Branford Settles Wayne Cooke Slander Suit for $500,000

It’s official Branford and Wayne Cooke have finally reached a settlement on his civil rights and slander lawsuit. It will cost taxpayers $250,000 and the town’s insurance carrier will pay an additional $250,000. Cooke will receive $500,000 from the town overall. Cooke has also agreed to pay the town $80,000 in back taxes as well.

Here is a statement by Branford First Selectman James B. Cosgrove on the Cooke settlement released Tuesday afternoon by his office.

“In a nearly unanimous, bi-partisan vote last evening, the Branford RTM gave final approval to the settlement of the civil rights and slander lawsuits brought by Wayne Cooke against the former First Selectman Anthony “Unk” DaRos and Tax Assessor Barbara Neal, First Selectman James B. Cosgrove announced today.

The RTM vote follows similarly strong approvals from the Board of Selectmen and Board of Finance last week.

“The clear winners are the residents of Branford,” said Cosgrove. “I am pleased that members of both parties have come together and helped the Town move forward.”

Last week, the Board of Selectmen approved both the proposed settlements in the Cooke v. DaRos slander/civil rights cases and the three remaining tax appeals filed by Cooke respecting the farmland declassification of certain properties belonging to entities controlled by Mr. Cooke.

On the same day, the Board of Finance voted 5-1 to approve the funding of the Cooke v. DaRos settlement.

“The Board takes its fiscal responsibility to the Town seriously and while it was difficult, we were able to put aside the personalities and the history and do the right thing for the taxpayers,” said Board Chair Joseph Mooney.

In the tax appeal cases, the Town agreed to restore farmland tax status retroactive to 2008 on three of the four properties originally declassified by the Tax Assessor in 2009---616 East Main Street, East Main Street a/k/a Red Hill Road and Thimble Island Road. Farmland status was already restored in the case involving 573 East Main Street in 2010 by the DaRos Administration.

In exchange for the reclassification, Mr. Cooke will pay back taxes on all three properties at the farmland tax rate. The back taxes, which total approximately $80,000, must be paid in full by December 31, 2014 pursuant to the terms of settlement.

Mr. Cooke has already paid the Town approximately $30,000 of this amount.

In addition, Cooke and the various ownership entities will give the Town a full release with respect to the tax appeal matters that includes Town’s officials, agents, Board members and employees.

“The Town has already paid its previous Town Counsel more in legal fees defending these tax appeals than we could ever reasonably recover,” First Selectman James B. Cosgrove said. “There was zero fiscal benefit to the taxpayers in continuing to pay legal expenses in defending these appeals, especially as the Town already conceded farmland status on 573 East Main Street.”

The four parcels had been taxed by Town as a single “farm unit” under the 490 Act since 1955 when highway and road development (I-95 and East Industrial Road) began to split up the property. Connecticut courts have held that under the 490 Act a farm unit can be made up of non-contiguous parcels, including parcels that constitute “woodland or wasteland.”

In the slander and civil rights lawsuits, Cooke will withdraw the lawsuits he filed against DaRos and Neal personally and provide a full release in favor of the Town and its employees, Board Cooke Statement 11-25-14 members and agents in exchange for a $500,000 settlement, half of which will paid by the Town and half by the Town’s insurance carrier.

“Many of the claims involved in these two lawsuits, and the potential punitive damages associated with an adverse decision are not covered by the Town’s insurance,” Cosgrove said. “After the millions spent on settling the Tabor matter, eliminating the risk associated with these lawsuits for $250,000.00 is a business decision that is clearly in the best interest of the residents and taxpayers of Branford.”

The settlement received almost unanimous support from Democrats on the RTM.

Democratic RTM Leader Chris Sullivan said that after hearing more about both sides of the case in executive session, he was convinced that it was time to accept the settlement and move forward.

“I don’t like feeling as though we are rewarding bad behavior, but I know in my work as a risk assessor that minimizing the Town’s potential exposure is the chief objective,” said Sullivan. “I do think that accepting the settlement is probably the best way to minimize the risk to Branford and its taxpayers.”

Selectman Bruce Storm, who voted in favor of the settlement of the lawsuits, noted that he was convinced after hearing a full presentation of the issues.

“I was initially skeptical of rushing to a judgment on the settlement,” said Storm. “But the information provided to the Board made it clear to me that while not perfect, this settlement was the best way to end the slander and civil rights lawsuits.”

Majority Leader Ray Ingraham stated that he felt the settlement was in the Town’s best interest and hoped it would allow town leaders to reduce the animosity associated with these matters.

“Not accepting this settlement would jeopardize the Town’s continuing insurance coverage and expand our exposure,” Ingraham noted. “I simply wasn’t convinced by what I heard that we would ultimately prevail in what would surely be a long, expensive continuation of this personal battle.”

In the slander and civil rights cases, the Town is represented by Thomas Gerarde of Howd & Ludorf under the Town’s insurance policy. Gerarde, who successfully defended DaRos and the Town in the Queach matter years ago, echoed Cosgrove’s remarks.

“These cases were withdrawn without admission of any liability,” Gerarde stated, “but there was real risk here and I strongly recommended this settlement to Town Officials as something that was in their best interest.”

Town Attorney Bill Aniskovich, who worked with Gerarde in bringing the matters to a settlement, also noted the legal risk associated with the tax appeal cases.

“The record created in the tax appeal cases would have presented additional risk to the Town in the slander/civil rights cases with no guarantee of a successful outcome on any of the separate appeals,” Aniskovich said.