THEATER REVIEW - "RESPECT"

  

THEATER REVIEW

“Respect” - Produced by: Theatre Three– Port Jefferson

Reviewed by: Jeb Ladouceur 

Leave it to Theatre Three in Port Jefferson … when they promise to bring Broadway quality entertainment to the 106-year-old playhouse on Main Street, they always deliver. Currently Mary Powers is at the helm directing “Respect,” Dorothy Marcic’s retrospective of songs that have defined the evolving position of women in American society throughout the past century.

Appropriately, things get underway with “Bird in a Gilded Cage” (my grandmother would have preferred “After the Ball” though she was never allowed to sing it, I’m told) and Lori Beth Belkin does a pretty good job with the lyrical plaint. Jessica Contino lightens things up with a cute rendition of “I Want to be Loved by You,” the boop-boop-a-doop come-on that maintains the show’s theme of female subservience in the early 1900s without engaging in too much self-pity.

Of course no musical genre can generate the precise degree of sympatico that deprived 20^th century women deserve, like ‘The Blues’ can. To fill that prerequisite, author Marcic has selected “God Bless the Child,” and in this production, the nearly impossible-to-sing Billie Holliday ballad is assigned to Amanda-Camille. The much more manageable “Body and Soul” would have been a lot easier for Amanda-Camille to croon, while delivering the same message.

The fourth member of the performing quartet (all clad in black blouses, black skirts, and diamond necklaces) is the show’s narrator, Elizabeth Ann Castrogiovanni. She helps out vocally on some of the earlier tunes, but turns in probably the best performance of Act I with a tender “Que Sera, Sera.”

Logically, the brief second act (the outfits have become black pantsuits) illustrated the arrival of the Liberated Woman with the show’s biggest surprise, the catchy “You Don’t Own Me.”

One can understand why the often impudent and always irreverant Rush Limbaugh invariably used this number as the introduction for his wiseguy shots at the Feminist Movement, wherein he ridiculed some activist statement or other on the part of Helen Reddy, Oprah Winfrey, Gloria Steinem … etc. The few chuckles in the audience when the ‘Respect’ quartet launched into the number, with its interesting changes of key, quickly changed to cheers as the four women interpreted the 1963 Leslie Gore hit single to perfection.

Apart from “You Don’t Own Me” and a nicely choreographed version of Nancy Sinatra’s number one worldwide hit “These Boots Are Made For Walkin’” Act II of ‘Respect’ is more frenetic, but considerably less satisfying musically than  Act I (where are “Tammy” and “My Man” for instance?).

However, the one consistently magical component of this memorable production is the exquisite background music provided by Steve McCoy (pianist/conductor), Don Larson (drums), and  in particular, David Grudzinski who serves up the beautiful bass line flawlessly.

When the final encore had been sung at last weekend’s performance of ‘Respect,’ and the final bows were taken, I scanned the audience to confirm what seemed to be the case … and sure enough … every patron in the sellout crowd was standing, most still applauding, and many were singing.

Award-winning writer, Jeb Ladouceur is the author of a dozen novels, and his theater and book reviews appear in several major L.I. publications. His newest book, THE GHOSTWRITERS, explores the bizarre relationship between the late Harper Lee and Truman Capote. Ladouceur’s recently completed thriller, THE SOUTHWICK INCIDENT, is due next month, and will be introduced at the Smithtown Library on Sunday afternoon, May 21st. The book involves a radicalized Yale student and his CIA pursuers. Mr. Ladouceur’s revealing website is www.JebsBooks.com

SUFOLK CLOSEUP - $8.1 Million For Signs That No One Seems To Want

SUFFOLK CLOSEUP 

By Karl Grossman

Leaving New York State and entering Vermont is almost like going to another country. One leaves the billboards and other signs that litter the New York landscape and go to a state that is billboard-free.

In recent times, adding to its sign pollution, New York State has erected—all over Long Island and upstate—signs boosting itself. “The New York State Experience,” reads one of the many signs. “New York Outdoor Recreation,” says another. And there’s “New York Attractions” and “New York History” and “New York Food & Beverages.”

They’re almost a state governmental version of the Burma-Shave signs which littered U.S. highways between 1925 and 1963 when they were removed after the Burma-Vita company, in decline, was sold.

And the New York State signs have been put up with our tax money. An Associated Press article last month said the state has spent $8.1 million on its “I Love NY” sign program.

The signs have not been loved by most people on Long Island, with some exceptions. “They make me think about the good things that New York State has to offer,” wrote Mick Du Russel of Lake Ronkonkoma in a recent letter-to-the-editor in Newsday. I’d say he is in a distinct minority. Out in Montauk, there was an uproar over the signs. “They’re ridiculous,” said East Hampton Town Supervisor Larry Cantwell in July, a month after the program began. “They’re totally out of character in Montauk.” The state agreed to take down most in Montauk.

Similarly, after complaints from residents and elected officials, most of the state signs erected in Port Jefferson and Orient were removed.  Port Jefferson Mayor Margot Garant spoke of efforts at “cleaning things up” in the village and, of the state signs, “they’re ugly.”

Southold Town Supervisor Scott Russell said the signs in Orient were “counterproductive” as they blocked scenic views. One state sign was posted “right in front” of a nature preserve—and the sign, instead of the preserve, should “not be the first thing” people see getting off the ferry from Connecticut, arriving in New York. 

The Federal Highway Administration jumped into the situation charging in November that the signs are a safety hazard, a distraction to drivers, and were illegal under U.S. and New York State laws. It threatened a cut in federal funding for highway and bridge projects if the signs weren’t removed. The state has “agreed that no more will go up while we’re in negotiations” with federal officials, a spokesperson for the state Department of Transportation said last month. A Federal Highway Administration spokesperson said a “moratorium” was put in place and the state “has agreed to not post any new signs, and we have discussed with them removing the existing signs.” 

Meanwhile, the state sign brouhaha has spawned a new Suffolk County anti-billboard effort. Good news!

Suffolk Legislator Al Krupski of Cutchogue has just introduced a “Local Law Prohibiting Billboards on County Highways.” His measure notes that “billboards are common along many major roadways throughout the county” and they “can be distracting to drivers navigating roads, limit sight lines and contribute to accidents.” They are “also unappealing on an aesthetic level, detracting from the natural environment.” His bill “concludes that the county should prohibit the placement of billboards on county road rights-of-way.”

Brookhaven Town Supervisor Ed Romaine earlier wrote a letter to the Suffolk Legislature asking that the county follow in Brookhaven Town’s “footsteps and adopt legislation that would phase out billboards along county roads.” Billboards “distract drivers” and take away from “the beauty of the area,” he says. 

New York State indeed has many “good things” to “offer.” But they don’t need to be pushed Burma-Shave sign-like with many hundreds of highway signs proclaiming it.

In 1968, Vermont passed its landmark anti-billboard law. An example of citizen action, its passage is credited as largely the result of extraordinary efforts by one person, Ted Riehle. He “believed strongly…that Vermont would benefit financially and aesthetically…Time has proven him right,” says the Scenic America website (www.scenic.org). Maine, Alaska and Hawaii now have their own anti-billboard statutes. As do “1,500 cities and communities,” Scenic America notes. Of course, entities led by the Outdoor Advertising Association of America fight this.  

New York State should get tougher on billboards. To have them blot the beautiful mountains of upstate New York and landscape of Long Island is wrong. For starters, the state should immediately end its part in causing sign pollution along our roadways.

Karl Grossman is a veteran investigative reporter and columnist, the winner of numerous awards for his work and a member of the L.I. Journalism Hall of Fame. He is a professor of journalism at SUNY/College at Old Westbury and the author of six books.

Congressman Zeldin Releases Results Of One Survey Question From Telephone Town Hall

Congressman Lee Zeldin’s spokesperson Jennifer DiSiena released the results of the first of five survey questions asked during the February 23 Telephone Town Hall meeting. 

According to Ms. DiSiena the Telephone Town Hall meeting had 9,116 participants. 1,341 people responded to the first survey question asking callers to identify their priorities. The results show that health care was the number one priority for callers receiving 23 percent of the response, second was the environment receiving 18 percent, followed by immigration and border security which received 16 percent.

Ms. DiSiena has indicated that question one, about priorities, is the only result that will be publicly released. 

The remaining survey questions included:

Do you agree with the job I’m doing in Congress?

Do you approve of the job President Trump is doing?

Do you believe our country is on the right track or the wrong track?

What do you believe should be done with the Affordable Care Act?

Notes From Congressman Zeldin's Telephone Town Hall Meeting

Notes from Congressman Zeldin’s Telephone Town Hall meeting Feb. 23. The word from the Congressman’s staff was that the meeting would start at 7 pm. The actual start time was 7:12pm.  In a press release Wednesday, the congressman’s spokesperson Jennifer DiSiena said that 100,000 constituents in the 1st CD would receive a call inviting them to participate in the call. People were also invited to register for the call or to follow online. 

After the Telephone Town Hall meeting, Ms. DiSiena said that 9,000 plus people participated in the event.

Twelve questions were asked and answered from people on the call or online.  There were also five poll questions the Congressman asked the audience to respond to. 

Tina questioned Mr. Zeldin about the Affordable Care Act (ACA)  which he would like to repeal. Zeldin supports allowing young people to stay on their parents plan and supports coverage for those with pre-existing conditions. He talked about other areas where those covered under the ACA were limited in the number of insurers to chose from. The Congressman spoke about NY’s program Health Republic and stated that many lost coverage when Health Republic was denied rate hikes and withdrew as a provider. When questioner Jacquline asked about the challanges of repealing and replacing the ACA requirement that all people are insured, Zeldin acknowledged that it is a a difficult issue.

On the VA Zelding said he supports allowing Veterans to use their VA benefits to go to private providers.

The Congressman was asked by Meridith about his support for HR38 The  Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017 - This bill amends the federal criminal code to allow a qualified individual to carry a concealed handgun into or possess a concealed handgun in another state that allows individuals to carry concealed firearms. A qualified individual must: (1) be eligible to possess, transport, or receive a firearm under federal law; (2) carry a valid photo identification document; and (3) carry a valid concealed carry permit issued by, or be eligible to carry a concealed firearm in, his or her state of residence. Additionally, the bill allows a qualified individual to carry or possess a concealed handgun in a school zone and in federally owned lands that are open to the public. He stated his support for the 2nd Amendment and spoke of the many uneforced rules on the books that make more stringent background checks unnecessary. He acknowledged that many disagree with him saying “that he will not be all things to all people.”

A woman named Cynthia asked his position on legislating that presidents must release their tax returns. Zeldin never really answered the question but went through a discussion where he said Democrats on committees are “hyper-partisan” and making this proposal every day. He expressed the sentiment that the Government Oversite Committee would treat concerns about President Trump the same way they treated concerns about President Obama. Zeldin expressed his view that many were looking to impeach the president “right out of the gate.”

A caller named Joe asked “As an American, as a Jew, how do you condone Donald Trump’s belated condemnation of the rise of anti-Semitism? The same caller asked about President Trump’s seeming anti-semetic appointment of Steve Bannon and lack of leadership on both Holocaust Day and the missed opportunity to visit the members of the burnt out mosque in Texas. Zeldin reminded the caller of a statement he issued which addressed his position.

SUFFOLK CLOSEUP - Health And Safety Or Commercial Enterprise?

SUFFOLK CLOSEUP

By Karl Grossman

The efforts of the Town of East Hampton to quell aircraft noise involving the town-owned airport have been negated by a federal appeals court. This has resulted in a move to have the town shut down its airport and open the more than 600 acres for other uses.

It’s an issue affecting all of Long Island. Helicopters particularly, ferrying passengers between Manhattan and East Hampton, have been flying loud and low over the length of the island creating a terrible racket for folks from Nassau through western Suffolk—with Smithtown affected—and the East End. The East Hampton Airport became during the warm-weather months, Long Island’s biggest noisemaker.

With the court’s ruling, “we will again be subject to noise disturbance at any time of day or night,” says Patricia Currie of Noyac, a co-founder of the new group Say NO to KHTO. (KHTO is the airport’s aviation designation.)

East Hampton is seeking to go to the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn the ruling. That may be a long shot. “We cannot let stand unchallenged a decision that completely federalizes our small community airport and strips the town of any meaningful local control of the town-owned airport,” said East Hampton Supervisor Larry Cantwell following the November ruling. 

Laying out East Hampton’s priorities for 2017 at the town board’s organizational meeting last month,  Mr. Cantwell said: “The town’s diligent efforts to gain local control of the East Hampton Airport through a thoughtful process and adoption of local laws was thwarted by the Second Circuit Court of Appeals nullifying local restrictions.” He said that “absent a lawful strategy to significantly reduce noise, the future of the airport is likely to be called into question,”

And that—with Say No to KHTO—is what is happening. “This huge tract of commercially-zoned land can better serve our community in a variety of ways,” says Barry Raebeck of Wainscott, with Ms. Currie a founder of Say No to KHTO, and its chairman. “The airport is being operated at a huge cost to the community in lost jobs and lost dollars. We are actually subsidizing the destruction of our own environment and quality of life—simply to benefit the handful of commercial operators…This land could be used for wind and solar power generation, for affordable housing, for parks and recreation, and for low-impact businesses…  Communities across the country are struggling against unwanted and unnecessary aircraft intrusion. East Hampton should once again be in the forefront of such socially sensitive and environmentally responsible efforts,” declares Mr. Raebeck.

The website of Say No to KHTO says: “KHTO has become a hub for out-of-state air taxi operators peddling lucrative Hamptons flights, wine included….Our group consists of noise-affected residents from communities across the East End and those living in western Suffolk and Nassau Counties, up to 100 miles from KHTO, East Hampton’s noisy polluting airport.”

Say No to KHTO challenges what it describes as a “myth” that the field is economically important to East Hampton. It provides “about 25 jobs” and “generates no revenue for the town or its people.” All its income must be used at the airport. The town “could earn $10 million to $15 million per year, perhaps more, if the property were put to other uses,” says the group. 

The East Hampton Airport noise issue has been hot for years. In 2015, aviation interests poured $250,000 into the campaigns of two town board candidates they considered supportive. Both were overwhelmingly defeated. The board thereafter voted on a set of restrictions that included an overnight curfew and limited hours for takeoffs and landings by aircraft which Federal Aviation Administration standards rate as noisy.” The legislation noted that the year before there were a whopping 24,000 complaints about noise from aircraft using the field.  “Noise complaints at East Hampton Airport far exceeded the level of complaints at major airports around the country,” it said.

A U.S. District Court first heard the case brought by aviation interests and modified some of the restrictions. But the aviation interests still wanted the entire law eliminated and the federal appeals court in Manhattan complied citing “federal preemption.”

There have been moves elsewhere to close municipal airports. Santa Monica, California, because of noise, has been moving to shut down that city’s airport. Chicago got rid of its Meigs Field in 2003—despite bitter opposition of aviation interests. Mayor Richard Daley “ordered city crews to destroy the runway immediately by bulldozing large X-shaped gouges,” relates an Internet account. The next day he “defended” his action saying “it would save the city the effort of further court battles.” What was Meigs Field is now a park featuring a 7,500-seat pavilion for music concerts, strolling paths and a beach.

State Assemblyman Fred W. Thiele, Jr. of Sag Harbor, an attorney, disagrees with the ruling, issuing a statement that “the court has expanded federal control at the expense of local government, eroding the concept of home rule. In doing so, the court has now raised the question of whether or not the Town of East Hampton should be in the ‘airport business’ at all. The health and safety of its residents must always take precedence over commercial enterprise.” The ruling “causes all responsible persons to first reconsider whether or not the town should be in the airport business.”

Karl Grossman is a veteran investigative reporter and columnist, the winner of numerous awards for his work and a member of the L.I. Journalism Hall of Fame. He is a professor of journalism at SUNY/College at Old Westbury and the author of six books.