Grand Jury Critical of Smithtown Officials in Demolition

Report claims local government’s practice ‘undermines the town code’

By Chad Kushins

This week, a Suffolk County Grand Jury issued its report on the 2009 demolition of a Smithtown lumberyard. The report was critical of members of Smithtown’s Town Government for their complicity in the unlawful demolition of the property. Although no legal action is expected against town officials the 40-plus-page report pulled no punches in criticizing how certain town officials participated in unlawful activities and violated Town Code.

The property in question, located at 102 West Main Street, was partially demolished and under investigation since 2009.

According to the Grand Jury, the end result of the 2009 unlawful demolition “constituted an utter disregard for the well-being of local citizens”. The report goes on to state that the commercial site was demolished with asbestos within the structure. According to the testimony of an unnamed New York State employee, the Department of Labor inspected the parcel of land following the demolition and, after testing those samples, found asbestos to be present.  Because of the significant health issues attributed to airborne asbestos there are strict rules regarding the removal of asbestos. The unlawful demolition did not adhere to accepted protocol for asbestos removal.

The Grand Jury report did not identify town officials or the land developer; instead, letters were used to identify each of the parties involved.  According to the report, the developer of the property, identified as “Developer A,” was pressured into demolishing the property and at one point received a handwritten, unsolicited tax map chart from a town official, identified in the report as “Town Employee C,” which showed a tax reduction of more than $40,000 if the land were vacant.

The report continued, after being notified of the potential $40,000 tax reduction if the demolition was done before the March assessment deadline, the developer began the demolition and was issued a Stop Work Order.  Soon after the issuance of the stop work order, in a phone conversation, “Town Official A” pressured Developer A to continue the demolition, telling him, “Yeah, what’s the big deal?  You get a summons.”

Although the report utilized letters to represent the names of the parties, local media was quick to identify certain aspects kept from the record.  In a 2009 article, The New York Times reported that the Smithtown property was owned by North Fork Management and Maintenance, headed by East Hampton resident Salvatore DiCarlo; in a recent interview with Newsday, Councilman Robert Creighton identified the lot, stated as “Commercial Parcel A” as the former site of Nassau Suffolk Lumber and Supply.

Councilman Edward Wehrheim has identified himself as “Town Employee E”, although he did not confirm the names of others in the report. 

Despite the report’s findings, of unlawful activity no indictments were issued. Instead, the Grand Jury issued 17 “recommendations” they include:

Smithtown must enact legislation establishing an independent Board of Site Plan Review to ensure “that the legal mandates of site plan review are enforced”.   Currently town board members serve in this capacity.

Smithtown must amend the town code requiring property owners adjacent to a construction or demolition project be notified to allow them to be heard.

Smithtown must amend the town’s Code of Ethics to mandate any public servant with personal knowledge of the violation of town code “has an affirmative obligation” to report it the appropriate town department.

Smithtown must adopt a statute authorizing the removal of any public servant “who engages in misconduct” consistent with the provisions of New York State’s Public Officers Law. 

Calling on town officials to refrain from interceding in commercial projects “in a manner that undermines the town code”, the Grand Jury recommended the town obtain an “independent review” by the state of the Office of Town Assessor to insure all properties are assessed “on a uniform and equitable basis” and that Smithtown “audit the practices and procedures administer by the town Assessor “particularly…the assessment of commercial properties”.         

Wehrheim commented that numerous suggestions from the report should be drafted into law, although appointing a Board of Site Plan Review could face the problem of having to pay additional employees selected for such a task.

According to the report, Developer A was fined $3,500. The report indicated that Town Employee “C” reconsidered the $40,000 reduction after the District Attorney’s office started its investigation. The property taxes were reduced by $4,000.

The Grand Jury findings come following a full investigation by Suffolk County DA Sputa, which concluded last June.  During the investigation investigators who left with boxes of official town documents raided numerous town offices, including Smithtown Town Hall. 

Until this week’s Grand Jury presentation, the nature of Spota’s investigation was unknown, 21 witnesses were called and over 1,000 documents were used as evidence.

Click Here For Grand Jury Report

NOTE: Smithtown Matters founder and editor Patricia Biancaniello, former Councilwoman for The Town of Smithtown, is identified as “H” in the Grand Jury’s report.