LUTHMANN NOTE: Kevin Barry Love can endorse a Republican. Kamillah Hanks can explain why her household’s political sales pitch belongs anywhere near a Democratic leadership title. What neither should expect is immunity from scrutiny because the questions are inconvenient. I’ve sued Hanks and Love over disputed fees and related claims, and readers deserve that disclosure. They also deserve records, answers, and an honest accounting of the influence this household claims. If Council Democrats finally discover accountability when a Republican benefits, they should explain why older public-interest questions failed to produce the same urgency. Party discipline is no substitute for public integrity. This piece is “Hanks’ Republican Love Affair Backfires,” first available on NY News Press.
STATEN ISLAND, N.Y. – Kamillah Hanks’ husband backed a Republican, wants credit for helping that Republican, and may now have handed Council Democrats the excuse to stop treating the Hanks-Love household as somebody else’s problem. Democrats in the City Council say Hanks faces punishment once the election dust settles.
No sanction has been publicly announced, but their grievance is clear: the majority whip’s household cannot advertise its importance to an apparent Republican victory and expect Democratic leadership to applaud.
The NYC Board of Elections’ unofficial returns put Assemblyman Sam Pirozzolo ahead of Democrat Matthew Mobilia by 1,313 votes, with 98.53 percent of scanners reporting as of 12:42 a.m. November 4. Pirozzolo had 18,322 votes across his Republican and Conservative lines; Mobilia had 17,009. Certification remained ahead, but the narrow margin supplied precisely the backdrop in which every political operator starts auditioning for the role of kingmaker.
This outlet reported Love’s endorsement on October 17. Love is now talking as though he and Hanks supplied the winning margin. The tally cannot establish that claim, however enthusiastically Kevin promotes it.
What it establishes is a close contest; what the boasting creates is a leadership headache for a Democrat whose title carries an expectation of political reliability.
Speaker Julie Menin brought Hanks into her leadership team in January, when Hanks publicly thanked her for the trust. A whip helps hold a caucus together.
Having the whip’s husband celebrate a Republican endorsement while claiming the household delivered decisive influence makes that arrangement look less like disciplined leadership and more like a political franchise operating on both sides of the street.
Love has every right to support Pirozzolo, and his endorsement does not automatically become his wife’s. The October report documents his action, rather than a public endorsement by Hanks. But Council Democrats describe her as interested in a borough-president run, and that ambition sharpens the accountability question: does the household want Democratic leadership’s prestige while selling itself as indispensable to Republicans?
Cross-party cooperation has a public purpose; a couple’s perpetual influence auction deserves considerably less reverence.
Council Democrats describe consequences still to come, with no publicly announced decision specifying their form. Menin nevertheless owns the judgment behind her leadership team, and the question of Hanks’ reliability is now sitting squarely on her desk.
The couple’s controversies long predate this endorsement. NY News Press has reported disputed campaign-payment claims and Richard Luthmann’s litigation against Hanks and Love.
Those allegations require their own evidentiary treatment, but they explain why Kevin’s latest victory lap lands against an established record of conflict, rather than an otherwise tranquil political marriage suddenly disrupted by one Republican handshake.
The Ettore Mazzei reporting identified his board role at Hanks’ Historic Tappen Park nonprofit. IRS-derived tax-return data list Hanks receiving $82,375 in 2019. That nonprofit connection warrants scrutiny of governance and the relationships Kevin Barry Love and Kamillah Hanks maintain.
Then came Love’s reported July 10 detention during a Bay Street narcotics sweep. A source claiming to have been detained in the same operation placed him at the McDonald’s and later the 120th Precinct. That account remains uncorroborated by an arrest report, criminal complaint, or released bodycam, which are currently being sought under multiple FOIL requests.
The amended FOIL request seeks records capable of confirming or disproving that account. The NYPD’s July acknowledgment projected a response around November 30, a date still ahead. The responsible demand remains disclosure: establish what happened, explain the disposition, and let the records settle whether political influence entered the process.
A separate campaign-finance trail now reaches Thomas Curitore, the former Staten Island official arrested in Florida last week. Official Campaign Finance Board entries list “Barry, Kevin,” identified for this reporting as Kevin Barry Love, contributing $2,000 on September 25, 2008, and $100 on November 24 to Curitore’s 2009 Council campaign. Both list Maribella X Group and the occupation Real Estate Manager, consistent with contemporaneous reporting about Kevin Barry’s real-estate business.
Other archived donor records list “Barry Love, Kevin” with “Maribella Grp.” as employer.
Curitore was arrested last month by federal law enforcement on one count of distributing visual depictions involving the sexual exploitation of minors. NYC’s own appointment announcement confirms his earlier Staten Island transportation post and NYPD career.
The Child Sexual Abuse Material (CSAM) charge remains an accusation. Love’s donations establish earlier political support, not knowledge of, involvement in, or responsibility for the conduct now charged.
“Ettore Mazzei traffics drugs. Tom Curitore looks like a kiddie porn peddler. Both are lucrative vices,” said a New York City political consultant. “When was the last time Kevin bought or sold a building?”
On November 4, this outlet sent Hanks and Love a 30-question inquiry covering the Pirozzolo endorsement, possible Council consequences, the Bay Street detention account, Mazzei, Curitore, and disputed campaign payments. Speaker Julie Menin was copied on the email. The inquiry invited Hanks and Love to answer separately, deny allegations, identify errors, and supply supporting records.
As of press time, there was no response. Here is what we asked:
Date: On Wednesday, November 4th, 2026 at 3:16 PM
Subject: PRESS INQUIRY: Hanks-Love Republican Victory Lap, NYC Council Fallout, and Unanswered Questions
To: kevinblove@gmail.com, district49@council.nyc.gov, kamillah.hanks@gmail.com, khanks@council.nyc.gov
CC: richard@nynewspress.com, richard.luthmann@protonmail.com, RALafontaine@protonmail.com, ralafontaine@protonmail.com, mthomasnast@protonmail.com, msully0916@gmail.com, frankiepressman@protonmail.com, Jmenin@council.nyc.gov, SpeakerMenin@council.nyc.gov
-
Has anyone discussed your continuation as majority whip, requested an explanation or apology, or raised possible changes to your leadership responsibilities, committee assignments, or participation in caucus activities? What, specifically, has been proposed?
-
Do you intend to remain majority whip, and what is your answer to Democratic colleagues who question whether your household is helping defeat their party’s candidates while benefiting from a Democratic leadership position?
-
Are you considering a campaign for Staten Island borough president? Have you or Mr. Love discussed that prospect with Republican officials, donors, political organizations, or intermediaries? Has support for Pirozzolo figured in any such discussion?
-
Did you enter the 120th Precinct or spend time in a holding cell? If so, when, for how long, and what explanation were you given for your presence or custody?
-
What suspected offense, if any, did officers identify? Were you issued a summons, appearance ticket, release paperwork, property voucher, or other document? Please provide the releasable paperwork and any incident, complaint, arrest, or disposition number.
-
Was any property taken from you, inventoried, retained, or returned? What explanation were you given, and what records document its handling?
-
Did Mazzei, his businesses, or entities he controlled provide money, loans, property, services, fundraising assistance, or other benefits to the nonprofit, either of you, or a Hanks campaign? Please identify the transactions and supporting records.
-
How did you meet Curitore, why did you support his campaign, and what other campaign work, fundraising, introductions, or political assistance did you provide?
-
Did your relationship continue after that campaign? Please describe subsequent personal, political, business, or governmental dealings, and identify your most recent contact.
-
Earlier reporting describes calls to collection attorneys in which you invoked the FBI, DOJ, political connections, or possible professional consequences. Do you dispute that account or the authenticity of the recordings identified in the reporting? Please explain the purpose and context of those communications.
Independent Journalist
(239) 766-5800
What Menin should confront is the Hanks-Love operation’s appetite for influence and the unanswered questions surrounding it. If Democratic colleagues finally act because Kevin helped a Republican, they should explain why party loyalty commands an urgency that older public-interest questions did not.
Hanks cannot make her household’s claimed clout the sales pitch and then treat its political consequences as an intrusion. The whip’s job is to count votes; Kevin’s victory lap may have invited a different count, of colleagues still willing to carry her baggage.
