A public meeting to determine whether tiny Sagaponack Village gets a police force all its own — “the last one before the board decides yea or nay,” promised Mayor Donald Louchheim when the village board met on Monday — will take place on Sept. 7 at 9 a.m.

    The board will hear views pro and con at that time, said the mayor, this time including line-by-line budgets. An Aug. 10 meeting, attended by 100 or so residents, did not provide detailed numbers and ended with more questions than answers.

    Mr. Louchheim and the board feel that a Sagaponack police department would provide more service to residents, at a lower cost, than Southampton Town police do now. The village has tried over the past two years to get the town to provide more coverage for its $2.3 million annually, but without success. “As a practical matter,” said Mr. Louchheim, having its own force “may be the only course available under current law.” If public opinion backs him up, he hopes for a local force to start patrolling no later than Jan. 1, 2014.

    The mayor told Southampton Town Supervisor Anna Throne-Holst last week that he would consider a proposal from the town up until Sept. 16.

    In response to requests at the Aug. 10 meeting for a public referendum, the mayor said he had researched state and village laws and that the board was “prohibited from holding a referendum on this.”

    A resolution was unanimously passed on Monday to hire William Wilson, a former Southampton Town Police chief, as a consultant to prepare a budget and a timeline of implementation. He was chosen, according to the mayor, for his knowledge of police department personnel, equipment, supplies, and vehicles.

    The budget will be posted on the village’s Web page, and the board will negotiate with other local departments for services such as dispatch and the use of a jail.

    Mr. Wilson, who resigned from his town job in November after 18 months of disagreements with the town board and the supervisor, will be paid a fee not to exceed $2,500.

    Al Hulten, a village resident, had a few questions for the board. He was unclear if and how a police department would be formed by Jan. 1; the mayor confirmed that that was indeed the target date. Mr. Hulten then suggested that unemployed officers recently laid off by Southampton Town might be interested to work outside the Police Benevolent Association’s requirements. The mayor said that applications had already been received.

    In other business, the board decided to widen Sagg Road and add painted shoulder lines as the process of improving its drainage continues. Although it will not be a bike lane, which would require four feet and special markings, the widening is expected to enhance the safety of bicyclists and pedestrians.

    An application for a Family Fun Day at the Renksy residence on Bridge Lane, which was rejected at the board’s last meeting, was revised and revisited following a plea from Kimberly Proal, who runs Ms. Rensky’s New York business, City Babies. Calling it a “charity event in Tracy’s backyard,” Ms. Proal offered to remove a vendor section which was to have been set up for retailers to promote their products. “Besides juice and water, they have all have been eliminated,” she said.

    The charity to benefit, Baby Buggy, delivers basic babies’ needs throughout the five boroughs, she explained.

    Joy Sieger, a trustee, recommended that a parking plan be submitted by tomorrow. The application was accepted on that condition, and the applicant was also asked to include a local charity.

    “If a valet parker tries to park on the road, they will be ticketed,” warned Mayor Louchheim.

    The East Hampton Town Zoning Board of Appeals had applications before it in recent weeks on properties facing Gardiner’s Bay, delaying decision on one — which Tom Preiato, the town’s head building inspector called “an insult,” and saying no by a split vote to two others for a concrete revetment. A few mixed decisions and yeses were also handed out on less controversial proposals.

    The application that Mr. Preiato objected to was for property at 57 Waters Edge in the Barnes Landing neighborhood of Springs. Because coastal bluffs and wetlands were involved, the owners sought a natural resources permit. They also asked for a variance to allow them to build 43 feet from a bluff crest when 100 feet is the required setback. The hearing was on Aug. 6.

    An 1,196-square-foot-house with a 500-square-foot deck had been constructed on the site before the town zoning code was adopted, so it was a legal pre-existing, nonconforming use. The owners had come before the Z.B.A. in early 2012, requesting variances to construct a 549-square-foot second story, along with a terrace and a 480-square-foot swimming pool. These requests were granted. At the same time, however, the board denied a request for an additional 1,136-square-foot second-story expansion, which members found would violate the pyramid law regulating the height of buildings in relation to property lines. Then, in Nov. 2012, the board approved a modification of the previous approvals, granting permission to replace the existing deck. So far, so good.

    But on April 30, Mr. Preiato issued a stop-work order after learning that not only had the deck been removed, but the house itself. By removing the house, Mr. Preiato, and subsequently the Town Planning Department, agreed that the house had lost its pre-existing, nonconforming status. This was significant because the rules for new houses on vacant lots take the environment into consideration.

     Lisa D’Andrea, a member of the Planning Department staff, sent the board a memo before the hearing noting that the property is in the Peconic Estuary critical environmental area as well as the Accabonac Harbor scenic area, a state designation. A new house would have to be sited, the memo said, in an area less harmful to the environment on the property, which is well over an acre.

    “I made it clear from day one that this house was not to be removed,” Mr. Preiato told the board at the hearing. He also addressed what he indicated had become a questionable practice: rebuilding a nonconforming structure by taking it down one wall at a time. He called the practice “an unwritten code.”

    Not only had the whole house been removed, but the foundation itself had apparently been moved. He called what was done an insult. “I was born at night, but not last night,” he said.

    Jonathan Tarbet, an attorney, did his best to defend the owners. One of them, Matt Rutigliano, also spoke at the hearing. Mr. Tarbet said Mr. Rutigliano thought he was complying with law. Mr. Rutigliano said he had taken the house apart in pieces, with the goal being to reconstruct it as it was. “I made a mistake,” he said.

     Alex Walter, the board’s chairman, commented that it had been a 1960s-style house and asked, “Once you take it apart, how are you going to put it back together?”

    “. . . You must have known this wasn’t going to work,” Don Cirillo, a board member, said. “You want the best of both worlds. Every homeowner is going to say, ‘What a great idea.’ Just accidentally tear the house down.” The board is expected to rule in the next few weeks.

    Two no votes were on applications from the owners of 235 and 237 King’s Point Road, facing Gardiner’s Bay in Springs. Virginia Schmidt and David Wagner wanted to build a single 180-foot concrete structure, ribbed with rebar, and held in place with helical wall anchors to protect both lots. Each lot is slightly under 30,000 square feet. A natural resources permit was needed. It was unclear whether the East Hampton Town Trustees would also have to approve the project. The board voted 4-to-1 against the applications, with Don Cirillo casting the only yes vote.

    At a June 4 public hearing, David Lys, a board member, said the applicants had not demonstrated that they had sufficiently explored softer alternatives to the concrete structure. He warned of the impact such a bulkhead would have on neighboring coastline. Another member agreed. “The bulkheads have a large scouring effect,” Lee White said. Brian Gosman, who is also a member of the board, said he sympathized with the owners, but added, “The way the code is written, it doesn’t meet the code.”

    Mr. Cirillo disagreed. “All the houses to the west have hard structures. It is not fair to say to the applicant that they are the last ones in, and they are not allowed to build. They are not going beyond what the neighbors have done,” he said.

    However, Mr. Walter pointed out that the neighboring bulkheads were made of wood. In its review, the Planning Department had warned of negative implications of approval.

    In other action, an application was recently approved  for a 10-by-55-foot solar panel to be built on a Montauk bluff by Nejma and Peter Beard of Old Montauk Highway. The well-known naturalist and photographer and his wife had come to the board before. At that time, the panels were to be placed just one foot, rather than the required 15 feet, from neighboring state parkland. The board had voted it down, 4-to-1. The proposal had subsequently been modified, moving the panel six more feet from the sideline. After a brief discussion following a July 23 hearing, the board approved the amended application unanimously.

    In two other appeals, the board gave each applicant both a yes and a no. Sean MacPherson, the owner of the Crow’s Nest restaurant in Montauk, wanted to build a 432-square-foot second-story addition on his house on Miller Avenue in Montauk, along with legalizing a shower and a deck, which had been built before he bought the property.

    He also asked for approval to build a new 600-square-foot garage for his vintage cars. The board went for the second-story addition, but not the garage. Mr. Gosman said it would have “too big of a footprint” on the environmentally sensitive property. And Mr. Cirillo agreed. “It looks more like a barn than a garage,” Mr. Cirillo said.    The board voted 4-to-0, with Mr. Lys abstaining.

    Another yes and no were given to a second Montauk applicant who wanted to build an addition along with a garage that would have dwarfed Mr. MacPherson’s.

    Donna Gilbert had applied for a 400-square-foot, two-story addition for her Madison Drive house in Montauk and a new 971-square-foot detached garage. The board voted unanimously to approve the addition to the house, but gave the garage a resounding 5-to-0 no.

    While the topics addressed at an Amagansett “listen in” hosted by Democratic candidates for town supervisor and town board were diverse, the message was unmistakable: Quality of life, for which so many choose to make East Hampton their home, has deteriorated, and something has to be done.

    Like the rising seas and the more violent and destructive storms the scientific community says are upon us, residents asserted that problems caused by summer visitors, in their numbers and their behavior, have become extreme and must be mitigated.

    Larry Cantwell, the Democrats’ candidate for supervisor, and Job Potter and Kathee Burke-Gonzalez, candidates for the town board, fielded questions from a sizable group of residents on topics including affordable housing, pedestrian safety, climate change and sustainability, air traffic, litter, services for the disabled and mentally ill, alcohol consumption on beaches, deer, taxes, open vistas, and bicycle lanes. It was their third such forum. The others were in Springs and Montauk.

    Among the many phenomena that come along with summer visitors, said Dell Cullum, “is the trash buildup at our local beaches. The reason I get so sad about this topic is because I grew up on these beaches. . . . I don’t see anything being done about it; I see it getting worse as the summer progresses. . . . Is there hope, is there something that can be done, not just at beaches but at the Nature Trail?”

    “I’m insulted by the litter I see in places, and the condition of our beaches after a Saturday night is deplorable,” Mr. Cantwell said. “There are a lot of elements to it, certainly education and enforcement. But I think the village does a reasonably good job, and a much better job than is being done in the Town of East Hampton in terms of overall appearance. That’s a question of utilizing your resources to meet the problem.”

    “I agree with Larry,” said Ms. Burke-Gonzalez, “but it goes beyond beaches. In Springs, people feel if they don’t need a couch or a dresser anymore they’ll just put it in front of their house and wait for someone to take it. When did that become acceptable?” Mr. Potter said that he and his colleagues were committed to reopening the household exchange at the town’s recycling center, a remark that drew applause.

    The town’s code enforcement, said Mr. Cantwell, is inadequate, an observation the entire room seemed to agree with. “Everywhere we go, we hear the same thing over and over: ‘You’ve got to do something about overflow parking, noisy nightclubs waking residents at 3 a.m., wild parties on beaches, overcrowding in Springs.’ People have had it up to here on the negative impact on quality of life. We live here for quality of life, and the town has a responsibility to stand up and do something about it.”

    Like a school’s budget, said Ms. Burke-Gonzalez, a town’s budget “is a reflection of what the community’s goals are. You’re going to see us allocating things differently to get a fully-staffed code enforcement department. We need a chief building inspector. We need a fully engaged and staffed legal department. We’re sending a lot of legal work to outside firms, and that’s costly.”

    Mr. Cantwell was asked if the village allows alcoholic drinks on its beaches, to which he replied that it does not. “Then, based on what’s happening at Indian Wells beach in the last two years, do you expect to extend that ban to the town?” he was asked.

    Alcohol consumption, Mr. Cantwell said, “is part of the problem. . . . In terms of the town of East Hampton, it’s something I would certainly consider. . . . There are a lot of ways to do this that are not a complete ban, but we could wrestle with the issue of huge beer parties on public beaches that are not designed and not traditionally used for anything like that.”

    Mr. Potter said that he had counted a group of approximately 350 young adults at Indian Wells Beach the previous Saturday afternoon. “There were beer cans everywhere, red cups, rum and vodka bottles. They weren’t actually doing any harm, and controlling traffic has only helped, but it really looked strange and out of place to me. . . . I think we have to deal with this. We have to target that particular area.”

    On the same day, Ms. Burke-Gonzalez said, she had picked up her daughter at the same beach and found “an accident waiting to happen,” given the crowded parking lot and abundance of young adults who had been drinking.

    “If you’re there at 3 or 4 p.m.,” said the questioner, “you’ll find kids urinating on the beach, vomiting on the beach. . . .”

    “They’re not bad people, as such,” said Mr. Potter, “but they’re not Amagansett kids. I don’t think Indian Wells needs to be that place.”

    Excessive consumption of alcohol is a problem beyond Indian Wells Beach, said Susan Jaxheimer. “I walk my dog in the morning at 7:30,” she said, “and on weekends Amagansett looks like a hamlet with a hangover.” She cited litter including bottles, cans, cups, pizza boxes, and paper plates, as well as merchants’ signs demolished and split-rail fences broken in half.

    The candidates were asked to address share houses. “These mammoth houses that are being built,” one person in the audience said, “would make tremendous share houses.”

    “It gets back to the code enforcement,” said Mr. Cantwell. “This is a fundamental issue that is pervasive, whether you live in Montauk, Springs, Amagansett, or Northwest, whether it’s an overcrowded house in Springs or someone who’s rented a house on Miankoma Lane to 30 people. It’s a question of the town having the will to enforce the code that is well established and the community supports. Right now, I don’t think the town’s current administration has the will to enforce these laws, and the public is getting fed up with it.” The room erupted in applause.

    Discussion also turned to affordable housing, pedestrian safety, and preparedness for natural disasters like Hurricane Sandy.

    Responding to a question from Hope Mulholland about climate change, Mr. Cantwell said, “We need to prepare for it. . . . There are a number of things we need to do better,” emergency planning among them. “I’ve talked about the need for a hazard mitigation and recovery plan. . . . We need to examine the coastline with the natural protections we have. Much of our coastline has been preserved, yet we have areas in Napeague that are very vulnerable where we have development.”

    Advance planning is critical, he said. “We don’t want to be making it up as we go along. The modeling today to predict storm surge and damage is available. We can put together a plan for exact steps we need to take.”

    Mr. Cantwell, who recently retired as the East Hampton Village administrator, listed actions the village government took, such as securing a $400,000 grant to install solar panels on public buildings and the recent transition to natural gas for heating. “Not only are we doing something for the environment, but we’re lowering operating costs,” he said.

    Milford Crandall, who has lived in Amagansett since 1957 and who Mr. Cantwell said had been his fifth-grade teacher, recalled a long-ago traffic accident in which a colleague’s grandchild was killed by a drunk driver on Atlantic Avenue. “If you look at the lanes of Amagansett, you will not find one sidewalk that goes from Main Street to Bluff Road. . . . I have not seen any change in safety of our roads in the 56 years I have been here. . . . Something has to change. We’ve got to protect our pedestrians.”

    Vehicular and pedestrian traffic have increased tremendously, Mr. Potter said. The sidewalk along Bluff Road improved pedestrian safety there, but he said that to do more, both the town board and the highway superintendent will have to work together.

    “The way you begin to address an issue like this is by looking at the most important places you want to move people to and from,” Mr. Cantwell said. “School is an obvious one.”

    In Springs, said Ms. Burke-Gonzalez, who serves on that hamlet’s school board, “we got $554,000 for safe routes to school,” referring to a grant from the state. “They actually gave us more money than we requested. We worked closely with the police, the Planning Department, the Highway Department.”

    With many senior citizens in attendance at the meeting, which was held in the community room of the St. Michael’s senior citizens affordable apartment complex, much of the discussion addressed the shortage of affordable housing. In his opening remarks, Mr. Potter, a former town board member, said that East Hampton “used to do a lot of affordable housing for seniors and working families. There’s nothing in the pipeline and hasn’t been for several years.” He pledged to work for the creation of more affordable housing if elected.

    Indeed, the need is great, said Brian Byrnes, citing a waiting list of more than 200 people for affordable senior citizen housing, not to mention the needs of younger people who grow up here and want to continue living here.

    The town “needs to be active in trying to find suitable locations where partnerships can be put together, as was done here,” Mr. Cantwell said, commending the partnership that came together to create the housing complex at St. Michael’s, calling it “a model development for affordable housing in the community” and one that should be used in the future.

    Consultants to East Hampton Town will discuss the development of a wastewater management plan at a public presentation on Monday at 1 p.m. at Town Hall.

    Pio Lombardo of Lombardo Associates and Kevin Phillips and Stephanie Davis of the FPM Group will address the three components of the plan: wastewater management, scavenger waste management, and water-quality monitoring.

    According to an announcement, they will focus on “the project’s science-based methodology” that will define “the corrective actions needed to achieve environmental and economic sustainability, to restore the impaired waters in East Hampton, and to protect the town’s valuable aquatic resources.”

    The consultants are expected to produce an action plan in the next six to eight months, with public participation through the appointment of an advisory committee that would hold monthly public meetings. A Web site, EHWaterRestore.com, will provide information and an opportunity for members of the public to communicate with the consultants.

    A town board majority voted on April 4 to hire the consultants, a consortium including Lombardo, FPM, and the Woods Hole Group, to develop the comprehensive plan at a cost not to exceed $197,989. East Hampton Town Supervisor Bill Wilkinson and Councilwoman Theresa Quigley had fought against developing the plan; Mr. Wilkinson was absent from the April vote, while Ms. Quigley voted no.

    At a board work session on Tuesday, Ms. Quigley took issue with the circulation, by Mr. Lombardo, of an e-mail announcement about Monday’s public meeting. Reading a list of the recipients — elected regional officials, environmental leaders, several private citizens, and a Montauk businessman — she said that “these people, in my mind, are all of a persuasion. Other than Paul Monte, these are all government people and special interest-group people.” The problem is, she said, that the notice was sent “to a bunch of environmental groups, and one businessman.”

    “Why are we limiting the invitation list? Where is Joe Public?” the councilwoman asked. According to town policy, Ms. Quigley said, the members of any appointed advisory committee must represent different points of view.

    News of the meeting, Councilman Peter Van Scoyoc and Councilwoman Sylvia Overby told her, was to be disseminated to the public through the media. The e-mails, said Mr. Van Scoyoc, were an additional notice to people “both in the community and within the region” who are “prominent people” who have expressed an interest in seeing the wastewater management plan move forward. It was “prudent,” he said, “to contact people in leadership positions that would inform other people” of the meeting.

    The members of the advisory committee are to be selected by the town board in a separate process.

    Mr. Wilkinson, too, objected to Mr. Lombardo’s having taken the initiative to publicize the meeting. But Councilman Dominick Stanzione, a strong proponent of the long-term planning effort, said he had “no problem with the initial invitation list. I’m excited for the project to get started.”

    “Sure, give [Mr. Lombardo] whatever responsibility you want to,” Mr. Wilkinson said to Mr. Stanzione, calling the process “laissez-faire management.”

    By phone later on Tuesday, Mr. Lombardo said that during the first few months of the project the consultants would identify the issues affecting water quality, such as bacterial contamination (an excess of nutrients). By late November, he said, the goal is to “zoom in on solutions and alternative solutions” and to lay out options and budget estimates for the town board. 

    East Hampton Town’s bond rating was upgraded by Moody’s Investors Service earlier this month by one level, from A1 to Aa3, reflecting the rating agency’s assessment of the town’s financial standing and its “stable outlook.”

    The rating was issued in advance of the sale on Aug. 15 of just over $2 million in bonds and bond anticipation notes, used to refinance previous notes and to raise money for upcoming capital projects.

    Len Bernard, the town’s budget officer, said Tuesday that the rating upgrade enabled the town to obtain a “great” interest rate of 2 percent on the bonds and .43 percent — less than half a percent — on the notes. At a previous bond sale, Mr. Bernard said, the interest rate was set at 2.75 percent. The current rate went down even though rates in general have been increasing, he said.

    Rich Tortora, a financial adviser to the town, had calculated the low interest rate would save the town approximately $100,000 over the bonds’ nine-year repayment period, said Mr. Bernard. Going from a single-A Moody’s rating to the highest-tier Aa level “is pretty significant,” he said, “especially with everything that happened here,” speaking of the previous administration’s financial mismanagement, which resulted in an accumulated deficit of $28 million.

    Moody’s ratings increase from Aa3 to Aa2, Aa1, and, finally Aaa, designating the highest possible financial standing.

    East Hampton’s upgrade, Moody’s wrote in its analysis, “reflects improvement in the town’s financial position over the past three years, the result of conservative budgeting and strengthened financial management practices. The rating also incorporates the town’s significant deficit financing as well as a moderate and shrinking debt burden and sizeable tax base characterized by strong wealth and income levels.”

    “The stable outlook reflects our view that the town’s financial position will continue to stabilize given strong budgeting and formal policies to maintain ample reserves.”

    Other positive attributes cited by Moody’s were “strong management with demonstrated ability to restore financial flexibility” and “above-average wealth levels with sizable tax base.”

    The town’s “challenges,” according to the report, include “above average” spending on debt service as a percent of budgetary spending, and the need to maintain “balanced financial operations amidst rising spending pressures and limited revenue-raising flexibility.”

    The conclusion reflects the agency’s view that “the town’s financial position will continue to stabilize.” Growing cash reserves, an indication of continued improvement, could result in a better rating, Moody’s said.

    Among the capital projects now funded through the recent bond and note sale are road repaving and sidewalk projects, the purchase of new police cars and a new garbage truck, refurbishment of town docks and of the comfort station at the Atlantic Avenue beach in Amagansett, and repairs and renovations to the East Hampton YMCA RECenter building.

    Darlene Smith, a bus driver for East Hampton Town’s Human Services Department, was suspended without pay for 30 days, retroactive to July 29, in a unanimous vote of the town board last Thursday.

    Diane Patrizio, the town’s director of human services, has charged Ms. Smith with misconduct and incompetence. Under the state’s Civil Service Law, a hearing officer has been appointed, and Ms. Smith can demand a hearing of the charges.

    A proposal meant to close a loophole that is barring enforcement of an East Hampton Town prohibition on running businesses and parking large commercial vehicles at residences will go back to the drawing board.

    A hearing to change the definition of “light truck” in the East Hampton Town Code was to be held tonight, but was postponed due to an error in the published notice. At the same time, members of the East Hampton Town Board found other details to adjust.

    The proposed definition of a light truck is one that weighs 10,000 pounds or less and is a maximum of 25 feet long. However, the legal notice for the hearing described a light truck as weighing “10,000 pounds or more,” not less. There are no restrictions on light trucks in residential zones.

    Councilman Peter Van Scoyoc said that, as now written, the code amendment “essentially outlaws anything that is not a ‘light truck.’ ” Business owners, he suggested, should be allowed to park one larger vehicle at their residences, “within certain limits. I’m not talking about a semi truck.”

    “I really don’t want to hurt the sole proprietor with a single vehicle,” he said. “It might be a landscaper, it might be a painter. . . .” 

    Another problem, Supervisor Bill Wilkinson pointed out, is that while the code amendment would make it clear that large trucks cannot be parked on residential lots, there is nothing on the books that prohibits the parking of those vehicles along residential streets.

    “We haven’t thought through all the details,” said Councilwoman Theresa Quigley.

    As she has during several previous discussions of the issue, she said she “is loath” to enact a law that could have an impact on business owners.

    “Before we start saying what you can’t do, you have to have a suggestion as to what you can do,” she said.

    And, said Mr. Wilkinson, if the town bans large truck parking on properties and on residential streets, the board must also “look at areas they could congregate” outside of those places, such as at public parking lots. He said he had hoped that “in each hamlet, we could provide some alternate parking for these vehicles.”

    “I just want to make a fundamental point that seems to have been forgotten: the zoning code already prohibits commercial businesses in a residential zone,” interjected Patrick Gunn, the head of the town’s public safety division, who has been asking the board for months to address the problems with enforcing this particular part of the code.

    Ms. Quigley presented maps showing the few vacant lots in the town that are zoned for commercial use. However, said Councilwoman Sylvia Overby, to get a real idea of what might be available for businesses now illegally operating in residential zones, the board should get information about the occupancy level of existing commercial sites, as well as the number that have been approved by the planning board but are not yet built.

    Another question, said Mr. Van Scoyoc, is “how many operations are in a residential area? That’s what I expect we will hear at a public hearing.”

    “We are trying to address a very specific problem here,” he said. “That is, people who are operating businesses in residential zones, to a level that affects, very negatively, the neighbors and the neighborhood.”

    “At a certain level,” he said, a business is expected to move its operations to an area zoned for that activity.

    “That’s ridiculous,” Mr. Wilkinson remarked. “Where is the mandate that they go into a commercial zone?”

    “That’s called zoning,” Mr. Van Scoyoc and Ms. Overby both told him. “If you disagree with zoning. . . ,” Mr. Van Scoyoc began.

    The problem, Mr. Wilkinson said, is the dearth of commercial zoning in the town — only 4 percent of the properties, he said.

    In hindsight, Councilman Dominick Stanzione said, the board could ask, “Was that smart?”

    “Certainly we used the zoning process to achieve that, and we would use the zoning process to adjust that,” Mr. Stanzione said. But in the meantime, he said, while there “is an obvious lack of preparation on the part of our planning” to provide adequate space for businesses, the board must “balance the interests.” He has advocated addressing the loophole in the code first before tackling larger planning issues.

    “It was a mistake. We’re sorry. . . . It will not happen again,” Sagaponack Village Mayor Donald Louchheim said Monday of a weekend-long event hosted by Ivy Connect at a private house in the village.

    Ivy Connect is a members club that holds “private events and curated social impact opportunities” including “members-only gatherings at outstanding locations,” according to its Web site. The club had asked the village last month for permission to host three days of gatherings at Michael Adler’s house on Fairfield Pond Lane, but the board turned down the request and issued a permit for only a single day, Saturday. Beri Meric, a co-founder of Ivy Connect, had promised the board last month that he would abide by its decision.

    Despite that, the programs continued on Sunday, too.

    “It was a zoo,” said Lilith A. Jacobs, a neighbor of the Adler house. “There were cars all over on Sunday.”

    “They will never get another permit,” Mayor Louchheim vowed.

    “Mr. Adler should be told too,” Rhode Winchell, the village clerk, said on Monday. It was “like a 72-hour party.”

    There were vans everywhere, the neighbor said, and people parking in neighbors’ driveways, too.

    “They just went ahead and did it anyway,” Mayor Louchheim said.

    William Barbour and Lisa Duryea Thayer, board members, were not surprised, having cast no votes on the permit because they suspected a three-day party.

    Also at the meeting, an event called a Family Fun Day planned for a house on Bridge Lane on Aug. 28 was denied an outdoor assembly permit.

    Tracy Rensky, who lives at the corner of Seascape and Bridge Lanes, was in attendance with a man described as the valet parking attendant.

    She explained that the event, initially discussed with the village clerk as a birthday party, would offer “fun things for kids” to support a charity called Baby Buggy that she is involved with as part of her New York City early childhood education center. Baby Buggy is a New York not-for-profit that works with community organizations to distribute new and gently-used baby essentials to the needy.

    Sponsors would attend the party, Ms. Rensky said. When asked if money would change hands at the event, she said, “They can try SmartWater for example. . . . People see what the brand is.” Companies seeking to promote their products often sign on as sponsors of such events, giving away their products for free to both support the cause and gain exposure among a certain set of potential customers. A gluten-free vodka company would be another sponsor, Ms. Rensky said.

    Ms. Thayer recalled that the road had been impassable during prior birthday parties for Ms. Rensky’s children.

    “I have real, great concern over the commercialness of this,” said Ms. Thayer, adding that it would likely not benefit children in Sagaponack, local vendors, or a local charity. Ms. Rensky said that Baby Buggy has supported the Retreat with gently-used or new baby items on many occasions.

    Asked about a parking plan, Ms. Rensky requested permission to park a minimal number of cars on Seascape Lane.

    “This is a market,” said Lee Foster, another board member. “My immediate consideration is that this is a full-blown bazaar.”

    “It is not a bazaar,” Ms. Rensky said. “I welcome any of you to attend it.”

    In a poll of the board, Mr. Barbour said that although he has no problem with a charitable event, he is “dead set against parking waivers on Bridge Lane.” At the same time, he commended Ms. Rensky on her recent construction process. “I was impressed that vehicles stayed on the property,” he said.

    “Thank you,” Ms. Rensky said. “ It did destroy our lawn.”

    Ms. Foster said that she was disappointed with the late request for the permit, and that she was “inclined to deny” it. She suggested that next year, “a proper venue could be selected.”

    Joy Sieger, another board member, agreed.

    “I’m allowed to have a birthday party,” said Ms. Rensky.

    “If there will be vendors at it, you’re not,” Mayor Louchheim said, adding that with “vendors, alone, there will be 20 cars.”

   Councilwoman Sylvia Overby will present to the East Hampton Town Board suggestions for locations where signs might be erected alerting motorists to state laws designed to protect pets from harmful conditions in parked cars.

    Ms. Overby noted that Assemblyman Fred W. Thiele Jr. recently acted to strengthen the laws and penalties for leaving pets in cars during extreme weather conditions, and a group of local residents is working with nearby municipalities to provide and install the signs.

    In a recent incident in Bridgehampton, a dog left in a hot car died.

    “My Sophie’s the most dear thing in the world,” Supervisor Bill Wilkinson said of his own pet at a town board meeting on Tuesday. “I take responsibility for her all the time.”

    “Some people have to be reminded not to be cruel,” Councilman Dominick Stanzione said.

    “Some people have to be reminded to breathe,” said Councilwoman Theresa Quigley. “Should we put up signs saying, ‘Let’s breathe’?”

    She said she is “completely opposed” to Ms. Overby’s initiative. Mr. Stanzione and Councilman Peter Van Scoyoc cautioned only that they would not like to see signs everywhere, but “more of a public education campaign,” as Mr. Van Scoyoc put it.

East Hampton Town

Metal Posts and Sand Fencing

    The East Hampton Town Board was presented Tuesday with recommendations made by a committee that examined rules on beach fencing.

    The use of metal posts to erect the sand fencing put up along ocean dunes to trap and hold sand is banned, but they are being used in Montauk in spots where, property owners say, it is too difficult to hammer metal into the hardpan below the sand.

    Lifeguards have told the board that the metal posts work their way out and become dangerous projectiles in the surf, while those who install them say that wooden posts break off, becoming hazards on the beach.

    The committee has suggested that metal posts be permitted where they are  proven to be needed, and that they be marked with tags identifying the permit number and who has installed them, so individuals can be held responsible for them. John Jilnicki, the town attorney, suggested that specific criteria be developed, outlining when metal posts are to be allowed.

Bicycle Safety

    Bicycle safety advocates asked the town board on Tuesday to consider and adopt a set of principles that would guide the development of bike lanes or paths throughout the town.

    East Hampton Village has already signed on to the concept, Howard Lebwith and Paul Fiondella told the board. The next step, they suggested, would be for the municipalities to join forces and seek an experienced design consultant to develop a comprehensive bicycling plan.

    With traffic congestion and accidents increasing, they said, action is needed. “To be frank, it’s anarchy out there,” Mr. Lebwith told the board. “You cannot ignore this any more. It’s a serious problem.”    J.P.

Sagaponack Village

Regulating Yard Sales

    The Sagaponack Village Board unanimously passed a local law on Monday to regulate yard sales. The purpose is to “limit such sales to casual and occasional occurrences and to avoid extended sales that have the character of a business.”

    The law, which grew out of a resident’s complaints about a neighbor’s ongoing sale, has been the subject of discussion for several months and had no opposition at any public hearings.

    The new law requires a permit from and a fee to the village, and restricts such permits to one per calendar year. Sales may not exceed two consecutive days and can only take place between 8 a.m. and 6 p.m. Adjacent neighbors must be notified prior to the event.    C.A.S.