As a community newspaper, we find ourselves tossing around the phrase “NIMBY” — standing for “not in my backyard” — from time to time. But it’s usually more of an expression, and a negative one, than a literal translation of residents resisting something from going into their actual backyards.
But in the case of drones, NIMBY could not be taken more literally.
Call them drones, call them unmanned aircraft systems — either way, the public perception of these flying devices is still developing as they buzz around the skies.
Huntington Town attempted this week to ground concerns over these drones when it introduced a resolution that would regulate their use for the betterment of public health, privacy and safety “so that operation of same is respectful of community standards [and] the concerns of residents, as well as protect property and privacy rights,” the resolution said.
Huntington wasn’t alone in its efforts to come out a step ahead of drone regulation, either. U.S. Sen. Chuck Schumer and several other elected leaders have been banging the drone drum for months now, calling on the Federal Aviation Administration to require drones to fly below 500 feet and limit where they can fly.
While we understand the legislative urge to keep an eye on the sky for the sake of public privacy and safety, we hope our public leaders don’t turn the drone debate into a droning drain on resources.
There are several things to consider when it comes to drawing the legislative line for drones. At what point would new laws encroach upon our personal freedoms? Whose job is it to regulate them? Does the regulator depend on how high the drone flies or what jurisdiction is underneath it? Should regulations vary based upon the type of drone?
Moving forward, our local municipalities should not jump the gun. Officials should properly investigate all the nuts and bolts of the drone industry and be careful when determining where governments should step in.
Flying a drone is not like flying a kite, and we, like many of our neighbors, are concerned about personal privacy and public safety. All we ask is that our elected officials consider the whole subject carefully before inking laws.
A deli on the Platt’s Tavern site would be demolished under Dominick Mavellia’s zone change application to construct a medical office building. Photo by Victoria Espinoza
Residents offered mixed opinions this week at a town board public hearing on a plan to rezone a historic Huntington village property that once hosted George Washington for dinner in 1790.
Developer Dominick Mavellia wants to change the zoning of a parcel on the corner of Route 25A and Park Avenue from R-15 Residence District to C-1 Office Residence District to make way for a 10,000 square-foot medical office building. Of that space, GoHealth Urgent Care would occupy 3,000 square feet, and 7,000 square feet would be regular medical office space for North Shore-LIJ Health System.
The project is located in the Old Town Green National Historic District and the Old Huntington Green Town Historic District and was the site of the former Platt’s Tavern, one of the first buildings in the area. According to town documents, Washington dined at the establishment on April 23, 1790, during a tour of Long Island.
At the time, Huntington’s population was around 2,000.
If approved, the new development would replace an abandoned gasoline service station/automotive repair shop, a deli and a vehicle storage yard. The demolition of the existing buildings and the construction of any new buildings would have to undergo architectural review and be approved by the Historic Preservation Commission, according to a town document.
The access to and from Park Avenue would be restricted to allow only right turns in and out of the property.
Also, East Main Street would be restriped in order to provide a left-turn lane for westbound vehicles looking to enter the site, and Park Avenue would be widened to provide a right-turn lane for northbound traffic looking to head east on East Main Street.
It is said George Washington dined at Platt’s Tavern, located at the corner of Park Avenue at Route 25A in Huntington. Photo by Victoria Espinoza
Part of the plan would also include situating a life-sized statue of George Washington beside his horse on the property.
An earlier iteration sought a zone change to C-4 Neighborhood Business District, which would allow for retail use, but the applicant amended his request for the zone change on the spot at Tuesday night’s town board meeting. The change came after consulting with “various members of the community,” according to a representative of the developer.
“Determining the fate of this exceptional corner and gateway to our great town is vital,” Mavellia, a lifelong Huntington resident, said at the meeting. “We heard everyone’s concerns loud and clear, hence the change in application to C-1.”
Mavallia also said he’s brought on a historical architect to work closely with town historians “to address their concerns and ideas.”
The main issue seemed to surround the proposed design of the structure, of which many individuals, including town board members Susan Berland (D) and Mark Cuthbertson (D), said didn’t look historic enough.
Cuthbertson said he took issue with the proposed awnings. “I’m hoping there’s room for discussion,” he said.
Berland said, “To me it looks like a CVS.”
Supervisor Frank Petrone (D) asked the developer’s representative if he would be consulting with the community on the design of the project, to which the representative replied he would.
Paul Warburgh, president of the Old Huntington Green Inc., said he was pleased the applicant decided to go with the C-1 zone change request, which is more in keeping with the character of the area and neighboring buildings.
“We’re here to work with the developer to put something there that will honor the Huntington Green and the historic area,” he said.
While some seemed heartened by the amended zone change request, others wanted to see the town take action and do something unique with the property, like rebuild Platt’s Tavern. Some said they were concerned the project would create even greater traffic issues. One individual wanted the scale of the building reduced, while some speakers — who were friends of Mavellia — supported the developer and spoke highly of his character.
The zone change was a big move for some who originally opposed the project, Petrone said in an interview after the meeting.
“That basically was a real change in terms of going to C-1, which was the biggest contention of our historic community especially,” he said. “And that has provided I think an opportunity now. They want to work together. So I’m hopeful that they’ll be able to come up with something that everyone will be proud of.”
Due to the amended zone change, the public record for the hearing will be held open for 10 days. Those interested may continue to submit written comments to Town Clerk Jo-Ann Raia (R).
Huntington officials have their eyes on the skies.
The Huntington Town Board voted to schedule a public hearing that would regulate the recreational use of unmanned aircraft systems “so that operation of same is respectful of community standards, the concerns of residents as well as protect property and privacy rights,” according to the resolution authorizing the hearing.
Huntington Town Councilman Mark Cuthbertson (D), who sponsored the measure, said he was inspired to do so in part by an experience he had shooting a promotional town video outside.
“And lo and behold up above, a drone,” he said.
Cuthbertson said he couldn’t tell who was operating the device.
“It all could be for very benevolent purposes, taking pictures of the boats on the water, but it could be something more nefarious,” Cuthbertson said. “You don’t know. So I think we need to at least start a discussion of how these things are used and what they’re used for.”
The proposed law defines an unmanned aircraft, also known as a drone or a model aircraft, as “a non-human carrying aircraft weighing no more than 55 pounds, capable of sustained flight in the atmosphere intended exclusively for sport, recreation, education and/or competition and is typically guided by remote control or onboard computers.” Restrictions would apply to all properties in the unincorporated parts of town — residential, commercial and otherwise.
Under the new rules, if approved, no one would be allowed to use the aerial devices to collect images or information on individuals, homes, business or property at locations where there is “a reasonable expectation of privacy.” That conduct would be prohibited unless permission is obtained from the individual property owner or manager.
It would also be illegal to pilot an unmanned aircraft on private property or town property without the owner or the town’s consent; pilot an unmanned aircraft that interferes with manned aircraft; or pilot an unmanned craft outside the operator’s visual line of sight.
The new rules would prohibit piloting an unmanned aircraft higher than 400 feet from the ground, near or over unprotected persons or moving vehicles at a height less than 25 feet from same; operate the devices under the influence of drugs and/or alcohol; use the devices in adverse weather such as high winds or reduced visibility; or pilot an unmanned aircraft near or over sensitive infrastructure or property like power stations, sewage treatment facilities and heavily traveled roadways in Huntington Town.
Those who violate the proposed law could be punished via a fine not exceeding $1,000 or imprisonment for up to 15 days.
The board voted to schedule the public at its meeting on Tuesday. Councilwoman Susan Berland (D) was the only one who voted against the measure.
“I think it’s premature, at best,” she said, noting that she had questions about how this law would be enforced and whether it would interfere with the Federal Aviation Administration or other jurisdictions looking into the matter.
In an interview after the meeting, Supervisor Frank Petrone (D), who seconded Cuthbertson’s resolution, said it was worth it to start the conversation with a public hearing.
“It’s a problem,” he said. “Bring it up, let’s air it.”
Earlier this year, U.S. Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) called on the FAA to employ sweeping drone regulations, including limits on how high the devices could fly and where or when they can be used. He and several other lawmakers zeroed in on drone regulations after an incident in which a drone operator flew an aircraft onto the White House property in Washington, D.C.
The FAA released several proposals for the usage of drones, requiring them to fly below 500 feet, away from airports and other secure airspaces and more, which Schumer applauded as a step in the right direction.
“Overall, the American public is a lot better off today with the FAA’s proposed drone regulations than we were yesterday, particularly related to the safety of our air travelers,” he said in a statement in February. “However, I will continue to work with the FAA to expand eligible commercial uses for drones and further protect privacy and safety.
The town board public hearing will take place on July 14 at 2 p.m.
Residents turn out for and against a plan to build a 69-unit assisted living facility in Huntington. Photo by Rohma Abbas
Plans to build a 69-unit assisted living facility in a residential, wooded Huntington neighborhood were largely met with heavy censure by neighboring residents at a town board public hearing on Tuesday night.
The room was filled to the max with individuals holding up signs for and against the proposal, and jeering and applause often punctuated speakers’ statements. Out of the nearly 35 individuals who spoke, most residents opposed Massachusetts-based Benchmark Senior Living’s plans to build the facility at the corner of East Main Street and Washington Drive, calling the proposal too dense for the area and criticizing the traffic, noise and sewage treatment aspects of the project. The residents called on the town board to reject the company’s proposal to rezone the six-acre land, which has both C-3 Special Business and R-10 Residential zoning, to R-HS Residential Health Services District, a designation that would make way for the facility.
The project has gone through several versions. The proposed number of units has been brought down from 87 to 69 units, and the proposed on-site sewage treatment plant has been moved to the northwest corner of the lot, adjacent to commercial property. A 40-foot-wide natural buffer along Old Northport Road will be built, and the gross floor area would be slightly reduced from 70,567 square feet to 66,995.
Representatives for the developer said at the meeting that the project would meet the needs of a growing senior population in Suffolk County and especially in Huntington Town. But many residents expressed frustration over the zone change request, urging the board to keep the zoning of the current land intact.
Some support Benchmark Senior Living’s request to rezone property to make way for a 69-unit assisted living facility in Huntington. Photo by Rohma Abbas
“Shoehorning a large-scale facility into this spot that would house 100 to 150 people including the staff is so far from the original zoning plan that it renders zoning laws absurd,” Jane Carter, a Cobb Court resident said. “Why do we have zoning laws in the first place? They’re there to protect us.”
Meanwhile, the plan got some support by fewer than a handful of residents, including the construction industry. The developer’s team of representatives argued the proposal is a good use for the site and for the town. John Dragat, senior vice president of development at Benchmark, said the plan destroys fewer trees than previous plans for the site, which included eight homes and an office building. Benchmark’s proposal covers less of the lot and, square-footage wise, isn’t much greater than the plan for the homes, Dragat added.
“In fact, we believe it’s a very responsible proposal,” he said. “It’s respectful of the surrounding community.”
Still, residents were not sold. Astrid Ludwicki, an Old Northport Road resident, said the project was too dense and called it a “monstrosity.”
“This building is too large,” she said. “It’s for Benchmark’s profits, clear and simple.”
Petitions opposing the project have been submitted to the town. Town Clerk Jo-Ann Raia (R) said if they’re valid, it could mean the board would need a supermajority vote — four out of five — to approve the zone change, versus a simple majority of three.
After the meeting, Supervisor Frank Petrone (D) said in an interview that the town’s planning staff would review the proposal. Asked for his sense of how the community feels about the project, he said “they’re against it.” The supervisor also said he agreed with the applicant’s claim that this type of facility is needed.
“I think there is a need,” he said. “I think everybody will say there’s a need. Now depending on if it’s in the right spot, we have to analyze that.”
Officials commend Smithtown on Friday for adopting the new geothermal code. From left to right, Michael Kaufman of Suffolk County Planning Commission; David Calone, chair of the county’s Planning Commission; Smithtown Supervisor Pat Vecchio; Michael Voltz, director of energy efficiency and renewable energy at PSEG Long Island; and John Franceschina of the Long Island Geothermal Energy Organization. Photo by Victoria Espinoza
A new Smithtown code has already translated into some cash.
PSEG Long Island presented Smithtown Supervisor Pat Vecchio (R) with a $10,000 check last Friday for adopting a new model geothermal code.
The utility provided an incentive program for any Long Island township that embraced the new geothermal codes, which utilize the constant, belowground temperature to heat and cool buildings, and help homes save both energy and money. PSEG Long Island committed to provide implementation assistance of $10,000 to each township and $5,000 to the first 10 villages with a population greater than 5,000 in Suffolk and Nassau counties that adopted the model geothermal code by May 31.
This particular new geothermal code helps municipal and private industry installers streamline the evaluation and installation process of the geothermal system in Suffolk County and ensures high quality installations to protect the county’s groundwater.
Vecchio said he was proud that Smithtown was the first town to adopt the code.
“I believe it’ll be a wave of the future; we want to be the first ones to allow this new energy to come in,” he said.
When PSEG Long Island and the Long Island Geothermal Energy Organization unveiled the new energy code back in November, Suffolk County Executive Steve Bellone (D) stood with the organizations, urging towns to consider the adoption.
Smithtown’s Town Board voted in March to make Smithtown the first town in Suffolk County to adopt the new alternative energy geothermal code for residential and commercial properties.
This is not the first time Smithtown has been one of the firsts to adopt alternative energy codes, signing onto a model code crafted at the Suffolk County Planning Commission for solar energy. The model code helps municipalities evaluate proposed solar energy systems for both commercial and residential properties.
Back in March when Smithtown adopted the code, Michael Kaufman, of the county Planning Commission helped draft the model code and said he believed that Smithtown residents needed to act locally by going green as much as possible because of the energy crisis on Long Island, with Long Island having some of the highest electrical rates in the nation.
“There is an energy crisis on Long Island,” Kaufman said at a previous town meeting. “We have some of the highest electric rates in the entire nation. Fossil fuel energy has high costs and we have severe environmental costs when fossil fuels are used. Town of Smithtown residents need to think globally and act locally by going green as much as possible.”
An x-ray device is used at a press conference to show how inspectors will monitor potentially harmful toxins in children’s products across Long Island retail stores. File photo by Barbara Donlon
Suffolk County is not playing games when it comes to toxic toys.
Legislator Kara Hahn (D-Setauket) saw one of her latest proposals receive unanimous approval last week when the Suffolk County Legislature approved measures that would ban the sale of any toys containing potentially dangerous toxins. The Toxin Free Toys Act zeroes in on six toxins most commonly found in toys marketed to children and will forever ban them once the legislation gets County Executive Steve Bellone’s signature.
Hahn said the initiative came as a response to a recent report issued by the New York League of Conservation Voters and Clean and Healthy New York that found several children’s products containing carcinogenic components on the shelves of Long Island stores. Most specifically, the legislation targeted dangerous materials that are linked to cancer, cognitive impairments, hyperactivity and genetic disorders in children, Hahn said.
“As a mother, I am outraged that children’s toys contain these toxic chemicals that can cause cancer, learning and developmental disabilities and respiratory, cardiovascular and gastrointestinal disorders,” Hahn said. “By passing this law today, we are acting proactively to protect our children’s health.”
Under the proposal, new children’s products sold in Suffolk County would need to contain less than specified limits in parts per million of the six following components: antimony, arsenic, cadmium, cobalt, lead and mercury. The legislation pegged the county’s Department of Health Services to head up the operation by notifying retailers by the beginning of 2016 that inspectors would be conducting random checks for toys and other children’s products containing toxic content using an x-ray fluorescence analyzer.
Clean and Healthy New York released the “Toxic Toys on Long Island” report back in December, which surveyed various retail spots like Target, Party City, Walmart, The Children’s Place, Macy’s, Ocean State Job Lot and Dollar Tree to find that some products contained potentially harmful materials. The report found more than 4,600 children’s products and toys contained at least one of 49 hazardous chemicals.
Kathleen A. Curtis, executive director of Clean and Healthy New York, was one of several health and safety advocates to applaud the proposal as an appropriate response to December’s report.
“In the absence of a strong state or federal law to regulate toxic chemicals in children’s products, it is both laudable and appropriate for Suffolk County to take action to protect its most precious and vulnerable residents,” she said. “Hopefully, this action will create a tipping point for New York State to follow suit. Otherwise, more localities will step up and follow Suffolk’s lead.”
Marcia Bystryn, president of the New York League of Conservation Voters, has also been at the forefront of the statewide push to limit the kinds of toxins children could be exposed to through their toys. While the state still waits for its own comprehensive response to toxic toy legislation, Bystryn applauded Suffolk for taking the lead.
“Toxic chemicals have no place in children’s toys, and they should not be on store shelves for sale,” Bystryn said. “I applaud bill sponsor Kara Hahn and the Suffolk County Legislature for sending a clear message to parents that they deserve the right to know what dangers are lurking in the products they bring home.”
It was mostly incumbents versus challengers during a debate between candidates for the Port Jefferson Village Board of Trustees on Wednesday night, with the two groups standing apart on issues such as the village’s comprehensive plan, taxes and the local power plant.
The event, run by the chamber of commerce, featured all of the board candidates: Mayor Margot Garant is running for her fourth term against businessman Dave Forgione; and Trustee Larry LaPointe is running for his third term against resident challengers Matthew Franco and Stan Loucks.
Two trustee seats are up for election — LaPointe’s and that of Trustee Adrienne Kessel, who is not seeking re-election — so the two candidates with the most votes will win slots on the board.
Longtime village Judge Peter Graham, who is unopposed for re-election, was also present.
At the Village Center debate, the five candidates sparred on the topic of the aging Port Jefferson power plant, which could need to be upgraded — or repowered — soon if locals want to keep it as a key source of property tax revenue for the village. Locals have feared the plant will not be repowered for several years, and village officials have been lobbying to save it.
Franco said the village is in a “wait-and-see pattern” on those efforts, but needs to be more proactive by finding places to cut the budget and thus lower taxes. Forgione also pointed to reducing taxes as a solution, saying that year-to-year village tax increases are too high.
On the other side of the argument were incumbents Garant and LaPointe. The trustee said he “resents the implication” that the village board has been just sitting and waiting, as members have been visiting Albany to lobby for repowering and bring parties to the table to negotiate as much as possible. Garant added that to help prepare residents for a potential loss of tax revenue from the plant, the board has been putting money aside each year and working to resolve tax grievances in order to stabilize the tax roll.
Loucks, who fell on different sides of different issues throughout the night, said the village must continue pressuring state officials to push for repowering.
On the topic of the draft comprehensive plan, which includes recommendations for development throughout the village, candidates were asked if they support the document as it reaches its final stages of review.
Garant, LaPointe and Loucks spoke in favor of the plan, with the incumbents saying it will work to improve the commercial areas uptown and downtown in particular.
“We have the problems of a small city,” LaPointe said that night, imploring the audience not to fear change. “I want the blight gone.”
Forgione and Franco argued the village should modify the plan based upon recommendations that the Suffolk County Planning Commission listed in its letter approving the plan.
In the fight for mayor, the candidates closed with Forgione saying he would strive to get more community input.
“I will do more than run this village,” he said. “I will serve this village.”
Garant called on the audience to return her as the village leader.
“This is a very critical time,” she said. “I am your mayor.”
Councilman Neil Foley, left, and Supervisor Ed Romaine stand by the jetty where a Selden man allegedly crashed his boat and then fled the scene. Photo by Alex Petroski
By Alex Petroski
Town and county officials aren’t taking boating safety lightly, and are urging residents to take precautions while out on the water this summer.
Boating safety was the topic of discussion at a press conference held at the Sandspit Marina in Patchogue Thursday, following a hit-and-run incident on May 24. Mark Tricarico, 31, of Selden, was arrested and charged with leaving the scene of a boating accident involving injury, according to a Suffolk County Police department press release.
Tricarico allegedly crashed a 23-foot boat into the west jetty at the entrance of the Patchogue River on the night of the 24th. One passenger was treated for minor injuries. Tricarico could not be reached for comment.
“If everyone follows safe boating procedures, most accidents can be prevented,” Brookhaven Town Supervisor Ed Romaine (R) said on Thursday, just yards away from the site of the incident.
June and July are typically the busiest boating months of the year on Long Island, and Romaine along with Suffolk County Police Marine Bureau Deputy Inspector Ed Vitale urged boaters to be aware of boating laws in the hopes of avoiding a repeat of the events of May 24.
From left, Assistant Deputy County Executive Tim Sini; Police Marine Bureau Deputy Inspector Ed Vitale; Brookhaven Supervisor Ed Romaine; and Brookhaven Councilman Neil Foley at a press conference on boating safety. Photo by Alex Petroski
Romaine and Vitale also reiterated some general boating safety precautions, like avoiding alcohol while operating a boat, being aware of weather forecasts and following paths set by buoys.
“Stay in the navigable channels,” Romaine said. “Understand what the buoys are for.”
Operating boats while intoxicated was a point everyone touched on.
“You don’t see it that often until you see a boat up on the rocks,” Jesse Mentzel, a bay constable, said in a one on one interview. “It happens, and they could hit another boat just as easily.”
Assistant Deputy County Executive Tim Sini attended the press conference on behalf of Suffolk County Executive Steve Bellone (D).
“We want to make one thing clear—boating while intoxicated will not be tolerated in Suffolk County,” Sini said.
Sini added that there would be checkpoints and patrols to monitor the waterways and ensure that everyone remains safe this summer.
Some additional safety precautions suggested by Romaine and Vitale included a boating course approved by the U.S. Coast Guard as well as a swiming and first-aid course, operating at safe speeds, and designating an assistant skipper in case you are injured or otherwise unable to assume command of the vessel.
“The water can be a very hostile environment,” Vitale said. “It’s a beautiful looking place and it is truly, but it can be very hostile to people. You have to pay attention. You have to be aware of the weather. You have to be aware of the currents. This is something that every now and then people get out on the water and they just don’t get it.”
Town board to host public hearings on new proposals
The town board will consider a ban on e-cigarettes at town beaches and playgrounds. File photo by Nick Scarpa
Huntington Town residents next week will be able to weigh in on a proposal to ban e-cigarettes from town beaches and on another measure that would expedite cleanup of graffiti-ridden properties in the town.
The proposals will be the subject of two separate public hearings on June 9 at 7 p.m at Town Hall.
Councilman Mark Cuthbertson (D) has introduced the new legislation to ban e-cigarettes from town beaches and playgrounds. Councilwoman Susan Berland (D) hopes to improve on old legislation to speed up the process of graffiti removal from both residential and commercial properties.
Berland’s proposal enhances existing graffiti cleanup laws. Under the new provisions, residents of Huntington would have 10 days after they receive a summons from the town to remove the graffiti from their property, according to Berland. After the 10 days expire, the town can send Huntington Town General Services Department employees in to remove the graffiti. The resident will then be charged with the cleanup fee and a $250 administrative fee.
If the owner fails to pay the cleanup bill within 30 days, the property will be added to a graffiti blight inventory, which will cost homeowners $2,500 and owners of commercial properties $5,000. Owners who fail to pay the bill will have the bill become a lien on their property.
The time frame is even shorter for graffiti that contains hate speech. The owner has a total of three days to remove it after getting a notice of violation before the town takes action.
“I think it’s important to protect our neighborhood from unwanted graffiti,” Berland said in a phone interview.
Berland has worked with graffiti cleanup for years and is now trying to create legislation that amends the town code so that the cleanups are routine.
Cuthbertson has introduced legislation to add electronic cigarettes to the list of products banned from town beaches and playgrounds. This list already includes tobacco and herbal cigarettes, pipes and cigars.
In 2010 a county law restricted the sale of e-cigarettes to those old enough to buy tobacco. Suffolk County Legislator William “Doc” Spencer (D-Centerport) sponsored legislation to ban vaping, or the act of smoking an e-cigarette, at county parks and benches in late 2012.
Many residents in Huntington approached Cuthbertson asking for legislation to end vaping on public grounds, since they have concerns with being exposed to secondhand smoke. However, this new law, if adopted, would not include private property, as well as the parking lots at beaches. New no-smoking signs would go up at each public beach and playground.
In an email through his legislative aide, Cuthbertson said he believes this legislation is important on a public health level.
“The extensive amount of medical research and published studies support our desire to protect the health and welfare of those at our town beaches from secondhand smoke,” the councilman said.
The political season is swinging into high gear in Huntington.
Last week, town Democrats and Republicans tapped their picks for two open seats on the town board. The Huntington Town Democrat Committee nominated incumbent Huntington Town Councilwoman Susan Berland (D) and town Deputy Director of General Services Keith Barrett for the spots, according to Mary Collins, chairwoman of the committee. The committee also nominated incumbents Ester Bivona for town receiver of taxes and Marian Tinari for district court judge.
The Democratic nominations took place last Wednesday, Collins said.
“We think they’re the best people we have,” Collins said. “They’ve shown an interest in good government and getting things done.”
The Huntington Town Republican Committee unanimously picked incumbent Councilman Gene Cook (I) and Northport-East Northport school board member Jennifer Thompson, according to Chairwoman Toni Tepe. The nominations took place last Friday.
“The screening committee recommended [them] to the full committee because they feel that Gene has been a stalwart supporter of the people and that he always has the interest of the people at heart,” Tepe said in a phone interview this week. “And Jennifer Thompson came in, screened very nicely, [was a] very personable, knowledgeable individual and would be an asset on the town board.”
Republicans also nominated Tom McNally, a Huntington Station-based attorney and a Republican committee member, for the Suffolk County Legislature 16th District seat, held by Democratic incumbent Steve Stern. The party also chose Jennifer Heller-Smitelli, a civil litigator from Huntington, to run for the 17th Legislative District seat, held by Democratic incumbent Lou D’Amaro.
At this point, the candidates need to collect signatures to get on the ballot. And it looks like there might be a contest for getting on the ballot — at least over on the Democratic side — with former Highway Superintendent William Naughton announcing this week that he wants to run for town board. In addition, newcomer Drew Merola, a business account manager at Verizon is vying for a seat.
Asked for her thoughts on primary elections, Collins said they could be good or bad.
“Sometimes they help solidify the party,” she said. “Sometimes they can cause rifts. It all depends on how people conduct themselves while the primary process is going on.”
Berland and Barrett, when reached this week, said they were excited to get the Democratic committee’s nomination. Cook and Thompson didn’t immediately return a call for comment on Wednesday morning, but Cook stated in a previous interview he’s running for a second four-year term because he’s taken issue with the way the Democratic majority has spent money.
Tepe and Barrett agreed that this year’s election would be about transparency and ethics.
“And also to maintain a community that is in the liking of people who live here,” Tepe said.
Prev
