WELCOME GUEST  |  LOG IN
east hampton indoor tennis, lessons, club, training
27east.com

Story - News

Jun 22, 2010 7:37 PMPublication: The East Hampton Press

No jail time, fine for Hults after guilty plea; grand jury does not indict McGintee

Editor's Note: Click here to read the special grand jury report on East Hampton Town's financial situation.
Jun 22, 2010 7:37 PM

Former East Hampton Town Budget Officer Ted Hults pleaded guilty on Monday in a Riverhead courtroom to two misdemeanor counts of securities fraud and official misconduct. In exchange for the plea, Mr. Hults will not receive a jail sentence or pay a fine. He was ordered to pay a $200 discharge fee to the court.

The two charges to which he pleaded guilty were among 14 misdemeanors and felonies handed down by a specially empaneled grand jury on Thursday, June 17, after a long investigation into East Hampton Town’s finances. The other counts against him will be dropped as long as Mr. Hults stays out of legal trouble.

Former Supervisor William McGintee, who resigned from office last fall amid the unraveling financial mess, four months before his third term ended, will not face any charges.

“You’re not the sort of person that usually stands before me,” Supreme Court Justice William Condon said to Mr. Hults in the courtroom. Mr. Hults, standing with his attorney, Sylvia Serpe, said nothing other than a simple “yes” when asked if he had committed the offenses to which he was pleading guilty. “I don’t think you’ll be before me again. I don’t think you’re a bad person,” Justice Condon said. “Some of this incompetence is nothing short of stunning, but I don’t think you meant to hurt anybody.”

In his plea, Mr. Hults admitted to having transferred some $8 million from the town’s Community Preservation Fund into other town accounts, beginning in August 2007, to cover cash shortages and mask the extent of the town’s deepening deficit, despite having been told by former East Hampton Town Attorney Laura Molinari that doing so was illegal. He also admitted to having submitted statements about the town’s finances to bond agencies that were false.

According to Christopher McPartland, head of Suffolk District Attorney Thomas Spota’s Bureau of Government Corruption, the plea agreement by Mr. Hults concludes the investigation of East Hampton officials. Mr. McPartland said that the investigation had not revealed any evidence of criminal wrongdoing by Mr. McGintee but that the former supervisor had accepted responsibility by resigning. He said there was not a deal between Mr. McGintee and the D.A.’s office that he would not be prosecuted if he resigned.

“There was an agreement that he would resign ... that was not in an effort to avoid prosecution,” Mr. McPartland said of Mr. McGintee, a retired East Hampton Town Police officer. “We did not have evidence sufficient enough to charge him, but he does bear some responsibility for the events that took place.”

A detailed report of the grand jury’s findings, compiled from testimony by 17 witnesses about the financial mismanagement that sent the town tumbling from a multimillion-dollar surplus into a deficit surpassing $30 million, was released on Tuesday afternoon.

In an interview on Monday afternoon, Mr. McGintee accepted some of the responsibility for the financial problems that befell the town and missteps by Mr. Hults but reiterated his previous claims that he was entirely unaware of the transfers of funds from the CPF prior to being notified by the town’s independent auditors in January 2008.

“There has never been any wrongdoing on my end, but I accept responsibility because the buck stopped with me,” Mr. McGintee said. “Ted Hults is my friend and I wish him the best.”

Mr. McPartland said outside the courtroom that Mr. Hults bore the responsibility for the transfer of the funds from the CPF accounts and the false statements given to potential investors.

“Clearly Mr. Hults acted intentionally: When he had been told not to use or access the Community Preservation Funds, he did so anyway,” Mr. McPartland said. “With respect to the official statements, he did not know what representations were being made, whether they were truthful or not. They were false and Mr. Hults testified here today that he didn’t even have the knowledge of what those representations were.”

In the courtroom Mr. McPartland characterized Mr. Hults’s wrongdoing as a product of his own ineptness as the town budget officer. In explaining to Justice Condon why the District Attorney’s office was accepting the guilty plea on just two of the 14 charges and not asking for any jail sentence or fine, Mr. McPartland noted that Mr. Hults had not profited personally from his actions, does not have any role at the town level anymore and seems to have committed much of the wrongdoing because of his “own unfamiliarity with the task at hand—his own incompetence.”

“While he has taken responsibility for his own actions and the problems that caused,” Mr. McPartland added, “he should not in fact be held responsible for all the things that went wrong in the town.”

You've read 1 of 7 free articles this month.

Already a subscriber? Sign in

WOW! I am shock and disappointed that Hults gets no jail time and McGintee won't be charged. Didn't they work together to defraud the community of $9 million dollars?
By Rich Morey (335), Brooklyn on Jun 21, 10 5:07 PM
What did we learn today? "Mr. McPartland said that the investigation had not revealed any evidence of criminal wrongdoing by Mr. McGintee but that the former supervisor had accepted responsibility by resigning. He said there was not a deal between Mr. McGintee and the DA’s office that he would not be prosecuted if he resigned" and “There was an agreement that he would resign ... that was not in an effort to avoid prosecution,” Mr. McPartland said of Mr. McGintee, a retired East Hampton Town Police ...more
By Trail mix (13), East Hampton on Jun 22, 10 5:34 PM
What else did we learn today? Mr. McGintee reiterated his previous claims that he was entirely unaware of the transfers of funds from the CPF prior to being notified by the town’s independent auditors in January 2008. “There has never been any wrongdoing on my end, but I accept responsibility because the buck stopped with me,” Mr. McGintee said. “Ted Hults is my friend and I wish him the best.” So unless you have facts otherwise please do not trash McGintee or anyone else.
By Trail mix (13), East Hampton on Jun 22, 10 5:52 PM
disappointed,yes especialy that mcgintee was neither charged and punished. shocked?not at all...
By montauk resident (41), montauk on Jun 21, 10 5:53 PM
We wonder why our youth have no respect for law and those who enforce it?? We reap what we sow!
By BeachGal (72), Hampton Bays on Jun 21, 10 5:57 PM
1 member liked this comment
The old adage continues to hold true " It's who you know?" Can't help wondering who they are in this case.....could amount to quite a scandal.
By RJH (5), westhampton on Jun 21, 10 6:12 PM
1 member liked this comment
I actually kind of feel bad for Hults. In truth, he absolutely did not, in any way, have the necessary qualifications for the job but he was McGintee's personal choice for the appointment. THe question is WHY? I looks like he just did whatever that slime ball McGintee told him to do. Hmmm. And in the end, just as with all successful criminal king pins, he (McGintee) slithered away from prosecution because HE never committed the actual fraud. I bet all you East Hampton taxpayers who voted for ...more
By East End 2 (135), Southampton on Jun 21, 10 6:12 PM
I am happy Ted won't serve jail time or pay a fine. He was absolutely used in a a Svengali way by Bill McGintee. Bill McGintee is an evil man He made Ted feel his was part of his family. Then he threw him under the bus. Ted was naive about a lot of things. How McGintee can walk around town with his head up is unfathomable. He should leave town. Too bad it wasn't on a tar and feather bed!!
By bayview (155), Southampton on Jun 21, 10 6:25 PM
The way I see it, the only one who threw Ted under the bus was Laura Molanari.
By Trail mix (13), East Hampton on Jun 21, 10 8:24 PM
I am happy this is all over for Ted Hults. The witch hunt is over! So when do all the fools who predicted Bill's arrest man up? The DA had nothing on him besides he is as clean as it gets. The only mistake he made was being in office during an economic downturn and now we find out previous admin. took $ from CPF before Bill ever came into office.

On a side note some of the comments on this site really shine a light on some sad souls. Some people really need to get a life.
By Trail mix (13), East Hampton on Jun 21, 10 6:28 PM
The fact that Bill McGintee walks away doesn't mean he got away scott free. He had to resign under shame and he will be paying his lawyers for a long time. Our children will paying for a lifetime. You don't really think that Ted did it by himself? Trail mix in East Hampton must be one of McGintee's friends and that is good becauswe he doesn't have too many.
By housewife (74), east hampton on Jun 21, 10 6:55 PM
1 member liked this comment
This comment has been removed because it is a duplicate, off-topic or contains inappropriate content.
By no spin (16), East Hampton on Jun 21, 10 7:53 PM
1 member liked this comment
Housewife must be one of the ex-cons Bill McGintee arrested when he was a cop.
By Trail mix (13), East Hampton on Jun 21, 10 8:19 PM
No Jail. No Fine.... Sweet!
East Hampton Town is so funny (LOL).

Corrupt politicians walk scott free but the police will haul a civilian into court for no more than a runny nose.
By elliot (243), sag harbor on Jun 21, 10 6:31 PM
1 member liked this comment
Innocent people walk scott free. Where is all the resentment towards the DA's office for wasting countless taxpayer dollars trying to find a crime that never existed??
By springsgirl (16), East Hampton on Jun 22, 10 6:06 PM
2 members liked this comment
14 Felonys and Misdomeanor counts, he pleads guilty to 2 mis.and there's no fine or jail time.
Lucky they didn't let the lawyers bargain for a little longer, the town may have had to give him a bonus too.
By Andrew (11), Calverton on Jun 21, 10 6:34 PM
Lots of bloodsuckers on this site. Mr. McGintee is the only person I know that has never been charged with anything but is guilty of everything. You people really need to find a new scapegoat-perhaps Len Bernard????
By no spin (16), East Hampton on Jun 21, 10 7:45 PM
Mmmmmm.

The "Teflon Stuporvisor", perhaps?

A lack of "guilt" in a court of law, does not deny malfeasance, or incompetence. He FAILED to do his job, as it is described, and outlined.
By Mr. Z (10651), North Sea on Jun 27, 10 9:12 PM
Now that Bill McGintee has not been charged with anything, and Ted Hults is walking away with the equivalent of a "texting while driving" ticket, maybe it is time for the DAs to look a little deeper into the real cause of all the troubles in this town-- the Schneiderman/Bernard administration. The facts are just beginning to surface...
By springsgirl (16), East Hampton on Jun 21, 10 8:03 PM
The Grand Jury, and an independent audit denied ANY culpabiility by the prior administration.

In fact, it revealed the McGintee administration began with a surplus, according to the numbers. No question, no doubt, the Schneiderman administration left the town in solid fiscal condition.
By Mr. Z (10651), North Sea on Jun 27, 10 9:15 PM
In the court of public opinion Tom Spota is the loser. In reality it's the EHT taxpayers.
By independent observer (34), east hampton on Jun 21, 10 9:29 PM
So it would seeem -- Spota must not have had much of a case to start with.
By Frank Wheeler (1802), Northampton on Jun 22, 10 12:28 AM
1 member liked this comment
Spingsgirl is a Conservator... or maybe one of the ex-supervisor's daughters. Trail Mix is also probably a Conn or a McGintee relative if you read some of his comments from back when McGint resigned. According to other newspaper stories, the Cpf report says Cpf was never misused by any previous administration. There is one guy out their who has been totally dismissed by independent auditors who is trying to stir a pot that is ice cold -- but wasn;t he asked to resign from the BAC by the BAC? ...more
By connwatcher (112), east hampton on Jun 21, 10 10:58 PM
Connwatcher is is most likely Rick Murphy disgraced editor of the Independent or one of his bootlicks.
By Trail mix (13), East Hampton on Jun 22, 10 9:50 AM
System is broken...

Time to more on....

Time to fix the financial mess these two fools saddled the Town.
Sooner rather than later.
By voter (33), Amagansett on Jun 21, 10 11:30 PM
To say McGintee had nothing to do with this is ridiculous!! AND to say Laura M threw someone under the bus when all she did was resign?? Whoa! I 'd love to get some of what the conservators are smokin'!
By YEAROUNDER (81), East Hampton on Jun 22, 10 8:29 AM
1 member liked this comment
A crook is still a crook, despite any legal side deals they worked out. Crawl back to your hole boys...
By Dayo (33), Sag Harbor on Jun 22, 10 8:34 AM
I've known Bill for over 30 years and what is painfully obvious from these posts is that the vast majority of you people don't have any idea who he is. You listen to reports from politically biased "journalists" (use that term loosely) and think you know all the "facts". The truth is, the DA would have liked nothing more than to charge Bill. Think of the political momentum HE could have garnered going into an election by exposing a political scandal in the Hamptons, but there was nothing there. ...more
By Bill's Main Man (10), East Hampton on Jun 22, 10 9:09 AM
There is one major flaw in your argument however, and thats that illegal things did happen. Mr. Hults was forced to enter a guilty plea to charges of securities fraud and official misconduct.

In order for your claim that nothing illegal was done by Mr. McGintee to hold any water, you would have to conclude that Mr. Hults was not only the brains behind the entire operation but also the sole person involved in making and authorizing the illegal money transfers to and from the CPF account ...more
By tm (174), mtk on Jun 22, 10 10:30 AM
Alternate scenario: Things happened exactly the way the DA and the judge said they did. Mr. Hults made the transfers without authorization of the supervisor because he was in over his head professionally and didn't even realize what he was doing was wrong. Mr. McGintee did not take the fall because he had no knowledge of what Mr. Hults was doing. The prosecution of Mr. McGintee would be a huge notch in the DA's belt. Any logical person would realize that if the former supervisor was "directing" ...more
By eh lover (6), East Hampton on Jun 22, 10 11:06 AM
2 members liked this comment
You are correct that Mr. Hults has pled guilty to these minor infractions, but have you heard the expression "ignorance of the law is not a defense"?

In securities laws, simply making a mistake is a chargeable offense, so charges could be filed against Mr. Hults for simply making an accounting error or missing something. Based on that, and the final tally of charges filed compared to those Mr. Hults pled to, would certainly imply to me this was more likely a case.

As for Mr. ...more
By Bill's Main Man (10), East Hampton on Jun 22, 10 11:08 AM
1 member liked this comment
Great argument George. You're really putting that GED to good use. What admission? What club? Don't let the facts get in the way of your argument.
By Bill's Main Man (10), East Hampton on Jun 22, 10 11:21 AM
Yeah, he's a member of the DA's "club." That makes a lot of sense. The DA makes a much bigger splash by investigating Bill McGintee for a year and letting him off with no charges than he does prosecuting him. (By the way, that was sarcasm George, in case you couldn't tell). If the taxpayers should be angry at anyone, it should be at the DA who wasted valuable taxpayer money and resources for over a year, and for what?? To give Ted Hults a slap on the wrist for making a mistake?? Seems there ...more
By eh lover (6), East Hampton on Jun 22, 10 11:30 AM
1 member liked this comment
The whole idea that Spota who is cross endorsed needs any momentum in an election is poorly thought out. He who runs unopposed, needs not momentum to win an election.
McGintee knew what was going on, thus he is a crook. Whether he directed the operation or just looked the other way, which is doubtful.
By ICE (1214), Southhampton on Jun 22, 10 11:43 AM
If i am wrong, please feel free to correct me, but i dont recall McGintee ever saying he had no idea these transfers were made. It is my recollection that he freely admitted they were made and that it was his opinion that they were perfectly legal. No?
By tm (174), mtk on Jun 22, 10 12:05 PM
i dont have to stay out of anything. I am a year round tax paying resident in this Town and i have every right to pose a comment or question on this issue, as it effects me just as much as it effects you.
By tm (174), mtk on Jun 22, 10 12:25 PM
2 members liked this comment
the aboe comment was in response to "EH lover"
By tm (174), mtk on Jun 22, 10 12:25 PM
According to the article above, Mr. McGintee "reiterated his previous claims that he was entirely unaware of the transfers of funds from the CPF prior to being notified by the town’s independent auditors in January 2008." I don't think he ever denied that they were made, only that they were made without his knowledge prior to January 2008. And just to be clear, I never said you "had" to stay out of anything, only that if you hate a witch hunt as you claim, you shouldn't participate in one. I ...more
By eh lover (6), East Hampton on Jun 22, 10 1:54 PM
1 member liked this comment
The fact is that the Grand Jury (the citizens of Suffolk County)did find evidence of criminality, hence the indictment.
By HB90 (153), southampton on Jun 22, 10 11:00 PM
Last I checked, Bill McGintee had not been indicted on any charge. Based on your argument, that would show no evidence of criminality on his part, right?
By Bill's Main Man (10), East Hampton on Jun 23, 10 9:08 AM
1 member liked this comment
i was referring to Hults
By HB90 (153), southampton on Jun 23, 10 6:28 PM
OK. Did not seem like the case as you had responded to a comment which mostly referenced Bill McGintee. To be clear though, an indictment does not necessarily show evidence of criminality, only of the potential for crimilality to be further explored through trial. Many people have been indicted only to be found not-guilty......
By Bill's Main Man (10), East Hampton on Jun 24, 10 11:04 AM
(Both men a good men. They were nieve, but did the best they could to preserve such a beautiful town. A town they both lived worked and had family for many years to keep it a safe and beautiful town.---Voted one of the most beautiful and peaceful places to come to.) It is a suggestion to look at beach front property owners that for years heckled and took high paid attourneys into town hall...The citizens of East Hampton will get justice...Next time the ones in office will not be nieve about high ...more
By UNITED states CITIZEN (207), SOUTHAMPTON on Jun 22, 10 10:38 AM
This is what happens when you put townies in charge of multi-million dollar corporations. I blame the small town Democratic party for this one. And just what were McGintee's educational qualifications anyway? But he certainly knew enough about the law (and hired Rudy Guiliani's firm to defend him against the DA's inquiries) to avoid getting nailed for improper/illegal actions. The real pity is the fallout and consequences to the community from all that incompetentence.
By East End 2 (135), Southampton on Jun 22, 10 12:03 PM
You pretend as if this town board did not hire one of the people who the grand jury found responsible for the fiscal condition to once again run the town's finances!
By ehboardwatcher2010 (21), sag harbor on Jun 22, 10 3:49 PM
2 members liked this comment
What are your educational qualifications?? What were Jay Schneiderman's? What are Bill Wilkenson's? Supervisor is an elected position-- all you need to be elected is US citizenship and people to vote for you. And if you really live in Southampton, as you claim, why do you even care??
By springsgirl (16), East Hampton on Jun 23, 10 7:28 PM
Referring to East End 2, by the way.
By springsgirl (16), East Hampton on Jun 23, 10 7:29 PM
Anyone know what became of former McGintee staffer who claimed never to have taken a day off for six years and was looking for six years back pay for the unused vacation?
By CommonSense (71), Southampton on Jun 22, 10 4:08 PM
No jail time and no fines for Hults and McGintee?

The Golden Rule -- He who has the gold makes the rule!

Shameful -- witness Nero fiddling while Rome burns.
By MJP (13), On Quiogue on Jun 22, 10 5:50 PM
1 member liked this comment
Correct. No jail time or fine for McGintee AS NO CRIME COMMITTED! That is the way our contry works. You don't get sentenced for a crime if you did not commit one. Although the Independent does not need facts to publish their stories, the Grand Jury does need evidence of a crime to charge someone. What's shameful is that you are looking for an innocent man to pay a fine and serve jail time for nothing.
By Bill's Main Man (10), East Hampton on Jun 23, 10 9:13 AM
ehboardwatcher2010 is mostly definitely a Conservator. Click on the number 18 and look at her (his?) comments: "This board...are an evil of the worst kind"..."This board has no intention of listening to anyone"..."Re-election for Wilkie will be a big No in my book"..."No one is qualified to be a congressman...(god forbid) Schneiderman." The words of a disgruntled Conn who is still blaming the previous administration for counts in in an indictment that happened in 2007 and 2008 -- three years ...more
By connwatcher (112), east hampton on Jun 22, 10 6:01 PM
perhaps connwatcher gets his info from the Independent. The Star reported, based on the auditors report, that Len Bernard utilized CPF funds improperly long before Mr. Hults did. There are many others facts, regarding financial mistakes by the Schneiderman administration that are now seeing the light of day. You're right, no one cares what Schneiderman and Bernard did (or didn't do) let sleeping dogs lie. But don't be a hypocrite-if you truly believe you are the self-proclaimed connwatcher then ...more
By no spin (16), East Hampton on Jun 22, 10 7:07 PM

JUST SIMPLY ------- A CASE OF THE FOXES TAKING CARE OF THE 'CHICKEN HOUSE -- GOOD JOB JUDGE! BE PROUD OF THIS DECISION TO WATCH OUT FOR YOUR OWN ----GEE! WONDER IF WAS AN INFLUENCE FROM OTHERS TO MAKE THIS DECISION? ---- OF COURSE NOT --
By pride of bonac (42), easthampton on Jun 22, 10 7:44 PM

I WONDER WHAT THE PUNISHMENT WOULD HAVE BEEN FOR THE AVERAGE PERSON COMMITTING THESE CRIMES? - I BET QUITE A BIT MORE ---OH THAT "SLAP ON THE WRIST" MUST HURT
By pride of bonac (42), easthampton on Jun 22, 10 7:53 PM
Billbonac:
THESE ARE THE FACTS: IF YOU READ THE "JUST RELEASED GRAND JURY REPORT" CORRECTLY THE PROBLEM IS THE BUDGETS IN 2003 and 2004 (SCHNEIDERMAN/BERNARD) PUT THE TOWN IN THE HOLE BY THEIR POOR BUDGETING. IN THE 2003 BUDGET THE INSIDE AND OUTSIDE TOWN TAX RATES WERE -.07% AND IN 2004( THE YEAR BERNARD RAN FOR SUPERVISOR) THEY WERE -4.6% AND -7.0% INSIDE AND OUTSIDE . THOSE BUDGETS WERE WHAT PRECIPITATED THE DOWNWARD SPIRAL. WHERE DID IT STATE ANYWHERE IN THE REPORT THAT MCGINTEE DID ANYTHING? ...more
By no spin (16), East Hampton on Jun 22, 10 7:57 PM
1 member liked this comment
No spin, you are absolutely correct. Those budget shortfalls in 2003 and 2004 were covered up by the administration in 03-04 in the hopes of getting bernard elected.
Not that McGintee and crew did anything better.. he clearly continued the "cover-up" trend to get himself re-elected. An endless unfortunate cycle that hopefully, since this has all come to light, will end. But it cannot end when the individual that started the "cover-up" is back.
It has to end for real, the taxpayers ...more
By ehboardwatcher2010 (21), sag harbor on Jun 23, 10 11:36 AM
No spin is definately a Conservator...and a real all spinner to boot. Billbonac is right on. The Star article about CPF last week ends with a quote from the independent auditor that looked at CPF for 1999 through 2009 that says everything accusatory in the article about the previous administration is wrong and those making the allegations are not capable of connecting the dots. The DA now says all the CPF abuse was in 2006, 2007 and 2008 after an extensive review of the program from start to ...more
By connwatcher (112), east hampton on Jun 22, 10 8:00 PM
Len, I mean Connwatcher:
Read the report!
By no spin (16), East Hampton on Jun 22, 10 8:10 PM
2 members liked this comment
Len?? And here I assumed Connwatcher was Rick Murphy. Oh wait... same difference.
By Finny's Mom (2), East Hampton on Jun 22, 10 8:29 PM
no spin.....billbonac read the report correctly and you are all spin. What your quote shows is that schniederman's original budgets and the town board's adopted budgets were essentially the same. The years always ended with big surpluses. In the subsequent years under McGintee there were big differences between the tentative budgets and adopted budgets. That was the point.

The report says:
"Throughout the following years, specifically, 2006, 2007 and 2008, the
changes in the tax ...more
By connwatcher (112), east hampton on Jun 22, 10 8:46 PM
I'm just reading the grand jury's report as stated, not interpreting it like you, Len. The Independent...who reads that??? Finny's mom, maybe you are right. Maybe this is Murphy. I agree,... no difference.
By no spin (16), East Hampton on Jun 22, 10 9:39 PM
1 member liked this comment
Finny's mom and no spin...one in the same? Rick, Len...maybe Sullivan, or no maybe Reg, or maybe Nancy or Tom, or better yet Jayo......??? You are very confused. Typical for a Conservator -- always looking to point fingers while drinking the Kool-Aid.
By connwatcher (112), east hampton on Jun 22, 10 9:55 PM
billbonac...right on point. There are not too many "Finny's Mom's" out there. One happens to be someone who has been at the forefront of exposing the McGintee scandal and I know for a fact she did write the comment above, which just goes to show you how dispicable this has become. When you intentionally make yourself out to be someone you are not to try to hurt that person professionally you have stepped over the line...but it is to be expected from the Conservators...even the ones who are all ...more
By connwatcher (112), east hampton on Jun 22, 10 10:37 PM
Rick, you have become hysterical-your "crazy eddie" personality is showing. You, of all people, have a problem with someone intentionally pretending to be someone else in an attempt to hurt someone professionally. How about all your fictious letters to the editor signed:"fear of retaliation", "town worker", "prefers to remain unknown", "Unknown shopkeeper". You utilize these tactics on a weekly basis in that fishwrap you call a newspaper and then you boo-hoo, like the little boy that you are, ...more
By no spin (16), East Hampton on Jun 23, 10 8:11 AM
A typo correction... I know for a fact she DID NOT write the comment above...sorry.
By connwatcher (112), east hampton on Jun 22, 10 10:38 PM
The DA is not up for re-election this year. He was re-elected last year. So any comments about this being a way to score political points are off-base.
By HB90 (153), southampton on Jun 22, 10 11:02 PM
1 member liked this comment
HB90 you are correct. Some people on this site have intelligence. This is a rather simple senario which the hatemongers cannot accept. Mr. McGintee, after a lengthy and complete investigation by the DA's office, was found innocent of any criminal wrongdoing. Mr. Hults plead to 2 minor charges and received a conditional discharge. Just because connwatcher and billbonac prayed every night for a different outcome doesn't change the facts. It's laughable that the DA's was their best friend during ...more
By no spin (16), East Hampton on Jun 23, 10 7:57 AM
1 member liked this comment
He is a politician-- think about it. Not talking about being re-elected as DA. Tom Spota has higher political aspirations, and McGintee's head on a platter would have been his crowning glory. People can't accept the fact that he simply could not find anything to prosecute.
By springsgirl (16), East Hampton on Jun 23, 10 8:09 AM
HB90 - Im not really sure what you are boasting about, the Judge, the DA and the Report classify Hults and McGintee as being:

1. Grossly incompetent for the job at hand;
2. Asleep at the switch when it came to town finances
3. The primary reason for destroying the financial health of the town; and
4. Leaving "a record of fiscal malfeasance rivaling any other town government in the history of the state.

So, he didnt get incited or charged with a crime, how nice. ...more
By tm (174), mtk on Jun 23, 10 3:39 PM
I'm not boasting. It is a mess, you are right. Southampton is a mess too. I say come November we boot everyone (local, state, federal). The whole country is in a financial mess.
By HB90 (153), southampton on Jun 23, 10 11:00 PM
Business as usual...
By Mr. Z (10651), North Sea on Jun 23, 10 1:29 AM
This comment has been removed because it is a duplicate, off-topic or contains inappropriate content.
By fatkittym (1), East Hampton on Jun 23, 10 7:01 AM
1 member liked this comment
“You’re not the sort of person that usually stands before me,” Supreme Court Justice William Condon said to Mr. Hults in the courtroom. That says it all, doesn't it.
By dagdavid (646), southampton on Jun 23, 10 8:39 AM
"Their Way"

It matters not - what we say

the insiders will have it their way

and the regular people just watch the decay

and can't do a damm thing -cept --bitch --

while the political rectitude

continues to slide deeper in the ditch

and the people all want reform

but it ain't happen-en

As long politicians are born

By pride of bonac (42), easthampton on Jun 23, 10 8:16 PM
This was apparently a very extensive Grand Jury investigation and the only criminal charges they had were against Hults, who apparently was the fall guy in all this and who was in way over his head. I'm sure if there was evidence of crimes commited by other people they would have been prosecuted. The DA has a history of going after crooked politicains. Anyone remember Peter McGowan and Wayne Prospect?

From the Grand Jury report it seems that it is typical political behavoir by politicians ...more
By HB90 (153), southampton on Jun 23, 10 11:07 PM
Has anyone else noticed the very interesting choice of words the DA used to describe McGintee: MALFEASANCE. According to my dictionary, the exact definition of this is "wrongdoing or misconduct, especially by a public official; commission of an act that is POSITIVELY UNLAWFUL."

A lack of a grand jury indictment only means they didn't feel they had enough evidence to charge him--it does not mean he is not guilty.

As for Hults, there is no cause to give him the benefit of the doubt ...more
By bonacgrrl (1), East Hampton on Jun 24, 10 4:16 PM
1 member liked this comment
There is I believe another way to charge Mr. McGintee. A taxpayers lawsuit against him for malfeasance. A class action suit by many of the taxpayers of East Hampton. Ted Hults was the scapegoat for this mess. McGintee is laughing at all of us.
By housewife (74), east hampton on Jun 25, 10 1:32 PM
1 member liked this comment
And I quote the first page of the Grand Jury report:

"The Supervisor is the chief fiscal officer of the Town and is
responsible for the Town’s daily operations, including reporting to the Board."

A poor, poor, pitiful supervisor it makes him, because he SHOULD HAVE BEEN AWARE of not only the budget, but where the funds were coming from, and how expenses were to be covered. THAT WAS HIS JOB! It is what a Supervisor is supposed to do. If he, and others actually did it (their ...more
Jun 27, 10 7:26 PM appended by Mr. Z
What "saved" McGintee? A MECHANICAL SIGNATURE. Because he NEVER signed a document himself, there cannot be criminal culpability.
By Mr. Z (10651), North Sea on Jun 24, 10 7:26 PM

Excuse me mr. billbonac -of Springs - You gotta be McGintee
By pride of bonac (42), easthampton on Jun 24, 10 8:08 PM
In East Hampton it seems O.J. Simpson is no longer the #1 guy who got away with it, and the local Dems will now forever be known as the McGintee party.
By montaukman (98), easthampton on Jun 24, 10 8:17 PM
Not at all surprised.
By badhorse (1), East Hampton on Jun 26, 10 8:29 AM
Many posters here, especially "No Spin" need electric shock treatments.

Hults pled GUILTY as a result of prosecution and McGintee RESIGNED to avoid prosecution. These are called DEALS in the legal profession.

To continue to accuse anyone other than these two and the brain dead board they governed with is insane.
By BobbyH (44), Southampton/NYC on Jun 26, 10 11:48 PM
Thank you Bobby H!! Reading about who is this "poster" or "that person" is not only childish, it is boring. As someone else pointed out earlier, and as a reminder, the definition of malfeasance is "wrongdoing or misconduct, esp. by a public official; commission of an act that is positively unlawful: distinguished from misfeasance, nonfeasance." I thank the press for posting the Grand Jury report but am sorely disappointed that Spota made the deal back in October with McGintee's lawyers without ...more
By Board Watcher (529), East Hampton on Jun 27, 10 12:00 PM
1 member liked this comment
Main problem was, is that McGintee may have NEVER put his own hand to a piece of paper.

About all of the paperwork had a "mechanical signature" on it. He has "plausible deniability" down to a science at this point.

New law? NO MORE STAMPING OF SIGNATURES.

"Teflon Stuporvisor", indeed...
By Mr. Z (10651), North Sea on Jun 27, 10 9:26 PM
TO BE CLEAR - it is the DA's office which decides who to indict - not a Grand Jury. A Grand jury is asked by the prosecution to decide if there is enough evidence against "Mr. A" or "Mr. B" to indict on the crimes of "XYZ". If Mr. Spota - who directs this process and decides who gets indicted and who doesn't - never ASKED the Grand Jury whether or not McGintee should have been indicted then - ah, viola!! He isn't indicted! To Springsgirl and No Spin and BillsMainMan - I am happy that you are ...more
By Board Watcher (529), East Hampton on Jun 29, 10 3:34 PM
So Board Watcher, you are telling others (myself included) not to "go around surmising about Tom Spota's ambitions", yet you are sitting here talking about the possibility of Mr. Spota never ASKING the grand jury to indict and you are continuing to assume you know everything about the situation because you read last weeks issue of the Independent.....Perhaps it is you that should stop surmising.......
By Bill's Main Man (10), East Hampton on Jun 29, 10 4:22 PM
Perhaps - I missed last week's Independant, Main Man, and your defensiveness is unnecessary - my comment was to correct the patently false statements (assumptions?) made on this blog that because the Grand Jury did not indict the man means McGintee committed no crimes. I repeat - it is Spota's office which decides who it asks the Grand Jury to indict - a GJ does not spontaneoulsy "exonerate" people - either Spota presented evidence specifically against McGintee and asked them to indict or not - ...more
By Board Watcher (529), East Hampton on Jun 29, 10 5:09 PM
He also ALMOST NEVER put pen to paper. That makes him NOT prosecutable.

He knew what he was doing, took his supervisor pay, and rode the train to Hell just like the rest of our world financial markets.

With his pension, and supervisor pay, he not only enjoyed the ride, but will be sitting back and enjoying the "fruits" of his "labor"...
Jun 30, 10 6:00 PM appended by Mr. Z
NO MORE STAMPS!!!!!!!!
By Mr. Z (10651), North Sea on Jun 30, 10 6:00 PM
i am sure the fact that he was a police officer didnt have anything to do with he being let of the hook he could have stole millions of dollars and be getting away with it!! it is a disgrace to the people of this town...that nothing is gonna happen to him and ted didnt sell him out!!
By dan222 (3), east hampton on Jun 29, 10 6:46 PM
how do people blame the previous board when he has been there this long and there was a surplus of money before him!!! people are funny these are the same people that dont see what is going on with our country !!
By dan222 (3), east hampton on Jun 29, 10 6:51 PM
The people are a fickle lot indeed, but after this week's Editorial section in the Independent, there should be no doubt whatsoever that the ball is solely in the court of the McGintee administration for East Hampton's fiscal situation, by their gross fiduciary negligence.
By Mr. Z (10651), North Sea on Jun 30, 10 4:40 PM