A group largely consisting of young Latino adults who are determined to both live on the South Fork and participate in the political process have organized a monthly meeting at which they can discuss the issues important to them and their peers.

The first such meeting of the group, dubbed the New Leaders of East Hampton, will be on Monday from 6 to 8 p.m. at D’Canela restaurant in Amagansett. The restaurant, which serves Latin and Mexican cuisine, is a popular gathering place for Latino residents of the South Fork, said George Salazar, a member of the group who is also a manager there.

The East Hampton Democrats, with which some members of the group are aligned, “want to get as many people involved with the community — especially immigrants, not necessarily people that were born here — and give them a chance at new opportunities,” Mr. Salazar said.

The South Fork’s Latino community is underrepresented in government, said Mr. Salazar, who was born in Columbia and came to the United States in 1998. “Someone in politics that will speak our language and understand our issues and where we are coming from” would be beneficial to that demographic, he said.

The Latino population on the South Fork is “huge, and I don’t think we’re well represented,” agreed Isabel Saavedra, a 2006 graduate of East Hampton High School who is now an immigration attorney. “I joined because I live here full time now, and would want that to change. Anyone can be on the committee,” she said, “but it’s mostly minorities. We want to get more involved in the community.”

Integration and a greater sense of inclusion would benefit all of the town’s residents, said Franaldo Hanna, who works at CW Arborists in East Hampton. “When I grew up there was more of a community feeling,” he said, “as opposed to it being all about money.” More year-round activities for youth, he said, would also serve the community by discouraging the negative consequences, such as drug use, of “too much downtime.”

Mr. Salazar, Ms. Saavedra, and Mr. Hanna all cited the scarcity of affordable housing on the South Fork, which has forced many young adults to leave their hometown, as the most urgent issue of the day. “Every day, housing is becoming harder and harder to find,” Mr. Salazar said, and is “especially difficult once you have a family.”

“Do we really have to move out of here because it’s not affordable?” Ms. Saavedra asked. “We want to change that concept by having people to represent the people that live here year round.”

All have been invited to attend the meetings, Ms. Saavedra said. “The more people that get involved, the better.”

Alexander Peters of Amagansett, who owns 3.5 acres of vacant land atop the Stony Hill aquifer there and wants to sell the parcel to the Town of East Hampton but has been stymied by a 20-year-old deed giving others a right of first refusal, said this week that a recent development may support his cause.

In 1992 and 1997, Richard J. Smolian sold Mr. Peters two vacant lots on LaForet Lane, which, together with a third lot at 82 Stony Hill Road, make up the land he wants to sell. The deeds of sale, however, included a provision that should an offer be made for those two lots then Mr. Smolian, along with Randy Smolian, his former wife; Darielle Smolian, his daughter, and Jonathan Smolian, his son, could buy them back for the same price if they so chose, provided the family retained its ownership of an adjacent lot.

Mr. Peters, president of the advocacy group Amagansett Springs Aquifer Protection, sued in State Supreme Court in December for summary judgment, asserting among other things that Randy, Jonathan, and Darielle Smolian are “strangers,” or not parties, to the deeds. If a judge agrees, that would nullify their claim to right of first refusal.

Richard Smolian waived his own claim some time ago, but stated that his family members had refused. Jonathan Smolian has now enlisted partners with whom he would develop the property.

Mr. Peters offered Jonathan a settlement of $100,000, which was declined. “The loss to me and my partners would be far too substantial to decline the purchase,” Jonathan Smolian wrote in an email to an intermediary.

Last June, the East Hampton Town Board appropriated $3.6 million, a figure that is below the land’s market value, to buy the land, using money from the community preservation fund. The lots in question are part of a Long Island Special Groundwater Protection Area and of the town’s own Water Recharge Overlay District.

On April 6, Mr. Smolian, who like Mr. Peters wants to see the land preserved, signed an affidavit formally waiving his right of first refusal. “He went out of his way to reaffirm that,” said Anthony Pasca, Mr. Peters’s attorney. “To the extent he’s taking sides, it’s a significant statement.”

The affidavit has been submitted to the court.

“Dick is basically asserting the understanding that he and I have had for a quarter-century,” Mr. Peters said on Monday. “He has just come out confirming everything that we have alleged. All I want to do here is the right thing: sell to the town, as everyone in these watershed areas should. That’s what we need to do as citizens of the Town of East Hampton. No more house lots here if you want to drink clean water.”

According to Mr. Peters’s lawsuit, the town’s purchase would stipulate that public use and enjoyment be allowed on the land and wildlife habitat maintained. Even if the Smolians can legally exercise their right of first refusal, the suit contends, they would be compelled to match those conditions and limitations.

Jonathan Smolian did not reply to a telephone call and email seeking comment.

When the East Hampton Town Planning Board met on April 22, all the stars seemed — at first, anyway — to be aligned for the approval of a proposed 40-acre subdivision of mostly open Wainscott farmland into seven buildable lots and a large agricultural reserve. The plan for the property, at 55 Wainscott Hollow Road, has had both neighbors and board members sharply divided.

Bob Schaeffer, a member of the board who has championed the plan but has missed a few meetings lately while undergoing radiation and chemotherapy treatment, was present that night. Each time Mr. Schaeffer missed a meeting, the proposal was tabled at the applicants’ request. His presence was vital to them because of the dissension on the board; four of its seven members had to approve the plan.

Mr. Schaeffer has now finished his treatments, and told board members he was feeling much better. So for the applicants, headed by Jeffrey Colle and Michael Dell, it seemed the right moment to have the board vote, as Diana Weir, who has repeatedly called the proposed map “bad planning,” was absent.

Ms. Weir objects to the placement of five buildable lots along a hedge line northwest of the property, across what is now open vista. She also opposes the long driveway off Wainscott Hollow Road that is proposed as access to all seven lots, even though two of them would be just off Sayre’s Path, on the other side of the land once owned by Ronald Lauder. Mary Jane Asato, the applicants’ representative, had explained in 2012, when the subdivision process began, that an address on Wainscott Hollow Road was worth more on the market than one on Sayre’s Path.

When the vote was taken, Ms. Asato was left visibly perturbed. Reed Jones, the chairman, Job Potter, and Kathleen Cunningham, all voted no, while Mr. Schaeffer was joined by the other two members present, Nancy Keeshan and Ian Calder-Piedmonte. That left the board deadlocked.

Ms. Asato rose. “This is a denial,” she said. “My remedy is to basically challenge it through the courts.” She then turned and walked out.

It will now be up to the town attorney’s office to defend the vote. Ms. Asato has already beaten the town and its planning board once in a lawsuit over the property. In 2011, a State Supreme Court justice ordered the board to reverse its denial of a site plan she had put forward in 2009.

Seeking Independence Party Candidates

The East Hampton Independence Party will screen candidates for the Nov. 3 election on Tuesday and Wednesday at 7 pm. at the community hall of the senior citizens housing complex at St. Michael’s Lutheran Church in Amagansett.

The party will screen candidates for the positions of town supervisor, the town board, superintendent of highways, assessor, trustees, and justice. Candidates, who may screen on either night, have been asked to provide a résumé.

Those seeking more information can call Elaine Jones, the Independence Party’s chairwoman, at 267-8820, or Pat Mansir, the vice chairwoman, at 324-4131.

G.O.P. Honors Trustees

The East Hampton Town Republican Committee, which held a candidate screening on Tuesday, will host a celebration of the town trustees next Thursday from 6 to 7:30 p.m. at Michael’s Restaurant in Springs. All have been welcomed to join in honoring the trustees.

The $50 suggested donation, which includes heavy hors d’oeuvres, can be paid either by check, made out to the committee and mailed to P.O. Box 616, East Hampton 11937, or online at ehnygop.com.

Those planning to attend have been asked to RSVP by calling 875-8652.

Residents of a Napeague neighborhood along the Atlantic beach are facing down Memorial Day without the no-parking signs that stood for years along the west side of Dolphin Drive, and are predicting traffic and problems caused by people seeking a spot to park so they can go to the ocean beach.

On the east side of Dolphin Drive is the town-owned South Flora nature preserve, a site for which future plans are still up in the air. While the ecologically fragile land will be protected, a draft management plan developed by members of the town’s nature preserve committee that calls for an area where visitors can park also has the neighborhood residents up in arms.

Jonathan Wallace, an attorney who lives on Dolphin Drive, has filed suit against East Hampton Town. Allowing parking on that street, he contends, threatens his health and well-being if ambulance and fire trucks are unable to pass, “threatens to create intolerable congestion on the street,” the suit says, and could threaten his house because “any erosion of the South Flora nature preserve dune system” would “amplify flooding.”

Neighborhood residents who spoke to the town board last Thursday and on Tuesday painted a picture of cars speeding through their streets seeking places to park and beachgoers who will leave litter on the sand.

Town Supervisor Larry Cantwell said Tuesday that a survey authorized last week by the board would determine the width of the road and its right of way along Dolphin Drive and the border of the nature preserve — information that the board will consider in determining what to do about parking along the street.

The draft management plan for the preserve has not been formally submitted to the board for consideration, but when it is it will be publicly discussed, he said, with a hearing held to solicit public comment before a management plan is adopted.

Mr. Cantwell said Tuesday that “it would be a mistake to leave that street without any parking restrictions whatsoever” during the coming season. “I think the board has to address the issue for this summer,” he said.

Residents had protested some time ago when no-parking signs along the west side of Dolphin Drive were removed. Although the signs had been up for years, a search of the town code found no law on the books prohibiting parking. The no-parking signs had been changed to signs allowing resident-only parking for a time.

Having cars parked along the road would inhibit emergency vehicle access, Mr. Wallace told the town board last week.

On Tuesday, his wife, Mary Wallace, told the board the neighborhood is facing an “urgent, urgent, dire situation.” Without a parking ban, she said, “We’re inviting cars and strangers into the neighborhood who are going to be speeding through. Believe you me,” she said, “somebody’s going to get hurt.”

“We are going to go up to every level of government,” she vowed. She urged the board to “kill that management plan,” calling it “a danger to our community,” and to reinstall the no-parking signs.

“We believe our street will be taken over by the party crowd and look like Cyril’s did before the town took action,” Mr. Wallace said in an email on Tuesday. “We are afraid of drunken drivers but also of congestion so great ambulances and fire trucks will not be able to reach us.”

“The town’s liability for an injury or death here, or failure of an emergency vehicle to get through, will potentially be immense,” he said.

In his lawsuit, Mr. Wallace demands a judgment from the court that the change in the parking signs, from no parking to resident-only parking, and finally the removal of the signs altogether, was illegal. He seeks to have the no-parking signs restored, and asks that the court permanently block parking there.

The East Hampton Town Zoning Board of Appeals, by a vote of 4 to 1, rejected a request from four homeowners to build a revetment on Gardiner’s Bay toward the end of Louse Point Road. The application had stirred considerable interest and been the subject of two public hearings.

The applicants, who own adjacent lots on the bluffs, wanted to construct a 560-foot-long revetment, using two and four-ton stones, to protect their properties from erosion. The plan called for a triangular stack of stones to be connected to an old revetment in front of two properties immediately to the north. It was designed to start at three feet below sea level and stretch to the top of the bluffs, some 13 feet above sea level.

The town code bans erosion-control structures in that area, but the applicants’ representatives had told the board over the course of the hearings and almost eight hours of testimony that the proposed revetment was the only solution that could effectively protect their clients’ properties.

At their work session on April 14, board members enunciated the multiple problems they found with the application. First and foremost, members insisted that the applicants had never really tried an alternative, at least not one that was documented for the board.

“The code requires that the applicant must prove that coastal restoration projects won’t work,” Cate Rogers, the board’s vice chairwoman, said. She went on to point out that the town trustees, who own the beaches in that area, opposed the project, as did Kevin McAllister, the former Peconic baykeeper.

In the first of several skirmishes that night between board members and Don Cirillo, the member of the panel who voted for the revetment, Mr. Cirillo cited a presentation by Charles Voorhis of Nelson, Pope and Voorhis, a coastal planning company. “They are telling us that soft solutions won’t work,” he said. The other board members sided with Ms. Rogers.

David Lys said the only previous effort that had been made as an alternative to a revetment did not come close to qualifying as a true restoration project. It was not done by engineers, he said. Rather, “sand was placed on the beach by a mining company.”

Board members said the applicants had not proven their contention that the erosion they were fighting  was chronic. Ms. Rogers said that before each of the public hearings on the matter, first in August of 2014, then in March of this year, she had photographed the site and concluded that there appeared to be no visible change. She quoted a statement by one of the applicants with regard to Hurricanes Irene and Sandy. “If it wasn’t for those two storms, I probably wouldn’t be here,” he had said.

Mr. Lys pointed out that the waters of the bay in the area are shallow. “There is a lot of sand out there,” he said. “You can go out 150 yards at low tide, and the water is only waist high.”

John Whelan, chairman, cited the availability of 12,500 cubic yards of sand that potentially could be dredged from Accabonac Harbor and used for coastal restoration there. “They have not addressed the issue of scouring,” he said, adding that the revetment was likely to eliminate public access to the beach at high tide.

Mr. Cirillo, on the other hand, said denying the application could result in the high water mark being at the applicants’ back doors. He challenged other board members several times, saying they weren’t properly balancing the negative and positive sides of the proposal.

“I don’t think you’re a proxy for the applicant,” Ms. Rogers said to Mr. Cirillo, during one sharp exchange.

Another 4-to-1 vote turning down an application took place that night. TJX Corporation, the owner of HomeGoods, the home furnishings company moving into the 15,000-square-foot store recently constructed on Montauk Highway in Wainscott, had applied to put up a sign on the back as well as the front of the building, exceeding the total square footage allowed. With the exception of Mr. Cirillo, members did not see the need for a sign in back, since the massive store is the only business being served by the parking lot.

“It would just open the door for every business,” Lee White warned. “It can change the character of a neighborhood,” Ms. Rogers said, before the vote was taken.

The East Hampton Town Republican Committee will hold screenings on Tuesday at 7 p.m. at the American Legion in Amagansett for the positions of town supervisor and town councilperson. Two town board seats, those of Sylvia Overby and Peter Van Scoyoc, Democrats, are up for re-election this year.

In addition, the G.O.P. has invited those wishing to screen for a seat with the town trustees to be interviewed on Tuesday.

Those wishing to screen or attend have been asked to contact Tom Knobel, the G.O.P. chairman, at 875-8652.

The East Hampton Democrats will screen candidates on May 6 and 7. Details are to be announced.

East Hampton Town

A Place to Meditate in Eddie Ecker Park

A 50-foot-wide stone path in the shape of a labyrinth will be constructed in a section of the Eddie Ecker Park, on Fort Pond Bay in Montauk.

With a vote last Thursday night, the East Hampton Town Board agreed to accept a donation from Twelve Women, a local group, to fund the installation and maintenance of the labyrinth, a cobblestone path leading in concentric circles. Walking a labyrinth is a traditional spiritual and meditative practice.

The Montauk Citizens Advisory Committee “overwhelmingly approved the idea,” Councilman Peter Van Scoyoc, the liaison to the group, said in an email this week. However, he said, the concept will be referred to the town’s division of land management for input before the labyrinth is installed.

Town Seeks to Buy Parcels in Springs

Springs will be the next focus of an East Hampton Town community preservation fund campaign to acquire land around water bodies and in watersheds, as well as parcels that can provide trail links and add to already preserved areas.

Scott Wilson, the town’s director of land acquisition and management, told the town board on Tuesday that about 130 tracts have been targeted; their owners will receive letters from the town asking whether they are interested in selling. The targeted areas cover about 350 acres, Mr. Wilson said.

A small number of the sites contain houses or other structures, which would be removed by the town, as would lawns. Development on environmentally sensitive lands has a direct impact on nearby waters such as Accabonac Harbor, Mr. Wilson said.

A similar outreach effort already undertaken, to preserve areas around Lake Montauk, has resulted so far in the purchase of 25 parcels, with more, potentially, to come. This is the first large-scale outreach to Springs property owners, Mr. Wilson said, and likely not the last.

A carry-in, carry-out policy aimed at keeping trash from piling up at East Hampton Town beaches could begin on a trial basis this summer, at a beach yet to be chosen.

At a town board discussion on Tuesday, members approved of the idea but said it would require extensive public education and a shift in the mindset of beachgoers accustomed to leaving their trash in the cans at beach road ends, or, worse, on the beach. The cans often overflow despite frequent pickups.

“We’ve basically programmed people to associate road ends with garbage locations,” Councilman Peter Van Scoyoc said. In addition to the detritus from a day at the beach, some people bring household trash to deposit in the town cans at public places.

“Rather than continually going bigger and inviting more and more garbage at those locations, why not reduce the amount?” Mr. Van Scoyoc asked. Removing the trash cans altogether would require people to take their trash home from the beach, the councilman said. The approach is used successfully at state and federal parks, he noted.

But, acknowledged Supervisor Larry Cantwell, “you’re going to have some pain.” Even if the program eventually proves successful, he said, “you’re going to have some transition period that’s not going to be pretty.”

The town’s litter committee has been discussing the carry-in, carry-out approach, which was first suggested years ago by former Town Councilman Pete Hammerle. It has been approved by the East Hampton Town Trustees, and was discussed on Monday by the Amagansett Citizens Advisory Committee; that meeting is reported on elsewhere in this issue. Many members of the committee objected to making Indian Wells Beach in Amagansett the guinea pig, though they were more amenable to the idea of a pre-season trial in May and June.

Initiating the change at a “locals’ beach” is key, Councilman Van Scoyoc said, as residents are likely to feel a greater stake in keeping beaches clean, and could help to spread the word — and new habits — among summertime visitors.

“It has to be very well advertised, what we’re trying to achieve,” he said. Councilwoman Sylvia Overby agreed. “It would have to be a full-on press that this was happening.”

An awareness campaign could take a tailored approach according to which beach is chosen to roll out the program, said Councilwoman Kathee Burke-Gonzalez, who has had a career in advertising. For instance, she said, if Indian Wells is chosen, outreach efforts could center on participants in the town junior lifeguard program, which takes place there, and on schoolchildren, for whom being old enough to spend a summer day alone on the beach with friends is “a rite of passage,” she said. If the Ditch Plain Beach, another possible location, were chosen, perhaps the surfers who frequent that spot would be targeted.

“It’s got to be structured in such a way that it has a chance to succeed,” Mr. Cantwell said, with enough lead time to publicize the new policy.

Ms. Overby, the liaison to the litter committee, agreed to have that group work on details of the pilot program, and Mr. Van Scoyoc, who is the board’s interface with the Parks and Sanitation Departments, will further the discussion with them.

Changes to the East Hampton Town Code were on the town board’s agenda this week, and hearings will be scheduled soon to gauge public opinion on some of them.

In the face of widespread unhappiness with a plan to open some town launching ramps to use by personal watercraft such as Jet Skis, board members agreed it should not move forward.

The Springs Citizens Advisory Committee, asked by Martin Drew, a Springs resident, on behalf of his brother, to advocate for the proposal, had given its blessing, and Ed Michels, the town’s chief marine patrol officer, backed it as well. The current law bans the watercraft from town harbors.

Councilman Fred Overton, who, as the Springs C.A.C. liaison, brought the issue to the board, told members at Tuesday’s work session that there is “not an overwhelming support for this legislation. There are more concerns that have been raised.” He said he had received about a dozen emails from people who disagreed with the change, and only two in support of it.

“There is nothing that would make me decide to change the status quo,” said Councilman Peter Van Scoyoc. Other board members agreed; the matter will be dropped.

As businesses get ready for the summer season, the board reviewed legislation that would address the recent transformation, particularly in Montauk, of once-quiet motels into destination restaurants or clubs. Resorts and motels may have bars or restaurants on site, but they are considered an “accessory” to the main business of lodging, and primarily for overnight guests.

A number of Montauk motels have also become restaurants or nightspots in their own right, causing neighborhood problems with crowding and noise, especially where the motels are “pre-existing, nonconforming” uses in a residential area — that is, established before zoning laws took effect.

To stem the tide, the board is considering an amendment that would require a special permit from the planning board to add a bar or restaurant. Only businesses with 25 or more rooms would be eligible, and the new facility would have to be housed in an existing building. Music or other entertainment could only take place with a town music entertainment permit, and no amplified outdoor music would be allowed.

The law would additionally require outdoor seating areas to be a certain distance from neighboring residences, twice that of the setback for accessory buildings such as sheds.

The new regulations would not apply to resorts or motels that already have restaurants or bars unless they seek permits for a “substantial expansion,” as defined by the town code. In that case, they would have to meet the new standards.

Laura Michaels of Montauk’s Ditch Plains Association voiced support for the measure at Tuesday’s meeting. The proposed law is a “much-needed initiative,” she said, to address the “rapidly expanding” club scene in Montauk. Another possible change to the zoning code would add flower shops to the list of businesses allowed to operate in the town’s limited-business zones, residential areas where certain kinds of businesses deemed compatible with the neighborhood are allowed.

While most retail businesses are barred from those zones (with the exception of antiques shops and art galleries), a florist or flower shop would be allowed provided that items were not displayed outdoors, nor sales conducted outdoors. Wholesale sales would not be allowed; neither would raising plants on the site.

The proposal came about at the request of Beth Eckhardt, who has to move her business, Amagansett Flowers by Beth, from its spot on Amagansett’s Main Street and is eyeing another Main Street location in the limited-business zone. “It’s a real-life circumstance” that prompted the discussion of the code change, Bill Fleming, her attorney, said this week.

Board members agreed to schedule a hearing on the draft law. “It’s hard to be against flowers, I guess,” Supervisor Larry Cantwell said. “Especially after a long winter,” said Councilman Peter Van Scoyoc.

Two other bureaucratic changes were discussed briefly. A change in the building permit fees for structures greater than 3,500 square feet appears to be in the works, at the request of the Building Department. The fees have not been increased since 2008, Ann Glennon of the department told board members, and should be in keeping with those of surrounding municipalities. Mr. Van Scoyoc agreed, saying a change was “long overdue.”

“We need to keep current with what the cost of actually administrating the permits is,” he said.

The board is also thinking of giving the Building Department the authority to issue permits for deer fencing, rather than the Architectural Review Board, which currently reviews those requests. Among its other responsibilities, the review board sets the criteria for deer fencing. The proposed law would codify the fencing criteria, and property owners would seek permits at the Building Department offices rather than submit applications to the A.R.B. Those seeking to erect fencing different from that described in the code could still apply directly to the A.R.B. for permission.