Jan 22, 2013 10:13 AMPublication: The East Hampton Press
East End Governments Will Request More Than $5 Million In Federal Monies To Pay For Hurricane Sandy Costs
> Bridgehampton Students Lend A Hand To The Rockaways Dec 4, 2012 2:00 PM
SEE HOW THE STORY UNFOLDED
By Rohma Abbas
Southampton and East Hampton towns, and the villages incorporated within them, are seeking a total of about $5.5 million in federal reimbursements to cover the cost of Hurricane Sandy-related expenses.
The East End governments are planning to take advantage of a pot of more than $50 billion in federal emergency funds for Hurricane Sandy victims that was approved by the Republican-controlled House of Representatives on January 15. The bill must now gain approval in U.S. Senate.
The largest requests come, not surprisingly, from the towns, where officials in Southampton and East Hampton towns have applied to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) for about $2.1 million and $1.8 million, respectively, to cover damages to town property, roads and debris cleanup costs.
The two towns also have a separate wish list of items they'd like to see funded. Southampton Town officials have said they're seeking $50 million in reimbursements to pay for measures like sand replenishment and generators for municipal buildings to protect against future storms, while East Hampton Town Supervisor Bill Wilkinson said he'd like $20 million in federal funds to replenish a badly battered 2.3-mile stretch of beach in Montauk spanning from Ditch Plains to the Oceanside Beach Resort.
East Hampton Village is in the process of bidding out a $400,000 restoration project that includes repairing the road end at Georgica Beach and the pavilion at Main Beach. Village officials hope to get the project reimbursed by the federal government and have not yet spent money on it. East Hampton Village has also submitted $275,000 in claims to FEMA for debris removal and emergency measures. Sag Harbor Village intends to apply for $180,000 in reimbursements, which includes damage to village docks and storm cleanup. Sag Harbor Village will likely call a special meeting this week in order to go out to bid to repair damaged docks.
Southampton Village is requesting $250,000 in federal reimbursements for storm-related costs. Westhampton Beach Village has filled out two FEMA applications asking for a total of $112,000 in reimbursements, which would pay for things like equipment expenses, labor and highway cleanup. Quogue Village has applied for somewhere between $300,000 and $350,000, which includes funding for emergency measures, debris management and sand replenishment, according to Village Mayor Peter Sartorius.
Town and village officials emphasized that the FEMA reimbursement amounts they applied for don't necessarily reflect all storm costs. Also, some of projects they're including in the FEMA reimbursable expenses haven't yet been funded and will be bid out at a later date.
The Congressional vote on the multibillion-dollar relief package came after harsh criticism by both Republicans and Democrats in the Northeast when Republican leadership in the House failed to bring a $60 billion aid package approved by the U.S. Senate to the floor for a vote earlier this month. Days later, the House approved a smaller amount of the Senate bill—$9.7 billion—on January 4.
Democratic U.S. Representative Tim Bishop's office has been talking to municipalities within the 1st Congressional District to gain an understanding of the most hard hit areas, according to Oliver Longwell, the congressman's communications director.
"There are a lot," Mr. Longwell said. "The main one in East Hampton is the erosion in Montauk, in downtown Montauk. Southampton, Dune Road."
The levels of federal reimbursement vary. In the first 10 days after a storm, FEMA reimburses up to 100 percent of costs for emergency work to get electricity or transportation up and running again in a community, said Mr. Longwell. For other expenses such as debris removal and road repairs—if it is a federally-aided road—FEMA will reimburse up to 75 percent, with a 25 percent local match, he said. That local match can come in the form of actual funds or work in kind, i.e. the costs of labor.
The $50 billion relief package includes various provisions that apply to Long Island, according to a January 16 statement issued by Mr. Bishop's office. The bill was approved in a two-part process, and it would fund FEMA and Small Business Administration programs in response to the disaster. It also funds coastal protection and hazard mitigation work by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
Some key provisions include $11.5 billion for the Federal Emergency Management Agency Disaster Relief Fund; $5.35 billion in funding for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; $13 billion in mitigation funds; $16 billion for Community Development Block Grants; and $780 million for Small Business Administration disaster loans.
Porkopolis.
By dnice (2346), Hampton Bays on Jan 16, 13 10:21 PM
By Mr. Z (11847), North Sea on Jan 21, 13 12:38 PM
500,000,000 dollar gift to Amgen. Nice hank o' bacon if you can get it.
Shocker! Bishop loves another spending bill. Why can't congress put forth a bill that is soley for relief from hurricane Sandy. I think most people are in favor of that. Problem is they load these bills with unrelated expenditures. Wasting tax payer dollars seems to be the only thing these politicians are good at! No wonder this country is broke.
By razza5350 (1911), East Hampton on Jan 16, 13 11:31 PM
By SHNative (554), Southampton on Jan 16, 13 11:49 PM
I suspect my friend SHNative just lost patience with dnice and razza, and let fly,thus incurring a takedown by the management. Hey Native, I know it's hard, very hard to stay civil with these guys when they criticize even the spending measures we desperately need -- and fullly deserve, since it's our tax dollars -- just because the spending comes via a congressman who's on their hit list. These two would likely have a problem with the Second Coming if it hadn't been blessed beforehand by Uncle ...more Rush.
By Turkey Bridge (1979), Quiogue on Jan 18, 13 9:09 PM
philathome
Many of the population believe there was no First Coming, for Pete's sake.
By Mr. Z (11847), North Sea on Jan 18, 13 9:40 PM
Turkey you need to learn how to read! I dont have a problem with spending measures for thing we depserately need. I DO have a problem when the bill is sold to the public as one thing but in reality is loaded with pork. More waste of taxpayer dollars for policticians means. We are all the suckers who fund their self interest
By razza5350 (1911), East Hampton on Jan 19, 13 9:14 AM
Not a big deal TB considering SHNative usually posts out of emotion instead of logic and reason. Read the bill, then come back here and post about how great it is. Would be terrific if all $50 bil were going towards hurricane relief. Big surprise that it is not. Here is a challenge. When you post, actually try to incorporate some fact into your thinking instead of pure emotion. Oh and for the record, I can't stand Rush Limbaugh.
By dnice (2346), Hampton Bays on Jan 20, 13 9:55 PM
I read some odd statistics the other day.
It would seem our current POTUS is not responsible for all five trillion dollars we're in hock since the last ten trillion.
In fact, minus the hidden debt from the Bush years, the bailout, and the interest, our current POTUS is only in hock 1.5 trillion. By comparison, in "real dollars", that amount pales by recent standards...
"minus the hidden debt from the Bush years"
This is fiscally impossible and absolutely false. Some of the spending was the result of supplemental funding requests which is normal during events which require funding within the two year budget cycle, but every penny was added to the debt level at the time it was incurred.
By Mr. Snerdley (397), Southampton on Jan 19, 13 5:41 PM
Allegedly the expense of the Bush "emergency" bills were only added to the debt after he left office, were not part of the budget, and totaled approximately 1.6 trillion dollars. This debt was added to the total after Obama took office.
Allegedly, I like that. Unfortunately, it doesn't work that way. We had to borrow on liability, it just didn't materialize one day out of thin air as if it never existed. This is one of the biggest liberal lies out there. Let's get to the big picture, Bush was responsible for a cumulative 5.2 trillion of the defecit in eight years. None of it was hidden, he would and will always own it. Obama is somewhere in the ball park of 6 trillion in four years. Whether the policies started under Bush contibuted ...more to thouse is irrelevent. Obama continued the Bush policies. He now owns them as well.
In a way, it does.
The first full nine months of Obama's first term, was Bush spending, with no increases in revenue to back it up as usual. This included, but was not limited to increases in the GI Bill, Medicare Modernization Act costs, Midwest flood aid, "emergency" military funding above and beyond the budget, and discretionary programs.
It's also interesting how the upward curve in debt is almost identical to the massive, inflationary increase in the money supply by the Fed ...more in trillions as well. Inflate the currency, inflate the debt.
Source please Mr. Z Thanks
By bigfresh (4666), north sea on Jan 19, 13 7:54 AM
source..Henry Rollins
Lou Colagiovanni:
Republican pundits love to say that the national debt has increased by $5 trillion because of President Obama. Factually, that statement is simply untrue. Let's examine the evidence.
Of the alleged $5 trillion, $1.6 trillion is related to costs of the Iraq/Afghanistan Wars. These were costs George W. Bush intentionally hid from the budget, and that President Obama allowed to be calculated when he assumed office.
Note that Obama could have continued ...more to hide the bill as Bush did, passing it along to his successor.
President Bush was able to manipulate funding for the Iraq/Afghanistan wars using special emergency authorization bills. He did this because, as you recall, the Democrats were attempting to defund the war legislatively.
The overall point is simple: Obama, as president, authorized not one cent of that $1.6 trillion to be spent.
It has been previously reported by marketwatch.com that President Obama increased overall government spending by a smaller margin than any modern president, all the way to President Eisenhower.
Rex Nutting at marketwatch clarifies:
What people forget (or never knew) is that the first year of every presidential term starts with a budget approved by the previous administration and Congress. The president only begins to shape the budget in his second year. It takes time to develop a budget and steer it through Congress — especially in these days of congressional gridlock.
Over $1.4 trillion was spent on interest payments caused by the already standing debt.
Knowing that, let's examine the GOP's argument.
They say President Obama has spent too much, but 32% of the total amount they claim has been spent is a direct result of Republican presidential policies, and previous spending.
President Obama is stuck paying the bill for the previous GOP administrations of Reagan, H.W. Bush, and W. Bush. President Clinton left with a surplus if you recall, and added nothing to our debt. This point has been discussed constantly, and was even visited by President Obama's former Press Secretary Jay Carney during a press gaggle.
It is not disputed that the national debt was $10 trillion before President Obama took office.
The interest that is paid on the debt today was created by the very same people who now are attempting to blame the cost of that interest on the president. Do not allow yourself to be fooled, the GOP is attempting to blame the president for something they caused.
Now our journey of $5 trillion has been twiddled down to $2 trillion.
Another piece of the puzzle is that the CBO projected because of the Bush Era Tax Cuts, our government lost over $1.6 trillion in projected revenue. Of course, these unpaid taxes were supposed to create jobs for the middle class. The tax cuts have been in place for over 10 years, one would think our nation would be swimming in jobs. Yet, friends, that is not the case.
If reasonable tax rates were in place that were similar to those used while President Clinton was in office -- America's fiscal outlook would be more optimistic.
This leaves only $400 billion to be unaccounted for, and surely the fervor about reckless spending can not be over that amount because in that regard there are many instances where the GOP is equally guilty, if not more culpable. For example, our nation is still paying for the wasteful Medicare part D plan. Passed in 2003 and enacted in 2006, it has been estimated to cost a staggering $17 trillion in unfunded liabilities. Others put a more conservative price of $8 trillion, including former head of the U.S. Government Accountability Office, David Walker.
$8 - $17 trillion in spending, and yet they say President Obama is the reckless spender? No matter how you look at the numbers, the GOP is guilty of at least one-and-a-half more spending, or three times as much spending. How can they claim to be the party of fiscal responsibility?
The overall premise of the argument has now been debunked, and the truth is quite clear; 88% of the debt which the GOP blames on President Obama was not created as a consequence of his policies
Lou who? Probably another liberal science fiction writer. I actually liked it better when you referenced Sam kinison and Henry Rollins.
By razza5350 (1911), East Hampton on Jan 20, 13 12:58 AM
Yeah, 'cause both of them are/were dumber, and poorer than you razza. Try looking for news from alternative sources for a change.
I thought lower taxes, plus less regulation led to a healthier economy, and more job creation?
SO, where are the jobs, and the ******* growth? The amount of resources has not changed. The amount of gold extracted from the Earth has increased, as well as iron, bauxite, coltan, and other minerals.
The one thing that has decreased is the value ...more of a dollar, and what assuredly has increased it the cost of everything from a bottle of milk, to a home. "Middle Class" salaries have remained stagnant, or worse been cut in thirty years. Any tax, or price increase hurts alot more when your earnings are being debauched by the people who are hoovering up the butterfly ink like a bunch of coke fiends.
Check out Daly v. Montgomery, should you get the chance...
Jan 20, 13 8:07 AM appended by Mr. Z
If you bought gold "on paper", dump it. If you have gold, make sure it's not plated tungsten...
By Mr. Z (11847), North Sea on Jan 20, 13 8:07 AM
"alternative news sources" I buy alternative source but your use of the word news is questionable.
I am a middle class American citizen and taxpayer. I am working two jobs, I pay my taxes, and I do not receive any assistance from the government in the form of food stamps, free heating oil etc.
This year my paycheck is smaller because my TAXES went up, my health insurance premium went up 10% , even my union dues went up. My employer is constantly talking about reducing the workforce, so I am in fear of being laid off.
Food prices rise every time I go to the store, and I'm ...more paying four dollars a gallon for gas and heating oil
I thought Obama and the democrats were supposed to help the middle class?? Well what happened?? I'm still waiting!!. And you all can blame Bush, Clinton, Carter, Reagan, Elmer Fudd all u want- I don't care and I don't give a dam about the national debt- I'm worried about MY debt. You can argue politics and assign blame all u want but the bottom line is the middle class is going belly up and fast, and things better change soon. Obama- 4th and goal at the one, your team is down , time running out- get your helmet on and take the ball.
By CaptainSig (716), Dutch Harbor on Jan 20, 13 6:46 AM
You are a tax payer and citizen of this country. The national debt IS your debt. It has a symbiotic relationship with many factors in your life. If not for your sake then for the sale of your children, grandchildren and the country..... You should care
Blaming the prez for increases in union dues? That's a new one...
By Nature (2966), Hampton Bays on Jan 21, 13 10:14 AM
Nature , do pay attention to anything? To deny Obama is extremely pro union is ridiculous. It does show your ignorant colors well though.
Can you get Timmy to get me a fireworks permit? maybe? circle beach about 25 feet from the plover nests. Tell him i got cash. Then he wont have to worry about returning it AFTER he gets caught. haha
By double-D (96), southampton on Jan 28, 13 6:36 PM
Geez guys, are we really arguing whose fault it is. When do we finally come to the conclusion that the political system is broken and that almost none of them have our best interest at heart. That isn't the way "their" system works. There are a lot of reasons why it has gotten to this point. It is partly our fault as politicians cannot rule without consent of the ruled and we have allowed them to pull the wool over our eyes.
I only threw that out there after reading another thread tallying the debt. Power brokers and politicians can't solve our problems. They have only made them worse. Self interest taken to it's worst extreme has led us to this point.
We need more leaders, and public servants. We need more smart people in government, not millionares who don't really care about us, and line their pockets at our expense. That's not class envy, because the truth is the average net worth of a Congressman ...more is 13 million dollars. As Bastiat so eloquently put it: ""When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living in society, they create for themselves, in the course of time, a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that glorifies it."
Or, as Carlin more eloquently put it: "Good honest hard-working people continue, these are people of modest means . . . continue to elect these rich c*********s who don't give a **** about you. They don't give a **** about you . . . they don't give a **** about you. They don't care about you at all . . . at all . . . at all, and nobody seems to notice. Nobody seems to care. That's what the owners count on. The fact that Americans will probably remain willfully ignorant of the big red, white and blue d**k that's being jammed up their a******s everyday, because the owners of this country know the truth. It's called the American Dream cause you have to be asleep to believe it . . ."
We don't need to replace democracy. What we need is for democracy in the Republic the function as designed and intended.
There are some very important and incredibly significant reasons the founding fathers gave corporations no place in civic life whatsoever. That changed after the Civil War and look at the disaster we have.
George Carlin the comedian drug addict is where you got your political views from? lol How about we get a leader in the White House? We have had no budget since this guy has come into office. We are spending money faster than any time in history, and Obama still thinks Bush is responsible. Obama also wants to continually break the debt cap, but when he was campaigning he said piercing the debt limit is unpatriotic. This president has done nothing except spend money, and you fall for his nonsense.
By chief1 (2800), southampton on Jan 21, 13 8:48 AM
The system, as it was intended, would work fine. Politicians need to be held accountable. For the most part a small percentage of voters actually pay attention or raise a stink and when they do the outcry is usually short lived. Apathy towards the system is what enables it. I'm sure there are good, qualified people that would do the job but they aren't running because they are smart enough to stay out of that mess.
By dnice (2346), Hampton Bays on Jan 21, 13 8:51 AM
Hey chief, the dollar is also more worthless than it ever has been in history. And just for reference Carlin was a helluva lot smarter than you.
Why do you think it takes so many more of them to get the job done?
You can only debauch a currency to a certain point before it collapses.
Ah, George Carlin truly appreciated The Golden Rule.
"He who has the gold makes the rule!"
From the end of Mr. Z's quote above: "It's called the American Dream 'cause you have to be asleep to believe it . . . "
By PBR (4956), Southampton on Jan 21, 13 6:18 AM
George Carlin was hilarious.
He was also a brilliant social commentator, author, and talk show circuit guest.
A few Lifetime Achievement Awards under his belt too.
Dont forget to mention an alcoholic and drug addict.
By razza5350 (1911), East Hampton on Jan 21, 13 2:46 PM
Haha, we all have our crosses to bear.
By PBR (4956), Southampton on Jan 21, 13 5:02 PM