In 2001 SUPERVISOR FRANK PETRONE CALLED THE HUNTINGTON TOWN BOARD "AN INCUBATOR FOR RUMORS...", when deposed about an "incident" that occurred in 1999...
14 YEARS LATER...
THE INVESTIGATION OF THAT INCIDENT HAS COST THE TAXPAYERS OVER FIVE MILLION DOLLARS AND IT'S NOT OVER YET...
The truly never-ending saga of the"Harbormaster and the Councilwoman"...is still ongoing...
Since you, the taxpayers have paid and continue to pay millions of dollars in legal fees for all of this drama you have a right to the details of the depositions of the politicians and the details contained in the many lawsuits, however sordid some of them might be. The documented facts of this story-amassed over a decade- are however so voluminous and costly, they will appear in this forum in several parts...or rather...Acts and Scenes from Frank Petrone's...
"Taxpayer Funded Political Theater..." (of the absurd?)
The Players: (Time period; 1999 to the Present)
Frank Petrone: Huntington Town Board Supervisor, Democrat, currently running for Town Board. In 2001 he was a Republican...(Joined the GOP in 1976)
William Townsend Perks: Then Harbormaster for the Town of Huntington, now retired. Worked under Susan Scarpati-Reilly on the Mobil Oil Spill Response Unit.
Susan Scarpati-Reilly: Then a Town Councilwoman for Huntington Town. An attorney, Ms. Scarpati-Reilly was Town Board liaison for the Town’s Mobil Oil Spill Response Unit in 1999.
Steve Israel: Currently a Congressman, Mr. Israel was a Town Councilman for Huntington Town at the time. Dated, married and divorced Marlene Budd.
Marlene Budd: Now a Suffolk County Family Court Judge (term 2006-2016) former Huntington Town Councilwoman, former wife of Steve Israel.
Joseph Anastasia: Director of Maritime Services; Mr. Perks' Supervisor, signed the payroll along with co-signer Phil Nolan who was Director of Environmental Control and the Landfill and the Ogden Martin (Covanta) Town Incinerator.
Lawyers and Law Firms:
Attorneys were paid for by The Town of Huntington for various lawsuits, defenses and appeals for the Town of Huntington, Susan Scarpati-Reilly and those she accused of various things and had filed a myriad of lawsuits against. These included but were not limited to: Thelma Neira, and Marlene Budd and The Town of Huntington Board of Ethics and Financial Disclosure, the Chairman Howard Glickstein and all the board members collectively and individually and several Town Attorneys.
Thelma Neira: Assistant Town Attorney for Huntington
Jim Matthews: Town Attorney for Huntington
Robert DiGregorio: Assistant Town Attorney for Huntington
Clifford Bart: Attorney for the Town in the Arbitration case
Maureen Hoerger: from Perini & Hoerger, For Susan Scarpati-Reilly
Ernest Stolzer: with Rains and Pogrebin, then with Bond, Schoeneck and King, LLP for the Town
James P. Clark: with Rains and Pogrebin, then with Bond, Schoeneck and King, LLP, Cullen and Dykman and James P. Clark Law Offices, for the Town
Jason Abelove: attorney for Susan Scarpati-Reilly
Gerald LaBush and Robert Vespoli: For the Independent Fact-Finder
Edward Yule: Northport resident, the only attorney the Town refused to pay for. Attorney for Mr. Perks for the entire fourteen years, has yet to be paid by the Town despite two court rulings that support Mr. Perks', union contractual right to counsel, when accused of an assault.
ACT 1: THE HARBORMASTER BLOWS THE WHISTLES
Scene One:
In 1996 William Townsend Perks, the longtime Huntington Harbormaster and an expert with extensive Haz-Mat and Emergency training, began documenting that the Town of Huntington had no formal emergency response plan for evacuation and they had no emergency response manual as is required by New York State Department of Labor Law. Despite the fact that Huntington Town Supervisor Frank Petrone used to be the Director of FEMA operations for the entire Eastern Coast of the United States, when notified by Mr. Perks of the Town's non-compliance, Huntington declined to comply with the state law.
Over time when his notices and warnings to the Town continued to be ignored, Mr. Perks said he began to file grievances about this and other problems, as was his job description and only recourse at that point. Mr. Perks, the Harbormaster, was eventually assigned to the Town's Landfill and according to him, he was being forced to work out of title.
Huntington was then fined for unpreparedness and for not having an emergency plan and manual in place in violation of the law. Mr. Perks contends he did his job when he tried to alert the public about the lack of an emergency contingency plan. But he believes the Town really went after him because he tried to let people know that for over ten years the Town was burning tons of radiated garbage that contaminated the scrap metal or “Grizzle” in the Town's waste-to-energy facility at 99 Town Line Road. It began to be returned as radioactive. When he started speaking out about this, he says, the Town then set about to destroy his credibility. He believes fourteen years and millions of dollars later, they are still at it and using taxpayer money, false statements and rumors to do it.
Mr. Perks contends that Mr. Petrone has continued this in order to cover up the contamination and to continue the bonanza of millions of dollars in legal fees he has awarded to law firms and individual attorneys over the years. Then in turn, they have donated tens of thousand of dollars to his campaigns.
There are boxes of documented evidence that support the fact that Mr. Perks was and is telling the truth about the radiated waste; including several affidavits and dozens of bills of lading and truck manifests, from Gershow Recycling in Medford, sending the truckloads of radiated waste through residential neighborhoods back to the Ogden Martin Incinerator (now called Covanta) in Huntington, because they contained radiated waste.
(See: State Orders Islip Landfill Capped)
http://freelance-documentdrivennews.blogspot.com/2010_08_01_archive.html
According to New York State Department of Conservation law, it is illegal to burn anything known to contain radiation, including "just medical waste". The “hot” or radiated metal that was sent back to the Huntington incinerator was first put into the 40 yard dumpsters according to several sources and then cut up and burned. Then they were burned again and re-burned, according to Mr. Perks who said he was an eyewitness to these events. "Why would you re-burn steel, over and over?" he asks. "This was not low level radiation such as found in medical waste as the officials tried to say it was back then", according to Mr. Perks, "It contained Radium 226...which has a half life of over 1600 years. Then the ash was dumped into the unlined landfills. "
Spent fuel rods and other radiated materials from Brookhaven National Laboratory were also burned in the Huntington incinerator, according to sources. The man who removed the leftover metal pellets after they were burned is a relatively young man who is now dying of radiation poisoning. He has had to have all his teeth pulled and was made to fight for his disability benefits. (See: “Three Courageous Affidavits”)
http://freelance-documentdrivennews.blogspot.com/2012_10_01_archive.html
Mr. Perks is currently undergoing “chelation therapy”, a difficult and sometimes deadly medical procedure for removal of heavy metals, including mercury from the bloodstream. The side effects can also be devastating.
Mr. Perks believes the Town has spent many millions of dollars to discredit him and stop the investigation of the serious charges he made in his grievances. He notified the Town of the workers' rights with regard to being exposed to toxins and the failure of the Town to follow the Right-to-Know Laws and to follow training and equipment requirements for people working around potentially deadly and other toxic substances.
Mr. Perks said when the Town finally installed a radiation detector, it was going off like crazy and the people working there had no Haz-Mat gear at all to protect themselves. When he complained and notified them, instead of providing the gear, Mr. Perks was informed by Town workers that employees of Ogden Martin had manipulated the background levels of the detector so high, nothing would have made it go off. When Mr. Perks complained to the DEC officials assigned to the plant, they informed him that neither of them were qualified or had any training in radiation related incidents.
Scene 2:
"THE INCIDENT" AT THE MOBIL OIL TRANSFER STATION
On March 9, 1999 the Town of Huntington Supervisor Frank Petrone, offered Town Board Resolution number 1999-184 calling for the Town Board to appoint an “Independent Fact Finder”, in order to ascertain all relevant facts surrounding an incident involving a Town employee (Mr. William Townsend Perks) and then Town Councilwoman Susan-Scarpati Reilly at the Town’s Mobil Oil Transfer Station. This was based on what Mr. Petrone called media reports of a police report of an “alleged assault”.”
Then Town Councilman Steve Israel, seconded Town Board Resolution 1999-184 in order to hire this "Fact Finder" and start an investigation against then Huntington Town Harbormaster William Townsend Perks, based on the allegations made by Ms. Scarpati-Reilly, an attorney and then a Councilwoman for Huntington Town.
You may think this is “old news”, however the fallout out of that "incident" and subsequent lawsuits and various appeals have already cost the taxpayers millions and millions of dollars and fourteen years later they are still paying lawyers and the investigation of this incident and legal wrangling is still not over.
THE FACT FINDER’S REPORT
The completed 33 page, "Fact Finder Report", cost the Town over $70,000 dollars and was released to the press and the Town of Huntington Board of Ethics and Financial Disclosure. It was not admitted into United States District Court, because Judge Joanna Seybert denied its’ entry.
From the Report by Gerald La Bush, the Fact-Finder hired by Huntington by a Town Board Resolution:
“On the cold and rainy night of February 28, 1999, around eight in the evening, at the Mobil Oil terminal in Cold Spring Harbor, an altercation occurred between then Huntington Councilwoman Susan Scarpati-Reilly and Harbormaster William Perks. Among the many questions surrounding the incident are: Did Mr. Perks slap Ms. Scarpati-Reilly on the arm? Or, did Ms. Scarpati-Reilly slap Mr. Perks on the side of the head? The precise facts of the altercation in the parking lot of the Mobil Oil terminal may never be susceptible of absolute determination, since the only known witnesses, Ms. Scarpati-Reilly and Mr. Perks tell irreconcilable versions of the same events.
However, our investigation has uncovered substantial evidence, both circumstantial and direct, that casts serious doubts on Ms. Scarpati-Reilly’s claims, and, more significantly, serious doubts about the propriety of her actions, both before and after the alleged incident. Her actions, in the aggregate, demonstrate a calculated and persistent disregard for the truth. They harmed many people, from ordinary town employees to elected officials.”
Despite the recommendations of the Fact Finder regarding Ms. Scarpati-Reilly’s questionable credibility and the fact that Ms. Scarpati-Reilly later admitted she lied to the press, the Town has forged forward with lawsuits and appeals relating to Mr. Perks.
The original resolution was about an assault, supposedly based on media reports about Mr. Perks, according to depositions by Town Board members in the case. The problem is that at the time of the original resolution, according to Mr. Perks, no media reports of assault existed yet, only rumors. Searches of multi-media sources...prior to the Resolution, have to date, produced not one media report that cites an "assault" having taken place.
From the Resolution:
“Whereas the Town Board, through media reports, has become aware of a police report alleged to have been filed by Councilwoman Susan Scarpati-Reilly complaining of an alleged assault upon her by William Perks, a Town employee…an independent fact finder must be appointed to ascertain all of the relevant facts pertained therein and report to the Board his findings.”
The resolution passed with 4 ayes with Susan Scarpati-Reilly abstaining from the vote.
The police report does not accuse Mr. Perks of assault, in it, Ms. Scarpati-Reilly charges him with harassment.
"EVERYONE'S IN FOR A RIDE"
Susan Scarpati-Reilly swore to the following under oath in a deposition in the matter of the Fact-Finder’s Report: (The only thing added is the names in parenthesis)
“When they got to the appointment of the fact finder, I left. I didn’t want to be present when the rest of my colleagues were discussing whether to have a fact finder involving me. And so I left. And that way I could avoid talking to them about what happened.
And right before—or during the course of the town board meeting, they gave me a new resolution appointing you (Gerald LaBush). It was worded very differently than the first one. And I went to Jim (Matthews) and Jim said they were angry with him for even talking to me; that he—they had asked him to get off the case and to assign Larry Cregan and that Jim said he couldn’t talk to me about it, that Larry was going to handle it. I said “All right.” But I said, “Who directed this resolution? Because it’s—there’s some inaccuracies. You have to do it within thirty days.” I said, “You know, what happened to right counsel, and the fact that this was pursued in the District Attorney’s Office?” And he said, “You have to talk to Frank.” I sit next to Frank (Petrone) on the Board. So, before we actually voted on it, I turned to Frank and I said, “Frank, whoever drafted this resolution doesn’t practice criminal law. It really violates my rights. It violates his rights. I mean this is an employee, employer matter." But at the same time I am waiting for the District Attorney’s office to give me a call back to see which direction I am going in.
And right off the start is the beginning of it, they said that I was assaulted---alleged assault. I wasn’t thinking tort law; I’m thinking criminal law. And I said, “Frank, I mean it’s just written poorly.” And he turned and he said, “You asked for it.” So I said “Okay, everyone’s in for a ride.” And they voted on the resolution.”…And I went home and thought about it and I knew this was going to be a political fiasco…and it’s--it’s just a harassment case.” (Deposition of Susan Scarpati-Reilly taken by the Fact-Finder Gerald LaBush on April 14, 1999)
The ride has still not stopped, the political fiasco endures and Frank Petrone purposefully and knowingly turned this simple alleged harassment case into a fourteen year, multi-million dollar financial bonanza and extravaganza for more than a dozen lawyers…all based on rumors, according to Mr. Perks.
(Note: Neither the Police, the District Attorney’s office nor the Ethics Board ever questioned Mr. Perks about the incident and the police and the DA declined to charge or prosecute Mr. Perks, despite evidence of significant pressure by Ms. Scarpati-Reilly for them to do so, according to information obtained.)
“ INCUBATOR FOR RUMORS”
In a deposition dated April 25, 2001 Mr. Frank Petrone (then a Republican…since 1976) testified under oath:
“Town Hall is an incubator for rumors.” When asked if rumors would be the impetus for the Town initiating an investigation into allegations of sexual harassment involving Susan Scarpati-Reilly, Mr. Petrone admitted that although he heard of rumors of an affair between Town Councilwoman, Susan Scarpati-Reilly and Bill Perks, “I don’t think rumors would move us into any direction, because if we had to do things based on rumors, I would have to have—I would have to have a team of attorneys just doing that. There are many rumors.”
Mr. Petrone’s statement would prove to be prophetic, as today over $4.1 million at 9% interest is owed to Mr. Perks' attorney, Edward Yule, since 2009 when Mr. Perks won his arbitration case. Since then both the arbitration decision and a Supreme Court Justice have agreed that Mr. Perks' union contract required the Town to pay Mr. Perks' legal fees, because according to the language of their own resolution...Ms. Scarpati-Reilly had accused him of assault. The Town's attorneys are currently in Brooklyn's Appellate Court, 2nd Department, appealing Judge Joseph Farneti's 2012, Supreme Court decision upholding the award of attorneys fees to Mr. Yule, by the Arbitrator, Mr. Gregory, based on the collective bargaining agreement.
Mr. Yule waited until the last possible moment and day to file the lawsuit against the Town, according to Mr. Perks, as he was desperately trying to work out a settlement for his legal fees, after the Fact Finders report was released. The Town then declined to pay Mr. Yule's attorney's fees, what was then a little over $70 thousand dollars (about what they spent on the Fact-Finders' Report). Fourteen years later, it is now over 5 million with interest and still counting during the appeal. That does not include the millions they have spent on legal fees for the Town's many other attorneys who have billed for thousands of hours and millions of dollars in these matters.
Mr. Perks said he was advised by Mr. Yule at the time, the only way to clear his name of these false allegations, was to file the sexual harassment lawsuit against the Town, something Mr. Perks said he did on the last day possible, albeit reluctantly. "No one wants to file a lawsuit when you've worked in a place for over twenty years...but my attorney advised me there was no other way to clear my name and reputation from all the false rumors and information being disseminated by the Town at the time."
On May 9, 2012 Supreme Court Judge Joseph Farneti upheld the decision of the Arbitrator, David Gregory, the Executive Director of the Center of Labor and Employment Law, awarding attorney fees to Mr. Perks' attorney, Mr. Yule.
Mr. Gregory had found in Mr. Perks' favor in an Arbitration lawsuit charging that Huntington Town had violated a section of Local 342’s Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) that stated the Town was required to pay for an attorney for Mr. Perks when Susan Scarpati-Reilly accused him of assault while he was on the job.
Judge Farneti agreed with Mr. Gregory and Judge Farneti’s decision is currently on appeal by the Town of Huntington in the New York State Appellate Division Second Department.
Scene Three:
Scarpati-Reilly Accuses Others
The Town paid for Ms. Scarpati-Reilly’s attorney, and also for the attorney of Thelma Neira, (who was then and is currently still a Huntington Assistant Town Attorney). Ms. Scarpati-Reilly had charged Ms. Neira with a criminal act. In that case, since Ms. Neira and Ms. Scarpati-Reilly had both at one time worked at the office of the District Attorney in Suffolk, the case was switched to the Nassau District Attorney’s office... where it languished and then eventually was dropped.
Ms. Scarpati-Reilly had allegedly also accused George Hoffman, Public Information Officer for Supervisor Petrone, of being the one who had filed the complaint against Mr. Perks with the police, when it was actually Ms. Scarpati-Reilly who had made the formal charge of harassment and asked to have him arrested. The police declined to do so and to this day have never questioned Mr. Perks about her allegations.
Eventually, Ms. Scarpati-Reilly admitted that she lied to the media when she claimed to know nothing of the incident, and that she lied when she said that she was home baking a birthday cake for her son at the time and that she lied when she insisted again to reporters she knew nothing of the incident. Ms. Scarpati-Reilly also sent a letter to the media finally admitting she had made the police report herself.
Ms. Scarpati-Reilly also accused Marlene Budd, now a judge, then also a Huntington Town Councilwoman, of “trying to influence a pending investigation”, according to an article in The New York Times (The Harbormaster and the Councilwoman by David Winzelberg, Oct 25, 2005).
The case was dismissed as without merit. The Town (taxpayers) paid for attorneys in these matters.
On January 14, 2000, the Town of Huntington’s Board of Ethics and Financial Disclosure issued their own report and based some of their conclusions on the Fact Finder’s Report in response to Town Board Resolution No. 1999-380. The report stated that even if Ms. Scarpati-Reilly was in fear of personal danger (which she had alleged as her reason for lying to the press) or even if she were concerned about the danger to herself or others, it would not justify the false statements to the press.
In their report the Ethics Board wrote:
“At the very least Ms. Scarpati-Reilly’s false statements to the press could well lead the public to conclude that she was engaged in acts that were in violation of the trust placed in her by the public. At the very least Councilwoman Scarpati-Reilly’s conduct violated Section 29-5(b)(5) of the Ethic’s Code, which prohibits government officials from engaging in conduct that created an appearance of impropriety.”
In May of 2000, Ms. Scarpati-Reilly filed an Article 78 lawsuit against the Town of Huntington Board of Ethics and Financial Disclosure, Howard A. Glickstein as Chairman, Beth Graham, Stanley Heller, Karen Joy Miller and Laurie Nolan as Members, the Town of Huntington Town Attorney’s Office, Lawrence W. Cregan, as Ex-Oficio Member of the Board and Special Assistant Town Attorney and Jim Matthews, as Town Attorney.
Ms. Scarpati-Reilly charged in the suit that on or about June 1, 1999 the Huntington Town Board pursuant to Town Board Resolution 1999-380 gave the Fact Finder’s Report to the Board of Ethics. The suit said that upon information and belief, the Board of Ethics met on several occasions between June 1, 1999 and January 4, 2000 to take testimony, review documentary evidence and discuss and prepare an opinion regarding Ms. Scarpati-Reilly’s conduct as described in the Fact Finder’s Report.
Ms. Scarpati-Reilly complained among other things she was not given prior notice as was required to be given to her and to the news media and other outlets at least 72 hours prior to the meetings. The meetings, minutes, correspondence, opinions and actions of the ethics board should have been confidential, according to her verified petition.
In an article in Newsday dated March 10, 1999 (by Chastity Pratt) Ms. Scarpati Reilly said “My only explanation for having exercised less than adequate judgment is that my name and reputation were being threatened and unfortunately, I panicked.”
In the letter to the editors, Ms. Scarpati-Reilly retracted statements for the record, where she denied filing the police complaint finally admitting she lied when she said she was home baking a birthday cake for her son at the time of the incident.
In an article in The Long Islander (Scarpati-Reilly: “I Panicked” by A. Anthony Miller, March 1999) it was revealed that after her initial denial to the paper that she had made the police report, she sent a letter of apology “in which she admitted to some ‘misstatements’ in her initial denial and she also acknowledged that she did, indeed, file the police report.”
Oddly enough, the Ethics Board never spoke to Mr. Perks during the entire investigation.
All the defendants retained counsel and the Town of Huntington (taxpayers) paid the legal bills. Ms. Scarpati-Reilly eventually dropped the lawsuit and eventually, the Town paid her legal fees as well.
No Resolution has yet been found that authorizes money to be spent on legal fees when Ms. Scarpati-Reilly is the petitioner. Jason Abelove was retained as Ms. Scarpati'-Reilly's attorney in the federal lawsuit where she is and was a defendant. But Mr. Perks says the Town continued to allow her to use Mr. Abelove and paid for his services when she filed lawsuits against others, including a defamation suit against him that was dismissed by Judge Catterson. This suit was dismissed because Ms. Scarpati-Reilly, although she had started the lawsuit, failed to give DNA when it was court ordered and failed to show up for a court appearance, without any explanation, according to court papers. The Judge was not amused. At the time of the appointment of Jason Abelove, then Councilman Israel said on the record if it were determined that Ms. Scarpati-Reilly acted outside the scope of her duties and responsibilities of her position as Councilwoman, she would be liable for the legal bills incurred by the taxpayer. To date there is no record of any reimbursement by Ms. Scarpati-Reilly for the legal fees incurred by the Town.
Scene: Four
SCARPATI-REILLY DENIES AFFAIR
Ms. Scarpati-Reilly has always denied there was ever a sexual relationship with Mr. Perks. Both were married to others at the time. Mr. Perks contends it was ongoing for over a year and when he tried to end it -Ms. Scarpati-Reilly got angry and vindictive.
The police report is not for an assault as the Town Board Resolution stated, but was for harassment, according to Ms. Scarpati-Reilly's complaint. It alleged that when Ms. Scarpati –Reilly threatened to bring Mr. Perks up on charges for being out of uniform, he allegedly slapped her arm. Mr. Perks denies slapping her arm and says she hit him in the head. During the course of the investigation it was determined that according to the Town, there never was a uniform or dress code for the Mobil Oil Spill Response Unit.
Eventually, Mr. Perks filed a sexual harassment lawsuit against Ms. Scarpati-Reilly who still maintains there was no affair between her and Mr. Perks. In Federal court, a jury determined that there was sexual harassment of Mr. Perks by Ms. Scarpati-Reilly, but at the same time they found the Town of Huntington was not liable for Ms. Scarpati-Reilly’s actions and awarded no damages to Mr. Perks.
It cost Mr. Perks approximately $50,000 dollar to file a lawsuit in the Appellate Division 2nd Department. He lost.
Mr. Perks contends this whole entire million dollar fiasco was designed to "kill the messenger" about the radiated waste being burned for decades. "We have the highest Cancer rates in the nation". No one wants the ramifications of exposing that. Mr. Petrone and others knew what was happening, but chose to allow it, cover it up and destroy the messenger. The real losers here are the taxpayers and people who live in the radius of the incinerator and are sick and may not know why. That is exactly why the State Department of Environmental Conservation strictly prohibits burning of any radioactive waste, in Covanta's permit. The winners are the attorneys and law firms who have made millions on these "exaggerated and false charges", according to Mr. Perks. "Mr. Petrone has gotten tens of thousands in campaign contributions from most of the firms and individuals, hired by the Town, since the incident, including Covanta, so he has also benefited directly himself."
Mr. Perks and his family on the other hand have been physically, financially, socially and psychologically devastated for over a decade, yet he continues to fight as the investigation is still ongoing...
Intermission…
In the next Acts: THE DEVIL IS IN THE DETAILS OF:
The Depositions of the Politicians
The Fact-Finders Report
The Ethics Board Report and Depositions
The Lawyers…Law Firms...Lawsuits and Legal Fees
The Campaign Contributions
The Devastation to Mr. Perks
What Now?
No comments:
Post a Comment