Acrimony Between Trustees and Warren Has Grown; Mayor Says Tensions Are Politically Motivated

Over the past month and a half, acrimony, accusations, discord and dueling narratives have become de rigueur at Southampton Village Board meetings, with the four village trustees, Gina Arresta, Bill Manger, Robin Brown and Roy Stevenson, presenting a united front as they’ve clashed with Mayor Jesse Warren over an ever-growing number of issues.

Whether it’s as simple as appointing community members to serve on a tree committee, or more serious business like hiring a new police chief, finding common ground with his fellow trustees has become an increasingly uphill battle for Warren — who is seeking reelection this spring and suggests that the tensions on the board may be politically motivated.

Attempts by the trustees to disguise or tamp down their frustrations with him during meetings have seemingly been abandoned, with differences that may have previously been worked out behind closed doors spilling over into public view.

Relations between the trustees and the mayor took a notable turn after the mid-December appointment of Suffolk County Deputy Police Commissioner Anthony Carter as the village’s new police chief — a failed attempt, as Warren harshly criticized the appointment, leading Carter to eventually withdraw.

Warren cast the lone dissenting vote against the provisional hiring of Carter, who would have needed to finish among the top three on a Suffolk County Civil Service exam set for March 25 to assume the job. At the special meeting on December 12 announcing Carter’s hiring — with Carter, and his wife and children present, as well as members of the public and media, and several Southampton Village Police officers — Warren spoke at length about his opposition to the hiring.

He expanded on those thoughts in an “Viewpoint” piece published in The Southampton Press a week later, and then participated in a story about Carter’s hiring published in the New York Post, which further highlighted his opposition and referred to the compensation package that Carter had been offered as “fat.”

A month later, Carter dropped out, letting the four trustees know that despite their public shows of support in him, he had ultimately decided to walk away from the job offer he had accepted only a few weeks earlier.

The trustees sent out a press release announcing Carter’s decision, in which they sternly rebuked Warren for his behavior, saying his actions had led Carter to decline the position. Notably, the release stated that “other recent actions” of Warren’s, which they described as “detrimental to the best interests of the village and residents,” would be “addressed at a later date.”

The follow-through on that promise came this week.

At the work session on Tuesday night, the board approved a resolution, by a 4-1 vote, stating that if the mayor is going to be absent from the village or otherwise unavailable to perform his or her duties for a period in excess of 24 hours, the mayor must notify the deputy mayor and village administrator of that expected absence or unavailability, in person or by telephone and by email.

The impetus for adding that resolution to the agenda was a December 23 weather event that required the issuance of an emergency order and closure of a flooded road. Arresta, the deputy mayor, said that on the morning of the storm, she and the rest of the trustees, as well as Village Administrator Charlene Kagel-Betts and other village officials, repeatedly tried to reach Warren by phone and text message to coordinate a timely response to the weather emergency, but were unsuccessful.

Warren ultimately issued the emergency order, sending it out via an email disseminated by Village Attorney Andrew Preston. Arresta said Warren never responded directly to her or the other trustees and village administrator, and added that it wasn’t until days later that she found out that Warren was on vacation.

Warren pushed back against the resolution, and the claim that he was nonresponsive during that time, calling the assertion that he was not in the village on December 23 “malicious and false” when it was discussed at the work session, while handing out printed copies of the emails showing that he sent the emergency order through Preston shortly before noon on December 23.

For Arresta, Warren’s conduct on that day was another example of his inability to communicate with her and other trustees in a proper and professional manner. She said that, in the past, Warren was always forthcoming with her about when he would be out of town, but lately, there has been a “tremendous” shift in the way Warren has operated, in terms of communication.

“It seems like it’s his way or no way,” she said.

That sentiment seems to be shared by the other trustees.

“The mayor likes to cut out from his communication channels anyone who disagrees with him,” Stevenson said. “If you don’t agree with him, you’re off the list of people he’s going to talk to.”

Stevenson accused the mayor of doing that not only to his fellow trustees but to Kagel-Betts, the village administrator, as well.

Kagel-Betts filed a lawsuit on Monday afternoon, suing Warren and the village, alleging she was subjected to age and gender discrimination, a hostile work environment, retaliation and slander. Warren said on Tuesday morning that a judge hired by the village to investigate those claims did not find evidence that any of the alleged discrimination took place.

Stevenson served on the police chief search committee, along with Brown, who chaired that committee. Brown backed up Stevenson’s assessment of the mayor’s behavior.

“Each individual has the prerogative to vote their conscience. However, there is a general expectation of civility that is expected of each individual on the board,” she said. “If that level of civility is breached, we have to respond and curb it.

“The mayor sees things in terms of loyalty to him personally, while I see my role as serving the interests of the village and its residents,” Brown continued. “The mayor is offended if the trustees do not support him blindly on every measure and retaliates if someone fails to do so. This can include withholding support for public safety measures.

“The mayor has said repeatedly that he has the right to vote his conscience. No one disagrees with that, but the mayor must understand that is a right that all the trustees hold.”

For his part, Warren said he is focused on trying to “take the high road” and remain above the fray and focused on doing the business of the village, although he added he feels compelled to respond to allegations he says are false, such as the one made by Arresta that he was out of town on December 23.

He characterized the recent actions of the trustees essentially as politicking, pointing out that nominating petitions for village elections are due in two months.

Warren is running for reelection for what would be a third term as mayor and said he already knows who his opposition will be: Bill Manger, who was elected to his current seat on the Village Board last spring, having served a prior stint before taking a job in Washington, D.C.

“Bill told me in no uncertain terms that he’s running for mayor,” Warren said. “And in my conversations with the trustees, they have said they’re supporting him. So, clearly, they have chosen their horse, and their goal at this point in time is to essentially seek to do whatever they can to advance their cause.”

On Tuesday, Manger forcefully denied telling Warren he was planning a run for mayor.

When asked, separately, last week if he would run, Manger didn’t confirm or deny any plans to challenge Warren but left open the possibility.

“I haven’t made a decision at this point,” he said. “I’m not running today. We’ll just have to see how things unfold.”