clubhouse, east hampton, indoor, tennis, cornhole, bar, happy hour, bowling, mini golf

Story - News

Sep 28, 2011 9:22 AMPublication: The Southampton Press

Town GOP Shuns Two Of Its Own In Campaign Push

Sep 28, 2011 11:41 AM

The Southampton Town Republican Party is trying out a new item from its campaign toolbox this year: Photoshop.

A flier promoting the party’s candidates for Southampton Town Board of Trustees went out this week, with a picture of smiling incumbent GOP Trustees Jon Semlear and Ed Warner Jr., and Republican Party-nominated challenger Scott Horowitz, who is trying to win back the Trustee seat won by Bill Pell two years ago. Mr. Pell is a registered Independence Party member who was cross-endorsed by the Democratic Party and is the first non-Republican to sit on the board in four decades.

But there were originally two other Republican candidates—incumbent GOP Trustees Eric Shultz and Fred Havemeyer—in the photo featured on the flier. The five Republican candidates had posed for the photo together but when the flier went to print, two of the veteran incumbents—it is the eighth campaign that Mr. Shultz has been on the Republican line, and the fifth GOP ticket for Mr. Havemeyer—had been cut from the picture, and their names were nowhere to be seen.

“I’m kind of dismayed,” Mr. Shultz, who is the Town Trustees board-elected president, said on Tuesday. “I’m told they’re not going to put us on any campaign literature.”

The root of the two veteran incumbents’ status as exiles would appear to be their decision last month to accept a cross-endorsement offer from the town’s Democratic Party. In public statements, then-GOP Chairman Ernest Wruck strongly criticized the pair for accepting the endorsement, saying they were abandoning the Republican Party and jeopardizing the reelection chances of their fellow Republican board members by adding their names to the Democratic line with Mr. Pell and Democratic candidates Janet Beck and Ed Pavlak.

Mr. Wruck was replaced last week as town party chairman by Bill Wright, who did not respond to several calls seeking comment this week.

Mr. Havemeyer said he doesn’t understand the acrimony of the GOP committee after the pair’s decision to accept the cross-endorsements, seen by most campaign veterans as a significant boost to both men’s reelection chances. He notes that cross-endorsements between the GOP and the Democratic Party are not unheard of, including in this year’s race, with Town Justice Edward Burke Sr. endorsed by both the GOP and Democratic Party. Suffolk County Executive Steve Levy was cross-endorsed by both parties in his last election, as was County Legislator Jay Schneiderman.

“It doesn’t make sense to me,” Mr. Havemeyer said. “I’m cross-endorsed by the Independence and Conservative parties, too. I don’t see why there is such a reaction to another party. Jon Semlear is endorsed by the Working Families Party, and the Working Families are a lot more liberal than the Democrats, and that doesn’t seem to be an issue.”

Mr. Havemeyer noted the change in leadership of the town committee, a rare move barely a month before an election, but said he hasn’t heard of any change in the committee’s stance on his standing as a GOP candidate.

The town Democrats said at the time that they were simply looking to fill out their ballot line after two anticipated Democratic candidates withdrew from consideration and they chose to offer the cross-endorsement to Mr. Shultz and Mr. Havemeyer because they were the board’s president and vice-president.

Mr. Shultz said he sees deeper roots in his abandonment by the GOP than just the cross-endorsement and hinted at behind-the-scenes personal disgruntlement over some of the Trustees’ legal challenges.

The Trustees have been embroiled in a series of lawsuits with West Hampton Dunes Village for nearly a decade over moves by the village and some of its residents to claim a swath of sand in Moriches Bay—an expanded portion of beach created when sand was deposited there after storms breached the barrier island in the 1990s—as buildable land. The Trustees have insisted that the land is still considered bay bottom, which they control on behalf of all town residents. Last year, the village government, Mayor Gary Vegliante and three other residents filed two separate lawsuits against the Town Trustees claiming the Trustees have overstepped the bounds of their authority by asserting their preeminence within the incorporated village’s boundaries.

Mr. Shultz noted that when the town’s Republican Committee was considering its candidates for its Trustees slate this summer, East Quogue resident Cornelius Kelly, now the party’s challenger to Suffolk County Legislator Jay Schneiderman, had presented himself as a challenger to Mr. Shultz’s candidacy specifically, pointing to the lawsuits in West Hampton Dunes as a key reason.

1  |  2  >>  

You've read 1 of 7 free articles this month.

Already a subscriber? Sign in

Well, well, now everyone can know for certain who's promised to do exactly as they're told by the Republican leadership. It's no longer just an insider's secret. Those that won't agree to follow orders got "Photoshopped" out of the group picture. Seems standing up for the public's rights over private interests has become a liability to local GOP leaders. They have no shame.
By goldenrod (505), southampton on Sep 28, 11 12:35 PM
The GOP out here is ruthless which is why I hope they get their come-uppance one of these days. Forget making informed independent decisions or following your conscience if you want to stay on the ticket or employed by the Town.
Look what they did to Graboski a few years back because she wouldn't vote for Zizzi. Now they are doing it to Havemeyer and Schultz.
The GOP cannot remain the driving force in town if we want good government. They are a patronage mill and do the bidding of their ...more
By baywoman (165), southampton on Sep 28, 11 3:15 PM

As Joseph De Maistre once said: "In a democracy, people get the government that they deserve". And the Southampto Town GOP Patronage cabal , long running the Town is ruthless as Nancy Grabosky and Linda Kabot found out if you try to follow your conscience and not their Diktats!

This is the Heaney/Wruck gang who took the greatest tax collection bonanza in Southampton history last decade and wasted it on god knows what and for whom, instead of spending it for the benefit of the Citizens ...more
By Obbservant (449), southampton on Sep 28, 11 4:27 PM
The GOP Party and its Chairs would be wise to engage in self-examination of both conscience and competence. Not having been able to entice or offer a viable candidate for the Supervisor's slot damages both the credibility and rationale for the Party's very existence. Eliminating two Trustees who have recently demonstrated renewed passion and commitment to their tasks from the GOP roster also does nothing to restore confidence.
By Rainfall (22), Hampton Bays on Sep 28, 11 5:48 PM
2 members liked this comment
What is really scarry here is that the Republicn Party has become so dysfunctional that the small fringe group of Westhampton Dunes operatives actually have a say in who the GOP nominates! As A lifelong Republican I only have one thing to say, "is that KABOT with a K?"
By gusbeme (33), southampton on Sep 29, 11 8:04 AM
Shultz and Havemeyer make a private deal with Bill Pell and democratic party bosses abandoning the republican trustees, they then refuse to publicly endorse Ed Warner, Scott Horowitz and John Semlear and somehow the press sees them as the victims! So much for fair and balanced. Vote for INTEGRITY! VOTE : WARNER'
By ernest wruck (10), eastport on Sep 29, 11 10:00 AM
2 members liked this comment
Ernie, you know better. Now, in desperation, you and your operatives are are going to try to trash Schultz and Havemeyer. Afraid to tell the public what really happened? Eh?
By goldenrod (505), southampton on Sep 29, 11 12:11 PM
I'd love to know the details - straight from the Horse's Mouth. Would you like some oats and hay?
By Nature (2966), Hampton Bays on Sep 29, 11 2:19 PM

Thank you for the courage to say and SIGN what you believe.

Gary Vegliante
By veggary (45), West HamptonDunes on Oct 6, 11 5:58 PM
The Republican candidates for Trustee have always run as a team - all for one and one for all. Eric and Fred have certainly benefited from those coat tails and strategy in the past. This year when the going got rough they cut and ran for opportuntiy to take the Democratic line, potentially hurting their Republican teammates and aiding the cause of the Democratic candidates. Their mock shock at the reprucussions of their betrayal of their party and teamates couldn't be more disingenuous.
By DJII13 (155), Hampton Bays on Sep 29, 11 10:32 AM
As a West Hampton Dunes Resident it is surprising to me that when the WHD law suits are mentioned in the paper, the facts are not made clear.
Mayor Vegliante personally benefits from this law suit.
He, under his wife name, owns one of the properties that was created during the wash over in 1991.
His property at 774 Dune Road was an illegal subdivision, neither sanction by the Town of Southampton or the DEC.
He even threatened legal action against his own zoning board if they did ...more
By Dunes Resident (1), West Hampton Dunes on Sep 29, 11 11:58 AM
2 members liked this comment
yes KABOT with a K
By xtiego (698), bridgehampton on Oct 5, 11 7:09 PM
Well, as a fellow taxpayer and actually the Mayor of West Hampton Dunes I feel compelled to answer the keyboard coward who supposedly claims to be a resident of our beautiful Village.

Just for the record this litigation is the latest in a series of seven or eight lawsuits brought by the Trustees or the Town against the Village of West Hampton Dunes. That’s right, the seventh or eighth time every Town taxpayer has footed the bill in an apparent vendetta against our little Village. ...more
By veggary (45), West HamptonDunes on Oct 6, 11 4:46 PM
I'm not well versed on much of the history of this subdivision - but I will speak to Point #1 you make as I'm experience qualifies me to respond to a portion of it.

You state that "In fact, the subdvision was completely sanctioned by Southampton, in fact it is still identified on the Town's GIS system as a single and separate lot".

That's a real non-sequitur. The parcel data that is on GIS (for those of you who dont' know what GIS is - it's a geographic informations system with ...more
By Nature (2966), Hampton Bays on Oct 6, 11 7:08 PM
As you claim "experience" is your qualification, it astounds me you seem to deliberately avoid what does qualify this lot as legal. Like it or not the only legal authority that approves or rejects subdivisions is the local ruling municipality. In this case our beautiful little village, West Hampton Dunes. You should have known that in fact once legally subdivided ( as it was) the only right the County and Town has is to assign it a tax number and start taxing it. I believe that by immediately more ...more
By veggary (45), West HamptonDunes on Oct 7, 11 7:45 AM

If you had noticed - I never said that Southampton had to approve your subdivision, nor did I ever state that it is an illegal sub. All I stated was that the fact that the lots show up on GIS on Southampton's systems, does not make it "legal". Also, the fact that a lot is being assessed as a single and seperate lot by the Town doesn't mean it's a legal lot either - assesors data never reflects legalities (a pool that lacks a C/O can still be taxed, even if it wasn't legal).

The ...more
By Nature (2966), Hampton Bays on Oct 7, 11 10:17 AM
Nature, PLEASE reading three paragraphs about what "does not make a legal subdivision" as it applies to my wife's property and never once touching on what makes a subdivision legal, serves only to display your bias.

Your accusation of voter fraud seems to be based on some silly statement made by someone in a movie. Let me remind you that our incorporation was fully vetted by the Town Supervisor and the complete legal staff of our Town, not an easy task (as seen in the application of Hampton ...more
By veggary (45), West HamptonDunes on Oct 7, 11 11:40 AM
to veggary:

Sounds like a subdivision is legal until challenged, much like a patent.

It's too bad that the trustees lost previous actions but since, without knowing the particulars, I presume that they were attempting to prevent further degradation of the barrier beach environment, they were doing their jobs. Thank goodness that they had the million dollars to spend! As for the current action against you and your wife, you have not denied that you are attempting to build on ...more
By highhatsize (4217), East Quogue on Oct 7, 11 9:59 AM
Highhatsize, my name is Gary Vegliante, Mayor West Hampton Dunes.


It's not "to bad" the Trustees lost the previous action, it's the law.

The Trustees don't have MILLIONS OF DOLLARS to spend. Those MILLIONS are our hard earned taxpayer money. I could never deny that my wife and I wanted to build our home on a legal lot that had been approved by all agencies, including the DEC and Health Department long before we purchased it. That’s just the American ...more
By veggary (45), West HamptonDunes on Oct 7, 11 4:04 PM
Hey Mayor, that's a crock about if you don't sign it's just a whine. Over 90% of the people who post on this site use screen names, always have. When in Rome, do as the Romans do, right? If you want to use your own name, fine, but don't try to force it on the rest of us.

BTW, if you followed what goes down on this site, you'd know that some of Highhat's positions make it very advisable for him to maintain cover. He deals with some of the most controversial stuff in this town. Not saying ...more
By clam pie (161), Westhampton on Oct 7, 11 11:42 PM

to Mayor Vegliante:

Let's cut to the chase. You want to develop the bay bottom on which new land was created by the '90s washover. You perceive, correctly, that the trustees' action to thwart your desires (pursuant to their authority under the Dongan Patent) will succeed. Ergo, you are trying to make them withdraw since that is the ONLY way that you will win. (While the trustees may have “lost” previous actions, those actions didn’t involve an egregious attempt ...more
By highhatsize (4217), East Quogue on Oct 8, 11 12:58 PM
Well Mr? Highhatsize,

You are simply wrong on every count, the accretion, what you believe my perception is, and even your interpertation of the Patent. In fact the 2003 decission on 770 Dune Rd. was directly on point and wasn't "lost" it was LOST.

I'm also not trying to "neuter" the Trustees I just believe they need to abide by(American) the law. Like me or not, that's everyone's obligation.

Highhatsize, I will not "forget about it, I will not conceed and I will NOT ...more
By veggary (45), West HamptonDunes on Oct 8, 11 4:17 PM
Mr. Mayor
It only became personal after your wife and neighbors attempted
to create buildable lots on the bay bottom land.
By Crusader Rabbit (6), Westhampton Beach on Oct 8, 11 6:14 PM
Crusader Rabbit, the facts are funny thing they don't change and are simply the facts. That lot was issued FULL PERMITS(even DEC & County BOH), and was FULLY RECOGNIZED ready to build and TAXED that way by our TOWN YEARS before my wife purchased it.

As well as the fact that this original action was brought against approximately 29 or 30 other properties, the Trustees have dropped, completely GIVEN UP and released almost all the others. WHY???

We all know events occur and have throughout ...more
By veggary (45), West HamptonDunes on Oct 9, 11 1:19 PM
Crusader Rabbit, the facts are funny thing they don't change and are simply the facts. That lot was issued FULL PERMITS(even DEC & County BOH), and was FULLY RECOGNIZED ready to build and TAXED that way by our TOWN YEARS before my wife purchased it.

As well as the fact that this original action was brought against approximately 29 or 30 other properties, the Trustees have dropped, completely GIVEN UP and released almost all the others. WHY???

We all know events occur and have throughout ...more
By veggary (45), West HamptonDunes on Oct 9, 11 1:24 PM
Eric Schultz and Fred Havemeyer -- by the way, congratulations on your recent wedding, Eric -- are both gentlemen, perhaps too much so for the back-and-forth of Southampton politics. Both are right to say something's going on behind the scenes in the Republican Party's abandonment of them, and yes, it's more than the cross-endorsement by the Democrats -- although I do believe these particular Republicans are bitchy enough to do it for that reason alone.

But there's more, and it is, as ...more
By fidelis (199), westhampton beach on Oct 9, 11 11:44 AM
to Mayor Vegliante:

I dispute all your assertions, as do the Trustees. Moreover, one can't help but notice that you trumpet ethical, patriotic and VAGUE reasons for your suit but carefully avoid specifics. For the edification of the readership, why don't you identify the property that you are trying to develop by street number(s) so that folks who don't want to delve into the particulars of your case can get an overview on google maps of the "accretion" in question. (You could describe ...more
By highhatsize (4217), East Quogue on Oct 9, 11 12:54 PM
The WHD mayor should look up the definition of accretion. If this was a slow accumulation of sand over a long period of time there would be no problem. According to the lawsuit your property increased in size as a result of avulsion. As a result of the1992 & 1993 noreasters the barrier island breached and there was a sudden increase in the size of the property by about 500 feet.This sand overlays the Southhampton bay bottom.
For 325 years the town trustees governed and regulated this land for ...more
By Crusader Rabbit (6), Westhampton Beach on Oct 9, 11 2:06 PM
This comment has been removed because it is a duplicate, off-topic or contains inappropriate content.
By Dunes Resident (1), West Hampton Dunes on Oct 11, 11 10:14 AM
Ok, last one for me, lets get serious (I can't believe I've actually just said this to people named Highhatsize, Crusader Rabbit, and Clam Pie). Why don't we just address the real gorilla in the room. Face it, you guys don't like me, my neighbors, our community, we "summer visitors", "snookivillegers", or my personal favorite, and old standby "those people", because just as you've said, we "make you sick".

These current posts are transparent as are most of your past posts. It's the old ...more
By veggary (45), West HamptonDunes on Oct 11, 11 6:08 PM
to Mayor Vegliante:

Actually, I was referring to the tongue of sand protruding out into the bay on the 774 Dune Road site, not the peninsula to the east that you identify. If you look at the site on maps.google, the tongue is quite clear, both the base that is above water and the body that extends out hundreds of feet underwater (still). Five hundred feet of now dry land overlaying wetlands and bay bottom and the underwater extension are all products of the '90s washovers.

I ...more
By highhatsize (4217), East Quogue on Oct 11, 11 7:50 PM
Opps, wrong again. Your" tongue" theory which uses the extrodinary science of Google Maps is now a matter of law. Sorry Highhat but the 770 case (that tongue again) clearly established acretion as the law of the land at that site. The Trustees position was devestated, not at the lowest Court as you claim, but unamimously at the Appellate Court and REJECTED for hearing by the HIGHEST court of the State, the Court of Appeals (you should try reading it ).

After the Baykeeper decision the ...more
By veggary (45), West HamptonDunes on Oct 11, 11 9:34 PM
to Mayor Vegliante:

Nice try in substituting a straw man for the Baykeeper case. THAT is the case you cite in your penultimate post as finding that "[t]he Trustees are nothing more than an agency of our Town." It is THAT finding (if your paraphrase is accurate) that I propose will be reversed on appellate review. You are quite mistaken if you believe that the Baykeeper case " establish[ed] law with no recourse. . . available ." That outcome is simply not within the power of the Supreme ...more
By highhatsize (4217), East Quogue on Oct 11, 11 11:32 PM
1 member liked this comment
Once again you completely avoid the challenge of fairness. While your wonderful vocabulary is quite impressive, it's what you say that betrays you.

Your rabid anti development disposition stops at nothing the facts, truth, and reality are all irrelevant.

Wrong again on that "Baykeeper" thingy just for your edification our Trustees argued against their "environmental stewardship". Even by English Common Law (you know, the King, that sort of thing), the Trustees elected NOT ...more
By veggary (45), West HamptonDunes on Oct 12, 11 8:40 AM
to Mayor Vegliante:

Fairness?! You are as fair in your depiction of the Trustees as you were in your treatment of the hapless DEC official who initially prevented your development scheme. He opposed you , so you killed his career by alleging misconduct (because he used YOUR house, with YOUR permission, to host volunteer wildfire training sessions.) With him off the board, the path was clear but - - -oops! - - - the Trustees decided to stand up to you. Those swine, off with their heads!

You ...more
By highhatsize (4217), East Quogue on Oct 12, 11 11:21 AM
Mr.Mayorethics violation
I disagree with you that I have made any disparaging remarks regarding your village residents.I only want them to be aware about what is occurring and how their tax dollars are being spent.
I do agree with your statement "the facts are funny things they don't change they are just the facts".Researching highhatsize's comment about the DEC Officer's possible ethics violation , lead me to the Inspector General Final Report April15 2010. Starting on page 5 the facts ...more
By Crusader Rabbit (6), Westhampton Beach on Oct 12, 11 11:32 AM
So the Mayor of Greed is back with the screen name thing again. Thought we settled that. I'm not Eric, Fred or Bill, but I'd be proud to carry any of their names if that's how Gary wants to do it. Whatever, but it's a distraction from the real issue, just like the class warfare thing is a distraction. Don't go playing the working guy card with me, Mayor, it won't beat my hand. The real issue is what I said before, just drive through the other beach towns and then drive through WH Dunes and ...more
By clam pie (161), Westhampton on Oct 12, 11 12:42 PM
OK, you guys got me again (# 12), High, & Crusader, lets try honesty and full disclosure.

That "hapless DEC official" was a 30 year plus employee and one of the most powerful (if not the most powerful) local official in the room. He also was the guy who correctly ISSUED that "development scheme" permit long before my wife bought it. It then became an issue after she was involved. Purely an example of power and how it can be misused. Also, I don't think anyone who has ever dealt with ...more
By veggary (45), West HamptonDunes on Oct 12, 11 12:48 PM
to Mayor Vegliante:

This IS getting tiresome.

However, I will make one last attempt at correcting your fundamental misapprehension of case law, to wit, the import of the Baykeeper case.

Since this case was never ruled on by an appellate court, its holding is NOT stare decisis. Whatever they find, their opinion can be overruled by ANY appellate court. That opinion is persuasive (i.e. advisory) only, it has no standing as precedent.

Ergo, if the Supreme Court ...more
By highhatsize (4217), East Quogue on Oct 12, 11 1:11 PM
Capisce? Caaapisce? Yes we understand Highat, and we "summer folk" also understand Yiddish slurs as well, but you know that. In fact you actually feel that.

Your fantastical fairytale about a poor hapless DEC official, our "friendship" and his victimization, is hilarious. Just how much are you willing to make up to create your grand delusion?

As is your continued attempt to interpret the Court system. Next time a Supreme Court judge has an "opinion" someone should go to jail ...more
By veggary (45), West HamptonDunes on Oct 13, 11 9:40 AM
I have not seen evidence that the DEC recognizes your lot as a legal subdivision with all permits in place to construct a new home.If I am wrong let the construction begin.More houses---that's just what hour little village needs.
By Crusader Rabbit (6), Westhampton Beach on Oct 12, 11 1:53 PM
To all the anti-Westhampton Dunes comments:

It appears that many people have watched too many episodes of Law and Order. Thank God we live in the United States of America where everyone is innocent until proven otherwise. For many years now on these and other forums the mayor of "The Dunes" has been the victim of countless allegations which have never been proven to be true. Site facts not opinions.

Time and time again members here comment on the number of homes built in village. ...more
By George V (3), Westhampton on Oct 12, 11 3:34 PM
"Similar lot sizes" maybe, but similar lot coverage? No way. You guys in WHD have that title by miles, and that's the problem, that's what makes your "village" look so ugly. It's probably why you made it a village in the 1st place, to pass rules that let your greed run wild. Actually it's an interesting way to deal with the deer problem -- build on so much of the lot, there's no place for them to stand.
By clam pie (161), Westhampton on Oct 13, 11 12:45 PM
1 member liked this comment
to Mayor Vegliante:

You have the same research capabilities as anyone on the internet and yet you persevere in ignorance and denial. "Capisce?" (understand?) and "schlemiel" (chump) are not slurs. The Baykeeper case is NOT stare decisis. The report, "DEC Inspector May Have Violated Ethics Rules" details your manipulation of the hapless "chump" to whom I refer.

Moreover, what does your identifying yourself as "summer people" have to do with anything? I have never disparaged ...more
By highhatsize (4217), East Quogue on Oct 13, 11 11:37 PM