Selling out Riverhead’s future, one bad idea at a time

The Town of Riverhead, once a tranquil stretch of farmland and small-town charm, is now the epicenter of a battle between progress and preservation — or at least that’s how they want you to see it. But peel back the layers of political spin, and you’ll find something far more insidious: a Town Board that claims to champion the interests of the community while lining the pockets of developers.

Let’s start with the man at the helm, Town Supervisor Tim Hubbard. This is the same guy who saw nothing wrong with finding Triple Five eligible to take over EPCAL and who later backed a proposal for a man-made lake in environmentally sensitive land. A lake that— oh, surprise!—might be a sand mining operation worth millions to anyone who pitched it. And now, Hubbard and his cronies on the board are trying to sell us on the idea that farm hotels and agritourism are the salvation for struggling farmers. Right. Because what every farmer needs to stay afloat is not better subsidies or cheaper loans and working capital or fairer market prices but a hotel chain sprouting up in the middle of their fields.

The truth is, the only thing growing here is developers—and by extension, the political war chest of the local in-power political party. Have campaign contributions from developers turned the Town Board into a de facto real estate agency, one that conveniently forgets its job to protect the land and the people who work it? It’s all about the money, folks. And when the outcry gets too loud, when the pitchforks and protest signs appear at town meetings, what do they do? They backpedal faster than a cyclist in a hurricane, with the supervisor claiming he never really liked the idea for a long time. Sure, Tim. We believe you.

It’s not just Hubbard, though. The entire board, all Republicans, seems to have forgotten who they work for. They speak of tax revenue and financial stability like priests reciting a holy text, as if the only way to save the town is to sell it piece by piece to the highest bidder. And when their proposals get called out for the potential scams they are, they pull the old switcheroo—suddenly, they’re the people’s champions, backing away from their own proposals as if they never even liked them in the first place.

This latest chapter in Riverhead’s ongoing saga of political theater was the adoption of the town’s comprehensive plan. The board proudly patted themselves on the back, proclaiming they’d listened to the people by removing the controversial agritourism resort recommendation. But don’t be fooled by this display of faux humility. In my opinion, the only reason they backed off was because their jobs were on the line. They’re not in this to help farmers or preserve farmland in my opinion—they’re in it to for much more selfish reasons.

Council Member Merrifield had the nerve to say that rejecting commercial development ignores “immense tax problems.” Well, here’s an idea, Denise: How about finding ways to solve those problems that don’t involve turning our town into the next commercial wasteland?

It’s not rocket science—it’s called responsible governance. But that might be asking too much from a board that potentially thinks creating a man-made lake on fragile land is a good idea.

And let’s not forget the rest of the crew. Council members Rothwell and Kern lament the town’s financial woes, bemoaning the lack of “solutions” from the community. Maybe that’s because the community is too busy trying to stop you from bulldozing their way of life in the name of “progress.” Kern even had the gall to say, “Residents can’t keep saying no to everything.” Well, Bob, maybe if you proposed something that didn’t benefit developers at the expense of everyone else, the community might actually say yes.

But here’s the kicker: Hubbard, in a stunning display of cognitive dissonance, claimed that agritourism resorts wouldn’t have had all the negative impacts predicted by the community. Yet he voted against it. Why? Because he’s “listening to the people.” No, Tim, in my opinion, you’re listening to the sound of your own job slipping away.

Maybe it’s time for a change in Riverhead. We need leaders who actually care about the future of this town, not just their next campaign check. Maybe it’s time to replace the party hacks with professionals—people who understand that governance is about more than just expanding the tax base. It’s about preserving the character of our town, protecting the environment, and ensuring that the people who put food on our tables—the real farmers—can continue to do so.

So, here’s a thought for the Town Board: If you’re so desperate to expand the tax base, why not start by taxing the developers who are lining their pockets with our tax money, instead of defending the IDA’s tax breaks? Or better yet, why not come up with proposals that actually benefit the community instead of just some folks’ bottom line? Because right now, all you’re doing is selling out Riverhead, one bad idea at a time.

Robert Gass is retired 27-year FDNY veteran and a resident of Calverton.