Rep. McCarthy, when FEMA created and implemented
flood zones pursuant to its “revised” maps of 2009, they changed the designation for Gibson to “AE”. They raised the elevation requirements for exemption from that designation from 8’ to 11.4’.  In spite
of the fact that Gibson did not experience flooding or related damages at 8’, FEMA raised the exemption level over three feet. They raised it to a level just beyond the elevation level of most of Gibson.
This had the effect of placing most of Gibson in the high risk “AE”
flood zone where it had never been before.

Please note that if Gibson did not experience flooding and storm surges at the lower 8’ level, it is extremely improbable that flooding would occur at an elevation significantly higher than eight feet. In fact, the hurricane, earthquake and torrential rain of 11 inches in August confirmed Gibson’s history.  Gibson barely had some mud puddles and experienced no power outages or flooding.  Ironically, residents during the hurricane
were urged to evacuate and go north of Sunrise Highway in Valley Stream. Those who made the journey experienced two things that those who remained in Gibson did not experience- flooding and power outages.

Why then Rep. McCarthy was the elevation level increased for Gibson and why has FEMA been allowed to avoid direct responsive answers
to that question?  When FEMA was at a public meeting at Valley Stream Central High School, their maps were completely discredited and they refused to show me the historical evidence of flooding in
Gibson in response to my questions.  Could it be that FEMA was looking to place an area in the high risk “AE” zone for the purpose of collecting huge flood insurance premiums with next to no chance of
payouts on potential claims?  Could it be that Gibson has been designated to be a cash cow by FEMA to help pay its
gigantic debt?

Rep. McCarthy, if you really want to help the FEMA
“victims” of Gibson, then you might want to consider the following. You are part of the Congress which oversees agencies like FEMA. Why don’t you go to the committee that oversees FEMA and demand that it meet and subpoena the Director of FEMA? Then, why don’t you ask him one simple question. WHAT HISTORICAL OR ENGINEERING EVIDENCE, DIRECTLY RELATED TO THE GEOGRAPHY AND SPECIFIC LOCATION OF GIBSON, JUSTIFIED AND REQUIRED ITS DESIGNATION TO BE CHANGED TO “AE”?  IN OTHER WORDS, WHY WAS THE ELEVATION REQUIREMENT CHANGED?

Of course you might want to ask the related question,
“Why is Gibson’s elevation requirement 11.4’ while Long Beach, which is a barrier island, has a 9’ requirement? The answers to these questions are much more relevant and important than trying to develop a way for lessening the pain of paying for exorbitant flood insurance premiums that have been wrongfully  placed on the citizens of Gibson. Your approach also does nothing to correct FEMA’s effect on the marketability of homes in Gibson.  The people of Gibson deserve the same treatment as the people of Hyde Park (south Los Angeles) who   were victimized by
FEMA in the same manner. Their flood maps were rescinded for the same reason   ours should be.

Those in the audience on March 8^th, witnessed a young mother from Gibson standing in tears at the audience podium and telling how FEMA is the straw that has broken her family’s back. She told how she and her children have lived their lives in Gibson. They love their neighbors, community and their schools. She then in total despair informed
those present, including some local officials from various parts of the county that the additional burden of flood insurance and the overwhelming increase in homeowner’s insurance, is forcing her to dispose of her house or face foreclosure; she does not want to leave Gibson but FEMA has given her no choice.

It is notable that local officials present at the meeting did not include the Mayor and Trustees of Valley Stream where Gibson, and perhaps the highest concentration of FEMA “victims”, is located. It is true that Mr. Becker is providing free copies of the meeting’s transcript to those
requesting same.  However, that transcript will not convey the emotions and atmosphere present in the room that night. At the very least, the total absence of that lady’s governmental representatives from Valley Stream gives an appearance of disinterest, indifference and lack of concern.

At a Village meeting this past autumn the Mayor of Valley Stream announced that one of the trustees was being designated as deputy
mayor and liaison with regard to the FEMA issue. I am surprised that such an individual would not attend a community forum on the FEMA problem to either offer or obtain information with reference to his activities as liaison. His absence, and that of his colleagues, was made more notable by the fact that, although this was a county- wide meeting, the overwhelming number of speakers going to the microphone was from Valley Stream, and not just from Gibson I might add.

I am not surprised by the absence of the Valley Stream officials and I am not convinced of Mr. Becker’s genuine concern; however, I am
concerned that the media has decided to make short shrift of the conduct of those officials and the actions they could have taken to lessen the pain being endured by their constituents. After, all, it was the various arms of local government  that could have so come forward two years ago to protest and reject FEMA’s maps. They did not and here we are today.

I would hope that local media would begin a detailed evaluation of the performance of local government in this regard. They might caption their reports with Edmund Burke’s famous and often quoted statement:

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

Of course, Mr. Becker already knew something about the problem, as he attended a community meeting at Valley Stream Central High
School when FEMA representatives were present. Of course, it was an election year back then and like other of nature’s entities, that arise at certain calendrical times, election years can count on the emergence of Fran Becker.

In the past, I and others opposing FEMA and its horrendous attack on homeowners in south Nassau, have explained our complaints against
FEMA. I went one step further and even mentioned suggestions in letters to the local press. I have suggested in the past that Legislator Becker propose tax relief for the “Victims” of FEMA’s onerous rules and regulations. FEMA’s acts of labeling properties as part of the “AE” flood zone have decimated the marketability of those properties and encumbered them with mandatory flood insurance costs on homes that have outstanding liens or acquire such liens in the event that are somehow sold to other’s. AND STILL THE COUNTY’S TAX ASSESSMENT CRITERIA DO NOT RECOGNIZE THE DAMAGE DONE TO THE VALUE OF THOSE PROPERTIES IN FORMULATING ITS ANNUAL TAX ASSESSMENTS. THE COUNTY CONTINUES TO COLLECT TAXES ON THOSE PROPERTIES AS THOUGH NOTHING HAS INTERVENED TO ADVERSELY AFFECT THE VALUE OF THOSE PROPERTIES. THE COUNTY CONTINUES TO REAP THE BENEFITS OF PROPERTIES THAT NO LONGER HAVE ANYWHERE NEAR THE VALUE AND MARKETABILITY USED BY THE COUNTY FOR THE COLLECTION OF TAX REVENUES.

My suggestions to Becker and other local officials to take remedial action with local taxes to ameliorate the extraordinary, unfair financial burden placed on the victims of FEMA have gone ignored.

However, it is election year again and here comes Becker. I understand that he is going to conduct a legislative hearing on this issue.
Generally, this is done to gather information to ascertain a course of action. Of course, Mr. Becker over two years have elapsed since this issue was brought to your doorstep. I, for one, am no longer interested in ascertaining facts and proposing courses of action. I would suggest to Mr. Becker’s constituents that if he really wants our consideration for his political aspirations or our appreciation for his performance in his present elective position, he should take the following suggestion seriously. Mr. Becker, it is nine months until election time and it is just after the election that FEMA’s two year freeze of flood insurance rates will expire with the expectation that those rates will resume at phenomenally high levels.

Mr. Becker, if you want me to take you seriously, you have nine months to enact meaningful tax relief for the “victims” of FEMA. Meaningful tax relief would at least attempt to restore the marketability of properties victimized by FEMA flood designations and would offer some assistance
to those facing heavy financial burdens created by those flood designations. Otherwise, I will just continue to view you, as I currently do, and that is with respect to Fran Becker, beneath the tinsel is the real tinsel.

After my walk to the park I dread to think about children playing at the park and rolling around on the grounds.

Last year, I raised this very issue in the mayoral campaign. I think for the most part it was downplayed by the public and press. Well, the campaign is long over and the new administration has had a year to begin instituting its programs. As most people know, the skate park and roller rink have been portrayed as a major accomplishment of the current administration. After I left the park I decided to go over to the rink and look at  this pillar of accomplishment for the administration.  Interestingly enough, on a sunny, relatively warm February day on which the schools were closed, there was no one at this facility besides me. However, I would like to note that the facility  and the grounds around it were pristine and feces free. I do not know how the administration does that but perhaps they can extend that accomplishment to Barrett Park where there were young children attempting to use the facilities.

My recent adventure to Barrett Park inspired me to look at the events and accomplishments of this first year of the present administration, particularly as two of the incumbents are uncontested for reelection. So what is it that they have or have not done?

Well, they are seeking to revitalize and beautify the Rockaway Avenue business district although there is no physical change indicating this.  Their construction projects on Sunrise Highway appear to be progressing at a speed reminiscent of that of the ancient pyramids. Actually, I think the pyramids made more visible progress.

Of course, the Village’s programs exclude any visible progress with respect to Gibson Blvd. where a row of many decaying buildings continues to be boarded up.  I remember at a meeting of the Village Government in early autumn when the new Village Clerk told me that we would see progress there in a relatively short period of time. If we really want to see progress there, I would suggest that the present Village Hall be sold and that those buildings on Gibson Blvd. become the new seat of the entire Village Government.

Of course, last but not least is the administration’s empathy for the resident of the ”AE” flood zone who are within nine months of a potential economic “earthquake”.  We were told by the administration several months ago that they are sympathetic to the plight of the flood zone residents and that they even wrote letters to FEMA. Well, although I am sure that effort may have exhausted them, they might have tried the following:

1)      Join the National Conference of Mayors and bring the issue to the door of the President while developing alliances with other communities nationwide similarly situated.

2)      Conduct public hearings in the Village to determine who might be making financial windfalls on the local level with regard to FEMA flood insurance requirements (particularly after the freeze on rates expires on December 31, 2012)

Although the upcoming Village election results are inevitable with two uncontested candidates for trustee positions, I might make a suggestion. I am voting and writing in a name not on the ballot (By the way, it will not be my name).  There is no chance that my selection will win but it is my way of sending a message. Imagine if a thousand people in Valley Stream did this. It might inspire some soul to come forward in three years to clean up a mess that is symbolized by vacant buildings, empty lots, and infinite amounts of goose excrement.

Well, I have to continue my recuperation. Perhaps we will bump into each other at one of the local recreation facilities. Just be careful of where you walk.

Joseph Margolin

P.S.- By the way boys, I am back.

 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.

 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.

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.

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.

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.

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”.