Bon Jovi Concert Ethics Debate Still Fuels Town Board Hostility

A discussion of some relatively minor updates to East Hampton Town’s ethics code devolved into a shouting match between Town Board members on Tuesday afternoon, September 14, that revived an ugly spat from the spring over board members’ attendance at a charity dinner and performance by rocker Jon Bon Jovi.

Councilman Jeff Bragman on Tuesday renewed his accusations that his colleagues had accepted “lavish” gifts from the events hosts, Clubhouse owners Scott and Holly Rubenstein, and ignored an instruction by the town’s Ethics Board and Town Attorney John Jilnicki not to bring non-paying guests to the event, which featured a cocktail hour, dinner and the musical performance. Instead, he said, other board members had tried to “cover up” what he says he sees as inappropriate behavior by those in government.

“This is one of the most important issues we deal with — we need to have the public understand that our public officials, particularly the highest public official, is acting ethically,” Mr. Bragman said. “We have an ethics code that prevents us from taking gifts in excess of $75 and this was lavish, lavish hospitality — by a business that we regulate.”

The event was held at The Clubhouse, the restaurant, bowling alley, mini-golf and arcade on the East Hampton Indoor Tennis property in Wainscott. The Rubensteins had donated space on the property early in the pandemic where the JBJ Soul Kitchen, a charity founded by Mr. Bon Jovi — whose real name is John Bongiovi — and his wife, Dorothea, set up a food bank that supported local food pantries for months after they were beset by soaring demand when the pandemic put thousands out of work.

The May 8 performance by Mr. Bon Jovi, who has a house in East Hampton, was billed as a “thank you” appreciation concert for those who supported the food bank and local food pantries through the pandemic. A press release about the event said that 30 “front line” volunteers had been invited to the show, though most of the crowd were guests of the hosts, who made a $50,000 donation to Project MOST and Meals On Wheels at the event. Mr. Van Scoyoc and other board members issued several proclamations at the event to volunteers, the Rubensteins and JBJ Soul Kitchen.

Mr. Bragman said that the dinner and private concert should nonetheless have been considered to be worth far more than $75, even though there were no tickets to the event advertised as for sale. The councilman said that he attended the early cocktail hour but left before the dinner and show because of his ethical concerns.

“What this shows is that there was an ethical blindness, or at least an ethical [insensitivity],” he said. “We should not be taking gifts. We should not be dealing with wealthy and powerful business owners behind closed doors. [The ethics code] is designed to create a high degree of moral conduct. I think the board fails to honor our ethical rules. I don’t like what it says about how we do business.”

As it had in the spring, the week after the event, when Mr. Bragman first leveled his accusations of impropriety at his colleagues, the sentiment angered Mr. Van Scoyoc and other board members, who accused Mr. Bragman of having politicized the issue.

“I find it really repulsive that you try to assassinate the character of the Town Board,” Mr. Van Scoyoc said Tuesday — insinuating, as he had previously, that Mr. Bragman had driven drunk after leaving the event and was trying to use the issue as a political cattle prod in his campaign against Mr. Van Scoyoc in the Democratic primary and now the general election. “You certainly could have expressed your opinions to your fellow Town Board members. You never did so … Instead you decided to play ‘gotcha’ by bringing it up at [a board work session].”

Following the event and the very public dust-up over the matter that played out in public meetings, on social media and in the newspaper, the Ethics Board issued a second letter to the Town Board, saying that it had felt hamstrung by the short-notice with which it was presented the matter, scolded board members for having ignored the advice on refraining from bringing guests and for turning its opinion into a “political football” as board member Judy Samuelson described it on Tuesday.

Members of the Ethics Board on Tuesday said that the board wanted to make clear to officials that it sees the timing they were given to render an opinion and the way that opinion was used as ill-advised.

“We’d like to reaffirm that time is needed to come up with an opinion,” board chairman Hugh King said. “Our correspondence with the [Town Board] should be kept confidential unless we agree it should be put out in the public sphere and … if our words are to be put out to the public, they should be portrayed accurately, and we were afraid that did not happen in this case.”

Setting aside the details of the debate over the Bon Jovi event itself, Ms. Samuelson said the board was left unhappy with the way its role had been handled in general.

“We were dismayed,” she said. “The time frame offered kind of indicates a lack of respect for the weight of the Board of Ethics.

“Our opinions are intended for the individual requesting the opinion and the entire town council,” she continued. “As an ethics board, we are scrupulously non-partisan and we object to our opinion being used in any other way.”

Mr. Van Scoyoc apologized for the short notice with which the request for guidance and been foist upon the Ethics Board, saying that he hadn’t considered asking for an opinion on the matter until he got wind of the fact that doubts had been raised — presumably by Mr. Bragman — about the propriety of board members attending, just two days before.

In a hurried opinion letter, the Ethics Board had cleared the board members to attend the event but warned them about bringing guests. All of the board members other than Mr. Bragman brought their spouses or significant others to the event — though Mr. Van Scoyoc and Councilman David Lys later said that their wives had been invited separately by the hosts.

Mr. King criticized Mr. Bragman’s handling of the matter as well — though not by name — saying the board was stunned to see their opinion letter end up on Facebook, which Mr. Bragman acknowledged was his doing, and that a letter to the editor of the East Hampton Star, also penned by Mr. Bragman, had not represented the Ethics Board’s options correctly.

As the argument between the elected officials descended into vitriolic shouting over one another, Ms. Samuelson and other Ethics Board members “walked out” of the virtual Zoom meeting.

“I’m uncomfortable listening to this whole discussion,” Ms. Samuelson said. “I feel like it’s a family battle and it’s not my family. So, with respect, I’m going to leave … I hope you will continue to consult us if you have questions on another issue because I never want to hear about this issue again.”