Supervisor reacts angrily, berates resident for asking if there’s anything new with Triple Five

The deal with Triple Five is dead, so stop asking about it.

Riverhead Town Supervisor Yvette Aguiar was clearly annoyed by Riverhead resident’s John McAuliff’s last week at Town Hall, and that was the essence of her irate response to his question about the deal.

McAuliff, coordinator of the EPCAL Watch group, asked the question during the Community Development Agency meeting, which generally takes place once a month on Town Board regular meeting dates. The Town Board is the governing body of the agency, which owns the property at the Calverton Enterprise Park. 

The Town Board passed a resolution in October declaring Riverhead’s $40 million contract with Triple Five affiliate Calverton Aviation and Technology “null and void.” 

Town officials last month acknowledged receiving correspondence from a Triple Five attorney but declined to discuss it, citing the possibility of litigation.

In a statement issued in response to RiverheadLOCAL’s inquiry, the Triple Five affiliate said it had reached out to Riverhead officials in an effort to move forward with the purchase of vacant industrial land at the Calverton Enterprise Park. Failing that, the company said, it would pursue any necessary actions to protect its legal rights.

“I’m wondering if … you can give the town some update as to exactly where that stands,” McAuliff asked last week. “I think the town has a big interest in exactly where that stands.”

Aguiar couldn’t bring herself to simply tell McAuliff — with whom she has been at odds during town meetings for the four years of her tenure as supervisor  —  that there was nothing new. Instead, she lectured him at some length, her voice growing louder as she went.

“I don’t know how to put it, Mr. McAuliff.  We terminated, terminated, ended — E-N-D — the contract,” she told him.

“It’s not going anywhere. If they did threaten to sue us, let them bring it to that point,” Aguiar said.“There is no interaction. We’re not going back and forth with them. There’s a possibility that there might be litigation in the future. So be it. That’s their choice. However, there is no back and forth. There was no entertaining,” Aguiar continued. “The contract is null and void. That is a very simple definition. We’re not going anywhere with it, we’re not entertaining anyone. If they choose to go to litigation, that’s their choice. And then we’ll worry about that. It’s closed, done, gone. There’s no planes flying over here anymore. People not gonna be coming in, there’s not gonna be cargo, there’s not gonna be all kinds of things up in the air, circling the environment,” Aguiar said. 

“Please let it go. It’s gone. It’s over. It’s terminated. I don’t know how clearly to present this to you. And we have in many different ways, including through the town attorney, through each board member, through myself. It’s done. Gone. Null and void,” she told him.  “You’re an activist group. You’re an interest group. You have interests, do what you feel is necessary. We’re not gonna interfere with that.  We’re not gonna guide you. As far as the board is concerned, unless anybody feels any different, within the last two months, it’s null and void. Gone, goodbye,” Aguiar said.

McAuliff was persistent. “That’s a very different answer than a month ago when the statement was made that it couldn’t be talked about because of potential litigation. So that’s — there still is a little uncertainty —”

“Make it what you want it to be,” Aguiar interrupted. “There’s a possibility of litigation. We’re not gonna give you our opinions, they’re just opinions. They haven’t even filed a lawsuit. You’re trying to jump the gun, to keep this alive,” she said.

“I’m not trying to keep this alive, believe me,” McAuliff said.

“I’m not keeping this alive and I believe and I believe my fellow board members feels the same way,” Aguiar said. 

“We need to end this. The property was returned to the residents. The entire board voted for it. And the rationale was null and void. I don’t know how better way to point it to. This, this is very different,” she said. 

“I teach. I’m a professor, and I’m very creative in teaching, but I can’t get this through to you,” Aguiar told him. Aguair, who holds a PhD. from Northcentral University, is listed by American Public University, a private, for-profit online university, as a full-time associate professor. “Null and void. Gone.  Let it be.  Move on to something else. You can probably have a lot more interest and be more effective. Get away from the EPCAL. The contract is not going — we’re not  going anywhere with it,” Aguiar said.

Supervisor-elect Tim Hubbard cut in. “John, the simple answer is nothing has changed since the last time you asked that question,” he said.

McAuliff thanked the incoming supervisor and said he hopes the town proceeds as was discussed at the recent comprehensive plan update public workshop, with a “deep dive about how “we can make use of those 1600 acres for … the long-term benefit of Riverhead. And we look forward to working with you on that. “

“That is the plan,” Hubbard said.

After the conclusion of  last week’s board meeting, Town Attorney Erik Howard said CAT/Triple Five has not filed a notice of claim as required by state law. 

New York State Town Law §65(3) states that before a town can be sued on a cause of action related to a contract with the town, the aggrieved party must file “a written verified claim” with the town clerk. The aggrieved party has six months to file the notice of claim after the cause of action accrues. The law also states that a lawsuit can’t be filed until 40 days after the claim is filed with the town clerk, but the suit must be filed within 18 months of the accrual of the cause of action.

If the Town Board’s resolution declaring the contract null and void marks the accrual of a cause of action against the town, CAT/Triple Five would have until April 24, 2024 to file the notice of claim and until April 24, 2025 to file the lawsuit.

“I obviously hit a raw nerve,” McAuliff said after last week’s meeting, in response to a request for comment on the supervisor’s remarks.

“She expressed pride in having insisted on the kill switch but may have counted on IDA [Riverhead Industrial Development Agency] approval,” he said.

“Methinks the lady doth protest too much.”

Editor’s note: This article has been amended to correct a typo in the date by which a notice of claim must be filed. It is April 24, 2024, not 2023.