On Tuesday, November 29^th, the Valley Stream Community Association had its inaugural meeting. Although I believe the weather kept the attendance lower than anticipated, the meeting was highly productive. Those in attendance had an opportunity to hear and see a presentation by two attorneys who specialize in local tax law with respect to assessments based upon real estate.  The elements of tax assessments, the procedures for review and appeals were discussed and clarified by the speakers.  Issues related to homeowners, who find themselves in the high risk AE flood zone,  were covered by the presenters at the meeting.

 I directed the attention of those present to a situation in Los Angeles which appeared on NBC-TV News with Brian Williams that focused on problems resulting from the implementation of the new FEMA flood maps in an area with no history of coastal flooding.

 Other information and organizational objectives were provided to those present by Carol Crupi, President of the Valley Stream Community Association.

 Kudos to Dena Biondo on her preparations and planning of the   inaugural meeting. With the meeting now behind us and future meetings being planned, it is time for the community to realize that FEMA has planned economic havoc for southern Valley Stream beginning in the second half of 2012. That is when mandatory flood insurance renewals will be mailed out with anticipated premiums that jeopardize the stability of the entire community.

 I am regularly asked by residents what they can do to prevent this economic cataclysm. I would strongly suggest the following:

 1- Become actively involved in the Valley Stream Community Association

 2- Vote in all elections (local, state and federal) and vote against ALL incumbents as there are no incumbents that have brought substantial relief to FEMA AE flood zone residents. Local and state officials could have introduced and obtained legislation giving AE residents tax relief and adjusted real estate assessments based upon flood zone designation. THEY HAVE NOT. Local and state officials will do nothing as long as they believe they have the flood zone vote in their pocket

In the upcoming federal elections in 2012, vote against ALL incumbents. In spite of promises and legislative bills that have gone nowhere, these federal officials have not done the one thing they could have done all along. Senators Schumer and Gillibrand and Representative McCarthy are all Democrats. They could have met with the President and publically requested that the President issue an executive order rescinding the 2009 FEMA flood maps. Unless these flood maps are rescinded by November of 2012, DO NOT VOTE FOR OBAMA, GILLIBRAND AND McCARTHY. 

 3- Begin a regimen of telephoning each of the following EACH WEEK and state that you believe the 2009 FEMA flood zone maps for Nassau County have no scientific and historical basis in fact, and that the officials you are calling should use their offices to have the maps rescinded. Contact numbers are as follows:

Sen. Charles Schumer (212) 486- 4430

Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (212) 688- 6262

Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (516) 739- 3008

Pres. Barack Obama: (202) 456-1111

 Even if you are told that some type of assistance is pending, or is about to begin, continue calling. We are beyond “pending” at this point. Results are required NOW.

 I am often reminded of the following quote by Edmund Burke when I see government officials sitting with their hands in their pockets, talking but doing nothing. 

 All that is necessary for evil to succeed is for good men to stand and do nothing.

 This is Joe Margolin from deep in FEMA’s purported tsunami zone wishing everyone a Happy Holiday and a Happy and Healthy New Year.

Well, the 2011 local elections in Nassau County and the Town of Hempstead on Long Island have come and gone with a fraction of the eligible voters overwhelmingly making their preferences known. They have decided for the most part that they want the people, who have been in office for years and have brought us to the state we are in today, to continue with the reasonable expectation that they will give us more of the same.

 What does this mean? Well it means that the incumbents, who signed off on the 2009 revised FEMA flood maps, can stay around and observe how their efforts will tragically and catastrophically affect their constituents. The can reasonably be expected to continue NOT to reform the criteria for  tax assessments which they have the power to do and which reform could be designed to include relief for their constituents who are the victims of the FEMA flood maps.

 As these officials have power to change local taxes and haven’t, we can expect more of the same. The elections have enabled many incumbents to have front row seats to observe  the return to pre-2011 mandatory annual flood insurance rates in  twelve months in the thousands of dollars per annum per homeowner. This may drive constituent families into financial chaos and worse. Unfortunately, there is no reason to expect our reelected officials to do anything more or helpful in the years ahead. Well, as a resident of the high risk AE flood zone, this is what the voters wanted for me and my fellow victims.

 The reelection of the incumbents makes more difficult the task of challenging FEMA and obtaining a recision  of the scientifically and historically indefensible food maps implemented in 2009. It makes it more difficult but not impossible. The Valley Stream Community Association is going forward with a variety of efforts on different fronts to assist the flood map victims of FEMA. 

 On November 29^th, 2011, a meeting will be held at Valley Stream Central High School at 7:00 p.m. to inform members of the community how we are proceeding and to enlist support for our efforts. Attendees will be provided with information on seeking tax relief under the current criteria and procedures. The use of the judicial process to obtain changes in the tax criteria will be discussed.

 The one thing that will not happen is that should local government officials be present THEY WILL NOT BE SPEAKING. This meeting will not be used for a political forum. If they wish to express themselves, they can do so by going back to their governmental entities and securing substantive relief for FEMA flood map victims. If they want credibility with flood map victims, they are going to have to produce.

 In the months ahead this blog will focus on positive and proactive actions being taken by the Valley Stream Community Association and federal officials to assist flood map victims. There will be little or no attention devoted to local officials as this will be consistent with their lack of proactive assistance to flood map victims.

 As Thanksgiving approaches I am thankful for many things including the fact that we have course of action available to us other than total reliance upon local politicos.

 From deep in the heart of the tsunami belt, this is Joe Margolin wishing  all a Happy Thanksgiving.

Now, after more than seven months have elapsed and on the eve of another critical local election, I believe that it is appropriate and helpful that I offer some reflections and views based upon my experience.  As many are aware, my first and last foray into politics was unsuccessful but extremely educational. I entered the arena with two of my colleagues with the hope of advancing and furthering our attack on FEMA’s unjustified map incursion into Valley Stream. We also advocated and brought with us an agenda that would have improved the quality of life for Valley Stream and political integrity in the Village. However, the voters expressed themselves and everyone involved in the election process has gone forward.  I continue to oppose FEMA’s flood maps and zone designations.

In any case, I did learn a great deal from the campaign. Although the political process occurred during the brutally cold weather of this past winter, I did get to meet many people in the community throughout the length and breadth of the Village. I also had the chance to say “Good Morning” to hundreds of early morning commuters at the three LIRR stations in Valley Stream.

What disturbed and concerned me most was the nature of questions and comments directed to me along the campaign trails. These were asked more than once and included the following:  1) Are you a Christian?  2) What are your views on abortion and birth control?  3) Are you a Democrat?  4) What kind of name is Margolin? [Unlike my adversaries in the elections, I did not think it was appropriate or relevant to place the name of my house of worship, if any, on my campaign literature.]

As I traveled around the community during last March’s election campaign, I noticed homes with the signs supporting incumbent candidates.  I was puzzled and did not understand why residents would support officials who created the very problems and issues plaguing the community.  I feel the same as I travel around Valley Stream now just prior to the major local election on November 8^th.

I have come to certain conclusions.  My election experience in Valley Stream has taught me the following:   1- There are many registered voters who do not vote or know the issues and positions of the specific candidates.  2- There are voters who don’t care what the positions of the respective candidates are because they vote based upon their religion, prejudices, and party affiliation or loyalty.  3- There are voters who vote because of their own specific economic situations and not the merit of political arguments or the integrity of specific candidates.

There are those residents who are well-informed about the candidates and issues. Unfortunately, not enough of them vote. They rely on the judgment of their neighbors who proceed to reelect incumbents who have had a part in causing or facilitating the problems facing the Village, like taxes based upon questionable assessment criteria, and the implementation of highly questionable flood zone designations.

Unfortunately, as I travel around Valley Stream now, I see March being repeated. I cannot understand why an individual would support and vote for an incumbent who has been part of the problem and has not actively been a part of the solution. To answer those who wondered about my political affiliation, I am neither a Democrat nor Republican. I examine candidate positions and the issues and do not vote for incumbents who have led us to where we are today.  In this instance, the devil I do not know MAY be better than the devil I do know.  My experience last March has reinforced my views that Valley Stream, the Town of Hempstead, and Nassau County, are in need of a giant breath of fresh air.

*Note: This year’s local election focuses on incumbent candidates common to the Five Towns and the Village of Valley Stream. Significant parts of North Woodmere (Town of Hempstead) are part of the Incorporated Village of Valley Stream including Hungry Harbor Road and the three block area adjacent to the  southern part of Hungry Harbor Road.

In his article last week entitled, “The Day of Reckoning”, appearing in the Sept. 30, 2011 edition of The South Shore Standard, Nassau County Legislator Francis Becker wrote regarding recent and prospective layoffs of county employees resulting from county economic difficulties, the following:

I have had many sleepless nights feeling the anxiety of families knowing that they were going to lose their jobs and wondering how they were going to be able to put food on their tables and pay their mortgages.

I am overwhelmed at Mr. Becker’s compassion for economic trials and tribulations being faced by county employees because of the policies and conduct of local government. However, I am still waiting to hear if Mr. Becker loses sleep over his concern for the destiny waiting for thousands of his constituents when the temporary reprieve limiting mandatory FEMA flood insurance premiums expires in just over fourteen months.

FEMA’s flood insurance victims already pay about $400.00 a year for mandatory coverage (if they have outstanding mortgages or a home equity line of credit) with the prospect of premiums rising to $3,000.00 per year by January of 2013.  Mr. Becker did not directly cause the FEMA problem but where were he and his colleagues when they had an opportunity to voice their objections prior to implementation of the revised flood zone designation maps in 2009? Where is Mr. Becker when he has the opportunity to propose and seek the enactment of local tax assessment relief for FEMA “victims” when he knows that the assessed value of their property does not take into account AE flood zone designations and the decimated marketability of their property?  Does Mr. Becker lose sleep from the prospect of people losing their property from foreclosure and going hungry from mandated FEMA insurance premiums that were never contemplated when his constituents bought their homes?

 What is most egregious in this scenario is that “compassionate” Mr. Becker also knows that the events of recent months and the revelation of facts concerning the creation of FEMA’s food maps have destroyed the credibility of FEMA’s revised maps, compounding and reinforcing the horrendous injustice perpetrated against residents of the AE flood zone south of Sunrise Highway. Those FEMA “victims” can be found in the Five Towns and Gibson (the Lawrence and Hewlett-Woodmere School Districts). These areas are among the most highly taxed in the nation. Now they can add mandatory flood insurance, which serves as a tax and not a protection, as many parts of this geographic zone have never and likely never will never see a tidal surge (tsunami). These areas are cash cows for FEMA and insurance companies. The FEMA “victims” will in all probability never collect from the insurance protection foisted upon them. Does Mr. Becker lose sleep at night from this prospect?  His most recent mailing on property taxes does not mention the unfair local tax burden being borne by thousands of his constituents who are FEMA “victims”. It does not make any reference to a contemplated course of action being taken by him in this regard.  I urge all of my fellow FEMA “victims” to join with me and ensure Mr. Becker  peace of mind and fewer sleepless nights in the future by voting for his opponent and allowing him the peace of retirement. It is hard to imagine his successor doing less than he has to bring tax relief to his FEMA “victim” constituents.

Sweet dreams Mr. Becker  From deep in the heart of the tsunami flood zone.

VALLEY STREAM VILLAGE BOARD MEETINGS- A PLACE TO LEARN ARROGANCE AND INSENSITIVITY BUT NOT PRIORITIZATION

I, along with a few other residents of the high risk AE flood zone in Gibson, attended the September 19^th meeting of the Valley Stream Board of Trustees. The actual meeting was preceded by a hearing concerned with the acquisition and development of an old building in the heart of town on Rockaway Avenue. Many years ago it served as the original municipal building and over the years served as an office for several banks. For the last few years it has been, for the most part, unoccupied. The Village government wants to acquire the building and use it as the Village Courthouse and location for the offices of Code Enforcement.

Some members of the audience spoke and questioned the Trustees regarding the building proposal. I was one of those who questioned the proposal with respect to adequate parking facilities, compliance with the provisions of the American Disabilities Act (ADA), and the reasons why the courthouse proposal could not be focused on vacant buildings in Gibson. However, what focused my attention most was the nature of one of the other participants in the audience and the new Village clerk, Mr. Barra.

In the case of Mr. Barra, when I questioned and commented on the building proposal, I mentioned the concept of eminent domain.  This was a subject brought up first by me during the recent mayoral election.  The current administration has decided to employ the concept in its planned renewal of the downtown business district but not in an attempt to remove the longstanding vacant strip of stores in Gibson.  Standing off to the side and ready to assist the Trustees with questions from the audience were two attorneys retained by the Village for it building proposal.

During my comments addressed to the Board, Village Trustee Barra felt compelled to blurt out two statements, although my comments were not directed to him. First, he attempted to teach me about eminent domain.  I quickly informed him that I had the same law school training as the two attorneys standing off to the side. His next comment regarded copies of letters I requested from the Mayor. He blurted out the requirement that my request be pursuant to the Freedom of Information Law. Both of his blurts were unsolicited by me I am not impressed with Mr. Barra and his approach. In the future when I need to refer to him, I will politely do so in accordance with is position as a Village employee.

With respect to the previously mentioned person in the audience, what I found most repugnant at the meeting that night was a comment from that lady who spoke about the building acquisition and the Village’s plans for the downtown area.  What attracted my attention other than her speaking technique was a reference she made when she rose to the microphone.  She immediately gave her name, as is the requirement, but she also said sho was not part of that “group in the back”.  That reference was directed to the four of us from Gibson, who spoke on the building proposal and the FEMA flood maps. When she made that comment about “the group in the back”, there was a favorable sigh of sorts in the room. That is very disturbing to me and reinforces some conclusions I came to following the recent mayoral campaign.  I hope Gibsonites take note of the perceptions and comments that other Valley Stream residents (not adversely impacted by the AE food zone designation) direct to or infer about Gibson. The only way that Gibson can address its problems and command the equal and equitable treatment it warrants is to unite. Gibsonites must express themselves and one of the most effective ways of doing this is through the ballot box. Only when Gibsonites vote as a unified front will Gibson and its needs get the attention they deserve.

One last note concerns one Gibsonite that came to the Trustees meeting on his own. He urged that the Board of Trustees take aggressive action regarding the conduct of FEMA towards residents of Gibson in view of recent events and disclosures showing the injustice of FEMA’s flood map designations and consequential requirements. When he suggested that his was a very important issue, the Mayor informed him that the Village government had to deal with many things and that the problems with FEMA was just one of many.  The gentleman from Gibson tried to explain that in fourteen months when the flood insurance rates, required by FEMA of most in Gibson, increase to the thousands of dollars, there will be an increase in foreclosures, bankruptcies, etc.  The Mayor again reminded this gentleman that he has many things to deal with in Valley Stream.  The Mayor said that even though it was pointed out that approximately 2,500 homeowners will be severely impacted by FEMA’s actions.

As this occurred at the very end of the meeting, I sat and contemplated my comment for this blog.  The meeting of September 19^th was truly an educational experience. I learned that our Village government has mastered arrogance and insensitivity; I think they need a great deal of work in prioritization.

Local Government- Part of the problem?  Or part of the solution?

I recently was approached by a local government official asking what he could do to deal with the FEMA flood zone designations in Valley Stream.  He asked if rallies, etc. were a viable course of action. I said there was something all local government officials could do and it was in the area of providing FEMA “victims” with tax relief.

Local government did not create the problem with FEMA flood maps, although it did have an opportunity to voice objections and make the adoption and implementation of those maps more difficult. Now local officials portray an image of compassion for FEMA “victims” and enunciate their hopes that this situation can be rectified. They do this while they collect taxes predicated upon real estate assessments, which do not take into account the negative impact of FEMA high-risk flood designations on property value and marketability.  In short, these “compassionate” and “well-meaning” local officials collect monies from people using a system that ignores the plight created by FEMA.  Make no mistake. These officials benefit from this plight with every dollar they collect.  What they should be doing is developing a system of tax assessment that takes into account the plight of FEMA “victims” and they should be developing a way to ameliorate the damages incurred by FEMA “victims” by local taxes.

So far local officials have not touched the tax system to help FEMA “victims”. It is for his reason that Radio Free Gibson believes that all incumbents should be replaced as they come up for reelection; this does not guarantee that their successors will be better, but a show of electoral unity is all the local officials understand and it gives local elected officials notice. If they do not change their approach to FEMA “victims” they can be the next incumbents not to be reelected. In short, no local elected official will be safe and secure from the votes of FEMA “victims”.

The next time you hear a local elected official say that the FEMA problem is a federal problem and beyond their control, make a note to vote against that person in the next election.

This is Joe Margolin from deep in the heart of FEMA’s tsunami zone urging you to remember the great philosophical phrase once uttered by Yogi Berra.  “IT AIN’T OVER TILL ITS OVER”.

OPEN LETTER TO PRESIDENT OBAMA, SENATORS SCHUMER AND GILLIBRAND, AND REP McCARTHY

 I am a resident of the Gibson section of Valley Stream, NY.  Two years ago the FEMA flood zone maps placed my home and my daughter’s home (3 blocks way) in the high risk AE Zone.  From that point forward we were “blessed” with extraordinary mandatory flood insurance premiums and the decimated marketability of our homes.  All of this has happened in Gibson, an area that has no history of flooding, no valid scientific documentation of the likelihood of flooding and a tidal surge, and no flooding at the PRIOR  8’ elevation level.

In the last month my fellow residents and I have experienced a day of record rainfall (8/14/11- 11” of rain), a second rain storm (3” to  5”), an earthquake, and Hurricane Irene.  Through all of this, Gibson did not experience any flooding nor power shortages.  In fact, I believe that Gibson may have actually been the most secure and safest location on Long Island. And yet, FEMA has placed Gibson in the heart of the high risk flood zone. If such a designation did not inflict severe financial pain on Gibson’s 2,500 families, it might be humorous.  Instead it is tragic.

I have enclosed this week’s edition of our local newspaper; I invite your attention to the article on the right side of page No.1.  I am aware of legislation pending that would alleviate the problems of Gibson citizens, if passed by Congress and signed by the President.  I respectfully wonder why this is necessary or the best approach.  Why was it not necessary to use this procedure in South Los Angeles last year where the same situation existed?  Wasn’t that mistake corrected by executive order and done expediently?

In a few months the citizens of Gibson will receive insurance bills that will bring severe economic hardship on our community. I am reminded of a line from the film “1776” where the character of John Adams asks “Is anybody there?  Does anybody care?”

How do you make a nightmare? FEMA knows how to do it. Two years ago FEMA’s tentacles reached into the community of Gibson on Long Island.  Gibson was and is a quiet hamlet within a larger hamlet, the Incorporated Village of Valley Stream.  The people of Gibson are a hardworking microcosm of American society.  There are doctors, attorneys, teachers, merchants, mechanics, plumbers, retirees, etc.  Families are raising their children, and the residents are struggling in a difficult economy to continue providing good schools and a wholesome environment for all.

The citizens face challenges comparable to communities all across America.  Different areas often have particular strengths and weaknesses. Some of Gibson’s strengths are climatic and geographic.  Although located on Long Island, it is not located too close to the water. Gibson has no history of flooding even during hurricanes past and present. Even significant rainstorms like the storm on August 14, 2011 and Hurricane Irene on August 27/28 left Gibson floodless. The recent earthquake inflicted no damage on Gibson. Although adjacent communities  endured the damages from events indicated above, Gibson remains untouched.

This is why FEMA’s conduct with respect to Gibson since 2009 is not only unjustifiable and inexplicable, it is repugnant and reprehensible.  In 2009, FEMA implemented new flood zone maps resulting in areas receiving new flood zone designations.  Using an engineering study focused on the eastern end of Long Island (about 100 miles away and close to the ocean), and some mysterious history, FEMA came to the conclusion that Gibson should be in the AE flood zone (high risk). This “blessing” bestowed on Gibson came with severe repercussions for Gibson and has created a nightmare for its residents. Homeowners with outstanding mortgages and/or home equity credit lines were required to purchase flood insurance, at a cost of approximately $2000.00 per year.  (The protests of residents and a couple of federally elected officials resulted in a two-year reprieve for the victims of FEMA in Gibson).

At the time FEMA implemented its new maps it raised elevation requirements for exemptions from AE flood status from 8’ to 11’4” in Gibson.  There were never any floods in Gibson at 8’.  FEMA raised the requirement to a level where flooding was virtually impossible and payouts for flood insurance policies were also virtually impossible. In short, Gibson was converted into a Cash Cow for flood insurance interests and FEMA.  Both financially benefit from flood insurance policy premiums which will virtually never have claims. In everyday parlance, the people of Gibson have gotten the “shaft” from FEMA.

This comes at a time when the people of Gibson are plagued by the same economic problems facing all Americans. Imagine on top of extraordinarily high New York taxes, federal income taxes, increasing unemployment and mortgage payments you receive a requirement from FEMA that necessitates monthly payments of several hundred dollars.  This faces people who moved to Gibson or lived there for many years without any knowledge anticipatory or otherwise that such expenses were coming down the road. What you have here is a NIGHTMARE for all, and particularly new homeowners, retirees and others with incomes with little wiggle room.

RADIO FREE GIBSON is dedicated to the fight against this nightmare and all who have had a role in its creation, implementation and continuation.  RADIO FREE GIBSON (RFG) will be reporting on what is being done to help the victims of FEMA and what is not being done.  The failure of government officials to affirmatively and proactively help the victims of FEMA will be a subject for future reports.

This is Joe Margolin, in the heart of FEMA’s “tsunami belt” telling all readers that this is Blog No.1 in THE FIGHT AGAINST FEMA.