The discretionary refusal to grant the license was within the Commission's statutory authority and petitioner had no property interest in licensure or a due process right to a hearing in connection therewith ( see Matter of Daxor Corp. v. State of New York Dept. of Health, 90 N.Y.2d 89; Matter of Hollywood Carting Corp. v. City of New York, 288 A.D.2d 71; Sanitation Recycling Industry, Inc. v. City of New York, 107 F.3d 985).
A review of the record confirms that there was a rational basis for respondent's findings that petitioner, by participating in the mob-controlled waste cartel's property rights system, failing to provide truthful information to the Commission and obstructing a 2002 investigation into alleged deceptive trade practices, committed anti-competitive racketeering acts, and that the Commission's consequent determination that petitioner did not possess the requisite "character, honesty and integrity" for licensure was not arbitrary and capricious ( see Administrative Code of the City of N.Y. § 16-509(a); Tocci Bros., Inc. v. Trade Waste Commn. of the City of New York, 251 A.D.2d 160, lv denied 92 N.Y.2d 812; Hollywood Carting Corp. v. City of New York, supra).
We have considered petitioner's remaining arguments and find them unavailing.
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.