Opinion
June 1, 1995
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County [Joan B. Lobis, J.].
The determination of the Board finding that the purported changed circumstances between Operations Order No. 49 (1981) and Operations Order No. 118 (1991) advanced by the petitioners, including, inter alia, the rising level of crime, the City's changing demographics, precinct boundaries, defective portable radios, and stress derived from additional solo patrol responsibilities, did not rise to the level of rendering the solo supervisor patrol program unsafe, was, on the facts, rationally based and supported by substantial evidence ( Uniformed Fire-fighters Assn. v. City of New York, 79 N.Y.2d 236, 241-242; Matter of Levitt v. Board of Collective Bargaining, 79 N.Y.2d 120, 128). We have reviewed the petitioners' remaining claims and find them to be without merit.
Concur — Rubin, J.P., Kupferman, Asch and Tom, JJ.