Bob Morrow, the developer behind a major retail and residential development project proposed in Tuckahoe, made donations to the campaigns of three Town Board members late last year—just months before going before the Town Board to request a special zoning change only that panel can grant.
In past years, those donations would have been revealed in the Town Board members’ annual financial disclosure forms: the law required that town officials list the names of those who made donations greater than $1,000 to their campaigns on a financial disclosure form before acting on any matter that would benefit the donor, according to Assistant Town Attorney Joe Burke. But the Town Board voted in April to change the law governing the documents: Now, the State Board of Elections online listing of campaign contributions stands as the disclosure.
The Board of Elections website shows that Mr. Morrow, his company, Kenilworth Equity LTD, and his daughter Dina Bean have made approximately $23,000 in campaign donations to Town Board candidates over the past five years. Of that total, the largest amount given to any single candidate, $4,550, went to Town Supervisor Anna Throne-Holst’s campaign. An analysis of her 330 donors shows that Kenilworth Equities is among Ms. Throne-Holst’s 10 largest donors.
“It doesn’t affect me,” Ms. Throne-Holst said Tuesday of the donations. “I’ve taken in $100,000 of contributions in office. Never once has it influenced how I legislate.”
Mr. Morrow has been before the Town Board twice since March 2010 to present his proposed project, dubbed “Tuckahoe Main Street,” which would feature a 40,000-square-foot King Kullen, two free-standing restaurants, two restaurants incorporated into larger buildings, 12 to 13 small stores, and 12 apartments on 12 acres off County Road 39 just outside Southampton Village. In April, the Town Board voted unanimously to consider Mr. Morrow’s request for a planned development district, a special zoning designation granted by the Town Board that would be required for the project, which would not be permitted by current zoning at the site. About a month later, the board voted 4-1, with Chris Nuzzi dissenting, to commence a state-mandated environmental review of the PDD proposal.
An earlier form of the proposal, which featured just a King Kullen and a few retail spaces, had been put forth by Ed Glackin, the vice president of real estate for the King Kullen Company, in 2008.
Mr. Morrow also said that he had no direct involvement with the construction project until March 2010, when he officially became a partner with Southampton Ventures LLC, the entity that initiated the development and first applied to the Southampton Town Board for special zoning allowances in the spring of 2009. He did acknowledge that he had been negotiating the deal for four to five months prior—which would be roughly the time of the fall 2009 town elections.
Still, Mr. Morrow contends that he had “no inkling whatsoever” in September—when he said he made many of the donations—that he would be involved in the Tuckahoe development project, in which Mr. Glackin still held an interest. Mr. Morrow, who also built the King Kullen complex on Montauk Highway in Hampton Bays, said that he has been contributing to political parties locally since the 1990s.
“Whatever contributions I made, I made,” Mr. Morrow said Tuesday. “I live in the community. I contribute to charities. I contribute to a lot of things. I do what I feel like doing.”
According to State Board of Elections records, Mr. Morrow, Kenilworth Equities LTD and Ms. Bean donated a total of $3,950 to the “Anna Throne-Holst for Supervisor” campaign in the fall of 2009. But the records indicate the money was donated after the November 3 election; prior to the election, Mr. Morrow had personally donated $600 to her campaign. He also donated to Ms. Throne-Holst’s opponent, Republican nominee Linda Kabot.
Mr. Morrow said Tuesday that he made all of the donations before the election, but that Ms. Throne-Holst’s campaign workers deposited some of the checks more than two months later. For example, he said he wrote a check of $1,200 on September 9, 2009, but that his bank records show it was not deposited until November 27, 2009. Board of Elections records show the donation as received on November 25, a time when Ms. Throne-Holst was still a councilwoman but preparing to take over as supervisor after the November 3 election.
Kenilworth Equities Ltd. made two $1,000 donations to Ms. Throne-Holst on November 16, according to state records. Mr. Morrow noted that those checks, while made on the Kenilworth Equities account, are actually from Hamptons Sunrise LLC and Hamptons Bellows LLC, two companies related to a condominium project in Hampton Bays he is involved with. That project, which calls for condominiums in the hamlet, has not been discussed publicly at Town Hall in recent years.
Ms. Holst, why was this not made public at the time of debate on this issue? This is an extremely large donation for a local election. The donation should be returned.
And in other news, Supervisor Throne Holst announced she has a bridge in Brooklyn she is willing to sell.............
"Still, Mr. Morrow contends that he had “no inkling whatsoever” in September—when he said he made many of the donations—that he would be involved in the Tuckahoe development project, in which Mr. Glackin still held an interest." HAH! Try again, Mr. Morrow.
We have a corrupt Supervisor and TB. You have to ask yourself why the law was rescinded, not requiring these donation be listed on the financial disclosure.
It was Supervisor Anna Throne-Holst who was the sponsor of this resolution, it removed all wording to disclose campaign donations from someone who was working with the town, just like Mr. Morrow. I would call this resolution a cover your butt resolution. Look it up Res# 2010-357 from the April 13 TB meeting.
I encourage everyone opposed to this proposal to get the press and read the entire article and then make your voice heard on this. It is time to put an end to these kinds of political shennanigans!
Reg rep is wrong, and this is a very ill-considered charge on her part, given that the contributions were legal, that there is no proof ...more of any connection between the contributions and the votes, and that, in the case of Nancy Graboski, the last Morrow contribution was in 2007. Also, just to clarify and just to give me the pleasure of saying it once more, in the case of Democrat Bridget Fleming, there is not even any initial basis for the accusation of corruption, because Ms. Fleming never received a penny from Bob Morrow.
Oh, do please respond, reg rep, so that I can say it yet again ... and again .. and again.
This development ...more proposal will destroy a neighborhood and, in turn, the village and set a dangerous precedent concerning PDD's and our town's future - the people are against this. I am against this. Any hint of impropriety concerning this development must be taken very seriously especially since the board voted to allow consideration to move forward even though there is no community benefit to this proposal. This smells of business as usual. If proved otherwise, fantastic, but I do not think that should be left to chance.
I would hope that anyone who received any campaign contribution step up to the plate and recuse themselves. Excuses like "it doesn't affect me" and "I had no inkling whatsoever." doesn't cut it. Filing an Article 78 may change some minds!
I would hope that anyone who received any campaign contribution step up to the plate and recuse themselves. Excuses like "it doesn't affect me" and "I had no inkling whatsoever." doesn't cut it. Seems that there's an applicable law on this. Guess this PROHIBITION legislation is something some are apparently unaware of. How is this so?
Here's what the town code says on this:
§ 23-4
Standards of conduct.
A. ...more
Ethical conduct. In fulfilling their public responsibilities, Town officers and employees shall act fairly, impartially, without taint of conflict of interest and without any appearance of conflict of interest.
B.
General prohibitions.
[Amended 6-12-2007 by L.L. No. 32-2007; 2-12-2008 by L.L. No. 8-2008]
(1)
Except as provided for in Subsection B(3) below, a Town officer or employee shall not use his or her official position or office, or take or fail to take any action, in a manner which he or she knows or has reason to know may result in a benefit to any of the following persons:
(a)
The Town officer or employee; or
(b)
The outside employer or business of the Town officer or employee; or
(c)
A person who shares the residence of the Town officer or employee; or
(d)
A customer or client of the Town officer or employee; or
(e)
A relative of the Town officer or employee; or
(f)
A person, as defined in § 23-3, which includes a public or private corporation, from whom an applicable Town officer or employee has received election campaign contributions to his or her individual campaign committee(s) aggregating $1,000 or more in monetary funds, or in-kind, over the prior 24 months, which includes the previous, current and future campaigns for public office. "Previous campaign" refers to the prior election cycle for said individual campaign committee. "Current and future campaign" refers to the present election cycle for a Town officer or employee who is either running for election as a first-time candidate or is seeking re-election or election to another elective office.
Please turkey, stop acting like a child.
Turkey is not being naive; he as usual will never make a negative statement of his candidate Anna Throne-Holst. If these donations were only given to republicans & Malone his comments would have been completely different (and you know it Turkey).
Lablover read your own comments, "tainted donations, donations to Ms. Throne- Holst were indeed meant to buy her support". What ...more do you call this? Buying someone's support, would make that person corrupt.
If both of you think for one minute that we have no corruption in SH you are both naive.
I didn't injure ATH, she did this to herself when she accepted and cashed checks from Mr. Morrow and also sponsored a resolution to rescind the law and not have this info disclosed on the annual disclosure form.
Give it some time turkey, Bridget is new in this game and took office to late, she will receive plenty of donation from developers like Morrow.
This whole thing reeks of impropriety.
Reg rep, you really need to stop commenting on posts you haven' t read. Your anger issues are yours, not mine.
Finally someone who gets it, and has a brain.
But can all 4 board members recuse themselves leaving only Bridget to vote on a resolution concerning this PDD? LOL, I don't know.
You may, however, want to be careful about giving Chris Nuzzi a gold star here. First, he was one of the three Town Board members to receive recent contributions from Mr. Morrow. ...more Second, as I noted under a related article, I think the vote was not to go forward with an environmental review of the Tuckahoe Main St. proposal. Mr. Nuzzi's No vote could have meant, not that he opposed the project, but that he thought no environmental review was necessary. That, I imagine, would change your opinion.
I am aware of the contribution made to him by Morrow and I believe that were Nuzzi not in tight with the Epley and the village crowd (who are opposed) he would support this proposal, but, if my above assumption is correct and he does not ...more support it, I don't care why, as long as he votes it down.
And you comment without reading all the posts. If you had read all the posts correctly you would have noticed that I was responding to semi local when she stated this above: " I would hope that anyone who received any campaign contribution step up to the plate and recuse themselves". Meaning recuse themselves when the time comes to vote on this PDD.
BTW keep your own anger issues in check.
Here is what the Town ethics board is responsible ...more for:
§ 23-25
Investigations.
A.
Upon receipt of a written complaint by any person alleging a violation of this chapter or upon determining on its own initiative that a violation of the chapter may exist, the Ethics Board shall have the power and duty to conduct with reasonable promptness any investigation necessary to carry out the provisions of this chapter. Written complaints must be signed by the individual complainant, must be notarized and must include his/her address. In conducting any such investigation, the Ethics Board may administer oaths or affirmations, compel attendance of witnesses, and require the production of any books or records that it may deem relevant and material. The Ethics Board shall make a reasonable effort to obtain voluntary cooperation prior to exercising or enforcing their right to compel testimony. Further, the Ethics Board shall take steps to ensure that every individual's right to due process is protected.
B.
The Ethics Board shall state in writing the disposition of every sworn written complaint it receives and shall set forth the reasons for the disposition. All such statements and all sworn complaints shall be indexed and maintained on file by the Board.
C.
Any person filing a sworn complaint with the Ethics Board, and every person who is named in such a complaint, shall be notified in writing of the disposition of the complaint.
D.
Upon the written request of the Town Board, of a Town officer or employee, or of any contracting party, the Ethics Board shall investigate and provide to the Town Board a written report and recommendation concerning any Town contract or agreement that may be void pursuant to § 23-6. Additionally, the Ethics Board may, in its discretion, undertake such an investigation upon its own initiative, in which case it may present a report and recommendation to the Town Board.
E.
Nothing in this section shall be construed to permit the Ethics Board to conduct an investigation of itself or of any of its members or staff. If the Ethics Board receives a complaint alleging that the Ethics Board or any of its members or staff has violated any provision of this chapter, or any other law, the Ethics Board shall promptly transmit to Town Board a copy of the complaint.
And we, like total DOPES, stand around wondering, "Gee, I thought it was all legal?!" "How could the town board vote on a totally unwanted shopping center????"
God... I hate when we're treated like morons!
Morrow has owned this property since 2001 as I recall, if not, please correct me. I didn't want to jump into the above fray, so I refrained.
SO, if this guy has owned the property for almost a decade, wouldn't it stand to reason he'd try to "grease the wheels" a bit in that time? Seems logical here, and I think we do need a regulation barring developers from making campaign contributions to local politicians. It would save ...more a world of headache, speculation, and prevent any tainting of decisions, or gain of political infliuence.
Everyone interested in honest government and transparent governance ought to pull out all stops to defeat Anna Throne Holst in the next elections.
She has a history of voting against public interest for her very political objectives, eschewing even her supporters - just ask the still shocked Highway Dept. Head and many members of the Democratic Committee that actively supported her!
The Community doesn't matter, just Queen Anna as she plots her next political move way beyond ...more just Southampton. He cynical and laughable public protestations that one of the biggest donations to her campaign made after the elections had nothing to do with her decision is ludicrous, juvenile and transparent.
One of her first moves as Supervisor was to limit public disclosure re campaign contribution! Absurd! She will lie without second thoughts while batting her big beautiful blue eyes!
You asked:
"Do you own a house, do you rent, do you pay takes . . . then you have a right to file an ethics complaint."
Read what was posted re the process of filing a complaint. It's not quite as simple as your questions ask if you are semi local. Just as an example, if you own a house here as a second residence can you vote in local elections? The answer is NO!
And, of course we all suspected that deep-pocket developers and others with similar interests were contributing like crazy. Hope the SHP goes a lot further doing investigative work. Congrats!
All this out of control wacky white elephant development going on proves that with a couple of exceptions, we have the best Town Board and Supervisor money money can buy!
Do we deserve government by developers, of developers, and for developers? We all should remember this the next time these guys campaign for office again!
It's the only time taxpayers have an edge over big campaign contributors and their big money. We can counter their white elephant projects with elephant ...more memories!
Yes, it could. But given the clear bias of your track record here, would you contort yourself in the same way twere it Ms. Fleming?
Howsabout dropping the "spin" and let's see how this plays out. I think you'll agree that there are some explanations in order, and I cannot imagine that, given the appearances(!) of impropriety, statements need to be issued, and maybe even some donations ...more returned.
Anna Throne-Holst is no dummy, and well understands perception vs. reality.
Address your letter to Darlene Troge, she is the only employee of the town that is a member of the ethics board.
Darlene Troge, Ethics Board Member
Town of Southampton
116 Hampton Road
Southampton, NY 11968
I believe the other members are:
Dr. Stanley Zinberg
Maureen Sutton
Eugene Gaughan
Michele LeMoal Gray
One of my favorite bands is Pantera, and they have a great line from one of their songs:
"Rape the world, for all it's worth, every inch of planet Earth..."
1. Ethics- The mid June article discussed campaign contributions. Any recusals yet?
2. SERQA- before deciding if PDD's are a benefit or not what are the State Environmental Quality Review findings on this project as it stands on it's face now? This is always the first step, and an opportunity for those aggrieved to file an article 78 within 30 days of any board's decision.
3. The more impervious surfaces there are, the more destruction there is to the environment, ...more which many years ago was pristine and is now constantly degraded with irresponsible development.
4. The land owner does have a right to develop property, but the various boards and commissions have an obligation to protect the environment and the community from impacts.