The Mansion At Ebo Hill

By Stacey Altherr

Richard Albano drove by the old white house on Edgewood Road, and knew he had to buy it.

Historic Mansion at Ebo Hill on Edgewood Ave (Photo Ebo Hill Facebook Page)“I passed by it and fell in love with it,” said Albano, 57, now living in Deer Park. “I said to myself, ‘Someone needs to fix that up.”

Built in 1843, and in a severe state of disrepair but with many of the original details, the Deer Park resident bought the house known as the Mansion at Ebo Hill. Albano, who owned an auto repair shop for 30 years in West Babylon and now owns pizza parlors in Commack and Deer Park, had also been buying and fixing up homes since 1984. This one, he wanted as his own home.

Albano was so enthralled by the thought of the project, he began work even before the closing, with the blessing of the previous owner, renovating to restore the grandeur of the old home by painstakingly going over every historic detail, working on it 7 days a week.

The Mansion at Ebo Hill fire 2018 “I worked on it five weeks before the purchase went through,” he said. “Two weeks later, it burnt down.”

The home was reduced to rubble on March 26, leaving behind a smoldering mess and chimney remnants. A cross beam in the fireplace, the only one fireplace of the four in the home deemed safe to use by an outside company, had caught fire. The fire must have been smoldering for hours before it flamed, he said. 

“I was at my girlfriend’s house about five houses down and a neighbor called,” he said. “By the time I got there, it was fully engulfed.”

“Friends tried to console me, saying that everything happens for a reason,” but it wasn’t until his daughter told him that it could have happened while they were all asleep in the house, that the words rang true. “I was sure of it. The problem with the chimney wouldn’t have been found.”

Albano was devastated. He had gone so far in the process with structural work, and the roof work was to begin the day after the fire. Already “thousands of dollars” into the house, both by sale price and renovation, the home could either be abandoned or rebuilt. For Albano, there was no question. His love of the house and its history meant he would rebuild.

Construction at The Mansion at Ebo Hill on Edgewood Ave. September 7, 2018With the community on his side (more than 6,800 follow his Facebook page), the house restorer has already laid the foundation and is working on the framing. He is using those same historic pictures to make the home as authentic as possible.

“My kids didn’t want me to do it,” Albano said. “They said it was too much of an undertaking and it will cost 10 times what it was going to cost, but I decided I would keep going. I feel a responsibility to the community and the home. Hundreds of souls have lived in that home.”

For anyone who would like to watch the process of the house restoration and rebuilding, follow The Mansion at Ebo Hill on Facebook where Albano puts up pictures and information on the progress of the project regularly.

Op-Ed Republican Running A Democratic Primary Is Hardly A Teaching Moment

By Elaine Turley

Surrogate Court candidate and Republican Tara Scully is asking Democrats to vote for her in the Democratic primary and is telling Democrats that she hopes to run on the Democratic and Republican Party lines to teach the Democratic Party not to make deals for cross endorsements.  Ms. Scully apparently objected to the candidate chosen by the Democratic and Conservative Parties to run for Suffolk County Surrogate because she agreed with Newsday that judicial candidates being endorsed by more than one political party deprives voters of a choice of candidates.  

If Tara Scully wins the Democratic Party primary she will run on the Democratic and Republican Party lines – thus depriving voters of the choice for Surrogate Court Judge she has said she is running to preserve.

Tara Scully herself accepted the cross endorsements of the Independence Party and the Reform Party when she ran for District Court Judge in 2015 and if she had received the Conservative Party endorsement she would not have lost her bid by a mere 173 votes.  Voters could vote for Ms. Scully on any of three party lines in 2015 and for her opponent on any of two party lines.  It seems that voters do have a choice for judge even with cross endorsements – but they did not choose Tara Scully.

Ms. Scully told Newsday that her plan and motivation for running is to change the New York law that provides for elected party delegates to select Supreme Court judges to a law that provides for electing judges in primary elections.  But Ms. Scully has posted on her website an article from the newspaper that endorsed her acknowledging that she has no power to make this change as judge since only the New York legislature can change this process.  Tara Scully speaking of her plan to “change the way we select judges in this state” and “to change the political climate” in the county gives voters the false impression that her being elected Surrogate Court Judge will allow her to implement her plan when she must in fact work in the legislature to do so.  But Ms. Scully is not campaigning to be elected to the legislature where she can make that change and she never has.

Tara Scully, an attorney, does not mention on her website that the U.S. Supreme Court in 2008 upheld New York’s method for choosing Supreme Court judges in a decision that opines that those complaining of this method “complain not of the state law, but of the voters’ (and their elected delegates’) preference for the choices of their party leadership.”  New York State Bd. Of Elections v. Lopez Torres, 552 U.S. 196(2008).  The Court notes that the “New York Legislature remain opposed to the primary (as a means of selecting judicial candidates), for the same reason their predecessors abolished it 86 years ago; because it leaves judicial selection to voters uninformed about judicial qualifications, and places a high premium upon the ability to raise money.”  The potential for large sums of money that must be raised to wage primary campaigns corrupting the judicial system disturbs not only the U.S. Supreme Court, but also at least one judicial selection task force in New York that recommends against this system of selecting judicial candidates. The Judicial Task Force of the Association of the Bar of the City of New York in December 2006 noted, “The need to raise large sums of money in order to compete independently and effectively for a nomination for Supreme Court Justice is profoundly disconcerting. …The primary targets of those fundraising efforts are the attorneys and law firms that appear or could appear before them.  The specter of sitting judges actively and aggressively soliciting large quantities of money for those who will or may appear before them is acid that corrodes public confidence in the independence and integrity of the State judiciary.”  Of course another concern for those attorneys who might appear before a judge waging an aggressive primary campaign is that opposing such candidate could be held against them in the future.

Ms. Scully’s website consists of multiple pages of Newsday editorials railing against the Democratic Party, political party leaders, and cross endorsement of judicial candidates which have been upheld and supported by the U.S. Supreme Court and the NY legislature.  The postings make political attacks against judicial candidates, not because the candidates are unqualified, but because of the men to whom they are married and the party leaders who selected them as candidates.  One would believe from Ms. Scully’s website that she is actually running against Democratic Party chairman Rich Schaffer and the spouses of qualified women who have served honorably in the judiciary and who are respected by the legal community of Suffolk County. 

Ms. Scully’s website includes in bold print, “Tara A. Scully’s candidacy would launch a wrecking ball at the plans of Democratic Party county leader Rich Schaffer….” and continues, “I am proud to step forward to offer voters an alternative to the political deal-making that has made it almost impossible for independent qualified candidates to become judges in Suffolk County.”

Tara Scully’s campaign for Surrogate Court Judge is a prime example of why courts and legal analysts have opined that judicial nominations should be made by party conventions or appointments rather than primary elections.  A judicial campaign is not the proper forum for aggressive attacks or for legislative advocacy.  Ms. Scully should know better.  

Ms. Turley is an attorney who lives in Smithtown. She is the former chairperson of the Smithtown Democratic Committee. 

SUFFOLK CLOSEUP - Vested Interest and Self Interest Get Results

SUFFOLK CLOSEUP

By Karl Grossman

Newsday last month ran an Associated Press story headlined: “A rising concern? After straws, balloons get more scrutiny.” I was surprised that no mention was made in the story of Suffolk County’s action against balloons. For Suffolk in 2005 passed a law prohibiting the release of 25 or more helium-filled balloons. It’s enforced by the Suffolk County Department of Health Services.

How Suffolk enacted its balloon law—in the face of some odd resistance—is an important story. Indeed, a book I am writing (my seventh) starts off in its first chapter with the story to begin to illustrate a major point of the book: how vested interest, self-interest are keys to how things happen or don’t happen, no matter the economic or political system or what nation is involved. A company sells a product or a process and it might turn out to be toxic and life-threatening. But that vested interest, that self-interest will drive most companies to stick with and keep pushing their poisonous product or process. Government sets up an office, starts a project, and it might turn out to be meaningless or dangerous, but a vested interest is created and it’s hard to end what has begun. The government program is pushed on.

The Suffolk balloon story started when then County Legislator Lynne Nowick of St. James (now a Smithtown councilwoman) received a letter from several third-grade students about helium-filled balloons falling into the Atlantic Ocean and Long Island Sound and, being mistaken for jellyfish, were ingested by sea animals which died. They urged legislative action by Suffolk. The children noted that the state of Connecticut had banned the mass release of helium-filled balloons because of the harm they cause to marine life,

Ms. Nowick conducted research and found that helium-filled balloons represent a common form of floating garbage offshore and regularly kill marine life, especially turtles. She wrote her bill prohibiting the release of 25 or more helium-filled balloons and introduced it. A legislative no-brainer, you’d figure.

But then along came something called the The Balloon Council. 

This is an organization—that still exists—based in New Jersey of manufacturers, distributors and retailers of balloons. As it states on its website—www.balloonhq.com—it was formed “to educate consumers and regulators about the wonders of…balloons.”

“At the time that TBC was established [in 1990] several state legislators were considering well-intentioned but ill-conceived laws, which would have severely limited consumers rights to obtain full employment from balloons.” The efforts of The Balloon Council “have helped curb this negative trend.” The Balloon Council notes the states that passed “balloon release bans” before it “was formed” and lists not only Connecticut but Florida, Tennessee and California. But then it has a longer list of states in which “TBC has been successful in defeating restrictions in” and this includes Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Washington, Wisconsin and Hawaii,

“The Balloon Council—Affirming America’s Ongoing Love Affair with Balloons,” it trumpets at the top of its website.

Vested interest. Self-interest. And never mind the damage caused by the release of balloons and their falling into waterways.

The Balloon Council lobbied in Suffolk against Ms. Nowick’s measure.  Nevertheless, it became law. It declares that “the release of helium and other lighter-than-air balloons into the atmosphere has a deleterious effect on the environment when they inevitably deflate.” Many of these balloons “land in the ocean or Long Island Sound.”  It speaks of how “research has indicated that marine life and animals ingest these as they appear near the surface because they believe they are spotting jellyfish or other edible resources.” They then “either choke on the balloon or the balloon will form an intestinal obstruction either of which will sentence these animals and marine life to a painful death.” These balloons, further, are a “source of pollution.”

As to any need for helium-filled balloons, a Florida-based organization called Balloons Blow, which has been active since 2011, states “all released balloons…return to Earth as ugly litter….They kill countless animals [and] are also a waste of helium, a finite resource.” “Find Alternatives,” is the heading of a section on its website—www.balloonsblow.org “Balloons are not the only thing to decorate with. There are many safe, fun, and eye-catching alternatives to balloons for parties, memorials, fundraisers, and more! “

That’s another major point of my book, titled May We Choose Life—that virtually all polluting products and processes are unnecessary. There are alternatives in harmony with nature. But those with vested interest, self-interest, destroy sustainability with their lethal products and processes—and deny the harm they are causing. The balloon article in Newsday quotes the executive director of The Balloon Council as insisting that there is no proof that helium-filled balloons are causing the death of marine life.

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.  

Op Ed - Israel's Unwavering Friends In America

Israel’s Unwavering Friends in America

By Perry Gershon

For decades, Democratic Party support for Israel was never questioned.  But recently, the GOP has taken up the pro-Israel cause, offering blind support while ignoring certain Israeli actions criticized by prior American governments.  Simultaneously, many Democrats have been critical of Israeli policy, even to the level of questioning the long-term bond between our countries. There is an inaccurate, but perhaps growing, perception that the Republicans are better for Israel than we are. 

As a Democratic candidate for the House in NY-1, I affirm traditional Democratic Party principles and stand in solidarity with Israel as our sole true democratic friend in the Middle East. The Democrats’ support for the Jewish State dates back to Israel’s declaration of independence in 1948, and has not wavered in the 70 years since.  While Democrats are known for their “big tent” and diverse views, there are certain issues shared by all wings of the Party. Support for Israel must remain one of them.

There cannot be a wedge between Jewish American voters and our Party, and it is imperative that we as Democrats stay true to our basic principles.  As your future NY-1 congressman, I pledge to hold to the following ideals that should be representative of us all:

• Israel is our strongest ally in the region. The US must remain committed to Israel’s security and ability to defend itself. This includes the maintenance of secure and defendable borders for the Jewish state.
• Americans must unite in opposition to the BDS (Boycott, Divest and Sanction) Movement. Despite claims to the contrary by its advocates, BDS is no more than a statement of anti-Semitism under a 21^st century guise.
• Hamas is primarily responsible for the current border violence in Gaza. We must unite in absolute condemnation of Hamas, which is a terrorist organization. The Hamas-initiated rocket fire from Gaza must halt.  If true peace is to be achieved in Gaza, either Hamas must abandon its violent ways and accept publicly the legitimacy of the State of Israel, or it must relax its iron-hand control of Gaza and let a new governing entity take control.
• The United States and Israel must remain committed to a true two-state solution for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.  Without a two-state solution, Israel will lose either its Jewish identity or its democratic identity, neither of which is acceptable. If there is no entity to negotiate peace for the Palestinians, the process must wait until such entity surfaces.

None of this is new or groundbreaking, nor should it even be controversial. These are democratic principles, and as a Democrat, I have a strong personal commitment to them. 

Many may try to confuse voters by suggesting that Democrats who criticize individual policies championed by a particular coalition of the Israeli government do not support Israel. This is a specious claim. As in America, Israeli governments change. Neither Democrats who criticize Trump, nor Republicans who criticized Obama are unpatriotic, much less haters of America. Americans have criticized many of our allies’ policies for years.  Why would a different standard be applied to Israel?  

My support for Israel is rock solid. The Democratic Party’s support for Israel remains unwavering, and those within the Party who question such support are misguided and unrepresentative. I am proudly running for Congress in NY-1 as a Democrat, confident that the Democratic Party was, is, and always will be, a true friend of Israel.

 Perry Gershon is the Democratic Nominee for the House of Representatives, NY-1

I Traded Long Island Traffic For White Sand Beaches And Ended Up With Red Tide

By Stacy Altherr

Red Tide: The Struggle is Real (and Smelly)

Photo courtesy of ABC Action NewsTwo years ago, I left my home in Miller Place for the sunny west coast shores of Sarasota, Florida. I was thrilled to leave behind two-hour commutes and white-knuckle snowstorm driving for the turquoise waters and warm white sands of Siesta Key and Sarasota.

The views all over town are just stunning; dolphins and pelicans frolicking in the waters, sunsets that take your breath away, and bright blue skies with paperwhite clouds above. They call it “Paradise’ for a reason.

Then, sometime in the middle of July, the usual turquoise waters took on a rather dull green hue. It was gradual in the beginning, but within a week or two, toxic red tide algae bloom, or karenia brevis, had swallowed up the coastal waters, stretching 150 miles at one point; from Naples to Clearwater Beach along the Gulf Coast. There’s nothing new about red tide – there was an outbreak when I got here in the summer of 2016 and there is textual evidence it was around in the 1700s – but what is different now, say many, is the severity and the effect it is having on life here on the Gulf Coast.

Why so bad this time? That is being argued by scientists, residents and politicians alike. Some say that it is a natural occurring phenomenon, while others say nature is being exacerbated by pollution led by lax environmental controls by state leadership. One thing is true. Something is feeding the toxic red tide monster, making it bloom bigger and stronger and more resilient. 

Larry Brand, a professor of marine biology and ecology at the University of Miami’s Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science, was quoted in the New York Times last week saying red tides are about 15 times worse than they were 50 years ago, and this year’s bloom is exacerbated by pollutants discharged from Lake Okeechobee, to the north and inland of Sarasota, as well as other environmental factors.

The discharge from Lake Okeechobee is not causing red tide, but can be making it worse, scientists from Mote Marine Laboratory in Longboat Key said at Thursday local public meeting, also noting there is no quick fix for the problem.

The consequence of red tide is evident all along the shoreline and beyond. Here in the Sarasota area, small dead fish that normally wash up during red tide are now so numerous they are being forklifted and hauled away by the tons.  Larger sea life, such as dolphins, loggerhead turtles, manatees, and even sharks, are also washing up onshore- killed by the deadly neurotoxins produced by the red tide.  The smell is something so horrific, it is impossible to tolerate more than a few moments at a time; like a carful of teenage boys after an intense summer sports workout that just ate tacos. And it causes respiratory issues, even several hundred feet away from the beach. Some of the local shellfish are off limits because of the neurotoxins in the red tide, according to the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission.

Needless to say, this is not the place people want to spend their hard-earned vacation dollars right now, so August became a bust for the end of the summer tourist season. I own a small café on Longboat Key, a beautiful beachside community just north of the city of Sarasota, and, while it is usually slower this time of year, is a virtual ghost town. My sales are down an average of 60 percent this month. 

I am not the only one hurting, of course. The whole Gulf Coast is reliant on tourism, and even Siesta Key – often named the Number One beach in the country – is empty. One hotel is offering two night free to anyone who spends $250 in town shops and restaurants. Beachy restaurants that often have waiting lists have just a few patrons. 

Governor Rick Scott has declared a state of emergency, which may seem odd to those up north, but the effect of red tide is about as damaging to businesses as a hurricane. State officials have noted that money will be used to help small businesses, but when I call, they are only offering no-interest bridge loans of 180 days. Not much of a help.

And as sorry as I feel for me, I feel worse for those tourists who didn’t get the memo (mostly Europeans) and came here only to be struck by the smell and sight of the red tide. They come to my café looking so sad, so I do my best to give them options other than the beach.

The winds are shifting, literally, out of the east now, and as of today, the air seems clearer. Some of us are hoping for a hurricane or tropical storm to break up the mucus strand of toxic algae that doesn’t want to leave our shores, and praying it all disappears in time to save our all-important winter season. At some point, this will be gone and we will have our gorgeous beaches back, with tourists and snowbirds alike, streaming into our cafes and shops. We will be back to normal, we hope, but what about the next red tide occurrence? How can we mitigate it now so it doesn’t come back?

Stacey Altherr is a former Newsday reporter now living in Sarsasota, Florida. Her beats included Smithtown, where she covered governmental affairs.  She now runs a café in Longboat Key near her home and writes freelance. Altherr has won many awards, including a 2010 Society of Silurian Award for community service journalism for a multi-part series, “Heroin Hits Main Street,” and a third-place National Headliner Award for public service for a multi-part year-long investigation on spending at fire districts on Long Island.