05] six abstentions in the passed.

[1:52:08] Eric, congratulations, Mr. Tultino.

[1:52:12] Next, appointments are to the Planning Commission.

[1:52:15] We have items 31, 32, 31 and 32 I'll call right now.

[1:52:25] These are resolutions to confirm

[1:52:26] the County Executive's appointments

[1:52:28] of Murray Foreman and Reed Sackiewicz

[1:52:31] to the Nassau County Planning Commission.

[1:52:34] Moved by Legislator Ferretti,

[1:52:36] seconded by Legislator Gaylord, those two before us.

[1:52:40] But in the meantime, so we can consider all these together,

[1:52:43] we do have an emergency item, which is 125 or 22,

[1:52:47] to resolution confirm the Nassau County Executive's

[1:52:50] appointment of Condon Sharona-Kalati

[1:52:53] to the Nassau County Planning Commission.

[1:52:55] So we need a motion to establish an emergency.

[1:52:58] Moved by Legislator Walker,

[1:52:59] seconded by Legislator Ferretti.

[1:53:00] Any debate or discussion on the emergency?

[1:53:04] Yes.

[1:53:05] We were under the impression before we provide votes for the emergency that someone was going to come up and justify the need for the emergency.

[1:53:19] Chris Lemoine from the administration.

[1:53:20] The original item as filed had a mistake in it.

[1:53:23] It referenced that Ms. Colatti would be replacing Sean Salley.

[1:53:27] That was a mistake.

[1:53:28] Ms. Colatti is going to be replacing, is going to be filling an open seat on the planning commission.

[1:53:32] so we apologize for any confusion.

[1:53:35] And thank you for the courtesy.

[1:53:37] Mr. Chris, the...

[1:53:41] currently, are there enough votes,

[1:53:44] members of the planning commission to have a quorum?

[1:53:46] Yes.

[1:53:46] There are.

[1:53:47] Okay.

[1:53:53] Any other questions?

[1:54:02] All right.

[1:54:03] Any other debate or discussion?

[1:54:04] Hearing none, for the emergency,

[1:54:06] all in favor signify by saying aye.

[1:54:08] Aye.

[1:54:08] Those opposed?

[1:54:10] Okay, the emergency is established,

[1:54:11] so I will call the item 125 of 22,

[1:54:14] resolution from the County Executive's Appointment of Kandan Kaladi to the Nessar County Planning

[1:54:20] Commission. Vote again by legislative Faredi, second by legislative Joffrey. So now all three

[1:54:26] of those appointments are before us. Come on up. How are you doing, Reed?

[1:54:38] So who wants to go first?

[1:54:48] Hi, my name is Kandan Kaladi. I'd like to first of all thank the county

[1:54:53] the executive and all the legislatures for considering

[1:55:00] me for appointment for the Planning Board Commission.

[1:55:05] I was born in Iran.

[1:55:07] I migrated to the United States in 1981.

[1:55:13] I went to school, and I got married.

[1:55:19] and I have, skipping a few decades, I have three children, four grandchildren, and I'm

[1:55:32] working currently at Board of Election. I also am one of the 15 elected members of the UMJCA

[1:55:46] central board in Great Neck. That's the Persian Jewish community in Great Neck. We

[1:55:53] have a very established system. We have a central board and many committees that

[1:55:58] are conducted underneath. I am very dedicated to community work. We have many

[1:56:05] meetings and we make a lot of decisions. I'm also a member of the Public

[1:56:14] Affairs Committee in my community which we try to keep a good relationship with all public officials.

[1:56:26] And that's about it. I am hoping to be able to use my experience and serve the county.

[1:56:39] Well, thank you. Any questions from Ms. Colotte?

[1:56:41] Good

[1:56:54] afternoon. My name is Maury Foreman. Thank you to county executive

[1:57:01] Blakeman and to the legislature for considering my appointment this afternoon

[1:57:06] to the Nassau County Planning Commission. I've been a resident of Nassau County

[1:57:11] for the past 25 years. I educate my highest degree as a master's of business

[1:57:20] Administration from Columbia University.

[1:57:24] I'm a lifelong emergency and acquisition practitioner,

[1:57:27] mostly in the area of what you would call today private

[1:57:31] equity.

[1:57:32] Currently, my area of focus is in health care real estate

[1:57:37] in the operation and ownership primarily of skilled

[1:57:41] nursing facilities throughout the United States.

[1:57:45] I am also active in community, having been the long-serving president of the Lawrence

[1:57:54] Union Free School District for the past 15 years.

[1:57:59] I look forward to bringing my broad-based business, development, and community service

[1:58:06] experience to my post as on the Nassau County Planning Commission.

[1:58:13] I'll entertain any questions that you might have.

[1:58:17] Let us know, Draca.

[1:58:19] Thank you, Presiding Officer.

[1:58:20] Hello, Mr. Forman.

[1:58:21] How are you?

[1:58:22] Fine, thank you.

[1:58:23] Thank you for being here.

[1:58:25] A couple of questions.

[1:58:26] I've been given some information.

[1:58:29] I was given some articles concerning major issues of Medicaid fraud and breach of fiduciary

[1:58:38] duties brought against you.

[1:58:40] specifically a press release from the FBI from 2010 indicates that the federal

[1:58:47] government accused you of involvement in a multi-million dollar Medicaid fraud

[1:58:52] scheme. Is that true? Unfortunately anybody who's been in the health care

[1:58:59] business has from time to time been subject to claims that are brought by

[1:59:07] which is basically a bounty system where individual people can bring a cause of action. That specific

[1:59:16] item that you referred to, if you read the rest of the press release, was settled without

[1:59:22] the admission of any guilt. So there's really nothing to say that we clearly deny all claims

[1:59:32] and that was it never it never proceeded but you agreed to settle the claim by

[1:59:39] paying 14 million dollars to settle those that is that is not correct I

[1:59:44] personally I was I was part of a group that was as I said that was a subject

[1:59:53] of this what they call a key 10 action and again if you'll read the press

[1:59:57] releases in detail by person.

[2:00:00] Assembly did not pay one penny towards that settlement.

[2:00:03] But you were involved in that settlement, though?

[2:00:07] I just, yes, similarly, as allegations were made, I was also involved in the settlement.

[2:00:13] But again, I did not pay one penny towards the settlement.

[2:00:16] So the allegations didn't go further because it was settled?

[2:00:22] The allegations did not go further because they were unfounded.

[2:00:28] But yet somebody paid $14 million to settle those allegations.

[2:00:32] Somebody did.

[2:00:33] Did you know who it was that paid these $14 million?

[2:00:36] That's confidential.

[2:00:37] Wow.

[2:00:38] You can't share that with us.

[2:00:39] Cannot.

[2:00:40] How many years ago did that happen?

[2:00:42] That was settled in excess of 12 years ago.

[2:00:45] And that's not a matter of public record?

[2:00:48] Who the individuals were?

[2:00:50] The individuals are, well, the entities and the individuals are,

[2:00:54] if you read the press release, are a matter of public record.

[2:00:57] You were also involved in a nursing home problem in which the bankruptcy court findings, they

[2:01:08] found a diversion of assets, a sham company was created to divert assets to avoid paying

[2:01:16] one billion dollars in wrongful death judgments.

[2:01:20] You know what I think about that?

[2:01:22] Again, that was a, you know, that too was a litigation brought by some very aggressive

[2:01:29] plaintiff's attorney, which unfortunately is also a risk of the nursing home business.

[2:01:34] And that too was settled without any adverse finding.

[2:01:43] Well, you know, one man's trash is another man's treasure, as they say, but you call

[2:01:48] at the risk of being in the nursing home or healthcare business, but you're still obligated

[2:01:54] to conform yourself to legal activities, correct?

[2:01:59] That is correct, and as I stand here today, I am unimplicated in any of the type of activities

[2:02:11] that you are speaking about.

[2:02:16] The bankruptcy court findings, I think, named you in those findings.

[2:02:21] Again, those were allegations, those were not findings, those were not entered, those were not entered into judgments.

[2:02:31] Can you talk about the genesis of what those claims or allegations were about?

[2:02:37] Again, there were very aggressive plaintiff attorneys looking for a source of payment

[2:02:45] for some, again, what I would say were very aggressive claims, and again, there's probably

[2:02:53] not enough time here today to really go into the whole, to the whole stores.

[2:02:59] So, notwithstanding aggressive litigators, you escaped unscathed?

[2:03:07] Again, I would say that there were no adverse findings, so that is correct.

[2:03:16] I have nothing further to discuss.

[2:03:20] Anyone have any other questions for Mr. Forman?

[2:03:26] Okay.

[2:03:27] Reed?

[2:03:31] Anything else?

[2:03:32] No, you're good for now.

[2:03:34] Thank you so much.

[2:03:37] Thank you.

[2:03:38] So, like this first up, my name is Reed Sackwich.

[2:03:42] I am a lifelong resident of the village of New High Park,

[2:03:48] proud graduate of all New High Public Schools,

[2:03:53] starting at New High Park Road School

[2:03:54] and New High Park Memorial High School.

[2:03:56] I am currently the owner of a plumbing company.

[2:03:59] I'm a licensed master plumber, Sackwich Plumbing.

[2:04:04] I also am a partner in the unit New High Park,

[2:04:08] a family run company business

[2:04:10] that my family owns. Currently, I'm the Chairman of the Board of Fire Commissions in the New

[2:04:16] Epoch Fire District. I am the next Chief of New Epoch Fire District. I am married with

[2:04:22] two children, a young lady and a son. And I look forward to serving Nassau County and

[2:04:29] trying to get them to proceed in a great direction.

[2:04:33] Thank you.

[2:04:34] Before I open up the questions, I've known Reid for probably 30 years or longer.

[2:04:40] I actually knew his father as well before him.

[2:04:44] Both Reid is his two brothers, one of whom was a New York City firefighter

[2:04:48] and the other who's also serving as a commissioner.

[2:04:51] Their father has been active in serving our community for not just decades,

[2:04:56] but we're talking 50, 60, 70 years that they've been giving back to the community.

[2:05:00] so you would be an excellent addition to serving the county.

[2:05:05] Any other questions or discussion?

[2:05:10] Okay, thank you, Reid.

[2:05:12] Any debate or discussion before we go?

[2:05:20] I just want to further expound on my colleague,

[2:05:25] legislative truckers, points in regards to Mr. Foreman.

[2:05:28] It sounded like Mr. Foreman gave some clarity in terms of the issue at hand,

[2:05:34] but I really would want to hear, and I'm going to respectfully request that that appointment be tabled,

[2:05:41] I really want to hear from the administration of whether or not they were concerned,

[2:05:45] or even aware of some of the stuff that occurred, you know, some 12 years ago,

[2:05:50] and were they comfortable with those responses?

[2:05:52] And it just seems like it seems like a very large issue,

[2:05:56] and I understand Mr. Forman has indicated that he didn't pay anything towards the $14 million,

[2:06:01] But, but, but obviously he decided and there's some concerns here with the FBI and I would

[2:06:07] think I would want to hear from the administration to get a little bit more clarity.

[2:06:11] I'm just concerned that we, we don't, you know, start to set a precedent that, that

[2:06:15] we're just going to look past this kind of stuff without hearing from the administration

[2:06:18] when we hear something on the floor that references Medicaid for, which I understand,

[2:06:22] you know, in that business, as Mr. Foreman indicated, a lot of people are investigated

[2:06:27] regarding that.

[2:06:27] But it just seems like the county has a history of stuff

[2:06:32] like this happening.

[2:06:34] And it's happening in previous administrations.

[2:06:36] And it just seems to be, it just seems logical to me that

[2:06:40] rather than just rush and pass it through, it just seems

[2:06:43] logical that we at least hear from the administration

[2:06:45] to make sure that they're still, I like to know that

[2:06:49] they're aware, because we discovered it by doing a

[2:06:53] Google search, because we didn't get a chance to

[2:06:55] interview Mr. Forman.

[2:06:56] But I just want to make sure that they're aware.

[2:06:59] So either someone come up, or we table it, or we discuss it another time.

[2:07:05] But it seems to me it seems to be a little improved to move forward after hearing what we just heard

[2:07:10] and to find out if they still want to be able to move forward.

[2:07:15] Well, there's members of the administration here.

[2:07:17] They're upstairs.

[2:07:18] Nobody's approached us and said, well, we're drawing this nomination.

[2:07:21] So I mean, that's really not an issue.

[2:07:23] So I mean, if you want to make a motion to the table, you can go ahead and do so if you need a second.

[2:07:30] Well, I mean that. I don't know if Chris Lamorne is still in the back. I mean, I'm not too sure if he is.

[2:07:39] He may not be able to comment on it, but he may not know if he's able to comment on what we just heard.

[2:07:44] I would like to start with whether or not the administration was aware.

[2:07:48] If the administration was aware, then we can go from there and maybe he can't comment on that part.

[2:07:55] But I'd at least like to know if Chris, if you don't mind coming up, just to find out.

[2:08:00] And he may say, you know, he doesn't know. Which is fine. That's okay.

[2:08:06] Chris, why don't you come to the microphone to tell us whether or not the administration is withdrawing this nomination?

[2:08:12] No, because I know from the administration we're not withdrawing the item.

[2:08:17] You heard from Mr. Foreman, he explained the factors around the matters that were brought

[2:08:21] up, so at this time we're not withdrawing it.

[2:08:24] So you were, so you, so just to be clear, you were aware before he was presented to us

[2:08:29] today of the concerns of Mr. Foreman.

[2:08:31] I was not aware personally, particularly, but the administration obviously has the

[2:08:36] background of Mr. Foreman and was more than happy to present him for the nomination

[2:08:39] today.

[2:08:39] Understandable.

[2:08:40] Okay.

[2:08:40] No further curses.

[2:08:42] We don't have any disabled.

[2:08:45] Now

[2:08:51] we're going to have a vote on the three nominations. All in favor of these three nominations,

[2:08:58] signify by saying aye. Aye. Those opposed.

[2:09:05] Passes by a vote of 11 to 7. They pass.

[2:09:11] The last two nominations we have today are items 36 and 37. Resolutions 80 and 81.

[2:09:18] these are resolutions to confirm the county executive's appointment of William

[2:09:22] Rockensees and Reginald Spinello to the Nessau County Industrial Development

[2:09:28] Agency. Moved by Legislative Ford, seconded by Legislative Walker. Those two

[2:09:36] nominations are for us.

[2:09:39] Good afternoon,

[2:09:53] everyone. Bill Rockensees, thank you for

[2:09:58] and I'm for inviting me here today for confirmation.

[2:10:02] Thank you to Bruce Blakeman for nominating me.

[2:10:04] I believe you have my resume,

[2:10:06] but just I'll give a brief synopsis.

[2:10:09] So I'm a civil engineer, graduated from Manhattan College.

[2:10:13] I have a license to practice engineering

[2:10:15] in the state of New York.

[2:10:18] Formally 30 years of service in municipal government,

[2:10:22] working for the Village of Freeport, town of Hempstead,

[2:10:26] as their engineer for the town. I was a commissioner of engineering. In those roles, I did a lot

[2:10:32] of obviously project design, but also involved in site plan reviews, both residential, commercial,

[2:10:41] subdivision work. So I'm very familiar with zoning and planning and that sort of thing.

[2:10:48] Currently, I work for a private engineering firm on Long Island H2M in there over five

[2:10:53] years so I feel that my background could help the board or services. I am a lifelong resident

[2:11:03] of Nassau County. I live in West Hempstead with my wife. I raise my kids in West Hempstead.

[2:11:09] Two of them have owned houses in Nassau County. If anybody has any questions, I'm here.

[2:11:16] I look forward to hopefully serving in this role.

[2:11:19] Okay, any questions for Mr. Roppensies?

[2:11:28] Good afternoon. I'm Reggie Spinello.

[2:11:31] I want to thank the county executive for the nomination

[2:11:36] and the opportunity to speak here in front of all of you.

[2:11:40] I was a councilman for two years in Glencove.

[2:11:45] I was also the mayor for four years for the city of Glencove.

[2:11:51] Also, during that time, I was the chair of the IDA, the CDA, and the local economic development

[2:11:59] court.

[2:12:02] One of the things that we did that was really tremendous for the City of Gwankow, we had

[2:12:09] a revitalization.

[2:12:11] It was a project that was many years into making.

[2:12:14] We revitalized 56 saithers on the waterfront.

[2:12:17] It was a billion-dollar public-private partnership with RxR, created about a thousand jobs, about

[2:12:28] 58 million in salaries, and because of the job and everything going forward with it,

[2:12:38] Over time, it will bring 50, have 50 more million dollars of spending into the local

[2:12:46] economy.

[2:12:48] We set it up.

[2:12:49] It was an interesting, it was called a PIF, which is a pilot incremental financing.

[2:12:56] The city was responsible for the infrastructure.

[2:13:00] There was a bond floated for that.

[2:13:02] In fact, the city was able to doing the sale of the property.

[2:13:09] We collected $15 million for the sale of the property which paid off a HUD loan to the county.

[2:13:17] We had $10 million in fees that helped us to turn a $5 million deficit in the city of Point Cove into a surplus when I left.

[2:13:28] Additionally, we were able to revitalize the downtown, we put together a mixed-use project

[2:13:37] in the middle of downtown, 146 rental units, and I think it's about 5,000 square feet of

[2:13:45] retail, so I'm familiar with IDAs and how they work.

[2:13:51] I look forward to the opportunity to serve the county.

[2:13:54] I think it's a very important thing.

[2:13:56] I think IDAs are very important, I think sometimes they're misunderstood, but I also think it's

[2:14:04] important that they be transparent and explain how they're doing everything with things going

[2:14:10] on in New York and people leaving.

[2:14:13] I think it's important that IDA take a role in actually maintaining residents here, bringing

[2:14:20] new ones in, and creating job opportunities so that we can keep people here.

[2:14:25] if you have any questions.

[2:14:28] Thank you, Reggie.

[2:14:29] Any legislative authority?

[2:14:31] Thank you, Presiding Officer. Good afternoon, gentlemen.

[2:14:34] Thank you. Congratulations.

[2:14:35] I served on the Town of Hempstead IDA

[2:14:37] for a couple of years before I was a legislator,

[2:14:39] and one of the things we did

[2:14:41] in the Town of Hempstead IDA

[2:14:43] was we put in place a policy

[2:14:45] that required any pilot

[2:14:48] proposal that

[2:14:49] notification go out to

[2:14:51] the elected representatives,

[2:14:55] the local

[2:14:55] municipality. While I don't believe that policy has been implemented in the county

[2:15:00] I do recall when the appointments to the IDA were made a couple of years back that I did

[2:15:06] ask that, nevertheless, even though it was our policy, that that be done. I'm asking for

[2:15:12] myself that I specifically be notified to any IDA pilot proposal in the 15th legislative

[2:15:17] district, but I'm sure my colleagues would agree that they want to be notified as well.

[2:15:23] That has happened. I have been notified anytime, but would you agree to ensure that we are

[2:15:29] notified of any pilot proposal prior to it being voted on yes in Glen Cove we

[2:15:34] did that actually this was a tax deviation so we had to present it to

[2:15:40] each affected tax jurisdiction we came here and presented to the county also

[2:15:45] and rather than just a straight pilot where the idea would approve it because

[2:15:51] it was a tax deviation we needed the approval of each of the four taxing

[2:15:56] district. We needed the city, the school, the county and the library. And we sent the

[2:16:03] information to all of them. It was a very complicated deal. And all of them had their

[2:16:08] attorneys looked at it and eventually all of them approved it and the product.

[2:16:12] Well, I understand that there's legal requirements to notify the taxing municipality. Don't

[2:16:17] speak specifically to me. I want an email being alerted that there is a proposed

[2:16:22] pilot in the 15th legislative district. Fair enough?

[2:16:26] Fine. Absolutely. Thank you.

[2:16:29] I think that goes for all of us. We're all very concerned about pilots recently so.

[2:16:44] Mayor, first of all, thank you for agreeing to take on this responsibility.

[2:16:49] And actually from both of the nominees, what do you view as being the proper function of the IDA?

[2:16:58] I

[2:17:01] would say to help with the economic growth of the county, to help bring in businesses,

[2:17:07] help keep businesses, I think it's important.

[2:17:10] I think small businesses need IDAs to help them wherever possible.

[2:17:14] So yeah, I think it's to help the economic growth of the town.

[2:17:21] As I had mentioned some of my thoughts, I also believe that it's important that

[2:17:28] that the IDAs can get, you know, depending on the project,

[2:17:33] we need also affordable housing.

[2:17:35] And with some of these IDA projects,

[2:17:37] like the one at the waterfront,

[2:17:39] there's about a 10% component for affordable,

[2:17:43] like all the workforce housing,

[2:17:44] but you have to make sure that housing

[2:17:46] is not 120 or 100 to 120% of AMI.

[2:17:51] You want it to be where other people can get there,

[2:17:53] like it's, whether it's,

[2:17:55] So it should go from like 60% up to 80%

[2:17:59] get those kind of people involved in it.

[2:18:02] The project, the downtown, there were so many people.

[2:18:06] 10% of it went for, went, was lottery.

[2:18:11] And some of those, some of those apartments down there

[2:18:15] are 60 to 80%, which is much more

[2:18:18] about really helping somebody out with

[2:18:20] because if you take 100, 120% of AMI,

[2:18:24] It's like a regular worker making $70,000, $80,000, $90,000 a year, so that really doesn't

[2:18:31] benefit the people that need it, but that's the component, and I think it's important.

[2:18:37] Thank you.

[2:18:38] I appreciate it.

[2:18:39] With respect to what would be your, I guess, basis of evaluating a particular project,

[2:18:45] what's your philosophy on that?

[2:18:48] In other words, what are you looking for in your evaluation of specific problems?

[2:18:55] Projects, what's your thought process?

[2:18:57] Well, I mean, you need to have some community benefit.

[2:19:01] It's got to benefit the community in certain ways.

[2:19:06] Obviously, you take a piece of property, like with the waterfront,

[2:19:12] there were no taxes for 30 years on that property.

[2:19:15] So, new revenue stream, more revenue, and you hope in some of these projects that IDA is still,

[2:19:23] unfortunately, a lot of them are rental units.

[2:19:28] And then when the numbers go to everyone, it doesn't look that good because the number of jobs created,

[2:19:34] how many jobs you have created in a rental unit, you have four or five workers, that's it.

[2:19:41] So I think you know you have to look at everything as a whole and you have to see what the needs of the community are

[2:19:47] Especially downtown, so if we're going to maintain people we need feet on the ground in downtown

[2:19:54] Downtown see people walking around at night City of Lankov unfortunately

[2:19:59] We're probably closed at five o'clock and you don't want a nine-to-five downtown

[2:20:04] So those kind of things that can keep people around and spending money in the local economy

[2:20:10] for me. I think that's important for an IDA. I appreciate it. Thank you for your insights.

[2:20:17] Thank you. Any other questions?

[2:20:21] Hi, I don't have a question, just a comment. I just have gotten to know both of you over the years,

[2:20:26] and I know Bill, my other life as an attorney, I've dealt with you at the town of Hempstead

[2:20:32] and land use issues, and I just, I'm very happy to see you both here for this today.

[2:20:38] gives me a lot of confidence in moving forward with the I.D.A.

[2:20:42] So.

[2:20:44] That's the Drucker.

[2:20:45] Thank you.

[2:20:46] Thank you, Presiding Officer.

[2:20:47] Mr. Spinello, I just have one question for you.

[2:20:49] So just to piggyback a little bit on what Legislative Roads had elicited from you

[2:20:54] about how, you know, your philosophy is that these pilots should benefit the community

[2:21:01] at large.

[2:21:02] So, in my district, Amazon built this tremendous last mile destination facility, so I'm sure

[2:21:12] you've seen them now or they're cropping up all over Long Island and heard about them.

[2:21:17] And although this was a blighted area and it was not on the tax rolls for 40 years

[2:21:23] or more, so I certainly welcomed a development project that conformed to the zoning

[2:21:32] there and provided the tax, put them on the tax rolls, but they applied for a pilot. And

[2:21:43] I vehemently opposed it because there was any other company in the world that is less

[2:21:50] in need of a pilot, it's Amazon, but yet nonetheless they got one. I'd like to know

[2:21:58] how you feel about something like that when you come across your desk as a member

[2:22:02] Well, I think that the way that they evaluate these projects for the IDA is, it may not be the size of the company and what they have, it's the amount of investment they want to make in that piece of property and the return that they're going to get from it if it's feasible for them with those particular numbers.

[2:22:28] and that's why they do the studies. They do the economic impact studies to see if that's

[2:22:35] the case.

[2:22:36] In this particular case, I think Amazon was playing a little bit of game of poker with

[2:22:40] the community saying that if they didn't get the tax pilot, they were going to withdraw

[2:22:45] from the project. This particular property was perfect for them. It was a vast swath

[2:22:50] of land. The project did not require any major excavation. It was a two-story building. It

[2:23:00] didn't require a lot of disturbance of the ground, of the soil, which was certainly that

[2:23:07] was concerning to the residents. And we had the Department of New York State D.E.C.

[2:23:12] on premises every single day, making sure that they did comply with the regulations.

[2:23:18] So they built it according to specs, according to zoning, but why in God's name did they need a pilot?

[2:23:26] This was not a major investment on their part. It was a two-story structure that required minimal excavation.

[2:23:35] And their allegation that if we didn't get the pilot, they're going to build it elsewhere.

[2:23:39] I said, well, good luck. Go find another property like this one. They didn't.

[2:23:42] Well, they didn't have to go look.

[2:23:43] But I just would like to know your comments, you know, you mentioned that the investment

[2:23:49] has to be commensurate with the return.

[2:23:53] Well, I don't think the investment was commensurate with the return of a pilot here.

[2:23:59] I wonder if you have thoughts on that.

[2:24:02] I mean, I can't answer that.

[2:24:04] I mean, people like pilots and people don't like pilots, and that's very understandable

[2:24:12] Because the measuring stick should be the amount of taxes that the property is generating versus future taxes.

[2:24:30] But for the incentive, they wouldn't get their return on investment.

[2:24:38] So I understand what you're saying, and sometimes companies are greedy, and that's where IDAs,

[2:24:45] where you have to make decisions and say no.

[2:24:48] But pilots don't lower taxes.

[2:24:54] Okay, pilots slow the rate of growth for a pilot,

[2:24:59] but a pilot never takes what the taxes are and lowers them.

[2:25:03] It just, the theory is that they grow at a rate, at a slower rate over time so that

[2:25:13] whosoever is project, they get to absorb and make the money back.

[2:25:18] Yeah, but the reduction in taxes at the early stages that a pilot offers, that gap is made

[2:25:25] up by the taxpayers, the residents, and there better be a return of investment there

[2:25:32] for the community. There better be a clawback if they don't comply with what you're talking

[2:25:36] about. The IDA puts these specifications on community improvement or benefits to the

[2:25:43] community. Well, you know what? I don't believe you can ever paint it with a broad brush

[2:25:48] and say, I either like pilots or I don't like pilots. Every pilot should be evaluated

[2:25:51] on its own merits. But I just wanted to know your philosophy in following up

[2:25:56] with legislative roads. If you had a philosophy vis-a-vis a company like Amazon.

[2:26:06] Well, Amazon hasn't come to going over and I doubt they will, but I mean every

[2:26:13] project like you said has to be looked at on its own merits and see what type of

[2:26:18] benefit it is for their community. I don't think you can paint it with a

[2:26:22] broad brush. I don't think there's one set four nil that works for every

[2:26:26] Thank you very much.

[2:26:30] What's that about?

[2:26:31] Just again, one additional question.

[2:26:36] Obviously in Nassau County and County projects we have prioritized the use of union labor.

[2:26:44] What's your view on either acquiring or strongly encouraging the use of union labor with respect to this project?

[2:26:53] I

[2:26:59] mean, as far as what we did in the city was the public amenities, which were the city's

[2:27:09] responsibility that we bonded for, that was union.

[2:27:13] That had to be union.

[2:27:14] When it came to the private piece of it, that became between the union and RXR.

[2:27:26] But it doesn't guarantee that union labor will be used on these projects.

[2:27:31] And I think I understand what legislative roads I didn't mean to take over from you, Steve.

[2:27:36] No, I mean, I think Union labor should be used on things, but in our particular case,

[2:27:44] there was a whole field and those are the things that sort of get negotiated.

[2:27:49] I mean, that could be negotiated in the beginning.

[2:27:51] We had that as the participation plan.

[2:27:54] We also had 20% local hiring for the project.

[2:27:58] So we had things like that that all went into the matter.

[2:28:01] But when you look at the issue of pilots, and I agree with you, every pilot should be looked at independently and evaluated on its own basis as to what the project is and what the investment is and what it will bring back to the community.

[2:28:15] But I think that my concern, and it may be shared by some of my fellow members up here, that when you look at pilots, even though you're claiming that it doesn't take away from the taxes,

[2:28:27] it does stop the growth of taxes on that property because it slows it

[2:28:32] slows it down you know it could be 20 years 15 years so when you look at that

[2:28:37] that is something any increases will be borne by the tax-paying base okay

[2:28:42] because as increases that that their increases will stay flat it can

[2:28:47] fluctuate even higher so residents so I think sometimes when we look at the

[2:28:51] fact that a developer is going to get a benefit okay in the form of a

[2:28:56] pilot that we look at, perhaps maybe they should advocate toward either a project labor

[2:29:03] agreement or utilizing union labor, because in almost all the cases, those union members

[2:29:09] will be local residents, so that that investment would be that they will then be hiring and

[2:29:16] bringing in people who actually live in the community or close to that community and

[2:29:20] that they will spend their money within that community.

[2:29:23] So when you go to non-union without having an apprenticeship program that is required

[2:29:30] in place, the developers then can bring people from out of state.

[2:29:34] So that's where we lose even more so.

[2:29:36] So that is, I think, why, and I'm sorry for jumping on your question, but I'll give

[2:29:40] it back to you, but that is why I say that the IDA has to seriously look at and petition

[2:29:46] in New York State to start changing this and require a certain percentage. If an IDA, if

[2:29:52] somebody is getting a pilot payment of a certain percentage of the project, it must be mandated

[2:29:58] that they either sign a PLA.

[2:30:04] And we had an apprentice program also, and minority business, everything else, yeah.

[2:30:11] Exactly, thank you.

[2:30:12] Well, Legislator Ford, you certainly covered the topic and the rationale for the questions,

[2:30:20] so I appreciate that one. Thank you.

[2:30:23] All right, thank you. Any other questions? All right, any debated discussion?

[2:30:28] Thank you, folks. Thank you. Reggie, Bill.

[2:30:33] All in favor, signify by saying aye. Aye. Those

[2:30:36] opposed? Passes again by a vote of 12, 11 to the power of 6, 7, 7 negative.

[2:30:48] All right.

[2:30:48] Those are all the appointments that we have. The next item we have is item 10, Resolution

[2:30:55] 54. A resolution proving a memorandum of agreement between and stipulates the settlement

[2:30:59] by and between the county and the Nassau County Sheriff's Correctional Officers Benevolence Association,

[2:31:05] local 830 of the Civil Service Employees Association,

[2:31:09] the Detectives Association, Inc., and the Superior Association of the County of Nassau.

[2:31:17] Motion by the Legislator Sheffer, seconded by the Legislator Walker.

[2:31:22] That's before us, Peter.

[2:31:24] Good afternoon, members of the legislature.

[2:31:26] My name is Peter B. And I'm a principal in the law firm of B. Reddy, Fishbine, Hatter and Donovan.

[2:31:33] With me today is my law partner Bill DeWitt.

[2:31:36] And we have previously spoken to several of your committees on this topic.

[2:31:42] But for the benefit of those of you who may have missed the legislative presentation,

[2:31:47] we were asked to assist the county in resolving what has been referred to as the longevity dispute,

[2:31:53] a long-standing dispute between the county and its several unions, five of them specifically.

[2:32:01] By way of background, each of the county's union collective bargaining agreements calls for compensation

[2:32:08] to be paid in a number of different categories, not just base pay.

[2:32:12] There is base pay.

[2:32:13] There are provisions for night shift differential, holiday pay, a variety of different categories.

[2:32:18] Back in 2011, you will recall that NIFA imposed a wage freeze, and that freeze covered essentially all categories of pay.

[2:32:29] In 2014, that freeze was lifted with respect to most categories of pay as a result of agreements between the unions and the county which were approved by NIFA.

[2:32:40] by NYFA. That wage freeze lasted right through them until 2014 when those agreements were

[2:32:49] executed with the county and approved by NYFA. However, those agreements left longevity frozen

[2:32:57] and therefore the county continued to pay longevity at the frozen dollar amounts which

[2:33:04] were then in place at 2014 and which had been frozen since 2011. That longevity pay basically

[2:33:11] provided for a certain amount of money to be paid based on years of service with the county.

[2:33:18] When the 2014 agreements expired in 2017, the unions took the position that longevity

[2:33:26] was fully restored and no longer frozen. The county took the contrary position

[2:33:33] And as such, since 2018, longevity has remained at those frozen rates, and the topic was put into litigation.

[2:33:44] The matter was litigated through the courts with the ultimate disposition that the courts directed that the resolution be the result of binding arbitration.

[2:33:55] Preparations were made fairly recently to go into binding arbitration.

[2:34:00] However, prior to the arbitration taking place, the current county executive suggested the

[2:34:07] possibility that the parties attempt to mediate the dispute, and that was done with the assistance

[2:34:12] of a retired New York State Supreme Court judge, Justice George Silver.

[2:34:17] The result of those mediations was that the parties did reach an agreement, the mediation

[2:34:23] was successful, and the outcome of that mediation is before you today.

[2:34:27] It provides, in short, that employees will get only one-half of the additional monies

[2:34:33] retroactive to January of 18 that they would have gotten had the unions won the arbitration,

[2:34:38] and only 72.22 percent of the frozen longevity formula going forward, starting in January

[2:34:44] of 22.

[2:34:46] It further provides for a ceiling or cap of 32 years of service for the accumulation

[2:34:51] of additional years of service towards longevity pay.

[2:34:55] While the retroactive portion of the settlement reflected a 50-50 risk assessment of going

[2:35:01] into arbitration, the going forward portion of the settlement is a prospective structural

[2:35:06] change, significantly reducing the longevity formula that were in effect previously.

[2:35:13] If any member of the legislature has any questions, we'd be happy to answer whatever

[2:35:16] we can.

[2:35:17] I just want to confirm what you just said that so the matter has been referred to binding

[2:35:22] arbitration.

[2:35:23] Yes sir.

[2:35:24] So once it goes to binding arbitration there's no appeals, there's no court that's going

[2:35:29] to intervene.

[2:35:29] Essentially what the arbitrator rules is going to be what the county will be stuck with.

[2:35:35] That is essentially correct.

[2:35:36] And over the years the county's history of binding arbitration has not been good.

[2:35:42] Well, there are two kinds of arbitration. There is both interest arbitration and grievance arbitration.

[2:35:49] This was ordered into grievance arbitration. An arbitrator is not bound by traditional rules of evidence,

[2:35:55] is not bound by many of the rules of law that would apply in a court, and therefore there is a risk

[2:36:02] that an arbitrator would reach a result that you or I might feel was not the proper remedy

[2:36:09] based on the documents before us, notwithstanding a potentially erroneous result, the courts

[2:36:15] are very unlikely to overturn it in the absence of irrationality.

[2:36:19] Okay. Any other questions for Mr. B?

[2:36:25] Thank you, Peter.

[2:36:26] Thank you very much for your time of attention. Appreciate it.

[2:36:28] All right. I'd like to ask Maurice to come up for a moment.

[2:36:31] Will

[2:36:43] you show us budget review? Did you take a look at the longevity deal?

[2:36:49] Yes, we did. And we came up with a number that is pretty close to their number.

[2:36:52] Our estimation was about $106.7 million versus their number.

[2:36:58] Did you also take a look at the possible exposure if this matter is not resolved?

[2:37:04] We were asked about that this morning and we looked at it and if this was resolved not in the county's favor,

[2:37:11] we would lose the 50% discount that we're getting on the retro, the 72.2 cap going forward,

[2:37:17] and the 30 year cap that this deal is offering by doing that the course will

[2:37:25] be an additional 81.1 million we estimate. Thank you. I noticed in your

[2:37:32] report that you indicated that Mr. DeLaweson had been negotiating contracts

[2:37:39] for the county but was not involved in this settlement, correct? That's correct.

[2:37:44] You noted how much Mr. DeLarvison has been paid to date?

[2:37:48] I believe it was $925,000.

[2:37:52] So Mr. DeLarvison's fees, as of now, paid by a knifer with the S.O. County tax payers money is almost a million dollars?

[2:38:01] That is correct.

[2:38:02] He's continuing to be paid $25,000 a month?

[2:38:06] That is correct.

[2:38:08] So here's, I mean, it's not for you, really, but I believe Knifer needs an oversight board.

[2:38:14] You know, this is a

[2:38:20] no big contract. They appointed him. There's little oversight.

[2:38:27] And we're going to be seeking copies of the hours and time sheets that he's put in for almost a million dollars.

[2:38:34] They make almost all their decisions in executive session. They come out and it's a pro forma vote.

[2:38:39] There's no public comment. I mean it's astonishing that a governmental body in the state of New York can get away with this, but they do.

[2:38:49] I'll get off my soapbox. Thank you.

[2:38:53] Thanks. Any other questions for Mr. Chalmers?

[2:38:56] Any

[2:39:00] other debate or discussion on the longevity payments settlement?

[2:39:04] If not, all in favor signify by saying aye.

[2:39:07] Aye.

[2:39:07] Those opposed, the carries unanimously.

[2:39:11] Move

[2:39:19] to item number nine, which is the settlement with Leipa.

[2:39:24] It's a resolution authorizing the county attorney to compromise and settle the claims of petitioner,

[2:39:29] a long-term lighting company doing business as Leipa,

[2:39:36] and the county of Nassau pursuant to the county law,

[2:39:40] the county government law, and the Nassau County Administrative Code.

[2:39:45] Anyone here from the administration on this?

[2:39:54] Motion by legislator Faredi, seconded by legislator Sheik.

[2:40:00] So it's before us.

[2:40:04] Mr. Vincelet.

[2:40:11] Good afternoon.

[2:40:12] I'm Dan Vincelet.

[2:40:13] I'm Trial Counsel to Nassau County for the Long Island Power Authority tax or charari proceedings.

[2:40:20] Previously, we provided a summary to the legislature on April 11th that highlighted the litigation that's before the court and the proposed settlement.

[2:40:29] To recap, a trial is scheduled before Judge DiStefano and Nassau County Supreme Court.

[2:40:36] On May 30th, appraisal reports have been filed exchanged by the experts of the respective parties.

[2:40:42] Both respective experts have valued the Barrett and Glenwood landing plants significantly below the indicated market values for the years at issue, which are 2015 through 2019.

[2:40:56] If this were to proceed to trial, the indicated reductions for the plants are in the range

[2:41:01] of about 70 to 80% over that course of years.

[2:41:04] It would be a very, very, very significant refund to the county in hundreds of millions

[2:41:10] of dollars, $700,000, $800,000,000, in addition to the refunds which would be paid with

[2:41:16] interest and costs, the revenue, tax revenue from those properties would be significantly

[2:41:22] reduced, based upon a reduced assessment found by the court.

[2:41:26] What is before you is a settlement that has been negotiated that basically sets,

[2:41:32] well, first and foremost, it waves refunds from the county to Long Island Power Authority

[2:41:39] and National Grid.

[2:41:41] It sets a payment plan, a guaranteed payment plan over a course of six years.

[2:41:46] that is about 46% of the current tax payments provides a glide path to the affected school

[2:41:56] districts. And it also provides for an extension, the power service agreement is supposed to

[2:42:07] terminate in 2028. If that agreement is extended, then the settlement period would be extended

[2:42:15] as well. The payments would remain the same even if assets were to be retired or removed.

[2:42:21] So that is the settlement that is before this legislature. If you wish me to recap further

[2:42:27] or answer any questions, they're before us. Glad to entertain you.

[2:42:32] Just to highlight a couple of points of what you just said. Now, assuming that the

[2:42:36] The exposure includes the 2005, 2006, 2006, 2007, 2008 cases, the possible exposure to

[2:42:45] the counties in the range of 750 million to 800 million.

[2:42:48] That is correct.

[2:42:49] And we have indication from the Office of Budget Review that if it was in that range,

[2:42:56] the debt service for the county would approximately be $100 million a year.

[2:43:03] Now you indicated the glide path and that after five years the liper will be paying 53.5% of what it is paying now.

[2:43:15] That is correct.

[2:43:16] In terms of the glide path, the first year, in terms of percentages, what will the liper be paying?

[2:43:26] I don't believe one. Let me see if I have that.

[2:43:28] You have just an approximate number.

[2:43:31] I have it in millions, believe

[2:43:39] the first year's payment I believe is $42 million from the current.

[2:43:50] I guess in general terms the percentage will be higher and it will start over the course of five years,

[2:43:57] it will go down to the 53.5%.

[2:43:59] It will be significantly higher.

[2:44:01] With respect to the appraisals that have been submitted to date, in terms of EF Barrett,

[2:44:08] What was Leip as opposed to in their appraisal, what would the reduction be for Barrett?

[2:44:16] Yes, EF Barrett has an indicated market value for the years at issue between $578 million

[2:44:22] and $503 million. Leip as appraisal report came in in 2015 at $371.2 million and in the last year

[2:44:32] 2019 at $27.8 million, which is a significant reduction. The county's appraisal for those

[2:44:39] years in the earliest year 2015 came in at $299 million, which is approximately $70 million

[2:44:47] less than Leipa's appraisal report. In the final year, the county's report came

[2:44:52] in at $93.5 million, which, while higher than Leipa's, is still significantly lower

[2:44:59] than the 500

[2:45:02] So generally the court will be deciding between those two appraisals.

[2:45:07] That is correct.

[2:45:07] And with respect to at least glen with landing, county's appraisal is even lower than LIPEs.

[2:45:16] Yes it is.

[2:45:17] And if county goes to trial on this action and loses, there's no glide path, correct?

[2:45:23] There is no glide path. What will happen is the refunds, the reductions will occur, refunds will be ordered with interest.

[2:45:29] and then the assessment will be set at the lower number.

[2:45:33] And that will be immediate.

[2:45:34] Now, we're not talking about five years from now.

[2:45:36] No, that's correct.

[2:45:36] It will be immediate.

[2:45:37] So those percentage reductions are substantially higher,

[2:45:42] greater reductions than under this light path.

[2:45:46] Correct.

[2:45:48] And there are no other appraisals out there.

[2:45:50] The court's simply going to be considering

[2:45:51] between one or other appraisal

[2:45:53] that's substantially worse than this deal

[2:45:56] is in the ocean.

[2:45:56] But the court is limited to the two appraisal reports that have been filed exchanged.

[2:46:01] In other words, the school districts are going to be hit with these tremendous reductions immediately.

[2:46:07] Correct.

[2:46:09] Any other questions?

[2:46:11] Mr. Vincenlant, let's say it's a Reggie Witten.

[2:46:15] Thank you, Presiding Officer.

[2:46:18] Look,

[2:46:20] I just have, in my mind, this has been going on for 10 years in my district.

[2:46:25] Lypa. Lypa has also, their revenue has gone up tremendously in those last 10 years.

[2:46:32] My district in Swells Island Park has suffered environmental losses that we don't even know yet.

[2:46:41] Lypa has a whole harmless letter saying they're not going to be responsible for any environmental cleanup in my district.

[2:46:49] I can't understand how that's even imaginable, knowing just little things that I know, including

[2:46:55] the fact that right near Leipa was supposedly one of the biggest fishing spots because the

[2:47:00] water was so hot.

[2:47:02] And that's, you know, who knows if that, what type of radioactive or whatever type

[2:47:07] of materials caused the water to be so hot in that area, drew all the fish there.

[2:47:13] So we have no idea what the environmental impact is.

[2:47:17] I just have a couple things that are just still bothering me.

[2:47:21] Look, if the school districts are doing okay, I'm happy about that.

[2:47:25] I'm concerned about the residents.

[2:47:28] Number one, like that is a utility.

[2:47:33] We have two separate assessment categories for utilities, correct?

[2:47:41] Yes.

[2:47:42] Number three and number four.

[2:47:44] So when one of those members of those groups is reduced like LIPA is, which we can get into another whole story,

[2:47:55] because I don't know how they're being reduced just because they found a way to use less space basically to do their business,

[2:48:02] but that's another whole problem, how is it that the homeowners are being affected with what I'm hearing is going to be almost $200 a month, believe it or not?

[2:48:14] within the five years of an increase in school taxes.

[2:48:17] How is it that homeowners who are not in those three

[2:48:20] or four class, how are they getting hit with this increase?

[2:48:23] We don't have exact figures, but what I, you know,

[2:48:27] what we have shared in the past is that WIPA does have

[2:48:30] separate agreements with the two school districts

[2:48:32] with respect to direct payments.

[2:48:34] So the thought is that the payments are playing

[2:48:37] to North Shore and to Island Park school districts

[2:48:40] will help soften the blow if you will.

[2:48:44] You know, no one knows what the tax levy for the school districts is going to be or what

[2:48:48] the rates are going to be, so we have to project that.

[2:48:51] But based on those estimates, it does get absorbed across the four classes, plus with

[2:48:57] the direct payments coming from LIPA that should help to soften the blow, if you

[2:49:02] will.

[2:49:03] Well, I had a problem with that from day one because, you know, Northport got $14

[2:49:08] million, I believe, which is tremendous. I forget I did. It's gotten before times, but

[2:49:14] I apologize, I don't know exactly how many more. It is for Island Park. We can go through

[2:49:23] this again during committees. Island Park is getting hit even harder, in my opinion,

[2:49:28] because not only is their average income for the area much less, but they're also

[2:49:36] getting hit percentage wise probably more than North Shore and they're still

[2:49:41] they're still producing a lot of energy from there. I don't understand how

[2:49:45] Leipa is getting this tax break. I am just saying that as a I understand that

[2:49:50] there seems to be this risk that everyone's concerned about and I and

[2:49:55] that's because they knocked down a building I get it they knocked down a

[2:49:58] building but they're still producing the same amount of energy they're

[2:50:01] still making the same profit. They're still a monopoly. We have no place to go other than

[2:50:07] Maipa. So I can go on. I think it's hurting my constituents not only with the school district

[2:50:14] because what happens in year six, you know? God knows what's going to happen in year six

[2:50:20] when there's no more benefit from this settlement. I mean, we're going to get clocked as the

[2:50:25] of, you know, the most professional word I can think of

[2:50:29] without saying a bad word.

[2:50:34] So the other thing that I'm concerned about,

[2:50:38] we wanted, I know what they wanted to settle this for a while.

[2:50:41] It's one of the reasons I understand

[2:50:44] it's part of the reason why we have oversight

[2:50:46] from the state, I get it.

[2:50:48] We have to get rid of this burden of this lawsuit.

[2:50:51] I understand that.

[2:50:52] However, when the prior administration tried to do this,

[2:50:58] we were told that we couldn't do a pilot with the North Shore anyway

[2:51:02] because Leipa does not own the property.

[2:51:05] They still don't own the property.

[2:51:06] It's national grid owns the property.

[2:51:08] There's no doubt.

[2:51:09] There's never been a question.

[2:51:11] So in the presentation that was provided to us during committees,

[2:51:15] pilot I think was used, I think accounted eight times.

[2:51:20] Now, you're changing it to some special usage that we use for sewer tax, saying that that's

[2:51:26] what we're going to be using now.

[2:51:28] I want you to explain to me, number one, has it ever been used before?

[2:51:32] And number two, how is it different from a pilot?

[2:51:35] Direct assessment, which is being used, has been used for assessment purposes for, say,

[2:51:41] for zombie houses or properties that are taken off the roll as a direct tax, if

[2:51:47] it has not been used in the compromise or settlement of tax or shirari proceedings.

[2:51:54] The way that it is different than a pilot is that in the calculation of the school tax rate

[2:51:59] and the school aid formula, that value gets counted in the bucket as far as the formula for school aid

[2:52:05] and for the school taxes.

[2:52:08] Do you think that this could be challenged in this court of law?

[2:52:11] Anything could be challenged.

[2:52:13] I think it might be.

[2:52:16] Anything could be challenged.

[2:52:17] And what would be your defense in saying that it's, you know, how did we use this?

[2:52:22] How did you put the utility in the same category as a sewage pipe?

[2:52:30] It's a direct assessment. It's not specific to sewage pipes.

[2:52:35] And again, this is consistent with the real property tax law

[2:52:38] and with the Nassau County Administrative Code.

[2:52:41] That's how it's being compromised.

[2:52:43] I think it's going to be tough to defend from what I've been told.

[2:52:47] First of all, even the fact that pilot was used by Leipa so many times,

[2:52:52] I mean they think it's a pilot.

[2:52:56] The legality of just that in my mind is a real question,

[2:53:01] because again, we want to save the county money,

[2:53:02] but if we're not doing something that will stand up in court,

[2:53:06] if it's challenged, I don't know how much money we're actually saving the county.

[2:53:11] So, again, as someone who represents this district, the school district might be okay for a couple

[2:53:20] of years.

[2:53:21] They're going to get hit very hard when this is over.

[2:53:24] It's very temporary band-aid, maybe you could say, and right now we're seeing it's a glide

[2:53:31] path.

[2:53:32] It's going to come in pretty hard that sixth year, no matter what you say.

[2:53:35] I'm hearing $200 a month.

[2:53:37] that was that was an estimate actually from you know from prior administration

[2:53:42] and I believe it fits in the just me looking at it the calculations um it's

[2:53:50] it's Leipa is the utility where I think we're I I understand the risk to the

[2:53:59] county but I think a lot of judges would take a look at this and say hey

[2:54:04] You know what? You're still making the same amount of energy.

[2:54:08] You may be found a more effective way to do it, great.

[2:54:12] But you're still making the same profit, and you still have environmental impacts.

[2:54:16] I forget the exact percentage that Island Park is still producing, but it's still a tremendous amount.

[2:54:22] I remember when we looked at a house in Glenwood Landing,

[2:54:26] before I was married, there was a beautiful house near the water,

[2:54:29] and I couldn't remember why I didn't sell.

[2:54:30] near Leipa plant and in the backyard there was a wire like 10 inches wide

[2:54:36] buzzing that went right by the house. I mean our residents have been exposed

[2:54:41] to all this. They're going to be continuing to be exposed especially in

[2:54:45] Island Park and we're all afraid that a judge is going to look at it and say oh

[2:54:49] Leipa you knocked down a building so you're entitled to have a you know

[2:54:54] $700 million tax cut congratulations. I just maybe because my father was a

[2:54:59] I have more faith in judges to take a real look at the evidence than this.

[2:55:04] I mean, I understand the risk, and I understand mitigating the risk.

[2:55:08] But at some point, when are we going to stand up to these utilities?

[2:55:12] Like, when are we going to say, you come into our area, you don't even live in this area,

[2:55:17] you make a tremendous amount of money, and you take advantage of our area environmentally.

[2:55:24] And, you know, we're not doing anything to stop you.

[2:55:27] I think it's morally wrong.

[2:55:29] And I'm glad that the schools have five years to get ready for the hit,

[2:55:34] but the hit's still coming.

[2:55:36] And the environmental impact, we don't even have a study,

[2:55:39] so we don't even know what that's going to be.

[2:55:41] And, you know, great.

[2:55:43] Maybe you get this lawsuit off the books.

[2:55:46] Congratulations.

[2:55:47] But it's at a big cost, in my opinion.

[2:55:51] Let's go to Ford.

[2:55:53] I'm just going to follow the legislative derigy written.

[2:55:56] And okay, so we're taking a look when I look at the Allen Puck School District and I think

[2:56:05] one of, I know it's been over 10 years and this has been hanging over our heads and you

[2:56:13] know I had a problem in the previous administration and I just don't understand why we carried

[2:56:18] this forward that when they negotiated a settlement with Leipa when they look at this that

[2:56:26] that they provide the same percentage reduction to all of the school districts that are involved

[2:56:31] in this, despite, you know, you had cited, you know, how these poor school districts

[2:56:36] and we're going to try to soften the blow. But it can never understand how you would

[2:56:42] reduce Isle and Park to the same level as Glenwood Landing when Isle and Park still

[2:56:48] has the Barrett and the building has not been demolished, not one piece of equipment

[2:56:53] has been taken out of it. It isn't basically an eyesore within the neighborhood which the

[2:56:59] people have to live with, close proximity. There are some very environmental concerns

[2:57:06] as it draws fresh water to cool the engines and stuff like that. Why didn't you look

[2:57:13] at this and say that maybe it would be fair if we took a look at what was on the property

[2:57:21] and what we were looking to achieve to help Leipa with their reduction.

[2:57:27] You know, I had expressed this a while ago about changing this.

[2:57:32] Why didn't you take a look at this?

[2:57:35] We tried to negotiate the best deal we could for both properties.

[2:57:40] The thing with the Glenwood Landing property was that the structure came down,

[2:57:46] but the roll was frozen at the time I believe.

[2:57:49] I came down in 2012 while the assessment roll was frozen.

[2:57:53] So

[2:57:56] we believe that the values that we negotiate at the end were the best that we could do

[2:58:01] for the two properties.

[2:58:02] But you said it.

[2:58:03] There was no building there.

[2:58:04] There's nothing there.

[2:58:05] When you look at Glenwood Landing, nothing.

[2:58:07] When you look at Isle and Park, there you go, you have this big, big end.

[2:58:10] The fact is that it still is generating electricity.

[2:58:13] It is still a viable power plant that is generating for hundreds of thousands of homes, all right?

[2:58:22] It will still be used. That location will still be used. It's not going away.

[2:58:28] It will still be used by LIPE or whatever energy company is going to come with them or after them or whatever,

[2:58:33] because we're looking, Equinor is planning on building a wind farm off of Long Beach Island.

[2:58:40] And there's their intention to run the cables from that wind farm up into the area of the

[2:58:45] Barrett.

[2:58:46] We also have our Bay Park Sewage Treatment Plant, which is now used to generate its own

[2:58:53] electricity, but to make it more stable, they invested $10 to $20 million in putting

[2:59:01] two new feeder cables so that it's a stable power supply for the Bay Park Sewage Treatment

[2:59:08] Plant.

[2:59:08] So we know that the power plant is there, but I just don't understand when we look at this you know both the north and the south shore

[2:59:16] It's not apples to apples. It's apples and oranges. So

[2:59:21] So what's going to happen is when I look at this and I

[2:59:26] Got thank you Maurice for providing me with this information

[2:59:29] But when I look at the difference in what these school districts are going to be impacted, you know based on

[2:59:35] on their school district, the number of residents,

[2:59:39] and it's where maybe Glenwood Landing

[2:59:44] might see a difference of like say $1,000,

[2:59:47] maybe Ocean Side will see a change of $1,000,

[2:59:51] but Island Park will go up maybe about $2,000

[2:59:55] or $2,500.

[2:59:57] So there is, you know, it really

[3:00:00] There really isn't. The comparison on the value of the plans is not consistent with the needs

[3:00:08] of the school. And I know Island Park is a much smaller school district, but it also has

[3:00:13] 43 percent of their students get free lunch, which is something that is not considered

[3:00:22] by New York State either, because had New York State education departments would take a look

[3:00:27] at maybe poverty levels in the various schools throughout the state, maybe they'd change their

[3:00:33] formula the way that they're handing down school aid, and then maybe Island Park would

[3:00:37] actually get its fair share or its rightful share to be able to stay in existence.

[3:00:44] But have you looked at other, or has anyone in the administration looked at other opportunities

[3:00:51] to soften the blow for Island Park?

[3:00:53] I know legislated Gerigie Witten and I had tried to float an idea of like maybe trying to establish some sort of a pilot through the county

[3:01:02] That maybe can help offset

[3:01:05] Has that ever been considered did we talked about that right to you? Am I?

[3:01:10] Unfortunately in the North Shore, we can't do a pilot because like but doesn't own the property

[3:01:16] Okay. All right, and I guess like but doesn't own the property. I think it's national grid that owns the property town in

[3:01:21] Island Park. The

[3:01:28] direct assessment, I was under the impression that by changing it from a pilot

[3:01:34] to a direct assessment that it would make it more palatable for the school district. But

[3:01:41] in essence it really doesn't. The taxes on the property paid by LIPA will be frozen

[3:01:49] and set at a certain rate, correct?

[3:01:51] That's correct.

[3:01:53] So will this type of maybe, Michelle can explain,

[3:01:57] will this type, will direct assessment,

[3:02:00] will this impact the formula that the school district,

[3:02:04] that the state may use in order to award state aid

[3:02:07] to the school district?

[3:02:09] I

[3:02:11] think it's the property tax cap that gets it

[3:02:13] impacted when it's a pilot.

[3:02:18] We'll go ahead, Michelle.

[3:02:19] Michelle's pilot deputy assessor.

[3:02:21] Regarding the pilot, I'm not an expert on how

[3:02:24] they deal with their tax cap. It's our understanding that it is a factor in their tax cap and that's

[3:02:30] why the county, after doing research and consultation with the county attorney's office has determined

[3:02:35] that the direct assessment would not impact them and they would be able to lower their

[3:02:40] levy by the amount of these payments. Should the school district choose to do that? We

[3:02:44] don't know if they're going to do that but the assumption is they would do that.

[3:02:47] And that would lessen the blow to the residents.

[3:02:49] all right and on the projections that we get you know we have received on you

[3:02:55] know like when you look at the glide path and I guess basically maybe based on

[3:03:00] what somebody is paying in school taxes currently and then with this glide path

[3:03:05] the increase is that we say they're usually you would incorporate the basic

[3:03:12] like 2% increase, but this currently includes the current state aid if it doesn't include

[3:03:22] any increase in any school aid on this, correct?

[3:03:25] That is correct.

[3:03:26] If they received more state aid than their levy would reduce even more.

[3:03:29] It also doesn't include the direct payment that is outside of the glide path schedule.

[3:03:34] So this is almost a worst-case scenario because the numbers changed from even Friday.

[3:03:39] Oh, okay.

[3:03:40] would we be able to get like maybe you know I know you can do it today but I'd

[3:03:46] like to see overall because I'd like to I've asked a county executive to send

[3:03:51] something out to the residents to explain yes I know I know Richard it's

[3:03:56] after the fact you know but yeah so

[3:04:04] Michelle Michelle I'd like to see so

[3:04:10] so that we can have a better understanding as we move forward, you know, with something

[3:04:14] like this.

[3:04:15] All right?

[3:04:16] Okay, thank you.

[3:04:17] Michelle, while you're there, I'd like to say to Richie, what has the question?

[3:04:21] Can you explain to me, I was told originally when I met with the assessment office, I'm

[3:04:29] not sure if you were there, and it was probably about nine years ago, not to worry about

[3:04:34] about school taxes or anything going up because life is a utility and they get assessed by

[3:04:41] usage or production rather. How the heck is this happening that we are giving them such

[3:04:48] a huge reduction just based on a building? No, no, no, no, wait, I'd like to hear it

[3:04:53] from the assessment department rather than the county attorney. I understand his thoughts.

[3:04:58] Unfortunately I'm not a utility assessor so I really don't have the expertise to

[3:05:01] answer that question.

[3:05:01] Alright, let me ask you another question then.

[3:05:04] Class 3 and 4 are for utilities and commercial, correct?

[3:05:09] Correct.

[3:05:09] Normally, when an entity that is involved with one of these groups, like Verizon, let's say,

[3:05:19] or whoever, leave or whatever happens,

[3:05:25] the other businesses in that class 3 and 4 pick up the difference, correct?

[3:05:30] No.

[3:05:31] So explain how that works.

[3:05:33] It depends on what the removal is.

[3:05:35] In this particular case, this is a physical removal out of class three and four.

[3:05:40] So that amount that they would share, that amount of the pie, so to speak, the class share,

[3:05:45] gets distributed equally to the remaining classes.

[3:05:48] In this case, that would be classes one and two.

[3:05:51] That's exactly contrary to what I was told like eight or nine years ago.

[3:05:55] I was with the mayor of Seacliffe at the time.

[3:05:58] So because a building is knocked down, it is now going to class 1 and 2.

[3:06:05] If a building was knocked down in class 3 and class 4, it would equally distribute to classes 1 and 2.

[3:06:11] So how does that work for the South Shore, for Island Park?

[3:06:14] Exactly the same way.

[3:06:15] But did you knock down any buildings, Denise?

[3:06:18] Did you have any buildings knocked down in there?

[3:06:21] No, Island Park, the Barrett is still the same building, right?

[3:06:25] So they didn't have any building at the beginning of time.

[3:06:26] The valuation aspect of it would be different.

[3:06:29] And in this particular instance, it's going to be a direct assessment.

[3:06:33] So it's going to be a removal as taxable value from the assessment rule.

[3:06:36] Even though building wasn't knocked down.

[3:06:38] Correct.

[3:06:39] So the reason it's happening on the North Shore is because the building was knocked down.

[3:06:42] It's being handled exactly the same way.

[3:06:45] All of these properties are going to be removed from the taxable portion of the roll.

[3:06:49] That's considered a physical removal, a quantity removal from those classes.

[3:06:53] and that's why the share will be equally distributed to classes one and two.

[3:06:58] Yeah, that does sound like a pilot.

[3:07:02] But the other thing is, I don't understand.

[3:07:07] Again, maybe I just have it, I've had it in my mind for so long

[3:07:10] that commercial and utility are completely separate from residential.

[3:07:16] They are separate as far as being in separate classes.

[3:07:20] You have to look at community as a whole.

[3:07:22] You can't just look at one class by itself.

[3:07:26] Something that happens in one class will affect the other classes.

[3:07:29] And the school district still needs the exact same amount of levy.

[3:07:33] So if class 3 and 4 are not paying that same amount of classes 1 and 2, we're going to pick up the difference.

[3:07:38] So I was told that the fact that Leipa was, you know, knocking down the building,

[3:07:45] I think that Verizon National Grid, and I believe it was Optima, was going to be picking up the slack.

[3:07:53] How much did they pick up?

[3:07:55] I don't have an answer to that question. We did not look at the other utility properties.

[3:07:59] So the other utility properties didn't have to pick up? Do you know if they had to pick up anything?

[3:08:05] We did not look at the other utility properties.

[3:08:10] So class 3 and 4 didn't have to absorb any increase, only the residential?

[3:08:17] We did not look at the other utility properties.

[3:08:23] I don't understand that because I've been told again, I don't know, I'm not an expert like you are and I appreciate, I'm sorry to have you in this position.

[3:08:33] It's not your fault, it's just that you're here representing the department.

[3:08:39] So, we don't know how much like of an increased Verizon or National Grid or Optima, all of those other members of Class 3 and 4 are absorbing.

[3:08:49] Correct. We did not look at the un-utility properties. We looked specifically at these properties that are in question.

[3:08:54] So

[3:09:01] what it is, though, within the school, within the district, within the Island Park School District,

[3:09:10] when you shifted over to, for the class one and class two to pick up the taxes,

[3:09:16] would it, if you shifted also to the, to any utilities, it would only be utilities in the school district?

[3:09:22] Correct. On the school side.

[3:09:24] On the school side.

[3:09:26] But the county would be, it would be shifted.

[3:09:29] If you shifted it to three and four, does the county portion?

[3:09:33] No, the shift would be the same way.

[3:09:35] It's just that when you're talking about the county,

[3:09:37] it's a very large county compared to a school district.

[3:09:39] But within, but the school portion taxes of the taxes

[3:09:43] would stay within the school, regardless of its utility,

[3:09:47] private home or business, correct?

[3:09:48] All right, thank you.

[3:09:50] Just, doesn't it happen every year that shifts takes place

[3:09:54] between the different classes?

[3:09:55] Yes.

[3:09:55] So if there's a massive reduction in commercial property in Nassau County, then it gets shifted

[3:10:02] to the other classes, correct?

[3:10:04] Correct.

[3:10:05] All right.

[3:10:06] We have several individuals who are here to speak.

[3:10:09] Two slips are in.

[3:10:10] Again, thank you for your patience and waiting here since we started the meeting.

[3:10:14] Richard Schoeren.

[3:10:20] Thank you for the opportunity to speak again, just to clarify some things that I've

[3:10:24] heard.

[3:10:24] It's kind of frustrating that the county is not up on these things, they can answer

[3:10:27] these questions clearly to me.

[3:10:29] Obviously, every business, every residence, every utility in Island Park's taxes are

[3:10:36] going to go up because of this.

[3:10:38] As you noted, Mr. Nicoletti, the tax levies are going to stay the same.

[3:10:44] Every residence, every business is going to have to absorb this, and I know I spoke

[3:10:51] about this before, but I want to give a little bit more flavor as to what's been

[3:10:55] going on in Island Park for the last decade.

[3:10:59] A decade ago the school came to the community and said we're faced with a tsunami, it's potentially catastrophic to the district.

[3:11:08] So many people, community-minded people like myself and the Civic Association and Denise was involved, we did what we could.

[3:11:16] We protested. Hundreds of students wrote cards that our library director here engineered.

[3:11:25] to all of our legislators, to Albany, to Leipa.

[3:11:30] We protested at the plant in the pouring rain.

[3:11:33] This is five, six years ago.

[3:11:36] We went to Leipa board meetings.

[3:11:39] The Chamber of Commerce president, myself,

[3:11:42] the library president, other people,

[3:11:44] we waited hours to speak directly to Mr. Falcone and others

[3:11:47] to tell them what the impact that their action was having on us.

[3:11:56] And we were out, our school district spent money, increased the money to be spent for our attorneys, and we hired a lobbyist, and we did all of this.

[3:12:07] And I went to the town of Hempstead meetings, I came to this meeting, this is maybe the third or fourth time I've been to this meeting, asking for help.

[3:12:14] Okay? And here we are. You all failed. It was a failure. We didn't get the help. This is a political question.

[3:12:26] LIPA is a political entity. Okay? Their board members are appointed by Albany.

[3:12:33] And we could have made a difference. We could have made a difference but it didn't work. It's a failure.

[3:12:41] As a result, everyone in my community is going to pay hundreds, if not thousands of

[3:12:46] dollars more.

[3:12:48] In five years, certainly, and the glide path you talk about, you know, it's going to get

[3:12:54] progressively worse, and many of them can't afford it.

[3:12:58] They literally can't afford it.

[3:12:59] They're going to be forced to move, okay?

[3:13:02] And I'm active in the school, and I'm very proud of the little tiny school district

[3:13:06] that we have.

[3:13:08] Okay?

[3:13:08] We have an elementary school and a middle school, and we send our children to pay tuition

[3:13:13] to Long Beach High School.

[3:13:15] I think we're the smallest school district on Long Island, but we provide a real quality

[3:13:21] education for children.

[3:13:22] It's one of the reasons that I raised my wife, my wife raised our family there.

[3:13:27] It's a great little tiny school district, okay?

[3:13:29] But it's always a question of what we can do.

[3:13:33] And I think we have a 40-48 million dollar budget, and the liper pays like 45% of that.

[3:13:41] So you take away 50% of that 43% contribution, the school district isn't going to be able to provide the same services.

[3:13:50] My children, thank God, are graduating now, and we benefited from a great school district.

[3:13:55] Okay, but there's so many families now that have moved in because Island Park is an affordable community

[3:14:01] Who have young children and their children are going to suffer as a result of this?

[3:14:05] Okay, and this is what politicians are supposed to do

[3:14:07] You're supposed to look out for the for out for our interests. Okay, and and we've had a 10-year warning

[3:14:14] And we did everything we could as I said hundreds of students hundreds of little kids wrote letters

[3:14:21] To everyone please help us

[3:14:24] Please help us. We spent hours. I probably spent, think about, I probably spent 500 hours, you know, working on this with other people, Chamber of Commerce, the Civic Association.

[3:14:35] Yet here we are, okay? And I just saw that the county attorney evidently has some information about what it's going to cost the residents of Island Park and shared it with you all, but somehow we don't have that information.

[3:14:52] Residents don't know. At least the last administration had a whole presentation to us.

[3:14:58] Okay, and literally hundreds of people...

[3:15:00] We filled the whole Lincoln Orange middle school and asked questions all the way until

[3:15:05] the night. We weren't satisfied, but at least you heard us and at least you had a presentation

[3:15:09] and we knew what it was going to cost us. And all sorts of people that I hadn't seen in

[3:15:14] many, many years came out. You know, people, simple people, people who care about one

[3:15:19] on one care about their community, they had an opportunity to be heard and they at

[3:15:23] least got to see what was going to impact them. You don't even have the respect

[3:15:28] to have a community forum for us. Nothing. Nothing. You're just going to vote right now.

[3:15:33] You're going to push this through. I also heard the county attorney say that trials

[3:15:36] isn't even until the end of the month. You have another meeting. You have another meeting

[3:15:41] before the end of the month. You could have a community meeting at Island Park.

[3:15:45] Sheldonman, why won't you have a community meeting at Island Park? Can you answer that?

[3:15:50] We have urged the administration to have community meetings, but it's not the

[3:15:53] the legislature's prerogative to hold a meeting in the community.

[3:15:59] We have a full meeting here in which the public's invited to it, and we're happy to be a member

[3:16:06] of the public.

[3:16:07] Are you asking right now, in this public forum, to the county to please have a community

[3:16:11] meeting?

[3:16:12] No, I'm not asking.

[3:16:13] I'm responding to your question.

[3:16:14] Well, I'm asking you.

[3:16:15] Will you ask?

[3:16:16] I'm responding to your question.

[3:16:17] Will you ask?

[3:16:18] Well, at this point, we're voting on this today.

[3:16:21] Okay.

[3:16:21] Time's up.

[3:16:22] If they want to have a meeting afterwards, then they can go ahead and do so.

[3:16:26] Will you table this to allow the community to have an opportunity to save?

[3:16:29] I'm telling you that time is up. We're voting on this today.

[3:16:34] Why is time up?

[3:16:35] Because the trial is imminent.

[3:16:38] Well, you have another legislative meeting scheduled before the trial.

[3:16:42] So what's going to change in a month?

[3:16:44] You're going to show respect to the people that are impacted by this.

[3:16:47] You're going to tell us how it's going to impact us.

[3:16:49] You don't have to give them an opportunity to tell you, to tell you how they're impacted

[3:16:52] by it.

[3:16:53] You don't care?

[3:16:54] No.

[3:16:54] I didn't say that.

[3:16:55] We have had all hearings, over to the public, public can come here and speak.

[3:17:00] The administration has chosen not to do a forum in the community, but at this point,

[3:17:05] for all purposes, it's on for a vote today and we're going to vote on it.

[3:17:09] As the legislative leader, as the president of this body, you're happy that the county

[3:17:14] executive is not providing a forum to the community?

[3:17:16] I'm not commenting on that, but I'm telling you this, we have been actively advocating

[3:17:23] for more for the school district for years, and we have tried in every possible way to

[3:17:30] gain more from the state, from Lypa, from wherever source we could, but time has run

[3:17:36] out, sir.

[3:17:37] Well, as sound as him and Mr. Sharon, if this case is not settled, you're not looking

[3:17:44] at a glide path. You're not looking at a few percent points that decrease in the first

[3:17:48] year. You're looking at 70 to 80 percent. You want to talk about devastation.

[3:17:53] We've known this for decades. We know it. You don't need to tell us. We live it. We

[3:17:59] know it. Our school district told us 10 years ago.

[3:18:02] Let's see if we're ready. Thanks, Presiding Officer. Just responding

[3:18:07] to some of Mr. Scherren's comments.

[3:18:12] Before attacking this current administration,

[3:18:15] The reality is, this was decided when the prior administration gave the Village of Island

[3:18:22] Park and Glenn was landing a going away gift before they left, which was an appraisal that

[3:18:30] tied the hands of the county in this administration.

[3:18:33] If this is not approved today, we're going to be sending in Mr. Vincelette for a trial.

[3:18:39] It's not going to be walking into a gunfight with a knife, it's going to be walking

[3:18:42] into a gunfight with your hands tied together, your feet tied together, and the result to

[3:18:46] Isle and Park and Glenwood Landing is certainly going to be more devastating than what we're

[3:18:50] seeing now. So I don't have a lack of compassion. Nobody wants their taxes to increase. But

[3:18:56] the reality is the fate of this situation was decided. I mean, how do you go into

[3:19:00] court where your evidence is worse than the evidence for Leipa?

[3:19:06] Sir, I can't see a question.

[3:19:06] Hold on. How do you expect Mr. Vincellette to go in?

[3:19:10] I can answer your question, sir.

[3:19:12] The answer to your question is every single person

[3:19:14] has known for 10 years the assessments

[3:19:17] are going to be very, very low.

[3:19:18] It's not a secret.

[3:19:21] The assessment that the county put in evidently

[3:19:23] before they left is no secret.

[3:19:26] Everyone knew.

[3:19:27] Every smart person, our county attorney,

[3:19:30] knew that we were under the gun and that the assessments

[3:19:32] were going to come in very low.

[3:19:34] Nothing new happened.

[3:19:36] Nothing new happened.

[3:19:38] you could try to push the blame. I know I understand it's your political strategy to do that, but those of us who have been involved, who know, it's complete nonsense.

[3:19:48] Sir, I talk in reality. The reality is the evidence is going to be put before the jury in court.

[3:19:52] Yes.

[3:19:53] The evidence on behalf of the county in this trial would be worse than the evidence put forth by Leipa for our position.

[3:20:00] I don't know how, as an attorney, I would expect to win a case like that. You're an attorney as well, would you?

[3:20:05] No one expected no one expects to win. Okay. Well, then I think that's why it's a political question

[3:20:10] Look, it's it's about hold on a second

[3:20:13] You came in here and talked about this administration and their lack of having a meeting and you praise the prior administration for having a meeting

[3:20:20] I didn't praise them. I did actually you said you wouldn't know you did okay

[3:20:24] The prior administration is who's tied our hands and has put us in this position today

[3:20:28] So if you if you bothered to go to the meeting that I was at you would know I attacked that administration

[3:20:33] just as much if not more than I attack this administration on the same way okay

[3:20:39] and I met with them privately and I attacked them privately too so it's

[3:20:43] not a political question it's a community it's a community begging to help and

[3:20:47] not getting it. Richard I just want to just two seconds yeah on while I

[3:20:54] understand why we why they are looking to settle this because of the county

[3:20:59] we guarantee, we understand that.

[3:21:02] But yes, the school district, Island Park,

[3:21:05] is gonna suffer more than the other school districts

[3:21:08] and more than any other community, we know that.

[3:21:11] We tried to get whatever way we could get some more money

[3:21:13] to be able to, I think, let me just,

[3:21:17] and we only got this today, so it's not like

[3:21:19] I could have shared it.

[3:21:21] But if I have to take, send something out myself,

[3:21:25] but like based on, and I'm just going by whatever

[3:21:28] of the numbers. Like say currently if somebody is paying in 21-22 if their taxes were 48-27

[3:21:37] at the end of this, by 26-27, based on a...

[3:21:44] Why am I talking about...

[3:21:45] But it would be like say they would end up based on these calculations with a 2% increase

[3:21:52] every year in school taxes, okay? They built this end to show more realistically. It

[3:21:58] it would be somebody would then be paying 75, 49.

[3:22:02] But that's without-

[3:22:03] So almost double.

[3:22:04] Yeah, and that's without, but that is what,

[3:22:07] but even if you didn't, if they didn't remove it,

[3:22:11] but they were saying that they showed

[3:22:13] that with the increases in everything with the pilot,

[3:22:17] I guess, the same amount in 26, 27 would be 5602.

[3:22:23] So it would, you know, so it would be like 775 more.

[3:22:26] And this one would be $2,700 more a year that somebody would be paying in school taxes.

[3:22:33] This does not, this number does not, and we'll try to get better numbers for you, but this

[3:22:39] number does not include state aid, okay?

[3:22:42] So it goes from four to seven, as I already said, with the settlement?

[3:22:46] Yeah, it would go, I'm sorry, I don't have my other glasses on, I apologize.

[3:22:50] So it would be like, say, this is just an example.

[3:22:52] Right.

[3:22:53] 4827 it would go up to 7549 with the settlement with the settlement but but

[3:23:00] that being said let's we have to you know we fought Richard we were in every

[3:23:06] kind of weather we fought we fought to get the barret repowered when they were

[3:23:10] looking about repowering that would have been something that would have

[3:23:13] saved the community it wasn't done that was changed now we have to look to

[3:23:18] see, what else can we bring and we will advocate to bring whatever we can to that bar because

[3:23:23] that plant isn't going anywhere. I want it to be cleaned up and I want it to bring in

[3:23:28] so that the assessment will go up and Island Park will have, see, reduction in their property

[3:23:34] taxes that they have to pay because of an increase. We also have to look at commercial

[3:23:39] development. But that being said, you have to realize Mr. Endazo and Dr. Vivino,

[3:23:44] Now, the same both of them said that Island Park School District has always been short

[3:23:49] changed on state aid, always.

[3:23:52] When you, no, no, no.

[3:23:54] It's just more percentage of our tax, of our tax base.

[3:23:57] No.

[3:23:57] Even if you, even if you quite, we'll put it, or it wouldn't make a difference.

[3:24:00] No, state aid or such property taxes, but I'll let you know.

[3:24:03] But we'll be in touch with this.

[3:24:05] We have other speakers.

[3:24:06] Thank you.

[3:24:08] Ms. Koenig, Jessica Koenig from the Island Park Public Library.

[3:24:17] Hi.

[3:24:18] To start out with, if you want, I can actually explain what happens on the tax cap form because

[3:24:24] I do it for the library.

[3:24:26] Yeah.

[3:24:26] Okay.

[3:24:27] So I'm going to give you an example.

[3:24:28] If we collect 1.4 million in taxes of which LIPA is paying something like 650,000.

[3:24:36] But because that's taxes, our 2% that we're permitted to ask for is 28,000.

[3:24:43] Just a straight 2%.

[3:24:44] If that were to turn into a pilot, so if 600,000 was now a pilot, we'd have to subtract that right off the top.

[3:24:53] Make 1.4 million minus 600,000. Now we're only allowed to ask for 2% on 800,000.

[3:25:02] So where we were allowed to ask for 28,000, now 2% is only 16,000.

[3:25:08] So that in a nutshell is the tax cap issue.

[3:25:12] Sure. Okay, so what I wanted to say today is that we want to make sure that the library is included in the settlement.

[3:25:22] We did foil the document, which kindly the County Attorney sent to us right away, and so we could see that the school is listed.

[3:25:31] We are not specifically listed.

[3:25:33] did the school district would need to have instructions of exactly what to forward to

[3:25:41] the library. So if it's your anticipation that the school that we should get a portion

[3:25:46] of that right now, we get approximately 4%. And I'm assuming that that that should continue.

[3:25:53] We get actually from Michelle's office a nice statement that shows what the school

[3:25:59] gets and what the library gets and so we're hopeful that even or I mean not even just hopeful

[3:26:05] we really need it to continue to be that way with the direct assessment the same as it

[3:26:10] is with the pilot. That there's a statement that the school gets every year that shows

[3:26:14] what they have to forward to us. We're not allowed to collect our own taxes. Everything

[3:26:19] goes through the school district and comes to us. So that was the first thing I wanted

[3:26:24] to mention. You know, for us, it really would be great if we could be included in one of

[3:26:30] these one-time payments. Everybody is understanding that the school district needs it. The library

[3:26:37] needs it, too. We're very small. We're one of the smallest libraries in the county.

[3:26:42] Our budget is too small for us to have reasonably extended taxpayer money to take

[3:26:49] on litigation, so we didn't. We understand why school districts have received most of

[3:26:54] the media attention in these disputes and libraries have been kind of lost in the shuffle.

[3:26:59] As you know, libraries serve all members of the community. If there were some kind of payment

[3:27:04] that would come our way, it would go a long way and the library libraries are very efficient.

[3:27:09] I also thought it would give some good PR to Lypa and they could certainly use it.

[3:27:15] Our library has stood the test of time. We were one of the few libraries that was very, very impacted by Superstorm Sandy.

[3:27:24] It took us nine months to come back, and as you know, our community is coming back from it.

[3:27:30] I think the other thing that was mentioned on April 11th is that it would be that some monetary relief should come to all of us from the state.

[3:27:40] and we are interested in that too, and we may be coming to you again for some support in that kind of endeavor going forward.

[3:27:48] We do feel a bit in the library like we're collateral damage that we're a small entity among much larger entities with larger concerns.

[3:27:57] We of course understand why the settlement is happening, but we're just asking for your help. Thank you.

[3:28:03] I have one quick question for you. Any discussions between the library and the school district

[3:28:09] about sharing any of the payment that the library is going to be making to the school

[3:28:15] district?

[3:28:16] There hasn't been discussion about that. I'm sure we could try, but there are much larger

[3:28:24] entities.

[3:28:25] I got you.

[3:28:25] Thanks.

[3:28:30] Michelle, I

[3:28:35] know you've been so kind in the past in providing the information for Mrs.

[3:28:40] Connick to be able to send the bill to the school so that they could get their payment.

[3:28:47] Under this direct assessment formula, will you still be able to do that for them?

[3:28:54] The receiver of taxes is going to be actually receiving that direct assessment because

[3:28:58] it's going to be part of the tax warrant, so they're going to be sending out a bill.

[3:29:01] They're also going to be collecting that money and they disperse it to the school

[3:29:04] district. It's the school district's responsibility to disperse it back to the library.

[3:29:08] So there is no, you know, because I know like, I think on my school tax in Long Beach

[3:29:13] there's like a school board and a line out. Is there a line item, I had to check with

[3:29:19] Janine Driscoll, right, to find out if there's a line item on the bill so that they know?

[3:29:23] I don't know that the mechanics of that have been worked out as far as creating

[3:29:28] a two line item for the direct assessment. That's something that we could absolutely

[3:29:31] Can you look into that and then that will save Jessica a lot of headache and trying to run after somebody to pay her

[3:29:37] So, you know, you know, we try to you know, you're gonna take a hit

[3:29:42] You know, we're gonna try to work with you Jessica because you know you are a very important library. I've been there

[3:29:47] So I thank you very much. I

[3:29:50] Have a question

[3:30:04] It should be baked into the item that the school district is responsible for paying to

[3:30:12] the library.

[3:30:15] That's actually the only thing we, that's before us, is the settlement between

[3:30:19] the county and the library as to the assessed values and the settlement of the lawsuit. So

[3:30:24] So the school districts are settling their separate lawsuits and receiving the monies

[3:30:32] that the LIPA is going to pay them.

[3:30:33] That's a separate lawsuit so we can't make any.

[3:30:36] Right.

[3:30:37] That's saying that we, the body should do that, but we should have made sure that

[3:30:42] that was part of the agreement with LIPA to make sure that all parties were made home.

[3:30:48] No.

[3:30:49] Actually, I did reach out to LIPA and on the county.

[3:30:53] library, and because we do not directly fund schools or libraries, and Leipa said that they're

[3:31:01] the issue that they have, the school district took an action against Leipa. The library

[3:31:08] did not. So that's why I couldn't get a separate payment from Leipa to the Island

[3:31:15] Park Library. I already looked into that, but we'll try whatever we have.

[3:31:21] anything from the school saying that we know that would be up to the school the

[3:31:26] school is the one that had took the action against Leipa so you know I will

[3:31:31] mention it to the school district in the hopes that they'll take us a portion but

[3:31:34] I cannot compel them to share any of the money that they get with this the

[3:31:38] library that's it's a I know it's that's that's the problem yeah the

[3:31:44] huge problem hit us. Councilman Di Esposito.

[3:31:53] Thank you very much and good

[3:31:54] Good afternoon, everyone. Thank you for having me.

[3:31:58] I think today there's an opportunity for the legislature to table this item. It seems

[3:32:06] that there's been questions coming from the dais that are not being answered. There's

[3:32:14] no specific numbers. There seems to be a lot of answers saying we'll look into that and

[3:32:20] will get you the legislature the information when we can. Today is the vote and today's

[3:32:26] vote I understand comes as you need to make sure that you look out for the county and

[3:32:35] you have a fiduciary responsibility to do that. But I think there's also an opportunity

[3:32:43] to hold off a little bit. And I'm not saying months, I'm not saying years. But if we

[3:32:51] go back, or the county goes back into the courtroom when this trial is planned and asks

[3:32:58] for an adjournment. I really do not see a judge saying no. There's been more action in

[3:33:05] this case over the last month and a half than we've probably seen in the last decade.

[3:33:12] We should ask for an adjournment until our argument, the argument of the town of Hempstead,

[3:33:17] the argument of the village of Island Park as to whether Leipa had the authority to bring

[3:33:23] such a lawsuit absent permission from the PAC-B board.

[3:33:30] We've mentioned the glide path a few times.

[3:33:33] This is not a glide path.

[3:33:35] It's literally driving a jeep off of a cliff.

[3:33:41] We also need more time, and again, I'm not asking for months and I'm not asking

[3:33:45] for years because I understand that each one of you have a responsibility to all 1.4 million

[3:33:52] residents of this county. And it's not all about Island Park and it's not all about Glen

[3:33:57] Wood Landing. But we need some time, and we need help. We need help from everyone on

[3:34:04] this dais, whether you're a Republican or a Democrat, to put pressure on the state

[3:34:09] of New York so that they can find funding to fill in the gaps that are going to

[3:34:15] crush our school district.

[3:34:21] When you're all voting today, I'm asking you to do one thing.

[3:34:27] When you're voting, vote as if this was the community that you grew up in.

[3:34:34] Vote as if this was the community that you raised your children in. That this is the place

[3:34:41] where they play Little League or soccer or lacrosse. This is the place that you're proud

[3:34:47] to call home.

[3:34:51] And think about tabling the item until we can have a conversation with

[3:34:57] the judge in the case and ask for an adjournment. There is more to be done. We've moved the

[3:35:04] needle over the last month and a half, going from a $3.5 million one-time payment to magically

[3:35:11] appearing $9 million from Leipa to the school district. $9 million to a school district

[3:35:18] that's going to be devastated, but have made the front page of Newsday twice in the last

[3:35:23] seven days for paying executives far over a million dollars who don't even live on Long

[3:35:30] Island. Yes, nine million dollars is a lot of money to all of us, but to lipa, it's

[3:35:36] not. And Mr. Presiding Officer, your comments in the beginning of session talking about

[3:35:44] about NYFA sounds eerily similar to LIPA. As a matter of fact, I don't think anybody

[3:35:51] from LIPA is even here today, which speaks volumes. It speaks the same volumes that when

[3:36:01] we did have the community meeting just before COVID, they literally sat on stage with no

[3:36:10] motion as resident after resident asked how they would keep their local business open.

[3:36:19] How they would continue to live in the home that they bought from their parents who bought

[3:36:24] from their grandparents so they can continue to raise their kids in the village or the

[3:36:29] community of Island Park.

[3:36:32] So ladies and gentlemen, I'm simply asking today to hold off.

[3:36:37] We have more to be done, and we've made significant movement over the last month and a half.

[3:36:46] Give us the time to make the difference, and that's all I could ask.

[3:36:50] Thank you very much for the time.

[3:36:53] Thank you, Councilman. Senator Aldermato.

[3:37:04] Mr. Chairman, members of the Board,

[3:37:09] I will try notwithstanding that I have been known to filibuster once in a while.

[3:37:17] in my old days in the Senate, and it's hard to break old habits.

[3:37:24] Let me commend the Board for taking the time to courteously pay attention to those who have spoken

[3:37:33] and raised their concerns with respect to the proposed settlement.

[3:37:41] Let me first say, I don't know how many of you may be aware, the Village of Island Park

[3:37:48] and the town of Hampstead are granted an order that gives us the opportunity, hopefully,

[3:37:59] to participate in the litigation that is underway.

[3:38:04] I support Councilman Espositos, the Espositos request, to adjourn this, not for a month, not

[3:38:18] for a year, but for several weeks, because there will be a hearing conducted by Judge

[3:38:29] Vito de Stefano, who I believe is the presiding judge in Nassau County, and who this matter

[3:38:40] with Leipa and the county is in front of.

[3:38:47] Larry Kelly and I are proceeding in my very seldom of undertaking anything since I left

[3:38:56] the Congress pro bono, but in this case, it's totally pro bono.

[3:39:03] On behalf of our community, Anthony mentioned that

[3:39:12] the so-called glide path was anything

[3:39:15] but that.

[3:39:17] Imagine your taxes going from $4,500 a year to approximately $9,000.

[3:39:29] And by the way, oh, we're giving you a glide path of five years.

[3:39:38] So we'll only be raising your taxes just on the basis of that, and no other increased

[3:39:44] expenditures, almost a thousand dollars a year.

[3:39:48] Do you really think that's a glide path?

[3:39:52] What do you think it does to the value of homes?

[3:39:56] What does it do to the prospects of the community?

[3:40:01] It is death and destruction.

[3:40:04] And if you look at the lost income, nine million, they lose more than nine million a year.

[3:40:12] And they're talking about, oh, we're going to give you a glide path of nine million.

[3:40:16] Come on, wake up.

[3:40:19] Anthony gave you one example.

[3:40:22] The Lypa officials. You've got a guy who heads Lypa who cares about himself, building an empire.

[3:40:30] Four officials getting paid as much as 325,000 a year. All of them live out of state.

[3:40:37] Oh, but they got two of them, got addresses in Uniondale within the past three or four weeks since it was exposed.

[3:40:45] It's probably both of them, two women at Marriott, renting a room there, supposedly.

[3:40:55] This is running our utility, and we're standing by.

[3:41:02] I spoke to the governor about this incredible ridiculous board, and his libel wanting to

[3:41:10] grab everything.

[3:41:12] And by the way, our lawsuit is not predicated on something that's rather important.

[3:41:21] I don't want to bring it to you.

[3:41:24] There never would have been a liper.

[3:41:29] We never would have had this situation had there not been a promise made by the former

[3:41:37] a governor, George Pataki, and made by the once-head of Leipa at the time, Richard Kessel,

[3:41:48] and both of them promised at various organizational meetings that they would never permit the reduction

[3:41:58] of the tax payments from the generating facilities.

[3:42:02] They would not have any certioraries unless the local communities did something that would

[3:42:11] occasion them to do that.

[3:42:13] For example, try to curtail their activities, etc.

[3:42:17] And none of the communities did that.

[3:42:20] Let's talk about the life of Power Plant in Isle and Park, Barry.

[3:42:25] It operates at 39 percent capacity.

[3:42:28] It serves over 300,000 homes.

[3:42:31] It has been a polluter since I was a kid and moved there quite a few years ago.

[3:42:39] By the way,

[3:42:43] the coverage that Newsday gives is not always very accurate.

[3:42:48] I'm not 88.

[3:42:50] I'm not 86.

[3:42:52] I'm 84, and I feel good, and I'm happy to be in front of you.

[3:42:59] But I'm not happy with these circumstances.

[3:43:01] And let me say this to you, I understand the counties wanting to get rid of this potential

[3:43:10] calamity.

[3:43:12] I do.

[3:43:13] Oh, my God, let's let the judge hear our motions in person.

[3:43:21] We're talking about May 13th when the answers have to begin, and we're talking, I believe,

[3:43:29] to 25th when the case begins. And I want to tell you something. We have a good case, because

[3:43:37] Leipa had started to deceive the people not just when Falcone got there, but his predecessors

[3:43:46] blazed a path of corruption, of lying, of thumbing their nose at the courts.

[3:44:01] Let me

[3:44:01] refer to a certain judge who comes from the North Shore up in your area and was

[3:44:14] Judge Dana Winslow. Did you ever hear that name? Did any of you ever hear that

[3:44:21] Dana Winslow made an order? And let me tell you what it was about.

[3:44:28] Riper wanted to come in and make this acquisition.

[3:44:33] Judge Winslow said, wait a minute, you can't do that.

[3:44:40] This is a contract over a million dollars.

[3:44:43] You have to go to the PACB board.

[3:44:48] That's what they did.

[3:44:50] They discontinued that purchase.

[3:44:54] They didn't appeal the order.

[3:44:55] that is still the order of the day.

[3:45:00] And it is the law. They have broken the law since that decision in 1999.

[3:45:11] It's a Brentcourt decision by Judge Winslow.

[3:45:17] They have not submitted any of their contracts.

[3:45:20] And, you know, the Katniss facility, how it came about?

[3:45:28] It came about so that they could purchase offshore power that was produced cheaper, not using

[3:45:37] the plant up in the North Shore, reducing utilization of the plant in Island Park.

[3:45:44] How did we create, or did any of those plants create their problem?

[3:45:49] No.

[3:45:49] They wanted more money.

[3:45:50] And by the way, none of those contracts went before the PAC Board.

[3:45:58] None of them.

[3:45:59] We have a moral issue here.

[3:46:02] The governor and the head of light were both with impromise.

[3:46:06] Oh, it wasn't written.

[3:46:08] So now we're going to get to that.

[3:46:10] What's morally right?

[3:46:13] What's right?

[3:46:15] We can let them disregard and we can say,

[3:46:18] we looked the other way. And the counties afraid they're going to get crushed. I don't blame

[3:46:23] you for being concerned. Not at all. I don't blame the present county objective. He inherited

[3:46:29] the situation. It's been going on for years. And nobody stood up, including the governor.

[3:46:38] I brought this to her attention, and she hasn't done a damn thing. Nothing for the

[3:46:46] taxpayers of Long Island, Suffolk County, Nassau County, we want to build an empire. Yes. Build

[3:46:54] an empire for Lyper. And you guys vote to continue this. You know what you do? You just

[3:47:01] strengthen Falcone. His blackmailed us. Nine million dollars. That is an even half of one

[3:47:10] year, what Island Park would lose. And we're supposed to say, Oh, thank you. Thank you.

[3:47:17] Shove it. That's what I say. What are you kidding? Now, if you can't grant us two weeks

[3:47:25] or three weeks, let Lyper know that they're going to be in for a battle. Let that court

[3:47:31] hearing be held on the 13th. Let us participate and see what the judge says. Because I'm

[3:47:38] I'm telling you, I think they have a very good chance to say all of the things you have

[3:47:47] done like it without the PAC Board permission or illegal void, have an issue.

[3:47:55] They don't want that argument to be raised.

[3:47:59] Nobody's raised it.

[3:48:01] We put it in our preliminary papers, the judge just signed the order, I just got

[3:48:07] it last night, which gives us the ability to be heard. The opposition said,

[3:48:16] apologize. Are we going to win? Will we be heard? I think we will be if you give us

[3:48:23] the time. Don't preclude us by saying, oh, there's a settlement, because I'll

[3:48:28] tell you the first thing that wiper will do,

[3:48:33] then he's listening to me.

[3:48:37] Okay. First thing they'll do is say, the county settled, there's no lawsuit for Island Park

[3:48:44] or the town hem said toward to come into. We won't get the opportunity to put before the

[3:48:50] court what Judge Winslow said. We won't get the opportunity to save all of us. I don't

[3:48:57] want the county to pay a lot of money, but you will be destroying Island Park. A bunch

[3:49:06] You're paying $4,500 a year in school taxes on your house.

[3:49:11] You're one of the lowest working income communities in all of Long Island.

[3:49:16] And your taxes go up to $9,000?

[3:49:20] You think that's a glide path?

[3:49:22] I ask each and every one of you.

[3:49:25] I'm not telling you to derail the settlement.

[3:49:29] I'm telling you to give us an opportunity to be heard.

[3:49:33] put that pressure on Leipa on that piece of crap who goes and hires a million

[3:49:39] dollars worth of people and they're going to tell us what to do and not one

[3:49:43] of them lived in Long Island. He's an arrogant SOB, arrogant and he's a liar

[3:49:51] estranged to the truth. Two years ago he promised me we're gonna build a gas

[3:49:57] facility, an island park, it will reduce because it will increase your assessed valuation.

[3:50:06] Put it off, he said, for three months.

[3:50:08] Comes in again with his assistant.

[3:50:11] Well, we'll put it in the beginning, nothing.

[3:50:16] And now he's got nerve.

[3:50:19] You know what he's done?

[3:50:21] you sent word to the what is that board that that reduces when you put build

[3:50:30] something your IDA one of the town IDA to know if they could apply to the town

[3:50:38] IDA he tried to get some changes in their administrative code about four

[3:50:45] months ago. And I found out this is a conniver. He doesn't work for the benefit of the people.

[3:50:55] He is hurting the taxpayers of Long Island. He runs an empire that he wants bigger. And

[3:51:03] he wants to run all of the electricity here. Him. Number one, Leipa. Take it away from

[3:51:11] the private sector will do better. If he does better, and that's an example of hiring

[3:51:17] four out-of-state people, paying them over a million dollars a year, not one of them

[3:51:23] living here, that is incredible. And the governor should do something. Wake up,

[3:51:31] Hocal, but more importantly, here at home. I'm asking you to do the right thing.

[3:51:37] put this over for three weeks. Put it over. Let Leipa know that you just don't march to

[3:51:44] their drum, that we follow the law.

[3:51:49] Let the judge take a look at our arguments. Let them

[3:51:54] hear our arguments and decide. Because I'll tell you this, if we win, the county wins.

[3:52:04] Thank you.

[3:52:06] You have any questions?

[3:52:08] I wouldn't if I were you.

[3:52:14] I'll give you for the record the judge's decision with respect to the...

[3:52:19] Well, we can ask when we get back out.

[3:52:21] Five minutes, please, sir.

[3:52:22] Okay.

[3:52:24] Do you want this the order of the court?

[3:52:27] Wait a minute.

[3:52:29] Sit down.

[3:52:31] I didn't get up when you were talking.

[3:52:33] Thank you.

[4:08:07] Legislative forward.

[4:08:09] Presiding officer, I ask that we table this item to the future date.

[4:08:15] We have a second part of the Legislative.

[4:08:19] There is a written, there's no debate on the motion to the table.

[4:08:21] All in favor, signify by saying aye.

[4:08:23] An aye vote is to table, opposed.

[4:08:29] The motion table fails by a vote of 10 to 8.

[4:08:32] All right, so before we have a vote on the item,

[4:08:34] if any legislator wants to speak and have a statement,

[4:08:42] I didn't know about the motion to table until it came out to the floor, so it's unfortunate

[4:08:47] that that actually failed.

[4:08:50] But I just want to bring this back home because what I've heard from residents over the last

[4:08:55] several weeks since it's been considered has been something that's been more simplified.

[4:09:02] When we're talking about settling a case with Lypa, and I understand the ramifications

[4:09:07] as it pertains to what the county exposure is, and I don't put all the fault on County Executive

[4:09:15] Blateman, nor do I put all the fault on County Executive Curran. I put some on both administrations.

[4:09:22] That being said, let's just simplify this in terms of who we're talking about. Are we talking

[4:09:27] about the same lipa that has had poor and shoddy service for the last 20-some odd years

[4:09:33] that I experienced through my residence in Baldwin in Unendale and Roosevelt during Super

[4:09:39] Storm Sandy had power for no, for periods of weeks. Are we talking about the same lipa

[4:09:44] that has raised rates to astronomical numbers for decades before PSC and G came into power?

[4:09:53] And now what we're doing is the proverbial, while I have you down, I'm going to kick

[4:09:57] you in your teeth by saying to residents, not just in Island Park and up in the North

[4:10:02] sure that we're going to say to them today that even though they did all this stuff to

[4:10:07] you, that they provided poor service to you for the last two years, they don't even have

[4:10:11] the respect to be here today, and on top of it they raised your rates, we're going

[4:10:15] to say to you today that we're going to pass a settlement that, one, because it's

[4:10:20] in the best interest of the county, and then two, that takes them off the hook.

[4:10:24] So, I truly have a problem with us protecting Lypa, and I think that's the most egregious

[4:10:33] matter that we can talk about today, because ratepayers in Nassau County have been getting

[4:10:37] kicked in the face by Lypa's rates for decades.

[4:10:42] I don't think anyone in this room, if I asked you, who here likes Lypa, no one's

[4:10:47] going to raise a hand, but I think that speaks to all our public utilities.

[4:10:50] All of our public utilities are despicable, and there's very little accountability from

[4:10:57] the water districts to the public utilities in terms of LIPA, Verizon, whoever, Altis.

[4:11:04] Each and every one of them have very little accountability to their ratepayers.

[4:11:09] And we've all seen our rates go up and up and up.

[4:11:13] I remember during SuperSong Sandy, I had residents that were without power for two

[4:11:17] or three weeks.

[4:11:18] some of them lost income because of that. Where does that settlement help them with this?

[4:11:24] They're getting off the hook. This settlement is a sweetheart deal for them.

[4:11:29] And I'm not casting aspersions on County Executive Blakeman.

[4:11:33] And I'm not casting aspersions on County's over Kirkland.

[4:11:35] I said it's a shared responsibility on why we're here today.

[4:11:39] But ultimately, that guy that lost his power for several weeks,

[4:11:44] who helped him pay for his mortgage when his power was out and he probably had to lose his

[4:11:50] job because he had to watch his kids or who helped that business owner in in in in Union

[4:11:56] Della Roosevelt when they couldn't operate their business they lost revenue for that period

[4:12:00] of time. I bring that up because we're talking about the same entity today. It's not some

[4:12:06] other phantom entity we're talking about we're talking about the same guys that

[4:12:10] have hurt our residents for decades. And the best we can do is a sliding scale to the future.

[4:12:20] I just feel like that is, and I understand the county executive's position in regards

[4:12:25] to this, but I just feel like that's the wrong message to send to our residents, residents

[4:12:30] that have paid and endured high rates from this public utility for decades. And if

[4:12:35] you're a homeowner or a rate payer in this county, you understand that LIPA has hurt

[4:12:40] you for two years, for two decades, if not more. And the bottom line is we should be doing

[4:12:47] more as the governing watchdogs for not just the county, we want to make sure the counties

[4:12:54] hold, of course, but for the people that put us here, great payers, homeowners, they deserve

[4:13:01] better. And this settlement does not do that for them. So we are going to vote no today,

[4:13:08] mainly for the reasons that I indicated before but also because it does not do

[4:13:12] enough. We are not doing enough in this settlement and if we need to sit back and

[4:13:19] get more time, I heard from Senator D'Amato on regard to this matter, I

[4:13:25] rather go the full length to the 11th hour before I give this utility which

[4:13:31] has been shameful in his actions, have raised rates, shoddy service, some type

[4:13:36] a deal that they think is fair. If anything, they should be paying our rate payers back

[4:13:41] something. Who's thinking about them today? Who's thinking about our homeowners today?

[4:13:57] I, too, will be voting no on this settlement because I believe that the Island Park School

[4:14:04] District as well as Oceanside needs to be protected even more so. You know, the way

[4:14:11] that it was a blanket reduction in assessment, regardless of the school district. They had

[4:14:17] a power plant and not a power plant, I think has proven to be unfair to Island Park because

[4:14:24] I think that maybe if Glenwood Landing went lower, we could have kept a higher assessment

[4:14:31] on the Island Park School District.

[4:14:36] I understand why the county is doing this. You know,

[4:14:39] and I think that I may not agree with it, but I do understand why they're doing this.

[4:14:43] When you look at an $800 million liability, and according to our Office of Independent

[4:14:48] Budget Review, the exposure for all of the residents in Nassau County could be about $90

[4:14:54] million a year.

[4:14:55] So, everybody else and the other people in the rest of the world.

[4:15:00] Most of my district would have to absorb that cost.

[4:15:04] You know, we need to go after our state representatives and our governor.

[4:15:11] You know, legislative minority leader, I should say, Abraham did mention these public utilities,

[4:15:18] like the has been out of control, PSE&G, Optimum Horizon.

[4:15:22] Each and every single one of these utilities falls under the jurisdiction of New York State.

[4:15:27] I have reached out to the Public Service Commission on various issues and, you know, lately they

[4:15:36] have been responding and somebody who – I worked for Utility for 25 years.

[4:15:41] So I know in the past when they used to be very – when the state was very powerful

[4:15:46] and didn't oversight on the Utilities, you know, they responded more prudently

[4:15:51] to the residents, to businesses, to everybody here in the jurisdictions that they served.

[4:15:58] So I think now, and I will keep reaching out to the county executives, so I see that DCE

[4:16:03] Walsh better get used to the fact that I'm going to keep reaching out to him in the

[4:16:07] hopes of trying to help the school district find some magic ways.

[4:16:11] But in the meantime, all of us, all of us, I know you're going to vote no, maybe

[4:16:17] you'll vote yes, but I'm asking all of you to join me in going after Governor

[4:16:20] Hockel. Going after our state representatives, I have to give credit to then Assemblywoman

[4:16:26] Miller, who actually did come up with a plan to try to make some relief for the Island Park

[4:16:32] School District, but could not get it through the Senate. But I'm asking all of you because

[4:16:37] we need to. This is a community of working-class people. I did not live there. I did not

[4:16:43] grow up there, but I know a lot of people, I have relatives who now live in Island

[4:16:46] Park and it is a gem of a community and it deserves all the assistance that it can get

[4:16:52] and I'm hoping that you'll join with me and I just asked for one thing, having been a

[4:16:57] telephone worker and spending many years climbing telephone poles and responding to all sorts

[4:17:02] of disasters, I just want to put on record because I think it's unfair to the workers

[4:17:07] that do that work. When we say that you've been out of power, yes, when we don't

[4:17:10] have power for three weeks, we don't have power for three months, we don't have

[4:17:13] power. Unless you do that work and you know the constraints and you know that the safety

[4:17:19] considerations that have to be made by people who do work out in the field, then you'll understand

[4:17:24] sometimes why it does take a long time for your power to be restored. It's not just a

[4:17:28] matter of flicking on a switch. A lot of times it's a matter of clearing debris, clearing

[4:17:32] trees, trying to get access to rear poles, highway poles, poles that are down. And

[4:17:39] And these workers, every time we always criticize them for not doing the job right, but unless

[4:17:46] you climb a telephone pole, unless you know exactly what it is, what it's like running

[4:17:50] cable in the most extreme type of weather conditions, then please, when you want to

[4:17:56] say that we didn't have power, just say that we understand that the workers have

[4:17:59] their constraints and they try their best, but sometimes it does take a long time.

[4:18:03] Don't lump them in with the liper executives because they're a completely different jurisdiction.

[4:18:11] Okay?

[4:18:14] No,

[4:18:19] I just want to point out that it's different because the workers are also the ones that

[4:18:26] have been struck out.

[4:18:27] I have nothing but respect for the workers.

[4:18:28] I just wanted to be clear.

[4:18:29] It's already clear coming from my mouth.

[4:18:31] I never mentioned the workers.

[4:18:32] workers, but that being said, the administration did a port Lypa administration, let me make

[4:18:38] sure I'm clear, not the workers, but they did a very poor job, not just with Superstorm

[4:18:42] Sandy but Isaias. There's multiple storms that they were unprepared. What I'm saying

[4:18:48] is-

[4:18:48] I'm not defending Lypa.

[4:18:49] Okay, but it sounds like you just were to some degree, but what I'm saying is the

[4:18:54] fact is that people went without power for weeks, but it sounds like we're talking

[4:19:00] about a different Lypa. And I'm glad to see that you're going to vote no. I wish there

[4:19:03] was somebody else on your side who was going to vote no. But that being said, people went

[4:19:08] without powerful weeks. And here we are considering Lypa of all the public utilities, probably

[4:19:15] the worst one. Here we are considering Lypa for a settlement today, which they consider

[4:19:22] to be fair, which I can't believe that we would do anything that Lypa would consider

[4:19:26] to be fair because that means they think it's to their benefit. I mean, think about what

[4:19:32] the residents have went through that went without power. The workers, this has nothing to do

[4:19:35] with the workers. It has everything to do with the LIPE administration handling and

[4:19:40] poorly executing a plan for Superstorm Sandy. Everyone, the reason why we have PSEG today,

[4:19:47] folks, is because they did such a shoddy job on Superstorm Sandy. So it's not just

[4:19:51] me that's saying that. There's no one criticizing the workers. The fact remains

[4:19:55] means, we're still going to vote for a settlement that gives shoddy work as well as somebody

[4:20:01] an entity that raised rates for decades. I just don't see the logic in that. And look,

[4:20:07] I understand the rather counties in the position they are in today. But that being said, from

[4:20:12] our standpoint, I cast blame on both sides, nor do I cast any blame totally on one entity

[4:20:18] in terms of demonstrations. But I think we can do better. And I think we should

[4:20:22] go forward with doing better and challenge this up into the 11th hour.

[4:20:27] But if we can't get another vote to do that, then that's okay.

[4:20:31] Disagree with one point that was made, the minority of Abraham's indicated that Leipzig

[4:20:37] is on the hook.

[4:20:38] That's exactly 180 degrees opposite, so if the county is on the hook, you litigate cases

[4:20:45] and some cases are just, you're going to lose.

[4:20:49] That is this case.

[4:20:50] And we battled with Knifer, the county has, we get for the administrations, and this case

[4:20:56] went on its way through the court, it was adjourned and public meetings were held.

[4:21:02] But the county was always going to lose the case, they're on the wrong side of the case.

[4:21:08] Because it comes down to what is the assessed value of those plants.

[4:21:13] And when the county looked at those plants, it actually came up with lower values than

[4:21:19] liper.

[4:21:19] So this was a loser. We were going to lose this case and we are at the point now

[4:21:25] We had to face that reality just as they had to face the reality in Suffolk County

[4:21:30] The exposure to county taxpayers by all accounts is upwards of eight hundred million dollars

[4:21:37] A hundred million dollars a year for debt service to pay this

[4:21:42] more importantly for the residents of

[4:21:45] of those districts, if we litigate this case and lose,

[4:21:50] and we're going to lose because our appraisals are even lower than lipers,

[4:21:55] the immediate reduction in assessed value for that plant will be either 81% or 94%.

[4:22:03] That means that in October, in the Island Park School District,

[4:22:09] liper will be paying 81% less than they were paying out on 94%.

[4:22:14] Basically, they're going to wipe out almost the entire amount of money that Leipa is paying

[4:22:18] into that district if we litigate this case, which we're going to lose.

[4:22:23] So we have no alternative at this point.

[4:22:25] We've battled this for years.

[4:22:27] It's up for a vote now, and if we don't do this, we are going to do a grave disservice

[4:22:31] to our county, to the residents, and it's time to vote.

[4:22:36] Mr. Chairman.

[4:22:37] So the message is today, I'm sorry, Senator DeMarco.

[4:22:39] Mr. Chairman, may I make an observation?

[4:22:43] Yes.

[4:22:44] with your permission, and I appreciate your indulgence.

[4:22:48] I didn't ask you to put it on after the court meets.

[4:22:58] You have at least three weeks before the court meets, maybe longer.

[4:23:09] What I'm asking is to give the court an opportunity to listen to our argument, because our argument,

[4:23:21] if indeed, lipo violated the PACB law, which said every contract over a million has to

[4:23:30] be approved by PACB. And it goes back to the cake in this matter, where they started

[4:23:37] to bring in the power from outside, so these plants did not have to be utilized. So if

[4:23:45] I said, put it on after the case is scheduled, you'd say, Senator, we have a settlement

[4:23:53] the county. I'm not asking you to jeopardize that settlement. I'm asking you to give the

[4:24:01] court an opportunity. And to some of the members on the board, I don't understand why you would

[4:24:10] not give the court an opportunity to hear the Island Park town of Hempstead case before

[4:24:22] before the court takes up your settlement. You still don't lose that, and if he wants

[4:24:29] to settle on it, but why not give us the leverage to do better with the governor and

[4:24:36] with Leipa by an adjournment? A journey for two weeks, a journey for two weeks.

[4:24:42] You made those arguments eloquently before. But guess what? If they're so eloquent and

[4:24:49] they fell, then they should be failing for a reason. Give me a reason. I'm not

[4:24:56] excuse me. I'm not asking you to jeopardize the county settlement because

[4:25:03] they've entered into an agreement already with the county. They can't rescind it.

[4:25:08] What I'm asking you is to give the court an opportunity to listen, I think

[4:25:15] is May 13th to listen to Island Park and to the town of Hempstead. It does not interfere

[4:25:25] with the data, which I think is May 22nd. What do you lose? What are you jeopardizing?

[4:25:32] Why not put some pressure on Leipa? If they were the little choir boys, if they did everything

[4:25:38] properly. If they were fine. But I'm going to tell you, Billy Gaylord, I don't understand

[4:25:45] why you wouldn't vote to give us an opportunity before the court. Not jeopardizing the county

[4:25:52] settlement. Give us a chance. Why don't you put the pressure on life before it change?

[4:25:58] You like being blackmailed? That's what's going on. You're marching to a drum. Some

[4:26:06] political drum? What the hell drum is it? Why won't you vote the right way? That's to

[4:26:13] give us an adjournment for three weeks. I don't understand it. So you go ahead and

[4:26:20] vote. Well, let me tell you, if you vote not to give us an adjournment, you're

[4:26:26] failing the taxpayers, certainly the taxpayers of Island Park by not giving

[4:26:32] them an opportunity. I didn't say, back away from your agreement, I didn't say that. If

[4:26:40] I said to do that, you'd say it's unreasonable. So I say to my Republican colleagues there,

[4:26:47] you know, there's a time to act for what's right, and you don't just march through a

[4:26:52] political drum. Thank you for your indulgence.

[4:26:56] Thank you. Thank you. All right. It's time for a vote. All in favor sick. Yes, I'm going to request a roll call vote.

[4:27:06] Sure. Thank you. Roll call vote.

[4:27:15] Thank you. Roll call vote proceeding deputy presiding officer Howard

[4:27:20] Calpell. Yes.

[4:27:27] Alternate presiding officer Denise Ford.

[4:27:32] Legislator C. Lobino. On the

[4:27:35] motion, I'm going to vote no for the fact that I do think there's more time necessary

[4:27:42] to make sure that the agreements between our special districts are baked and that they

[4:27:49] make sure that they protect all the special districts. If even one is left behind,

[4:27:54] it would be a crime. This is an opportunity for us to make sure that we're doing our very best as

[4:28:01] fiduciaries to protect our special districts as well as the county. So I'm voting no. Thank you.

[4:28:10] Legislated Carrier Salage. I'm voting no for the I want there to be a proper chance of due

[4:28:17] process for the residents of Island Park and the Ten of Hamps had to be heard. It would

[4:28:22] not heard anyone just also to grant the adjournment. I'm voting no.

[4:28:27] Thank you. Legislated W. Muley. I will be in no vote also for the reasons stated. We have

[4:28:38] the time. It doesn't make sense to me to not allow that process to go through. We still

[4:28:48] have the opportunity to protect the people who live in Island Park, in particular, and

[4:28:59] still protect the taxpayers in all of New York County, and I'm voting you.

[4:29:05] Thank you.

[4:29:08] Legislators, C. William Gaylord III.

[4:29:12] All right, so it's a difficult decision, and the senator brings up some very compelling

[4:29:17] and arguments, so is Councilman Diaz-Posito, as well as everybody else.

[4:29:23] Looking at the overall bigger picture to the county, we've got a certain fiduciary responsibility

[4:29:28] that we're charged to uphold, an obligation to preserve the taxpayers' precious resources

[4:29:36] where we can.

[4:29:37] That's all the taxpayers in Nassau County.

[4:29:42] This agreement is really a revocable agreement.

[4:29:45] It could be pulled by light, but tomorrow.

[4:29:46] tomorrow. It could be pulled by the county tomorrow. I don't know. It's here before us

[4:29:51] to be ratified, and it gives us some certain assurances of a resolution to a matter that's

[4:30:00] In contentious for a decade, a matter that's been discussed, debated, in the courts, out of

[4:30:08] the courts, in one administration, in the second administration, in the third administration

[4:30:11] now, for ten years. But it still comes back to what's best for all of the residents of

[4:30:19] Nashville County. And in this case, I think it's best if I vote yes in the affirmative.

[4:30:25] Yes, let's move on.

[4:30:27] Thank you.

[4:30:28] Legislator John Tuprey?

[4:30:32] My vote is yes.

[4:30:33] Thank you.

[4:30:36] Legislator Mazyp Ali?

[4:30:38] I will vote yes in order to protect the entire resident.

[4:30:43] Thank you.

[4:30:45] Legislator Delia DeRitchie Whitten?

[4:30:49] I want to just give like a quick story of what happened.

[4:30:52] I think it was two years ago.

[4:30:53] I was asked to go on a Zoom meeting with Leipa

[4:31:00] President Norton, everyone on the phone was on the call and everyone introduced themselves

[4:31:04] and it was the mayor of CECLIF at the time and I was sitting in my backyard and it was

[4:31:10] during COVID so my husband and my daughter were home.

[4:31:15] I had already met with the administration and expressed my concerns and was questioning

[4:31:21] about the pilot and questioning about the fact that this settlement is going to affect

[4:31:24] Our residents for decades for the rest of the rest of the time they own their homes. It's a major major major

[4:31:30] decision

[4:31:32] And mr. Falcone said to me legislator

[4:31:34] I want you to really consider what you're doing by going against the settlement because if you continue to do so I

[4:31:43] I'm gonna

[4:31:43] Take everything out of the

[4:31:46] North Shore, you know glenwood landing plant and bring it in through

[4:31:51] Northport and you'll have nothing

[4:31:53] And I said, are you threatening me?

[4:31:55] Because I've been threatened a couple of times, even in the last week or so.

[4:31:59] And usually when somebody threatens you, it's because they feel an insecurity.

[4:32:04] So at that moment, some other person came on the phone.

[4:32:07] And that's the problem with Zoom.

[4:32:09] Especially back then, you didn't always know who was on the phone.

[4:32:12] And he said, no, no, no, Legislator, you're not being threatened.

[4:32:15] Life is not threatening you.

[4:32:16] No, no, no, no, no.

[4:32:17] I said, no, I think I was just threatened.

[4:32:19] I said, you just told me if I don't agree with it,

[4:32:21] you're going to take everything away from the North Shore. So to make a long story short,

[4:32:26] I finished the meeting because I hung up on them and I walked into my house and my husband

[4:32:31] said, I don't know who you're yelling at but I'm glad it wasn't me. So like, that's

[4:32:36] how they were. I mean that's how they were with me. They are bullies. And look, I know,

[4:32:42] I see how nervous the deputy county executive is right now. This is a checklist to help

[4:32:49] us get rid of NYFA. I get it. We have to get rid of this liability. I get it. But do

[4:32:54] we have to give them everything they want? No. And I agree with Senator DiMato. It's been

[4:33:01] a pleasure to see you again. And I'm so impressed with how sharp you still are and how strong

[4:33:07] you are and how you don't back down to people that tried to bully you right 15

[4:33:11] minutes ago and I appreciate it from my district and from Island Park because

[4:33:18] again we're gonna go home today and it's over and oh great you know but it's gonna

[4:33:24] impact these families for generations to come and I'm sick about it because

[4:33:31] again I feel like this is a company's making more money than ever and you know

[4:33:37] We just it's just it's just a real shame that we're I feel like we're kind of we're bowing down

[4:33:43] And I'm a fighter and I was raised by a fighter and I would I would I would fight

[4:33:48] I would definitely fight this and I appreciate you taking your time to try to motivate it

[4:33:55] But unfortunately, it's very hard to get any

[4:33:59] Anyone to break the ranks

[4:34:02] so

[4:34:03] You did a good job and you tried, but I haven't seen it happen before, so the odds were against you.

[4:34:10] So I vote no for the settlement.

[4:34:14] Thank you.

[4:34:18] Is James Kennedy available?

[4:34:24] Legislated Thomas McKevitt.

[4:34:26] Yes.

[4:34:33] Legislated Laura Safer.

[4:34:35] I vote yes.

[4:34:37] Thank you. Legislated John Ferretti.

[4:34:40] Sorry, I'm going to be a little bit longer.

[4:34:43] I think there's been an attempt today, specifically by my colleagues on the other side of the aisle

[4:34:49] to paint this picture that somehow the administration has negotiated a deal where the county is

[4:34:58] bowing down, I think that's what was said, where the life is getting everything they

[4:35:02] want.

[4:35:02] It's just not reality.

[4:35:04] The reality is that the evidence submitted by the county, by the previous administration,

[4:35:12] At best, at best, they will get an award, I believe Mr. Vincelette said, between $500

[4:35:21] million and $800 million.

[4:35:24] At best, that's if they agree with the previous county administration's numbers.

[4:35:30] Every one of our residents, with the exception of two legislators, will be on the hook for

[4:35:35] that money.

[4:35:36] Now, the minority talked about rates, the high rates of lipa.

[4:35:41] I agree.

[4:35:42] rate. Nobody wants to pay high rates. Isn't it possible that because they've been overpaying

[4:35:46] on these plants for X amount of years that they increase their rates as a result and

[4:35:50] that all of our constituents in every district are paying higher rates because of that?

[4:35:55] So when you talk about, you know, blipers rates, you know, and then vote no on the

[4:36:00] settlement, it's a contradiction to me. If you, you know, it's very, could very

[4:36:05] well happen that in the event that this does not pass, that the rates will get

[4:36:09] even higher. So, I don't really understand that. I respect and I understand the complaints

[4:36:16] about life as an entity and I agree with them. But I didn't hear anybody on the other side

[4:36:20] of the aisle going after the state when those things were happening. The state utility.

[4:36:26] And that's the reality of that. So, again, I just want to kind of drill home the fact

[4:36:33] that this is not a winnable case.

[4:36:38] Every one of our residents will lose.

[4:36:40] Island Park and Glenwood Landing, and I know, look, I don't love the term glide path either,

[4:36:48] but talk about a cliff. If we are to lose, it will be more devastating than it is now.

[4:36:54] Nobody wants to pay higher taxes. I have compassion for both of those communities.

[4:36:58] attorneys, we have to go to the state and get more money for them to mitigate this disastrous

[4:37:04] outcome. But we also have to do what's right for the entire county and that is why I am

[4:37:08] voting yes.

[4:37:12] Thank you, Legislator. Legislator Arnold Drucker.

[4:37:19] Thank you. You know, my colleagues who are attorneys, I'm so impressed that you have

[4:37:26] a crystal ball and you can predict the outcome of every single trial because I wish I had

[4:37:30] that crystal ball every time I went into court.

[4:37:34] You know, I, as I said, I'm an attorney and

[4:37:37] I believe in the rule of law and I believe in democracy and I want to thank Senator D'Amato

[4:37:42] for educating me on the procedural defects that life of faces that could be, that could

[4:38:00] not necessarily as the senator said about waiting till after the court hearing but

[4:38:05] at least to give us a few weeks time to just pump the brakes a little bit I

[4:38:10] think the rule of law is important and we have to respect that and you know

[4:38:16] also Leipzig is this behemoth that I don't know this this particular offer on

[4:38:23] its face also does nothing for the rate payers are they offering any sort of

[4:38:28] reduction to rate payers to compensate them for what has been going on for, as the minority

[4:38:33] leaders said, decades. Decades of ineptitude, decades of perhaps abject corruption. You know,

[4:38:42] and I for one believe that there shouldn't be a rush to judgment here. Stranger things

[4:38:48] have happened in pre-trial conferences. And maybe something can come out of this

[4:38:55] that's a little bit better for Nassau County taxpayers.

[4:38:59] Yes, you know, many times we were asked as legislators

[4:39:03] and we go into executive session and approve settlements

[4:39:06] that we, all of us, both sides of the aisle,

[4:39:08] we don't like but sometimes we gotta hold our noses

[4:39:10] and say, yeah, we're gonna have to vote for this

[4:39:12] because it's better for Nassau County

[4:39:14] to have to pay this than pay something

[4:39:16] a lot larger later on.

[4:39:18] That makes a lot of sense sometimes.

[4:39:20] This is one of those cases where

[4:39:23] I'm not one to hold my nose on.

[4:39:24] I want to give it some more time to percolate and maybe some better results can come out

[4:39:32] of this.

[4:39:32] So I'm going to vote no.

[4:39:35] Thank you, Legislator.

[4:39:37] Legislator Rose Marie Walker.

[4:39:41] And I guess I would have to say, and I don't have a crystal ball either, but I look on

[4:39:47] the other side that Legislator Drucker was looking on.

[4:39:51] And I think the result that it wasn't beneficial to us that it would hurt the residents so much more,

[4:40:03] hurt all of our residents and certainly hurt the residents in both of those districts very, very much.

[4:40:09] I'm going to vote yes, but I'm also going to say that I will do everything in my power

[4:40:13] and continue to do everything in my power along with the rest of us to petition the state,

[4:40:19] to petition the governor to do what is right to for both of these school districts.

[4:40:25] Thank you, ma'am. I'm glad you say it to Joshua Lafazan.

[4:40:30] Thank you, and I appreciate all who came down to speak today so passionately.

[4:40:35] This is something that legislator Derigy Whitten and I have been working together on for a number of months, if not years now,

[4:40:41] to protect the residents in Island Park, to protect the residents in Glenwood Landing, and to do the right thing, I vote no.

[4:40:49] Thank you.

[4:40:54] Legislative Stephen Rhodes. Thank you, Mr. Clerk. We do have, I guess, different

[4:41:00] opinions on what doing the right thing is, and I guess that's a question of our own individual

[4:41:05] perspective. This is not a rape case. This is not a case about the quality of service.

[4:41:16] This is a tax certiori case. This is a case like so many others that come before us where we have to look at facts, look at evidence, look at what we anticipate the court is going to see in terms of evidence, and make a decision as to what's in the best interest of the county.

[4:41:35] What we know, and I don't have a crystal ball either, but what I do know is that I've handled

[4:41:41] a ton of cases where you have experts on both sides.

[4:41:45] And what I do know is that when you hire an expert who gives you an opinion that not only

[4:41:51] agrees with the other side, but in fact says it's worse, there's a great chance you're

[4:41:57] going to lose.

[4:41:59] That's what I know.

[4:42:01] And that's the situation that we're in, in this particular case.

[4:42:05] I agree.

[4:42:06] Leipa is terrible.

[4:42:07] I agree that the Public Service Commission does very little, if anything, to protect

[4:42:13] rate payers.

[4:42:14] I've been fighting with the Public Service Commission over New York American water and

[4:42:18] Liberty water for the last, well, how long have I been here?

[4:42:22] Seven years.

[4:42:23] Four years ago, they gave them a rain increase anyway.

[4:42:26] I asked the governor to change the Public Service Commission.

[4:42:28] It never happened.

[4:42:29] We changed the governor before we changed the public service commission.

[4:42:32] That fight needs to happen up in Albany.

[4:42:35] But what's before us here is a situation where if this settlement isn't approved today,

[4:42:42] Leipa could walk away from that settlement tomorrow.

[4:42:48] Until both sides sign on the dotted line, and effectively what we're doing today by

[4:42:54] ratifying the agreement is signing on the bottom line, that agreement is fully revocable.

[4:43:01] And if Leipa walks away from that agreement, then Nassau County taxpayers are likely on

[4:43:07] the hook for between five and eight hundred million dollars in liability.

[4:43:13] That is money that will be paid by every single taxpayer of Nassau County.

[4:43:19] money, that is money that the residents of Island Park and the residents of Glenwood

[4:43:24] Landing, who I could not be more sympathetic towards, but if they win that judgment, there

[4:43:31] is no five-year phasing.

[4:43:33] It happens immediately.

[4:43:36] An 80 was an 87 or 94 percent, whichever was, increase immediately in their tax liability.

[4:43:45] So the reasonable thing to me to do and the responsible thing, in my opinion, to do is

[4:43:51] to vote for this settlement today for the assurance that one, we're avoiding this liability

[4:43:58] on behalf of all Nassau County residents, but providing a path even for the residents

[4:44:03] in those individual districts to have at least some phase in and at least some relief

[4:44:09] instead of the threat of being immediately impacted by a case that we are pretty confident

[4:44:15] we're not going to win.

[4:44:17] So I vote in the affirmative.

[4:44:19] Thank you, Legislator.

[4:44:22] Minority Leader Kavan Abraham's.

[4:44:24] Thank you, Mike.

[4:44:26] I've heard a lot of justification for votes today, which I guess it is what it is.

[4:44:31] We have to justify why we vote yes.

[4:44:34] At the same time, we have to justify that this is a different entity than the entity

[4:44:38] that has been hurting rate payers for the last god knows how many decades.

[4:44:43] That being said, your voters and your constituents don't see the differentiation.

[4:44:50] They don't see the examples that you're trying to make.

[4:44:54] At the end of the day, this is the same liper that has given them shoddy service and has

[4:44:58] raised their rates.

[4:45:00] We understand that that's not the force. Today, it's a tax-sertiorary case, but the little

[4:45:04] guy had a chance to score a victory today. And you guys voted with the big entity. That's

[4:45:09] the fact, that's the fact. The little guy could have won something today, could have been 1-0

[4:45:13] for the little guy, finally gets a chance to stick it to the big guy. And in agreement

[4:45:17] to Senator DeMotto, no, everyone knows this case has to be settled. But we don't have

[4:45:23] to settle it today. We're settling it because LIPA, LIPA said that we have to settle

[4:45:29] it today. Oh, we're back in a way. You just, that's placating to Lypa. That's the point

[4:45:35] that I'm making. That if Lypa says jump, you guys are asking how high. So, what, clearly

[4:45:41] what's happening today is that rape payers don't matter. Constituents don't matter.

[4:45:47] School districts, library districts don't matter. Lypa matters. That's the entity

[4:45:52] that matters. And that's where we're going wrong. And that's where we're losing

[4:45:56] in the message that the same entity that hurt your constituents during countless superstorm

[4:46:03] after after left them in the dark literally left them in the dark is getting what they

[4:46:10] want not just what they want but when they want it what kind of messages I say about

[4:46:17] you guys not a good one I vote no for the right pair thank you legislator for dining

[4:46:24] over to Richard Nicolillo? Our voters and the residents of Nassau County are a lot more

[4:46:27] intelligent than you give them credit for. They understand the fact that there's a potential

[4:46:33] exposure to the county of a billion dollars. You know, it's money that they have to pay,

[4:46:38] tax payers have to pay. Even the residents in the districts that are most prominently

[4:46:44] affected, they have more intelligence than that. They can understand the numbers. You

[4:46:50] We talked generally about experts, but let's look at what the experts are saying and this is an assessment case

[4:46:56] What is the value of those plants?

[4:46:59] Leipa says for the Barrett plant the value is $28 million would be a 94% reduction in the taxes they pay

[4:47:06] Necessar County well, they say it's 94 million dollars, which is an 81% reduction in the taxes that they have to pay

[4:47:13] Glad with landing, Leipa says that the plant is worth $40 million, 72% reduction in taxes

[4:47:21] that Leipa will be paying to that school district.

[4:47:24] Nessau County was less, $35 million.

[4:47:27] So under Nessau County's numbers, a 76% reduction in taxes that we pay to those school districts.

[4:47:34] Those are the numbers.

[4:47:36] Again, we can rail about Leipa and none of us like Leipa and there were, you know,

[4:47:42] a whipping boy that we could talk about and all that stuff.

[4:47:45] But our residents are smart.

[4:47:46] They understand the numbers.

[4:47:47] They understand that they don't want to pay another billion dollars

[4:47:50] in tax county taxes and get nothing for it.

[4:47:54] And the residents in the school districts are smart.

[4:47:56] They understand that at some point in the litigation,

[4:47:58] you have to decide whether you're going to settle or go forward.

[4:48:01] And in this case, they understand

[4:48:03] that if you don't settle, the reduction in taxes

[4:48:08] will be devastating and immediate.

[4:48:11] So I have a lot of respect for the residents of the county apparently more than you do

[4:48:16] And I think the residents will see this to be a good deal that it is for the county residents

[4:48:21] In fact for the school districts is the best we're ever going to get I vote yes. Thank you final final count

[4:48:29] Ten yes eight. No

[4:48:33] All right. Thank you. Yeah item passes. We have two other items the agenda

[4:48:38] Number one, a local law to amend Section 3-2.3 of the National County Administrative Code in

[4:48:43] relation to the Special Revenue Fund created pursuant to this section in a motion to open

[4:48:48] the hearing.

[4:48:49] Legislator Schaefer makes that motion.

[4:48:52] Legislator Walker makes seconds to motion.

[4:48:55] So the hearing is now open.

[4:48:59] Andy, you want to speak to it?

[4:49:03] Good afternoon.

[4:49:04] Andy Percival of the Management and Budget.

[4:49:06] As I spoke before in the committee hearing meetings last week, two weeks ago, I'm sorry.

[4:49:11] This just amends the special uses for the Special Revenue Fund to broaden its uses for what we can spend the money on.

[4:49:19] And I'm here to take any questions.

[4:49:21] Well, specifically, it will allow us to spend money with respect to the longevity payments.

[4:49:27] It will give us monies to fund the longevity payments.

[4:49:30] We have some other litigation out there that would open up the horizons.

[4:49:33] who has some article 18 cases out there that are still looming, some other post-employment

[4:49:37] benefits that we might be able to use the money for to, again, this will help us on

[4:49:42] the glide slope to get us out of the control period is what the ultimate goal is by spending

[4:49:47] down some of our or reducing some of the liabilities that are on the county's books that are

[4:49:51] unforeseen.

[4:49:52] Okay.

[4:49:53] Any other questions?

[4:49:54] Any questions?

[4:49:56] All right.

[4:49:57] Motion to close the hearing.

[4:49:59] Motion to close the hearing.

[4:50:01] Motion to close the hearing.

[4:50:02] Motion to close the hearing.

[4:50:03] Signified by saying aye.

[4:50:05] That was opposed.

[4:50:06] Carries unanimously.

[4:50:08] Item 2, vote on the proposed local law to amend section 3-2.3 of the National County

[4:50:13] Ministry of Code in relation to the Special Revenue Fund created pursuant to this section,

[4:50:17] motion by legislator Chifrey, seconded by legislator Ferretti.

[4:50:23] Any debate or discussion on this local law?

[4:50:26] Giving none.

[4:50:27] All in favor.

[4:50:27] Signified by saying aye.

[4:50:29] That was opposed.

[4:50:30] Carries unanimously.

[4:50:38] Oops, by Legislator Rhodes, seconded by Legislator Walker, all in favor of turning, signify by saying aye.

[4:50:44] Aye, those opposed, carries the limits.

Nassau County Legislature Full Legislature Meeting

Transcript