|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
Hearing
Aids? No Clarity in Correspondence by Counsel by Jay Beatty |
|
May 3, 2007 SMITHTOWN,
NY -- While Councilwoman Joanne Gray is looking to put what her
attorney termed a “frivolous” complaint behind her, the outside
counsel hired for the Smithtown Board of Ethics began his letter to her in
the past tense. “This firm
has been retained to represented [sic] the Town of Smithtown Board of
Ethics regarding a complaint that has been made against you,” wrote
lawyer Thomas McKevitt of Sahn Ward & Baker PLLC, in a letter dated
April 20, 2007. SuffolkJournal.com
has obtained, in addition to two complaint letters written by Councilman
Edward Wehrheim against his colleague, copies of recent letters from both
sides in the dispute that arose over letters sent to town residents on the
waiting list for boating slips. After
a prolonged lawsuit by the State of New York resulted ultimately in the
eviction of the Kings Park and Nissequogue Yacht Clubs from State
property, Gray sent a letter to interested boaters informing them of the
impending lottery being held by the State on November 30, 2006 for the
slips previously controlled by the clubs. Additional
materials included in the mailing from Gray — specifically a
refrigerator calendar magnet and a copy of a May 18, 2006 Smithtown
Messenger news article regarding the yacht club dispute —
were the subject of criticism by Gray’s political opponents. Gray had
long been a critic of the yacht clubs for what she — and the State, for
that matter — considered squatting on State property. Bickering
over the mailing resulted in Councilman Edward Wehrheim complaining in
writing to the Ethics Board in two separate letters on November 15 and 28,
2006. In the first letter he
requested “a full review of this matter for any improprieties.” Although
the refrigerator magnet (enclosed in some, but not all of the letters,
according to Gray) listed eighteen telephone numbers for various emergency
services and town departments, along with the voice and fax numbers for
the Town Council office, Wehrheim objected to the inclusion of Gray’s
photo and personal AOL email address.
The implication was that campaign materials were being mailed to
town residents with town postage. It
took another two months for the furor to result in a January 9, 2007 Town
Board resolution authorizing the Town Attorney to retain the services of
Sahn Ward & Baker as legal counsel to the Board of Ethics.
Town Attorney Yvonne Leiffrig, normally charged with the duty of
acting as counsel to the Ethics Board, cited a “conflict” in
recommending the hiring of outside counsel. It
took another three months before the outside counsel produced a two-page
letter to Gray intended as notice of a hearing on the complaint by the
Board of Ethics scheduled for May 3, 2007. Interestingly,
counsel’s letter does not correctly identify the sole complainant. “A
complaint has been made against you by Thomas Wertheim” writes a
confused McKevitt, presumably meaning to identify Councilman Wehrheim,
since the paragraph goes on to quote Wehrheim’s complaint letter
describing refrigerator magnets “as election campaign gadgets.” The
remainder of McKevitt’s letter is mainly a boilerplate recitation of the
Town Code, noting that the “purpose of the hearing is to determine
whether there has been a violation of section 30-4 of the Code of the Town
of Smithtown.” Despite
the formal tone of McKevitt’s letter, an April 27, 2007 letter from
Gray’s attorney —who happens to be her husband Lawrence Gray, an
experienced lawyer and former NYS Assistant Attorney General— to Sahn
Ward & Baker, PLLC, dismisses the Wehrheim complaint as
“frivolous” and “as factually contrived as it is asinine.”
Accordingly, the response notes that Sahn Ward & Baker are
“hereby notified that I have advised the Councilwoman not to in any way
participate in a farce orchestrated by Smithtown Supervisor Patrick
Vecchio, Councilwoman Patricia Biancaniello and Councilman Thomas McCarthy
and their complicit Town Attorney….” A
review of the Town Code shows that the burden of proof of a violation of
the Ethics provisions lies with the accuser. “The best way to dignify
nonsense is to respond to it at any length,” wrote Lawrence Gray to
McKevitt’s firm. “Therefore, you have this terse response for the record.” As to the scheduled May 3 hearing, it is unclear who will participate. -30- Click
here to add comments or request info
|
