Southampton Town Supervisor Linda Kabot has decided not to appeal a decision by the Suffolk County Board of Elections to toss out her petition to appear on the Integrity Party ballot in this fall’s general election.
Although she initially said she planned to fight the ruling, the supervisor said Wednesday morning that she had changed her mind. What influenced her decision, Ms. Kabot said, was the town’s financial condition.
“My focus needs to be on the town right now—that’s what I was elected to do,” she said. “Politics comes with the territory, but it is not my chief focus.”
An appeal would have cost her $8,000, she said, and would not have been worth it.
The supervisor also said she didn’t want to go through the process of suing her opponent, Anna Throne-Holst, saying that spectacle was not in the best interest of the town. “We sit next to each other and have to work together,” Ms. Kabot said. “I didn’t want to put the voters through that.”
The Board of Elections sent a letter to Ms. Kabot last week informing her that her petition was invalidated. That decision came about a week after Mike Anthony, the former chairman of the Southampton Town Democratic Committee, filed a challenge to the petition, arguing that many of the signatures on it were not valid.
According to Cathy L. Richter Geier, the Board of Elections’ Republican commissioner, Ms. Kabot collected 902 signatures, more than the 859 she needed to appear on the ballot. Of those, 143 signatures were ruled invalid, leaving Ms. Kabot with only 759 valid signatures, 100 fewer than she needed.
Initially, Ms. Kabot said she planned to appeal the ruling claiming the move to keep her off the Integrity Party line was an attempt at “election-rigging” by Democratic Party bosses at the behest of Ms. Throne-Holst, Ms. Kabot’s sole challenger this fall.
“This is yet another example of dishonest political maneuvering by party operatives—this time from Anna Throne-Holst’s camp,” Ms. Kabot said.
Ms. Throne-Holst said last week she would not engage in political rhetoric over the ruling. She did say, however, that Ms. Kabot had every right to appear on the ballot if her signatures were valid ones.
“It’s about democracy. It’s about following the law,” she said. “If you have enough valid signatures then you should be on the ballot. If you don’t have the signatures then you shouldn’t be, no matter who you are. It’s just that simple.”
Ms. Kabot argued that Mr. Anthony’s objections lack substance and focused instead on “smudges on dates, squiggles in signatures and other nitpicky aspects of the filed petition.”
“I think it is pure political sabotage to attack voter signatures on nominating petitions in this manner,” she said. “Moreover, it has been my experience that there is no fair play at the Board of Elections at all.”
Mr. Anthony said he objected to signatures on the basis that the signers were not registered voters and not Southampton Town residents and he pointed out that the Board of Elections, not the Democrats, threw out Ms. Kabot’s petition. And while Ms. Geier refused to comment on Ms. Kabot’s assertion, she did say that the elections board is made up of a bipartisan panel “to be fair and equitable to all.”
For a signature to be deemed valid under Board of Elections guidelines, it must correspond with the name of a voter registered in Southampton Town who resides at the address listed on the petition. And while anyone, including those not registered with a political party, can sign the Integrity ballot, a signature becomes void if it has already appeared on a different petition.
Town Councilwoman Nancy Graboski defended Ms. Kabot and criticized the Democrats’ actions.
“The challenge undertaken by Michael Anthony at the behest of Anna Throne-Holst is against the principles of the Integrity Party, which advocates for ballot access and voter choice,” she said. “For all their constant crowing every two years about ‘one-party rule,’ the Southampton Democrats are a bunch of hypocritical, disingenuous, underhanded sneaks trying to keep another party off the ballot.”
The Integrity Party flap is the latest in a string of challenges Ms. Kabot has faced in her bid for reelection. At its convention in May, the Town Republican Party snubbed her and instead chose then Southampton Town Conservative Party Chairman Jim Malone to run for supervisor. Ms. Kabot then vowed to force what was expected to be a bitter primary, and party leaders later relented, giving her the GOP’s endorsement. Ms. Kabot also expected to get the Conservative Party nod, but its leaders opted not to endorse a candidate for supervisor.
Ms. Throne-Holst has the endorsements of the Democratic, Working Families and Independence parties.
Is this fair and balanced reporting? It does not seem to be fair at all.
I like to know where the article is about what happened at the town board meeting on August 25th regarding the health care rally on Hampton Rd.
Speakers were not ...more at all happy about how Throne-Holst and the chair of the Anti-Bias Task Force Diane Relnick acted. The Rev. Havrilla from the Full Gospel Church was called a hate-monger by Relnick, she also accused him of being from the "organized right wing" Could you believe this, right out of the mouth of the ABTF chairperson.
The Rev. Havrilal was also denied the right to speak by Throne-Holst. She told him he was free to host his own rally. This was a rally in support (of the health care proposal), so if he wanted he was welcome to speak in support. Where is the Rev. freedom of speech? The following is a quote by Throne-Holst taken from one of the several papers that did report this story. "No matter where you stand on this issue or what your party affiliation is, if we cannot have open and productive discourse on this issue we cannot call ourselves a democracy. Is this not talking out of both sides of your mouth?
In other words someone is only allowed to speak if they agree.
God Bless America because I'm starting not to recognize it.
And while she's hard-headed and tenacious, stupidity hasn't been one of her hallmarks.
And "golfbuddy," stick a sock in it!. The not-very-reverend-like Donald . Havrilla is an intolerant bully and buttinski who is the second-most shameless "media-whore" in Southampton Town after Lucius Ware!
Thank you for your question, which gives me the opportunity to clarify my article.
Yes, the Democrats did file specific objections to Ms. Kabot's petition, which led to a review of those objections by both the Democratic and Republican commissioners from the Suffolk County Board of Elections.
Friday, the BoE found that enough of the signatures collected by Ms. Kabot were invalid and the petition was thrown out. Ms. Kabot has until Tuesday to appeal the ...more BoE's decision.
Thanks again for your interest.
Thank you for the clarification, and happy that you actually read this blog.
OK, so these petitions can be appealed and during the appeal process if a higher authority says that nothing was wrong with some of them the decision can be overturned and the petitions will stand as being legal. As you see Mr. Wheeler a process has to be followed.
Could you also answer why the SH press did not cover the story about the rally on Hampton Road and the outburst at the Town ...more Board Meeting on August 25. Almost every paper in SH covered the story.
Whatever is stated here is and exercise of freedom of speech, relevant or not.
I do not know the Rev. personally and have no idea if he is a bully or not, this is about a persons right to speak, so Frank I really can't stick a sock in it. I find it very interesting how strange your comments are on some issues. LOL.
There is no doubt in my mind that there was an enormous amount of collusion ...more between the party bosses to throw this election to Anna Throne-Holst (who was heavily supported by the Integrity Party in her upset victory 2 years ago) and therefore to bypass the will of the people.
I am hopeful that the public will finally catch on to the attempts by these party bosses to "fix" the outcome of this race. If the people of the town of Southampton really believe that Anna Throne-Holst best represents their interests and reflects their ideological beliefs, let them decide and not a bunch of back room political hacks.
OK. that was my question, here is my statement: If the Integrity Party is a real party, then I'm the centerfielder for the New York Yankees.
Please advise me when or where a press conference was held where the organizer's of the press conference allowed an opponent to invade their press conference and let them speak. Did George bush let the Nancy Pelosi speak ...more at his press conferences. No. It isn't done.
Let's see what other Southampton Democrats thought the Integrity Party was real when we endorsed them: Sally Pope, Alex Gregor, Kristine Lewis, Hank Beck, Melissa Bishop, Tree Wolf West. Oh! Don't forget Marge Schab!!!!!!!!!! Not only did the Integrity Party endorse these and many others, I planted their signs when no one else would and wrote many very impassioned letters to the editor of this very paper (just ask Joe Shaw) and other weeklies. How soon you forget, right number 19? I got a lot of Republicans pretty mad.
In contrast, up until this time, I have never planted a Republican sign (I will now) and I have never written in support of a Republican candidate except as part of the Integrity Party coalition ticket.
Fact of the matter was, the Integrity Party had no intentions of being involved this year. We have supported many candidates, mostly Democrats, and as soon as the candidates get elected, they forget we ever existed. The candidates love to believe they did it on their own. That is, of course, until they have to run again. Also, when we don't do what candidates want, then we have to put up with crap like you write.
I personally spent my vacation going door to door during the hottest day of summer with my walk books in hand getting signatures. How'd you spend your summer vacation number 19? I didn't mind doing it this time because I hate those backroom deals that essentially handed the supervisor's race to ATH without a vote being cast. I would do it again and I might.
Oh! BTW, if the Integrity Party is not a real party then are you saying that we should not endorse either Sally Pope (again) or Bridget Fleming? Let me know.
Keep at it Linda !
I contacted a couple of press people: they received nothing in regard to any press kits.
Websters definition of press conference: An interview given by a public figure to the press by appointment.
Definition of Rally: To unite, to muster for common purpose, to arouse for action, to come together again to renew an effort, to join in a common cause, a meeting intended to arouse group enthusiasm.
This was a rally as stated by every ...more news person that covered the story. Even ATH called it a rally. You can try to back peddle on this point because of the bad press that some of the paper printed but, if it walks like a duck and sounds like a duck, then it's a duck.
The democrat leader referred to those not in agreement with your agenda as terrorists and disruptive activists. You tell me, who are the hate mongers?
The pictures taken on Hampton Road of protesters standing in the street and on the sidewalk were on public property. If this rally was closed to the public then it should have taken place indoors or on private property. Those that were not allowed to speak were denied freedom of expression/speech and you know it.
As far as your comment about Bush & Pelosi. Did Pelosi ever ask to speak and was denied? I do know Bush never called her a hate-monger, terrorist or accuse her of being from a left wing organization.
Take care of that arthritis.
Integrity Party Guy: If you have so much integrity, then submit candidate petitions with signatures with a little...umm... ...more Integrity.
Kathy Bradley of Remsenburg is the mother of my son's best friend since they were both 4. They went through Catholic school together until they graduated last year and both are starting college. Kathy's husband Bruce is a senior vice president of Suffolk County National Bank. The Democrats also called Katy a "fraud" for reasons I will never understand.
Carol Palmer of WHB is the former postmaster of the WHB post office. Her son Charley Palmer and her son-in-law Charley Killian both served with me as officers at the 106th Air Rescue Group in WHB. Her daughter is a former postmaster in Westhampton. Carol's brother is a Catholic priest. However, according to the Democrats, the entire Palmer-Killian family are frauds.
I just returned from the Suffolk Country Third Party Club and found out that the Libertarian Party had their entire line kicked off by Boe and called everyone who signed their petitions are frauds. I happen to know Estelle Edwards who is one of the most idealistic and sincere reformers I know. What were the Democrats afraid of? That the Libertarians might actually get a few votes?
This attempt by party bosses to manipulate the results of local elections is outrageous. The Integrity Party has no intentions of quitting our fight to "fix" elections. We will prevail because I believe the people of Southampton will finally catch on to what is really happening and demand their right to decide who their public officials are and not party bosses.
Well, IPG, even a blind pig roots up a truffle from time-to-time.
But I agree with you -- whoever you are -- about the Party bosses.
Is Bishop happy with the outcome? Is he pleased with the results that some people's rights were violated. Even Bishops spokesman made sure he told the ...more reporter that Bishop did not organize this event. This was planned by the SH Democrats, what an arrogant group they showed themselves to be.
Also, I agree with Integrity Guy the attempt by party bosses to manipulate the results of this election is disgrace and outrageous.
Have you or your kids enjoyed the benefits of a public school education? If yes, then you are a socialist. Have you ever driven on public highways? Socialist. Do you now or will you receive social security benefits? Socialism, baby. Do you now or will you participate in Medicare? Socialism at its best. Have you accepted unemployment benefits? Do you believe ...more poor children should be entitled to free school lunches? Should low income elderly folks be entitled to home energy assistance?
All socialist programs funded by taxpayer dollars and thank God they exist.
Let me help you purchase an airline ticket so that you can go live in communist country and please do drop me a note and let me know how it is.
Better not try to speak against the government. BTW I hear they have real good socialized medicine just for you, baby.
SHNative has it just right, in both comments. As she points out, this failed petition, like the financial disaster, ...more is part of the typical Linda Kabot pattern of making a mistake and then ducking responsibility for it. The real problem is what SHNative rightly calls the "millions of dollars missing in town hall." If there was ever a case for throwing the rascals out, this is it.
both you and people first are on the left and I'm on the right side of these issue so it's a moot point to keep this going.
The real story should ...more be the reported $80+ million dollar Town budget, with almost $50 million in employee costs alone. Was our budget not around $60 million this year, not counting the $10-$20 million that is "lost"....... Add it up and we could be faced with almost $100 million in costs for 2010. For what? and where will they get the $$$.
I voted for Kabot believing she would follow the Republican tradition of small government and fiscal responsibility. Boy was that a lie. Dump Taxbot.
What makes you say that there are lawyers available through the party that are free. They do not get paid from the party? Do you mean they work totally for free?
Please explain your statement.
Remember when Kabot was whining about the cost of a special election, saying it would cost tens of thousands of dollars? The B.O.E. was quoted in this paper that it would not cost anything - all part of the process.
If Kabot would take even a shred of responsibility for even some of her mistakes, I might consider voting for her again. But lie after lie, all the while blaming everyone else........... As a Republican I am unsure what to do come Election day.
I understand that lawyers volunteer time to the party to help with petition challengers but I think you are misunderstanding what the $8,000 in lawyer fees were for. This was the lawyer fee to take this process 1-2 steps further, taking it the supreme court level and have a judge make the final decision. These fees are paid for by the candidate and I don't think any lawyer would take time out of his practice to go to court etc. for free.
Are you sure you voted for Kabot, from some of ...more your past blogs you sound more like a Dem to me or someone that has an axe to grind. Just an observation.
have any doubts, they will be happy to explain the process in detail. Or, look it up online. It's a neat process, I have followed a few challenges over the years. Besides, where do you think Town Attorneys come from - the Party faithful.......
Not a Dem, no axes here - I prefer a chainsaw. I like to look @ local news ...more and make both intelligent comments and sarcastic ones. I actually do not like most Politicians - nothing personal. I do like making fun of them though.........lol
I got it, so your just an insane person, breaking chops and having a good time. OK then good job.
I just like making a point here & there about Politicos when they get caught doing stupid things. I find it funny when people write opinions & comments that others disagree with they are immediately called insane. You must be a Limbaugh fan there buddy, but then - what do I care.
The bottom line is we have out ...more of control spending here in SH Town, no-one wants to take responsibility and we the residents & taxpayers are getting screwed. If you read my posts, I do not like ATH either, but will give her 2 years, as we did with Kabot. If ATH cannot do the job, we can dump her in 2 years - no biggie.......
This year the Republicans denied her their nomination even though she was a sitting Supervisor of their own party, givng the nod instead to Conservative Party chairman ...more Jim Malone. Then, when Linda got enough signatures to force another primary and probably beat Malone, the bosses backed down and gave her their blessing, demoting Malone to a Town Board candidate. The understanding was that Linda would also get the Conservative Party line, but they double-crossed her when the Conservatives announced that they would endorse no one for Supervisor.
Democratic Party chairman Gordon Herr nailed it when he said the Republicans want to get rid of Kabot, and declared that they can live more easily for two years with Democratic candidate Anna Throne-Holst as Supervisor, as long as they keep a Town Board majority to render her ineffective. (See 27east article, "Independence Party endorsements cause rift", 7/23/09.) There are good reasons involving government failures not to vote for Linda Kabot, but for the Southampton Republicans, it's all about power, not good government.
So now voters who can't overlook the DWI charge or the Kabot failures are left with only two Republican-line balllot choices: Jim Malone, leader of the double-crossing Conservative Party, and Chris Nuzzi, who has done nothing in four long years on the Town Board except faithfully mouth the prepared GOP script. Not a pretty picture, but folks who can overcome their reluctance to vote Democratic across the board can go for Throne-Holst, Pope and Fleming, a unified team with an agreed action plan. Any other choice just about guarantees government gridlock, which is the last thing Southampton needs now.
BTW, MaryMac, judging by her comments, seems to be caught between Attila the Hun and the LOSER for Supervisor. Hard stuff.
Just to answer a few questions we've gotten:
No, we're not allowing comments on the story about Ms. Kabot's arrest on a DWI charge. Our policy is generally not to allow comments on stories involving criminal charges--a few have slipped through the cracks in the past, but when we realized it we pulled the commenting off those stories. I think it's only fair to maintain the policy for the town supervisor.
We're monitoring comments here as well...if they cross ...more the line, we're taking them down. Please try to keep the comments reasonable.
If you take another look at that story, you'll see that the comments were removed and commenting was disabled.
Brendan O'Reilly
Web Editor
Who was the arresting officer for the DWI? Was Ms. Kabot "set up" by someone phoning in from whatever cocktail party she was at? The police, whose generous pensions and lack of elected oversight make them a dangerous presence, certainly have reason to "do a favor" for politicians peeved by their protege's potential predicament .
I will acknowledge fully that we're still struggling with how to manage commenting on certain stories. And I'm willing to say that our policies, as a result, can be a little inconsistent from time to time.
I think the criticism we're getting for not allowing comments on our lead story this week is fair. To be clear, I decided not to accept comments on that story, because it involves a pending criminal ...more case. But in other situations, as noted, we have allowed comments on some stories. I understand that people will see political motive in that, even though there was none--everyone is entitled to an opinion on that count. All I can say, it's related more to the difficulties inherent in allowing comments in the first place.
I think it's a great feature of 27east.com, and obviously so do a lot of people, since there are so many terrific and loyal commenters. It adds a level of interaction we've never had before--witness this note, which allows me to speak directly to you. But it's also worrisome.
We've had situations where criminal charges were filed against someone, and the comments tend toward the "he's guilty" or "fry him" variety. We get ugly sentiments about race and ethnicity. We get more information than we want--in one instance, a pre-teen who was arrested for public intoxication was outed, by name, in a comment online. That's just completely inappropriate.
Federal law says that we, as a newspaper, have no responsibility for things posted on the website by a third party--we cannot be sued for libel, for instance, simply for offering space to allow comments. But from the start we wanted 27east.com to accept some responsibility, and to try to foster a responsible discussion of the issues, and not allow it to deteriorate into the worst kind of ugliness that reigns on some sites. That's why we occasionally take down comments, or limit commenting, etc. It's an imperfect science.
We're having internal discussions right now about this issue. You've all made great points, and we're hearing them.
In the paper to be published tonight/tomorrow, you'll find an updated story on Town Supervisor Linda Kabot's arrest for DWI, which includes some info that doesn't appear online right now. Pick up a copy of the paper, or wait till the updated story is posted online Thursday morning, after the print edition is distributed. At the moment, we're tenatively going to allow comment on the story at that time, because the subject is a public figure, and it seems only fair to allow constituents to react.
But at the same time, we will reserve the right to delete comments that we deem inappropriate. Those are comments that unfairly convict someone who is only accused of a crime, crude comments, etc.
Bear with us--we appreciate the organic nature of online commenting and are trying to find a happy medium.
neither Brautigam or the E Hampton pols who are in legal trouble advertise in the Press. The comment section on the E Hampton Pols is still running, as are comments
about others. You should know better than most that if they piss off Kabot they will
not get access/interviews etc. etc.
The harshest & worst comments I have read are always in articles about hiring halls and illegal immigrants. ...more Will they not allow comments on those in the future too?
We will continue to take down comments that are inappropriate...