The Sagaponack Village Board adopted five local laws at a meeting on Monday, with lot coverage regulation and a coastal erosion plan among them.

    Local Law No. 4, designed to control excessive development of residential parcels, had been of particular interest to many in the village, as shown by large crowds at the public hearings preceding its adoption and many written comments.

    Additional setbacks for tennis courts were the primary concern among residents, builders, and real estate agents. Following a public outcry, the law was revised to exclude sunken tennis courts. The law also redefines the word “driveway” and the meaning of “lot area,” now exclusive of the “flagpole” portion of any flag lot.

    Following a directive from the State Department of Environmental Conservation, the village assumed the authority to implement and regulate a coastal erosion management program, including procedures for minimizing damage to structures from flooding and erosion, and protecting natural resources. Anthony B. Tohill, the village’s acting attorney, explained yesterday that a coastal erosion law is one of the few instances where a local law must be approved and certified by the D.E.C.

    Accordingly, the board repealed its existing coastal erosion law and replaced it with a new one, the Coastal Erosion Hazard Area Law, which is essentially the same as the Town of Southampton’s. Included in the law are changes to the regulation of building permits on waterfront lots or within 400 feet landward of the coastal erosion hazard line.

    In another environmental safeguard, site-plan approval will now be required in some circumstances for the deposit, excavation, importation, or exportation of fill, since changes to the natural grade or topographical elevation affect surface water runoff.

    Finally, the board repealed its ban on lawfully pre-existing, nonconforming signs.

    The board will convene next on Jan. 14 at 3 p.m., for a work session and to address planning issues.

   After a decade of attempts at remediating the often-polluted Havens Beach off Bay Street, the Sag Harbor Village Board has allocated $295,000 toward the project and entered into a grant agreement with Suffolk County to get it done.

   The cleanup plan involves the reconfiguring of a 24,000-square-foot drainage ditch and system, which storm waters run through before entering Shelter Island Sound.

   If the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation approves the plan, a grant from the Suffolk County Water Quality Protection and Restoration Program will provide $147,500, which requires a match by the village.

   The project will involve a costly Smart Sponge Plus filter to remove pollutants such as fecal coliform bacteria, found repeatedly in the water over years of testing.

The contamination of the beach water, and the ditch that children enjoy playing in, has regularly resulted in the beach’s closure after two inches of rainfall, and has been called a grave problem by Kevin McAllister, the Peconic Baykeeper.

East Hampton Town

Litter Initiatives

    The town’s litter committee is seeking a go-ahead from the East Hampton Town Board for a number of initiatives, Deborah Klughers, a committee member, told the board at a meeting on Tuesday. Several could save, or even earn, the town money, she said.

    The committee has asked the town board to lift the fee charged to businesses that deposit cardboard at the recycling centers. The cardboard can be baled and sold for $120 a ton, Ms. Klughers said, and businesses would save money. The group also wishes to promote recycling at town recreational areas by providing containers where glass and plastics can be deposited. The town code and its solid waste management plan both call for the recycling, said Ms. Klughers, who has advocated for several years for the replacement of bins the town once provided.

    An okay for the litter committee to show a film about recycling called “Bag It” at LTV Studios in Wainscott was not forthcoming. Board members said they would like to view the film themselves before approving a town-sponsored screening.

New to C.P.F. Committee

    By a vote of the town board on Tuesday, Khanh Ngo was appointed as a member of East Hampton’s community preservation fund advisory committee. He will serve the remainder of the term of Louis O’Neal, who has resigned, through March 23, 2019. The advisory group makes recommendations to the town board about potential land purchases after vetting properties and rating them using an evaluation system.

For Sale Online

    In order to sell surplus items, East Hampton Town lists them with an online auction site, auctionsinternational. com. Offered for sale by the town on that site right now is a box culvert.

About the Old Town Hall

    To move forward with the renovation of the old East Hampton Town Hall building, now vacant, Councilwoman Theresa Quigley suggested the board select and hire an architect to design a plan. Four firms had responded to a request for proposals earlier in the year. Ms. Quigley said the renovation, allowing some town offices to be moved into the rehabbed space, would provide savings over all, as the town is still paying to maintain and heat the unused building.

    Partial funding for the project was to come from the sale of seven office condominiums the town owns in a building on Pantigo Place, Supervisor Bill Wilkinson said. After discussing how to move forward — perhaps on parallel tracks, designing the new project while selling the offices to pay for it — the board members present during a discussion on Tuesday agreed to actively seek a buyer for the office condos, under conditions allowing the town to continue to occupy them until the alternative space is renovated.

    Mr. Wilkinson said the town has received an offer on one unit, while previous offers on others had been rescinded.

   An East Hampton Town employee who was suspended from her job for 30 days without pay after her supervisor, Diane Patrizio, the head of the Human Services Department, brought disciplinary charges of misconduct and incompetence against her, will be transferred to another town department, at a slight pay decrease.

    According to a negotiated agreement finalized on Friday, Linda Norris will be removed from the position of adult day care supervisor, where she was paid $29.34 per hour, and become an administrative aide in the town Department of Housing and Community Development, at an hourly rate of $26.56. That appointment will be temporary, and require Ms. Norris to pass a qualification test to retain it, John Jilnicki, the town attorney, said Tuesday.

    Details of the personnel matter were not discussed in public, beyond the agreed-upon measures described in a resolution, but town board members who voted to ratify the settlement on Tuesday expressed dismay that they had no choice but to settle the matter.

    “I’m really disturbed both by the underlying nature of this case, and the process by which it has been adjudicated, and a settlement has been proposed,” said Councilman Dominick Stanzione, who is the board’s liaison to the Human Services Department. He said it was “extremely frustrating” and “extremely unfortunate that the information in this case cannot be made public.”

    But, he said, “I rely on the advice of counsel in reluctantly supporting this motion.” Supervisor Bill Wilkinson echoed Mr. Stanzione’s sentiments, and referred to a “record of former decisions” that affected how the Norris case was settled.

    Councilwoman Theresa Quigley refused to vote for the settlement. “We have a complete failure in past practice,” she said. “It’s egregious enough that I think it’s time to take a stand.” 

    Ms. Norris had retained two attorneys to fight on her behalf, Thomas Horn of Sag Harbor and Lawrence Kelly of Bayport. Both have challenged East Hampton Town in several lawsuits on behalf of residents and employees. As a union employee, Ms. Norris was entitled to legal representation through the union, but instead retained the private attorneys.

    Mr. Horn said yesterday that his client was “very happy to be getting back to work. And I’m glad the board approved the agreement,” he said. “The agreement in the long run will keep a dedicated employee serving the community, and we’re happy with the results.”

    The settlement between the parties contains additional conditions not listed in the resolution passed by the board, Mr. Jilnicki said Tuesday.

    After hearing of the charges against Ms. Norris, a number of people familiar with her work — whose relatives had attended programs overseen by her at the senior center, for instance — came forward to praise and defend her.

    A crowd of supporters filled East Hampton Town Hall on Friday, when a hearing on Ms. Norris’s case was scheduled, after it was announced that Ms. Norris and her attorneys had asked that the hearing be conducted in public.

    The hearing did not go forward, however. Instead, negotiations between attorneys for the town and Ms. Norris took place over several hours, resulting in the settlement.

    Mr. Horn said last month that the charges against Ms. Norris were based on “a bunch of vague incidents thrown together,” and suggested that the employee was targeted because she was “one of Edna’s people,” referring to Edna Steck, the former longtime head of the Human Services Department, who has retired. Mr. Stanzione and Mr. Wilkinson had criticized her administration of the department.

    In addition, Mr. Horn suggested that the charges were related to a disagreement about the disposition of two bequests totaling more than $440,000, made to the Human Services Department by a former client, Nicole Kopf, and whether the money was intended specifically for the adult day care program or for all of the senior citizens’ services. The complaints included charges of “disrespectful and threatening” behavior toward subordinates, Mr. Horn said.

    A second Human Services employee was suspended on disciplinary charges at the same time as Ms. Norris. The charges against Sheila Carter, a senior bus service supervisor, will be the subject of an upcoming hearing before Eileen Powers, an appointed hearing officer who will make a recommendation to the town board as to how the matter should be settled.

    Prompted by a constituent’s frustration over being shuffled between the town’s planning and architectural review boards and a desire to streamline the review process, East Hampton Town Councilwoman Theresa Quigley advocated Tuesday for the planning board’s absorption of the A.R.B.’s duties.

    Although not all town board members were in agreement, the proposal will be subject to further consideration.

    A constituent, whom Ms. Quigley declined a request to name, came to her for guidance. The business owner had been through site plan review with the planning board and believed their approval was final, but later learned they had to go to the A.R.B. and eventually it was proposed that both boards review the project concurrently. Problems are created, Ms. Quigley said, when the applicants go through the process with the planning board only to have their plans changed later by the A.R.B.

    Ms. Quigley said the town attorney’s office had explained to her that the A.R.B. primarily deals with deer fencing. She believes rules could be written into town code to address these matters. The A.R.B. also reviews placement of signs and lighting, but those things, she said, could be dealt with by using a hired consultant when necessary.

    After determining that the A.R.B. costs the town about $36,000 annually plus attorney fees of $18,000, without benefits, she said streamlining the process administratively could also make sense for the budget.

    Councilman Dominick Stanzione urged caution in what could be a hasty decision, noting that the A.R.B.’s discretion has been an important “non-monetary contribution” to the community with its members weighing in on the architectural integrity of large-scale projects.

    Mr. Wilkinson wondered if the planning board could do “that same thing.”

    While recognizing the contributions of the board, Councilman Peter Van Scoyoc, a former member of the planning board, was open to the discussion of streamlining the process, and looking into deer fence laws to see if those applications could be handled administratively.

    The A.R.B.’s expertise is important to the aesthetics of the community, warned Councilwoman Sylvia Overby, also a former planning board member and chairwoman. She explained that the A.R.B. deals with historic district applications, and also with building materials and colors as part of a process that could end up being costly with a consultant. She also believes deer fence decisions should be made by groups in a neighborhood, when possible, to insure passageways for deer, and “so that it makes sense.”

    Mr. Stanzione also expressed concern about deer fencing, which he feels is “proliferating in our community, and neighborly relations.” He said that residents without financial means for a fence are suffering because of those who have them. “I’m not sure at all that deer fencing should be codified . . . to occur without any review,” he said. “Right now it is absolutely a right for everyone in the town,” Ms. Quigley said.

    Ms. Quigley maintained that some of the A.R.B.’s duties could become administrative functions, and at the very least, the code should be changed to make the board advisory only.

    “I am not going to decide on it today,” Ms. Overby said. “It wasn’t even on the agenda.”

     The owner of an approximately one-acre property at the northeastern corner where Ditch Plain Road hooks east and becomes Deforest Road continued to seek the East Hampton Town Planning Board’s approval on Nov. 28 to divide it into two lots, each about the same size. An existing house to the north of the property, which has a shared driveway with another lot to the east, would fall into the newly created eastern lot.

    While not questioning the owner’s right to divide the property into lots that are in keeping with neighboring Ditch parcels, board members expressed concern over traffic and the location of the new western lot’s driveway. In previous discussions about the proposal, the board encouraged the owner, identified only as Sullivan, to work with the town on a land-swap between a town right-of-way and a slice of the western property, with the goal of improving the sight lines for vehicles and pedestrians at that hairpin turn.

    Both Town Highway Superintendent Stephen Lynch, and Thomas Talmage, the town engineer, weighed in via memorandums, encouraging the board to approve the land-swap proposal, which involves about 1,100 square feet each way.

    The board did just that, voting 7-0 to approve the swap. When it came to placing the driveway, however, Nancy Keeshan, a board member who works in Montauk, spoke out.

    “People come to Montauk for that surf beach,” she said. “That corner is the gateway to the beach. I’d like to see it remain the same.” Stressing the difficulty of finding a safe location for a driveway on the western lot, Ms. Keeshan also asked the town board to acquire the property, a suggestion that other members embraced.

    “This corner is so busy. It’s one of the busiest corners in town,” Patrick Schutte, a board member, said.

    Reed Jones, the board chairman, proposed drafting a letter to the town board, requesting that the property be put on a list for potential purchase, and members voted 6-1 in favor. Diana Weir was the lone dissenter.

    “There are spots in Montauk that are magical,” Ms. Keeshan said yesterday. “That is one of them.”

    The Nov. 20 meeting of the East Hampton Town Zoning Board of Appeals, held two days before Thanksgiving, proved anything but a holiday for its members, who sat through a stormy four-hour session, almost all of it devoted to one of the most valuable parcels of land in the United States, at 278 Further Lane in East Hampton.

    The property, formerly owned by Adelaide de Menil and Ted Carpenter, was sold in 2007 along with its neighbor, 260 Further Lane — 40 acres in all — to the real estate mogul Ron Baron for $103 million. In the fall of 2008, he built two parallel walls, about four feet apart, between the ocean and the two parcels. The walls make a 90-degree turn that divides his eastern border from his neighbor, Taya Thurman. The hearing was held to determine whether the walls, which are in an area of dunes and wetlands, are eligible for a natural resources special permit.

    From the beginning, everything about the walls has been controversial.  To begin with, they were built without a building permit.

    According to Brian Matthews of McLachlan and Eagan, attorneys for Mr. Baron and 260A L.L.C., the owner of record, the walls were constructed after several conversations with the then-head building inspector, Don Sharkey. Mr. Matthews told the board the surveyor, David Weaver, had assured Mr. Baron that a permit was not needed, as the walls were to be only four feet high.

    According to Mr. Weaver, who addressed the board through an affidavit, Mr. Sharkey gave a verbal okay to the project in April 2008 and again that August, shortly before construction began.

    Later, Mr. Sharkey, who died in July 2009, denied having given those approvals, and Brian Frank, the town’s chief environmental analyst, said he doubted that he did. Mr. Frank told the board it would be unlikely for a head building inspector to give an approval of that magnitude in such a casual manner. “It doesn’t make any sense that Mr. Sharkey would have just said, ‘Go ahead.’ ”

    More important, said Mr. Frank, was that according to earlier aerial photographs of the site, it appeared that the walls had been built right over dunes, disturbing the rare double dune system. Larry Penny, the former director of the town’s Environmental Protection Department, had made that same point in a letter to Mr. Baron dated June 5, 2007.

    “The double dune preserve is unique,” said Mr. Frank. “There is no place else on Long Island where the entire structure is intact.”

    Mr. Matthews, however, cited surveys and studies made for the owner that indicated that little if any duneland had been impacted.

    Even the height of the walls was disputed. Mr. Matthews assured the board that they were only four feet tall, an assertion scoffed at by Michael G. Walsh, attorney for Ms. Thurman and the Thurman Land Trust.

    “Our findings were radically, radically  different than the findings you’ve been presented this evening,” Mr. Walsh told the Z.B.A. members. He said the actual height of the walls could only be determined by establishing a “natural grade” point, and contended that by that standard the walls were over 13 feet high.

    Mr. Frank agreed. Both men concurred that the walls were built using poured concrete with foundations and rebar and not as simple property demarcations. In fact, said Mr. Walsh, their true purpose was to raise the grade of the land to ensure that any house built there in the future would have a panoramic ocean view. He said the walls should rightly be called retaining walls.

    The lawyer and the environmental analyst both said fill had been dumped between the two walls and behind the back wall, which, Mr. Frank said, has allowed invasive species to move into the duneland. Mr. Matthews countered that the fill was from the immediate property.

    Mr. Frank asked the board, “Would I approve this if it wasn’t there already?”

    “We’re not here to make a determination whether these walls should be taken down,” replied the Z.B.A. chairman, Alex Walter.

    Mr. Frank agreed. “You’re here to determine whether the walls are eligible for a natural resources special permit,” a determination that is likely to be made during the board’s Dec. 11 work session.

    In the evening’s only other proceeding, the board heard Philip Giordano’s application to tear down and rebuild a house at 15 Deforest Road in Montauk.

    With weekends quieter than in the summer, when taxis swarm downtown hamlets seeking passengers buzzing about for a night of festivities, the East Hampton Town Board is taking time to review legislation that regulates taxicab companies here.

    A law put in place before last season required taxi operators to obtain licenses from the town clerk after providing proof of insurance and driver’s license information.

    Complaints continued through the summer about the number of taxicabs — many of which were coming here from out of town to compete for summer fares — the safety of passengers, and the behavior of some drivers.

    A proposed revision to the town code, worked on by Councilwoman Theresa Quigley with Rob Connolly, a town attorney, would tighten the rules, subjecting applicants for annual taxi licenses, both proprietors and drivers, to fingerprinting and a criminal background check, and requiring taxi companies to have a business office in East Hampton in order to pick up fares here.

    An initial draft proposal, discussed by the town board at a Nov. 20 work session, included a requirement that taxi companies have a fleet of at least three vehicles. That provision will likely be dropped from the final law, according to concerns raised by town board members about excluding small-business entrepreneurs.

    The proposal also would bar the use of vehicles more than 10 years old as cabs, or those with more than 250,000 miles on the odometer, beginning in 2014, and increase the fines for unlicensed cabs.

    Licenses would be required for the business, for each vehicle, and for individual drivers, and would have to be renewed each year.

    Ms. Quigley has also proposed setting up a taxicab license review committee, with three members to be appointed by the town board, which would review license applications. Having the existing five-member license review board, which deals with home contractor licenses and complaints, also review taxi licenses, was discussed at last week’s meeting, as was a way to eliminate loopholes, such as subleasing office space, that could allow out-of-town companies to do business here.

    Carole Brennan, the deputy town clerk, reported at the work session that, of 75 taxi companies with town licenses at present, 39 are based in East Hampton.

    “I think generally this is going to go a long way toward addressing some of the problems we saw this summer,” Councilman Peter Van Scoyoc said of the draft revision. The board is expected to finalize the proposed changes before scheduling the new legislation for a public hearing.

East Hampton Town

Free Well Water Tests

    Residents with private wells who are concerned about contamination after Hurricane Sandy can have their water tested free of charge by the Suffolk County Water Authority. The tests will seek to ensure that wells have not been contaminated by bacteria, fuels, or chlorides via saltwater intrusion during the storm.

    The free testing program will run through Dec. 20, although the deadline will be extended indefinitely for residents who have not been able to return to their homes by then because of extensive storm damage. Those who wish to schedule a water test have been asked to call the water authority at 698-9500.

Tallying the Block Grant

    The proceeds of an annual federal Community Development Block Grant to East Hampton Town, which is earmarked for public service and projects that help low-income residents, will be distributed as follows, the East Hampton Town Board decided on Nov. 20: $18,070 to the Retreat, $40,000 to the Whalebone Apartments, $5,000 for work at the town’s skate park in Montauk, $5,000 to Catholic Charities, and a total of $25,500 to the East Hampton Housing Authority.

Working on Wastewater

    Information submitted by consultants who could help the town establish a comprehensive wastewater management plan is being vetted by town staff, including Kim Shaw, the natural resources director, and will be discussed by the town board at an upcoming meeting. A presentation on the various proposals, highlighting their elements, similarities, and differences, is expected to take place at a board work session on Tuesday, with an eye to making a choice as to whom to hire by mid-January.

    Councilmen Dominick Stanzione and Peter Van Scoyoc, along with Councilwoman Sylvia Overby, have supported developing an overall waste management strategy before making long-term decisions about the future of the town’s scavenger waste treatment plant.

Shoreline Brouhaha

    An oceanfront homeowner on Deforest Road in Montauk looking to shore up the coastline has offered to add sand in front of adjacent properties owned by the town to avoid causing further erosion there. A town board discussion of the request for permission to do so, however, devolved into a political squabble, leaving the homeowner unable to move forward on protecting the Deforest Road house.

    When Councilman Van Scoyoc brought the request to the board on Nov. 20, he was criticized by Councilwoman Theresa Quigley and Supervisor Bill Wilkinson, who said that the matter should have been broached by Councilman Stanzione, as the board’s Montauk liaison, or by Ms. Quigley, the liaison to the Planning Department.

    Mr. Van Scoyoc said he had been filled in by Tom Talmage, the town engineer, to whom he is liaison, and that Mr. Talmage and other town staff could not process the application without town board approval, since placing sand on town land is involved. Ms. Quigley pointed out that Mr. Talmage’s post falls under the Planning Department’s umbrella. The homeowner’s request was tabled, as only Mr. Van Scoyoc and Councilwoman Overby were willing to act on it.

For Town Code Review

    Councilwoman Theresa Quigley said last week that she has chosen several people to serve on a committee that would review the town code for the purpose of making regulations more easily enforceable, including strengthening fines. The members she would like to appoint, she said, include lawyers, “town people,” and “two outside” — Bob Kouffman and Stephen Grossman, who had suggested the idea, Rob Connolly and Patrick Gunn, town attorneys, Catherine Casey of the East Hampton Housing Authority, Alice Houseknecht, a Montauk motel owner, and Amado Ortiz, an architect. The group would work on the project for a maximum of two months, she said.

    Councilwoman Overby asked if other names could be considered and requested a written mission statement describing the committee’s charge and “the parameters of what [it] will do.” Councilman Van Scoyoc asked that the idea be tabled for further discussion, but with Councilman Stanzione and Supervisor Wilkinson’s approval, Ms. Quigley got the go-ahead.

C.P.F. Revenue Up Sharply

    Revenues for the Peconic Bay Region Community Preservation Fund totaled just over $6 million in October, Assemblyman Fred W. Thiele Jr. has reported. The revenue, produced by a real estate transfer tax covering all five East End towns, is almost double that of a year ago, when October receipts totaled $3.19 million. The first 10 months of 2012 have produced $50.1 million for the land-purchase fund, a 4-percent increase over the same period last year, and the total for 2012 is expected to be in the $60 million range.

    In East Hampton and Shelter Island Towns, Mr. Thiele said in a press release, there has been a “substantial increase in activity.” Revenues of $15.9 million so far this year in East Hampton, compared to $10.9 million last year, are up 46 percent.

    Since its inception in 1999, the Peconic Bay Region Community Preservation Fund has generated $772.62 million. The tax program, which provides money to preserve farmland, historic sites, and open space, expires in 2030.   

    The East Hampton Town Board unanimously adopted the 2013 budget at a meeting last Thursday night, calling for $69 million in spending next year, an increase of just over 5 percent from 2012.

    The final budget, which includes several majority-approved additions to Supervisor Bill Wilkinson’s originally proposed budget, will raise tax rates for most East Hampton residents by 4.7 percent, at a rate of $27.91 per $100 of assessed value, and result in a 1.4-percent decrease for residents of the incorporated villages of East Hampton and Sag Harbor, for a rate of $10.96 per $100 of assessed value.

    Following a public hearing and board discussion of the supervisor’s tentative budget, the final spending plan includes a $25,000 increase of a grant to Project MOST, an after-school program in East Hampton in Springs, to a total of $35,000, and includes $40,000 to fund the first phase of a deer management plan, calling for a population survey of the herd.

    The budget also includes $26,000 to cover salary and benefits for the addition of a part-time code enforcement officer. Board members also agreed to add a part-time position for a land steward at a $30,000 salary, and to shift the entire salary for Andy Gaites, a land management department staffer, to the community preservation fund stewardship budget, paid for by the proceeds of a 2-percent real estate transfer tax. The result of that change reduced anticipated spending in the town’s general budget by $30,000.

    Under the terms of the town’s deficit financing plan, through which the New York State Legislature granted approval to issue up to $30 million in bonds to cover budget shortfalls under a former administration from prior years, the town is required to submit its proposed annual budgets to the state comptroller for review.

    In a letter dated Nov. 1, the comptroller’s office found that the “significant revenue and expenditure projections in the tentative budget are reasonable” in the 2013 budget.

    The letter also reviewed whether town officials had acted on previous recommendations made by the comptroller in 2012.

    Last year, the comptroller had suggested increasing a contingency appropriation, or money set aside for unforeseen events. The 2012 budget contained $530,000 for contingencies. This year, the amount was increased to $560,000, the comptroller’s letter said.

    The comptroller also said that the 2012 budget included estimated revenues of $250,000 from the sale of town property, but, the letter said, when the state officials reviewed the proposed budget last year, “town officials could not provide documentation to show that this revenue would be realized in 2012.”

    The expected revenue remained in the budget, the comptroller’s office said in the letter, “although we cautioned town officials regarding the attainability of this estimated revenue.” As of September, the year-to-date and projected revenue from property sales totaled $40,000, creating a $210,000 shortfall in the 2012 fiscal year.

    According to the comptroller’s office, East Hampton Town’s 2013 budget complies with a state law limiting increases in the annual tax levy to 2 percent each year. East Hampton’s leeway was larger than that this year, according to a state formula, because of tax levels in previous years.