News (All) - Page 24 of 161 - Campolo, Middleton & McCormick, LLP

CMM’s Survey Shows LI MacArthur Airport Could Generate $1.1 Billion

Posted: October 13th, 2021

The addition of more nonstop flights at Long Island MacArthur Airport in Islip holds the potential to generate more than $1 billion in new airport revenue annually, according to the analysis of a new survey of 504 Long Island businesses.

The Long Island MacArthur Airport Survey was designed to examine the current and future travel needs of the Long Island business community. Conducted between August 3, 2021 and September 6, 2021, the survey was sponsored by Hauppauge-based HIA-LI, one of Long Island’s largest business advocacy organizations. The survey was conducted by Campolo, Middleton & McCormick, LLP, a law firm headquartered in Ronkonkoma.

The surveyed firms reported annual travel budgets ranging from under $5,000 to more than $20,000. These companies currently spend an average of 36.2 percent of their overall travel budgets at Long Island MacArthur Airport. In dollar terms, this equals about $1.9 million out of their average, full-year, travel budgets of $5.2 million.

If the airport were to add additional nonstop flights, however, respondents said that this percentage would go up to 78.8 percent, a 218-percent increase. Their projected annual spending at the airport would rise to $4.1 million.

Grouping these businesses together as representative of Long Island’s business sector as a whole, an analysis of the survey results also looked at the potential for increased usage of Long Island MacArthur Airport by Nassau and Suffolk firms.

The analysis projected that Suffolk County has some 61,076 businesses with travel budgets. Applying the conclusions reached from the survey, these Suffolk firms would boost their spending at the airport by up to $532.2 million if more nonstop flights were added.

Nassau County is home to as many as 60,919 companies with business travel budgets. Applying the responses of surveyed companies to the Nassau business sector as a whole, firms in the county would spend up to $530.8 million more at Long Island MacArthur Airport if the airport were to add additional nonstop destinations.

Taken together, if the airport expanded its number of nonstop flights, the two counties hold the potential to generate as much as $1.1 billion in revenue.

“This survey clearly demonstrates Long Island MacArthur Airport’s significant untapped value,” said HIA-LI President and CEO Terri Alessi-Miceli. “Long Island business, government, and civic leaders need to join forces to expand the number of nonstop flights offered by the airport.”

“Long Island MacArthur Airport already stands as an important economic development asset for Long Island,” said Richard Humann, PE, who is President and CEO of H2M architects + engineers and serves as Chairperson of the HIA-LI board. “A key goal of this survey is to help the airport build momentum toward expanding its schedule of nonstop offerings, and that’s how we’ll put it to use.”

“The potential revenue that stands to be made from adding more nonstop flights at MacArthur Airport is staggering,” said Joe Campolo, Immediate Past Chair of HIA-LI, Managing Partner at Campolo, Middleton & McCormick, LLP, and a member of the Town of Islip’s Long Island MacArthur Airport Advisory Board. “My team and I spearheaded this survey to demonstrate the power and cohesiveness of the Long Island business community. Together, we can effectuate this monumental step forward for our region and economy.”

“HIA-LI is a tremendous positive force and advocate for economic prosperity for all of Long Island,” said Town of Islip Supervisor Angie Carpenter. “They understand that Long Island MacArthur Airport represents an important asset and an economic engine for our entire region both now and in the future. We are so grateful to HIA-LI members, HIA-LI President and CEO Terri Alessi-Miceli, and the organization’s Immediate Past Board Chair Joe Campolo, Managing Partner at Campolo, Middleton & McCormick, LLP,” she stated.

“Around the country we see chambers of commerce, convention and visitors’ bureaus, local governments, regional economic development associations, universities, and elected officials coordinating with their airports in a cooperative and unified manner, pledging support and frequently marketing dollars to ensure the success of new airline service and the ‘Fly Local’ use of airport assets,” said Airport Commissioner Shelley LaRose-Arken.

“Business travelers much prefer nonstop air travel,” said Bob Isaksen, Market Executive for Business Banking at Bank of America and an HIA-LI board member. “We want this survey to send a strong message to airlines about the payoff they’ll receive by deepening their commitment to Long Island MacArthur Airport.”

The Town of Islip owns and operates Long Island MacArthur Airport, which serves about two million airline passengers a year.

For a copy of the survey and an executive summary of the results, click below:

FLY ISLIP SURVEY

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

ABOUT LONG ISLAND MACARTHUR AIRPORT

Long Island MacArthur Airport customers enjoy flights on three major US domestic air carriers: American Airlines, Frontier Airlines, and Southwest Airlines. Together these carriers currently provide service to eleven cities nonstop and connect to hundreds of destinations worldwide. The airport serves 1.3M passengers annually and employs 6000 people, with a $16.1M annual operating budget and an economic impact of $600M to the region and local economy. For more information, go to https://MacArthurAirport.com.

HIA-LI. (2021, October 12). SURVEY OF OVER 500 LONG ISLAND FIRMS SHOWS THAT LONG ISLAND MACARTHUR AIRPORT COULD MORE THAN DOUBLE BUSINESS AIR TRAVEL BY ADDING MORE NONSTOP FLIGHTS. PROJECTING SURVEY RESULTS ISLAND-WIDE, AIRPORT COULD GENERAT $1.1 BILLION IN ADDED ANNUAL REVENUE [Press release].

Navigating COVID-Related Commercial Lease Disputes

Posted: October 13th, 2021

By Patrick McCormick

While the COVID-19 pandemic has not been kind to many business owners who had to comply with temporary closures and declining revenues, commercial tenants have nevertheless faced an uphill battle in Court trying to walk away from their rent payment obligations. While tenants seeking to be completely absolved from paying rent have not met much success in the court system, we have assisted many clients in successfully renegotiating their lease terms without resorting to litigation. Here, a look at the arguments that haven’t worked in Court, illustrating that negotiation is often a better strategy for landlords and tenants alike.

The unprecedented pandemic led to many commercial landlords and tenants finding themselves in the position of landlord Bay Plaza Community Center and tenant Vistasite Eye Care.[1] This commercial landlord-tenant case stemmed from the tenant’s failure to pay rent from April 1, 2020 (the height of the pandemic) and after. Bay Plaza commenced a suit for back rent and moved for summary judgment. In opposition, Bronx Vistasite sought cover under the doctrines of impossibility and frustration of purpose to excuse its failure to pay rent. The tenant also argued that then-Governor Cuomo’s various orders relating to the pandemic devastated its business, and that the temporary closure of the business due to these orders constituted a “taking” under the lease.[2]

The Supreme Court, New York County (Bluth, J.) disagreed. In granting the landlord’s summary judgment motion, the Court found that Governor Cuomo’s executive orders did not constitute a taking since the case did not involve the government condemning the building or invoking the doctrine of eminent domain. Further, the Court found that the doctrines of frustration of purpose and impossibility “have no place in this case.” The Court contended that a temporary hardship like the one described by the defendant does not excuse a tenant’s obligation to pay rent and therefore ruled in favor of the landlord and plaintiff in the case: Bay Plaza Community Center.

A similar scenario played out between landlord 695 Fifth Owner and tenant Valentino U.S.A.[3]Here, luxury retail and fashion brand Valentino brought suit, contending that the lease of its four-story Valentino Fifth Avenue New York boutique should be terminated, and seeking a determination that Valentino should be entitled to an abatement of any rent claimed due.

The lease had clearly stated that Valentino would be able to operate as a boutique retail store for customers to view and sample their merchandise in a luxurious setting, in addition to experiencing high-quality service and amenities. The lease also provided that Valentino was required to be open for business and continuously operate under the Valentino brand. Because of the COVID-19 pandemic, including the restrictions, social-distancing measures, a lack of consumer confidence, and a prevailing fear of “non-essential” luxury retail boutiques, Valentino claimed that its business had been “substantially hindered, rendered impractical, unfeasible, and no longer workable.”

Given the continuing business restrictions even as the shutdown orders eased, Valentino argued that it would be impossible to operate its boutique as initially envisioned under the Lease. Thus, Valentino contended that their continued operation at that location was impracticable, infeasible, unworkable, and/or impossible. Valentino then gave notice to the defendant landlord that they would vacate and surrender the premises by December 31, 2020.

Despite Valentino’s complaint, the New York County Supreme Court (Borrok, J.) dismissed the case because pursuant to the lease, the parties expressly allocated the risk that Valentino would not be able to operate its business and that Valentino is therefore not forgiven from its performance, including its obligation to pay rent by virtue of a state law.

The fact that the COVID-19 pandemic was not specifically enumerated by the parties does not change the result because the lease was drafted broadly and did not provide that government regulations and events beyond the reasonable control of the party “delayed in performing work” shall excuse the payment of rent. Furthermore, Valentino’s general allegation that the landlord failed to maintain the premises lacks causation since it appears Valentino continued to operate in the store as of July 22, 2020.

The challenges faced by the tenants trying to get out of their obligations in these cases – as well as the challenges faced by the landlords spending time and money in Court – illustrate that commercial landlords and tenants are often better served by negotiating their disputes rather than litigating them. CMM has successfully negotiated countless commercial lease issues since the start of the pandemic.

Please contact us to discuss the path forward.

[1] Bay Plaza Community Ctr. v Bronx Vistasite Eyecare, Inc., 2021 NY Slip Op 31568(U) May 5, 2021 Supreme Court, New York County

[2] Under the COVID-19 Emergency Eviction and Foreclosure Act of 2020, a residential or commercial tenant has the option to submit a “hardship declaration” stating that due to COVID-19, they are unable to pay rent. In that case, a landlord would not be able to evict the tenant until the moratorium is lifted (former Governor Cuomo signed an extension of the act in May, extending the moratorium until August 31, 2021; however, in September, Governor Hochul signed into law a new moratorium which is in effect until January 15, 2022). In the Bay Plaza Community Ctr. v Bronx Vistasite Eyecare, Inc., no such declaration was filed.

[3] Valentino USA v. 693 Fifth Owner LLC, 70 Misc.3d 1218(A) (Sup. Ct. N.Y. Cnty. Jan 27, 2021)

CMM Closes Multiple High-Value Transactions in Complex Family Business Deal

Posted: October 13th, 2021

CMM’s Corporate team has closed a large multimillion-dollar deal involving a host of coordinated transactions as part of a multi-step process to separate family members from being in business together, one of them being our client. The deal involved over 15 different companies, with over 70 documents signed in two days. The transactions also involved keeping meticulous track of over 40 parcels of land connected to the deal. Overall, over $100 million changed hands.

While the coordinated transactions were complicated, Senior Partner and Corporate Department Chair Christine Malafi led the CMM team, including Senior Associate Vincent Costa, to close the deal successfully. Paralegal Katharine Campolo’s efforts were essential in keeping track of the numerous documents throughout the deal. Even CMM’s administrative team played a role, helping work out some technical issues that arose in connection with the document-heavy transactions, to keep the deal moving smoothly toward closing.

The success of the complicated deal demonstrates CMM’s ability to handle large and complex matters, doing what it takes to make sure the deal is done right. These efforts are why Forbes has recognized CMM as a Top Corporate Law Firm in America. Please contact us for your next business deal.

OPINION: How Municipalities Can Expand Public Engagement by Going Hybrid

Posted: October 13th, 2021

By: Scott Middleton, Esq. email

Tags: municipal

For those who hoped never to hear the phrase “new normal” again… we’re not there yet.

Yes, we are getting back to a “new normal” as the pandemic continues on. And while the Delta variant is posing continued challenges, many in-person activities have resumed. But for municipalities, with new updates to the New York State Open Meetings Law, maybe a hybrid style model is the best way to expand public engagement and follow the new guidelines.

New York Open Meetings Law

Governing state and local government meetings is a piece of legislation that covers public bodies such as municipalities. Known as the New York Open Meetings Law, or OML, Section 103 of the Public Officer’s Law states that public bodies at the state and local level in New York must give notice of meetings and allow the general public to attend at a facility that permits barrier-free physical access.

According to Section 102 of the OML, public bodies are defined as any entity that requires a quorum to “conduct public business and which consists of two or more members, performing a governmental function for the state or for an agency or department thereof.” Therefore, a public body is any state, county, or municipal government. And a quorum means a majority of body members needed to take formal action of matters of public business.

Essentially, the OML gives citizens the right to attend and listen to the deliberations and decisions that go into the making of public policy in an open and public manner, enabling them to educate themselves on current legislation and observe the performance of public officials.

New York State Response to COVID-19 and the OML

On March 12, 2020, former Governor Cuomo issued Executive Order 202.1. The order suspended the requirement that members of a public body physically convene; now, teleconferencing was permitted. Therefore, instead of providing a meeting location where the public could gather, if a municipality wanted to host a meeting, the Executive Order mandated that the municipality had to provide remote access to the general public.

In addition to suspending certain requirements such as an in-person and physical location, some new requirements were also established for the duration of the Executive Order 202.1 such as recording and transcribing meetings.

OML Fully Functioning Again?

On June 25, 2021, the State Disaster Emergency ended, removing the provision that suspended the Open Meetings Law. So this summer, the aspects of the OML related to in-person attendance (that were previously suspended) went back in effect.

Many municipalities found the shift back to in-person meetings startling. When the pandemic began, it had been a challenge for many municipal and state boards to gain familiarity with platforms such as Zoom. However, many members of the general public attending the meetings virtually quickly became accustomed to the ability to watch and participate in municipal meetings from the comfort of their own home. As more municipalities and the public became used to hosting and attending virtual meetings, it quickly became commonplace and convenient. The many positive outcomes of these meetings included that people who had never participated in the municipal process in the past were able to watch, listen and comment – estimates suggesting that public engagement actually increased during an otherwise dark time.

Virtual Access Extended

So with the Open Meetings Law fully functioning again, that means all government meetings need to be held in-person again, right?

Not so fast. Earlier this September, Governor Hochul signed legislation extending virtual access to public meetings. This means that meetings can be held remotely again as long as the public has the ability to view or listen to the meetings, and as long as the meeting is recorded and later transcribed.

For municipalities who were hoping for in-person meetings again but enjoyed the increased engagement of virtual meetings, perhaps a compromise with a hybrid style model is the best option.

What Would a Hybrid Style Look Like?

If a municipality were to host a board meeting implementing a hybrid style model, then the meeting could be held in the usual physical meeting spot in addition to on Zoom or another video platform. This way, public engagement could be maximized to its full potential and follow Governor Hochul’s legislation at the same time.[1]

A hybrid style could also address the matter of accessibility and inclusivity. People that don’t have cars or access to transportation could continue to attend virtual meetings and stay in the loop. After all, communities work best when the people living in them and the people leading them work together. Therefore, hybrid-style meetings are a solution to improve outreach, participation, and inclusivity. While the pandemic disrupted most of our lives, municipalities should capitalize on the opportunity to collaborate with the public and find more ways to include everyone.

Questions on how to navigate the Open Meetings Law now that virtual meetings have been extended? Contact us at 631-738-9100.

[1] If a municipality wishes to host a virtual meeting only (without a physical location tied to it), then Governor Hochul’s legislation allows this option.

Annual Gala, Attorney Accolades, and Legal Updates

Posted: October 7th, 2021

NYS Appoints Cannabis Regulators, Moving Closer to Licensing Regulations

Posted: October 5th, 2021

By: Arthur Yermash, Esq. email

Tags: cannabis

Following the legalization of recreational marijuana and Governor Hochul being sworn in, the ball is finally rolling on establishing an Office of Cannabis Management (OCM) in New York State.

The OCM is the regulatory agency that will oversee New York’s legal cannabis industry. On September 1, the New York State Senate convened a special session to confirm Governor Hochul’s nominations: Chris Alexander as Executive Director of the OCM and Tremaine Wright as the Chair of the Cannabis Control Board (CCB). Alexander is a former policymaker for the Drug Policy Alliance and was involved in the creation of the Marijuana Regulation & Taxation Act. Wright is a former Assemblywoman and current Director of the Office of Financial Inclusion and Empowerment in the NYS Department of Financial Services.

OCM Executive Director Alexander’s role will be to oversee applications for licensing and permits for manufacturing, cultivating, processing, settling, storing and distributing cannabis. CCB Chair Wright will be responsible for the number of registrations, licenses and permits to be issued.

The approval of Governor Hochul’s picks means that New York State is moving closer to establishing regulations on cannabis licensing. The state legalized recreational marijuana this past spring after the issue took a backseat to the COVID-19 pandemic. Governor Hochul ordered the special session by saying she wanted “to jumpstart the long-overdue decisions pertaining to establishing cannabis in the state of New York.”

Following the NYS Senate’s special session to appoint New York’s cannabis regulators, on September 22, Governor Hochul announced her Cannabis Control Board member appointments: Ruben R. McDaniel, III and Jessica Garcia. As board members, McDaniel and Garcia will help create and implement the regulatory framework for New York’s cannabis industry. McDaniel is the President and CEO of the Dormitory Authority of the State of New York which provides construction, financing, and allied services. Garcia is Assistant to the President of the Retail, Wholesale Department Store Union, a national labor union representing workers along the food supply chain, as well as workers in non-food retail and healthcare.

The final two members of the five-person Cannabis Control Board include Adam W. Perry, Speaker Carl Heastie’s appointment, and Jen Metzger, Senate Majority Leader Andrea Stewart-Cousins’s appointment. Perry is an employment attorney, while Metzger is a former New York State Senator from the 42nd District.

Now that New York’s Cannabis Control Board is officially complete, and the Office of Cannabis Management has a director, that means that the regulatory process of legal marijuana can start to move forward with steps towards licensing, cultivation, production, distribution, sale, and taxation.

Visit our Cannabis Law practice area page to learn more about cannabis regulations, compliance, and licensing.

Eisenbud Featured in The New York Environmental Lawyer, 2021 Vol. 41, No. 1

Posted: September 30th, 2021

Tags: environmental law

This article by Frederick Eisenbud, head of CMM’s Environmental & Land Use practice, was originally published in The New York Environmental Lawyer (2021 Vol 41, No. 1), a publication of the Environmental and Energy Section of the New York State Bar Association, under the title, “A Better Solution Was in Plain Sight: Amend CPLR 214-c to Conform to the Requirements of CERCLA’s Federally Required Commencement Date.”

The Virtual Elimination of the Statute of Limitations Applicable to Damage Claims by Public Water Providers by the Legislature Will Cause More Harm Than Good – a Better Solution Was in Plain Sight*

By Frederick Eisenbud

I. Introduction

On November 4, 2019, Governor Andrew Cuomo signed into law New York Civil Practice Law and Rules (CPLR) 214-h, which appears to provide an open-ended statute of limitations for providers of public water claiming injury to their water source from contamination.1 This article (1) outlines the scope of CPLR 214-c which was enacted in 1986, and how it was applied to water suppliers prior to the adoption of CPLR 214-h; (2) outlines New York State Department of Health (DOH) regulations applicable to water providers and how they impact the running of the applicable statute of limitations; (3) shows that, pursuant to CPLR 214-c, DOH limits for contaminants in potable water do not have to be exceeded in order for the CPLR 214-c statute of limitations to be triggered; (4) discusses the expanded statute of limitations for water suppliers created by CPLR 214-h; (5) analyzes whether CPLR 214-h is to be retroactively applied and if it is, whether it will apply if the statute of limitations in CPLR 214-c otherwise would bar a claim prior to the adoption of CPLR 214-h; (6) argues that the provisions of CPLR 214-h which provide virtually open-ended time for water suppliers to commence an action for damages arising from contamination are inconsistent with sound public policy and may have unintentional adverse consequences for water purveyors; (7) concludes that CPLR 214-h should be rescinded and CPLR 214-c amended to provide a proper balance of rights that will further the goal of permitting water districts to recover their costs from responsible parties without undermining the purpose of having a statute of limitations; and (8) provides, as an Appendix, a proposed amendment to CPLR 214-c that will address the concerns of water providers without the potential adverse impacts created by CPLR 214-h.

Download To Read The Full Article

CMM Attorneys Recognized as 2021 “Super Lawyers” and “Rising Stars”

Posted: September 30th, 2021

Campolo, Middleton & McCormick, LLP is proud to announce that ten attorneys at the firm, in multiple practice areas, have been named to the 2021 Super Lawyers list, three of them as a “Rising Star.” The CMM attorneys recognized this year, in practice areas including Business and Corporate, Personal Injury, Real Estate, Business Litigation, Mergers & Acquisitions, Construction Litigation, Employment Litigation, Civil Litigation, and Appeals, are:

The rigorous Super Lawyers selection process is based on peer evaluations, independent research, and professional achievement in legal practice. The “Rising Stars” recognition denotes superior professional achievement by attorneys who have been in practice for under 10 years or are under age 40. No more than 2.5 percent of lawyers in New York State are named to the Rising Stars list.

Learn more about CMM’s outstanding legal professionals here.

CMM Closes Sale of Long Island Dance Studio

Posted: September 15th, 2021

Demonstrating the breadth of our industries served, CMM’s M&A team recently closed a deal in the performing arts space, representing our client in the sale of her dance studio. The innovative studio, a staple of the community for decades, specializes in various styles of dance including tap, ballet, jazz, lyrical, hip hop, and contemporary. The Suffolk County-based dance school brought their classes to Zoom during the pandemic and left a hybrid model in place after reopening for in-person classes, seeking to bring the art of dance to clients in a variety of settings.

CMM’s team, led by Partner Don Rassiger, worked diligently to push the deal to closing despite pandemic-related delays and a last-minute issue regarding the client’s PPP loan. The sale will allow the business to remain an important part of the local community for generations to come.

Innovative businesses need innovative lawyers, and the successful sale of the dance studio demonstrates CMM’s versatility and experience in handling M&A transactions across a wide variety of industries. Call us at (631) 738-9100 for guidance on your next sale, purchase, or restructuring.