WELCOME GUEST  |  LOG IN
Saunders, Real Estate, Hamptons<br/>
27east.com

38 Comments by Tim Tanuka

1  |  2  >>  

Judge orders DA's office to investigate alleged call made following Linda Kabot's DWI arrest

Oh, I see EastEnd68: It's inappropriate to suggest that Linda Kabot was at the artful dodger or magic's...even though she was pulled over and arrested for DWI.... but somehow in your mind its okay to "suggest" in an anonymous letter...that could have been written by anyone....that Anna Throne-Holst and the WHB cops took part in a cover up? So, its okay to suggest that a crime, based on second-hand information from an anonymous "single mom in Sag Harbor" ... but its not okay to suggest that a person who was actually pulled over and charged with DWI was at a bar before hand? What twisted logic.....

So...in your way of thinking: if an anonymous letter was floating around saying that Linda Kabot was at Magic's...would it then be okay to suggest?" Oct 28, 09 3:45 PM

hey, North of Highway...who do you mean by LT? Lawrence Taylor or Ladamian Thomlison.....? yeah, her plan is painful, expect to the 4 full time staffers in her office, none of which get the ax.... guess she needs that many to take shifts driving her around...." Oct 28, 09 3:52 PM

Noah Way makes a good point about the breath test. But if the SHP was really eager to do some hard nose reporting and be fair...they would call the DA in charge of the case and ask him specifically if he has a witness or any other evidence that Kabot was at the artful dodger and they would ask kabot is she was at artful dodger (how appropriate a name) but, wait, that can't be the case because kabot says she was at her sister's and the press published the photo to prove it...(although it was provided by kabot)

and they would also speak to the manager of the place.....and other workers who were there...of course..they might want to remain "anonymous".. but that doesn't seem to be an issue now does it? then they could report "anonymous sources" report Kabot doing shots before her DWI arrest... then they could really get a bunch of web hits" Oct 28, 09 4:10 PM

well, stanner..too bad a lot of people aren't as smart as your mule bessy b/c many will believe kabot is innocent and that throne-holst and the cops are responsible....heck, kabot's not responsible for anything anyway why should she be for this? btw...i heard from a friend who's a single dad in north sea that he heard from a friend that she was only drinking kool-aid and ath spiked it while she wasn't looking...." Oct 28, 09 4:37 PM

Boy Lenny and Sam: How big you guys are. Now you have to drag the woman's son into it? How despicable, especially when all this time Anna Throne-Holst has refused to hit Kabot on the DWI and has acted so classy about it. Besides, you have no idea of what you speak. And the reason the comment was deleted was it was inappropriate... All of these candidates kids should be left alone....." Oct 28, 09 7:23 PM

whatever you say, Sam....her kids...or Linda's kids...or any other candidates are off limits..... read what the post from the web editor says: "This comment has been removed because it is a duplicate or contains inappropriate content" it is both a duplicate and inappropriate....." Oct 28, 09 9:09 PM

the press thinks that because its not from an alleged anonymous source" Oct 29, 09 1:46 PM

Kabot's court date is pushed back to December

The Artful Dodger!" Oct 29, 09 1:49 PM

Southampton Town Supervisor incumbent Linda Kabot (R)

gee, wonder what changed between this scathing editorial of Linda Kabot by the Press and their recent endorsement of her? Things that make you go Hmm. Read it for yourself folks:

Apologia:

In a “Viewpoint” published in this edition of The Press, Southampton Town Supervisor Linda Kabot starts off with an apology regarding recent discussions about the town’s capital budget: “As supervisor, I publicly apologize for the confusion, controversy and blame game.”

But there is little doubt that it is The Press that owes Ms. Kabot an apology, as she has hinted for the past week or so. And so, allow this to serve as our official apology to the supervisor.

When, in the news pages, we reported that the town had a $19 million discrepancy between what the town’s computer system said was the capital budget balance and the actual cash on hand, we thought we were merely reporting a fact that the supervisor herself had brought up, in passing, at a meeting in January. In her “Viewpoint,” she maintains that the difference is $250,000, “not the alarmist $19 million conveyed to the Town Board.”

Clearly, in this scenario, Ms. Kabot could not be the “alarmist” person who delivered this information. So, despite clear visual and aural evidence to the contrary, someone closely resembling Ms. Kabot must have made those remarks to the Town Board. We apologize for the confusion and formally call for an investigation to identify the alarmist imposter.

Likewise, Ms. Kabot was sadly on target when she pointed out that working the $19 million discrepancy into headlines that week was part of a strategy to use such “sensational headlines” to sell copies of The Press. Guilty—although, alas, it was a gambit that failed to pay off, as our circulation numbers were essentially level. In retrospect, we certainly should have characterized the discrepancy using the more responsible phrase offered last week by then-Deputy Supervisor Richard Blowes: “significant millions.” Because, after all, if you don’t know how much is in the budget, you can’t very well put a specific number on the amount of the discrepancy, right? Apologies for that.

But the apology to Ms. Kabot is a much broader one. It was unfair to suggest that the town supervisor should be able to answer basic questions about essential budgetary issues. In January 2008, the new supervisor took office and, in her own words, began working toward her pledged goal “to restore public trust in local government and stop the ‘Enron accounting’ that was going on.” It has been only 13 months—far too soon to expect answers detailing, say, exactly how much money the town has to spend on capital projects in 2009 and beyond. Perhaps by the end of her first term?

After all, Mr. Blowes’s Business Management Department and Comptroller Steve Brautigam’s staff comprise only about $1 million in salaries and benefits. Getting a grip on the capital budget mess—an issue, Ms. Kabot says, that existed when she first took office—is a hard job. How quickly can a team that size be expected to tackle it? In a week? A month? Six months? A year? Let’s be realistic.

And it’s not like the town’s director of audit and control (a position added this year at a cost of $116,000) or any of Ms. Kabot’s office staff (all told, adding up to more than $450,000 in salary and benefits) could pitch in with a calculator.

We apologize, too, for using the terms “missing” and “unaccounted for” in referring to the discrepancy in the capital budget funds. Those were completely irresponsible choices—in our rush to sensationalize, we took the unforgiveable step of characterizing as “unaccounted for” funds that had once shown up in computer records, but now seem to, well, not be in the bank. No idea where our heads were on that one.

Finally, we have to fall on our sword for even hinting at who’s to blame, as Ms. Kabot, by lamenting the “blame game” that has been played, has suggested we did. The supervisor could not be more clear about the situation and what has caused it. There is no problem. Or there is a problem, and it’s simply being sensationalized by alarmists. Or there is a problem, but it’s the fault of the previous administration (which has been out of office for 13 months, but who’s counting?). Or the problem is far overblown, despite the fact that it has plagued Town Hall for more than a year. Or the current administration is investigating issues that clearly can be traced back several years—and since Ms. Kabot was a member of the Town Board during that time, examining and voting on each of them, who better to lead the investigation? How much more clarity could anyone ask for? We apologize to Ms. Kabot for suggesting that simple questions about the budget shouldn’t take more than a week, let alone a year, to answer, and that the town’s elected CFO is the one who should answer them. That’s reckless and unfair. We should be patient, and wait quietly while town officials strive to identify exactly how much taxpayer money they have—or don’t have—to play with. Get back to us on this one—when you have time. No pressure.

" Oct 30, 09 6:23 PM

Southampton Town Supervisor candidate Anna Throne-Holst (D, WF)

gee, wonder what changed between this scathing editorial of Linda Kabot by the Press and their recent endorsement of her? Things that make you go Hmm. Read it for yourself folks:

Apologia:

In a “Viewpoint” published in this edition of The Press, Southampton Town Supervisor Linda Kabot starts off with an apology regarding recent discussions about the town’s capital budget: “As supervisor, I publicly apologize for the confusion, controversy and blame game.”

But there is little doubt that it is The Press that owes Ms. Kabot an apology, as she has hinted for the past week or so. And so, allow this to serve as our official apology to the supervisor.

When, in the news pages, we reported that the town had a $19 million discrepancy between what the town’s computer system said was the capital budget balance and the actual cash on hand, we thought we were merely reporting a fact that the supervisor herself had brought up, in passing, at a meeting in January. In her “Viewpoint,” she maintains that the difference is $250,000, “not the alarmist $19 million conveyed to the Town Board.”

Clearly, in this scenario, Ms. Kabot could not be the “alarmist” person who delivered this information. So, despite clear visual and aural evidence to the contrary, someone closely resembling Ms. Kabot must have made those remarks to the Town Board. We apologize for the confusion and formally call for an investigation to identify the alarmist imposter.

Likewise, Ms. Kabot was sadly on target when she pointed out that working the $19 million discrepancy into headlines that week was part of a strategy to use such “sensational headlines” to sell copies of The Press. Guilty—although, alas, it was a gambit that failed to pay off, as our circulation numbers were essentially level. In retrospect, we certainly should have characterized the discrepancy using the more responsible phrase offered last week by then-Deputy Supervisor Richard Blowes: “significant millions.” Because, after all, if you don’t know how much is in the budget, you can’t very well put a specific number on the amount of the discrepancy, right? Apologies for that.

But the apology to Ms. Kabot is a much broader one. It was unfair to suggest that the town supervisor should be able to answer basic questions about essential budgetary issues. In January 2008, the new supervisor took office and, in her own words, began working toward her pledged goal “to restore public trust in local government and stop the ‘Enron accounting’ that was going on.” It has been only 13 months—far too soon to expect answers detailing, say, exactly how much money the town has to spend on capital projects in 2009 and beyond. Perhaps by the end of her first term?

After all, Mr. Blowes’s Business Management Department and Comptroller Steve Brautigam’s staff comprise only about $1 million in salaries and benefits. Getting a grip on the capital budget mess—an issue, Ms. Kabot says, that existed when she first took office—is a hard job. How quickly can a team that size be expected to tackle it? In a week? A month? Six months? A year? Let’s be realistic.

And it’s not like the town’s director of audit and control (a position added this year at a cost of $116,000) or any of Ms. Kabot’s office staff (all told, adding up to more than $450,000 in salary and benefits) could pitch in with a calculator.

We apologize, too, for using the terms “missing” and “unaccounted for” in referring to the discrepancy in the capital budget funds. Those were completely irresponsible choices—in our rush to sensationalize, we took the unforgiveable step of characterizing as “unaccounted for” funds that had once shown up in computer records, but now seem to, well, not be in the bank. No idea where our heads were on that one.

Finally, we have to fall on our sword for even hinting at who’s to blame, as Ms. Kabot, by lamenting the “blame game” that has been played, has suggested we did. The supervisor could not be more clear about the situation and what has caused it. There is no problem. Or there is a problem, and it’s simply being sensationalized by alarmists. Or there is a problem, but it’s the fault of the previous administration (which has been out of office for 13 months, but who’s counting?). Or the problem is far overblown, despite the fact that it has plagued Town Hall for more than a year. Or the current administration is investigating issues that clearly can be traced back several years—and since Ms. Kabot was a member of the Town Board during that time, examining and voting on each of them, who better to lead the investigation? How much more clarity could anyone ask for? We apologize to Ms. Kabot for suggesting that simple questions about the budget shouldn’t take more than a week, let alone a year, to answer, and that the town’s elected CFO is the one who should answer them. That’s reckless and unfair. We should be patient, and wait quietly while town officials strive to identify exactly how much taxpayer money they have—or don’t have—to play with. Get back to us on this one—when you have time. No pressure.

" Oct 30, 09 6:27 PM

Southampton Town employees protest board over planned layoffs

actually....all the signs are being stolen by cops (PBA members) on patrol....they are beind called by Anna Throne-Holst as to their exact location....together, they have a coordinated effort to steal her signs to make it look like the GOP is actually doing the deed.... b/c we know that they would never do such a thing.... " Oct 30, 09 10:35 PM

Southampton Town Supervisor incumbent Linda Kabot (R)

well, the Press would certainly understand wishy-washy....such as writing a scathing editorial of someone, just one of many, and then endorsing that someone later. Plus, they probably don't care for the 13 pt plan because it wasn't written by an anonymous source...." Oct 31, 09 10:40 AM

Kabot's court date is pushed back to December

golfbuddy says with certainty that.."I do have an issue with people that drive drunk, however she was not." I wonder how golfbuddy knows that "she was not" drunk...? was golfbuddy there? no doubt golfbuddy would have an issue with someone on this blog stating that she WAS DRUNK....because how could they know, right? yet....somehow golfbuddy knows that she wasn't....interesting
" Oct 31, 09 11:31 AM

Southampton Town supervisor candidates verbally spar over youth programs, affordable housing in Flanders

EQme makes a good point about the biased reporting: No mention of ath's specific proposal to cut the supervior's 4 full time staffers (all those job cuts from town hall and not ONE from her own office) which would allow youth services to be funded....guess the Press is too busy worrying about ath's treasurer missing the first filing date....SCANDAL!" Oct 31, 09 12:22 PM

Kabot's court date is pushed back to December

gee, golfbuddy....how do you know about these "new" facts? you must be in the know????" Oct 31, 09 1:54 PM

Southampton Town Supervisor incumbent Linda Kabot (R)

blank? 3 lines to 1...and that 1 line wasn't even kabot's at first...the gop committee voted by a huge margin to nominate malone, why was that voters? ... and a slew of endorsements to kabot's 1. That's some blank!" Oct 31, 09 2:01 PM

I'm not upset, golfbuddy...just pointing out a fact....kabot has 1 endorsement...the shp....throne-holst has the express and indy and just about every other one you can have....just a fact...i do realize that some find facts objectionable" Oct 31, 09 11:44 PM

i'm not saying WHY they endorsed her.....all I said was that the SHP was the ONLY endorsement she had...simple fact.....again....folks can read the above editorial and decide the why for themselves" Nov 1, 09 8:47 AM

Southampton Town supervisor candidates verbally spar over youth programs, affordable housing in Flanders

no doubt that if the PBA (as well as the CSEA, the LIBI, enviromental voters forum and all the rest) would have endorsed kabot...she have promptly told them "no thanks, i don't want your endorsements...I happy just with the SHP endorsement, that's the only one that really counts and is genuine."" Nov 1, 09 9:21 AM

Southampton Town Supervisor candidate Anna Throne-Holst (D, WF)

well, if the SHP says the plan evaporates and is wishy-washy then it MUST be so. Hell, I'm writing in the editors for supervisor and town council, since they are the obvious experts. " Nov 1, 09 9:34 AM

Oops, add Newsday to the ath column" Nov 1, 09 10:00 AM

Southampton Town Supervisor incumbent Linda Kabot (R)

Add Newsday to ath column..." Nov 1, 09 10:00 AM

Southampton Town Supervisor candidate Anna Throne-Holst (D, WF)

"inconceivable" TB, unless you are the SHP.....whose editors evidently don't read their own editorials and rely on anonymous sources to smear candidates they suddenly lose favor with......again, some folks find facts objectionable" Nov 1, 09 3:28 PM

Southampton Town supervisor candidates verbally spar over youth programs, affordable housing in Flanders

right on EastEnd68.....and what's wrong with the cops making the money they make? anyone who goes to work and could conceivably get killed as part of the job should be able to make as much money as possible.... and to all you morons criticizing the police: next time someone's trying to break into your house or you're in fear for your llife....call someone else" Nov 1, 09 3:34 PM

Kabot's court date is pushed back to December

guess it's impossible that Heaney and ATH could've been having lunch for business reasons???? say affordable housing?...or is it too much of a stretch that a town council member would have any business having lunch with someone who is now the director of economic development for the county and works with the town??? Nah...they were up to no good.....perhaps conspiring to arrest people" Nov 1, 09 5:55 PM

Southampton Town Supervisor candidate Anna Throne-Holst (D, WF)

yeah, you are right....publishing an anonymous letter that suggests a conspiracy to commit a crime by setting up a "fraudelent arrest"... nah, no smear there at all.... " Nov 1, 09 5:57 PM

doesn't matter why they published it...they did....and they also reported on it.....and if they did onlyl because of pressure from bloggers....that's even worse" Nov 1, 09 7:55 PM

Throne-Holst outraised Kabot in election campaign, though supervisor outspent her challenger

maybe I'm wrong....but according to this article, kabot's contributions are $52K, but her expenses are $60K..... throne-holst's contributions are $59K and her expenses are $46K.... so, kabot spent more than she took in...and throne-holst spent less than she took in.... pretty clear example of fiscal responsibility" Nov 2, 09 12:36 PM

and everything was heaney's fault and anna throne-holst is responsible for the dwi....and d.b.cooper is somewhere in balivia with all that money from the capital budget ...." Nov 2, 09 7:35 PM

Report: Missing firearm led to inquiry; Two Westhampton Beach Police officers suspended

Think about it....if any of the officers involved in Kabot's arrest were involved in this case...don't you think the Press would have mentioned that? And one does not have anything to do with the other.... Kabot will have her trial and she will either be found innocent or guilty....and, perhaps, after this, her innocent plea will be looked at with less skepticism and she may even get a fairer trial than before...." Nov 4, 09 8:26 PM

Throne-Holst unseats Kabot as Southampton Town supervisor; Republicans maintain board majority

nicole: sorry your candidate lost....there's no doubt that the dwi made a difference...but ath won 58 to 42 percent...that is a huge margin, especially in the same election where republicans kept control of the board.....I doubt the dwi factor could have erased such a deficit.....it would have most likely been closer, but with these numbers hard to say that it was the determining factor. Had this been a nailbiter...than maybe so" Nov 4, 09 8:38 PM

yes...16 percent is a huge margin for a town supervisor race....especially when you consider that republicans had a good night and kept the board.... No, it's not Reagan-Mondale, but its large enough to make the argument that without the dwi ath would have likely still won...I don't think the 16 percent was solely due to the dwi...that's my point. " Nov 4, 09 10:07 PM

1  |  2  >>