The Sagaponack Village Board is considering a law that would seek to rein in development in the village by addressing lot coverage, gross square floor area, and accessory structures in backyards.

    The board discussed a draft of the law at a meeting on Monday, but agreed that much work remained before the changes could be brought to a public hearing.

    The goal, according to Mayor Donald Louchheim, is to put “constraints on what people can do with the land.” Residents often ask him why people are able to build such large compounds in the village, he said, adding that they are also concerned about relatively small lots where “virtually every square inch has been disturbed” by a pool, deck, septic system, grading, garages, tennis courts, and more.

    Board members are also concerned about the recent trend of utilizing underground space, often exceeding the footprint of the house above, for spas, wine cellars, and other recreational uses. The Architectural Review Board has recently heard a request for an underground garage with a mechanical turnstile allowing a homeowner to select the car they want to drive and have it delivered to him, said Lisa Duryea Thayer. The same person also wants to have five or six bedrooms below ground level.

    Anthony B. Tohill, the village’s attorney, said he had a “clear sense of the evil” the board seeks to remedy,” but board members took issue with some of the wording of the law he drafted, saying they found it hard to understand.

    In the end, it was agreed that the draft legislation would be discussed further at a planning board meeting on July 16, when Richard Warren, the village’s consulting engineer, could offer his input and recommendations.

    The board also voted to appropriate $50,000 into the village’s tree fund, so that the tree committee could begin removing trees that are causing dangerous situations by obstructing sight lines at certain intersections. The newly-formed tree committee is working on a policy for the maintenance of existing street trees and the review of requests for planting new trees.

    A resolution was drafted about limiting construction on Sundays, due to citizen complaints. It would exclude homeowners from working on their own houses.

    The board will meet next on July 9 at 3 p.m.

    Town Supervisor Bill Wilkinson placed 14 items on the agenda for an East Hampton Town Board work session on Tuesday, all of which, he told the board, “We have to take action on or kick aside.”

    All had been previously discussed. Some were left hanging because of issues that arose during initial talks, or board members’ questions or requests for more information.

    Several had been the subject of resolutions, offered by Mr. Wilkinson or Councilwoman Theresa Quigley, which had failed to pass, deadlocking 2-2 along party lines in the absence, at a recent meeting, of the third Republican board member, Dominick Stanzione.

    The Republican supervisor and Ms. Quigley often take one side of an issue, with the Democrats, Peter Van Scoyoc and Sylvia Overby, voicing their own opinions. Dominick Stanzione, a Republican elected on the same slate with Mr. Wilkinson and Ms. Quigley, increasingly constitutes the swing vote.

    A rehash on Tuesday of the board’s previous discussions about regulating outdoor gatherings at restaurants and bars, where growing crowds have prompted noise and traffic complaints, was illustrative of the impasse.

    “Are we moving forward?” Mr. Wilkinson asked. Although board members had agreed that something should be done to create more leverage for the town to address problematic situations, they failed to agree on how it should be done. Councilwoman Quigley suggested that the ball was now in Mr. Van Scoyoc and Ms. Overby’s court.    

    “I want to be clear, it’s not me,” Ms. Quigley said. “I made a proposal, and about a month ago I washed my hands of it because there was a disagreement about what ability the current code gives us. So I have nothing to do with it.”

    Besides questions from the Democratic members of the board, who asserted that existing codes could be brought to bear on establishments that repeatedly have large outdoor gatherings, Ms. Quigley’s proposal to issue “entertainment permits” was opposed both by business owners, decrying additional regulation, and by those concerned about curbing outdoor crowds, who said the permits would in fact legitimize the activities.

    Mr. Wilkinson then brought up a resolution that had not been passed, to request proposals from information technology businesses with an eye to disbanding the town’s own I.T. Department.

    “Is that dead?” the supervisor asked. “Theresa and I voted for it — is it dead?”

    “I’m not going to support it,” Councilman Stanzione told him. “So that’s dead?” said Mr. Wilkinson. “For now,” Mr. Stanzione said. “I’m tired of kicking cans,” Mr. Wilkinson said.

    On changes to an outdoor lighting law, Ms. Quigley, who had convened a committee to draft a new code after her original revision drew criticism, said that “quite frankly, the law is ready, but the committee is stuck in whatever a committee is stuck in when it can’t come out of committee.”

    “Is it ready to be distributed to the other board members?” Councilwoman Overby asked. “You have to ask the committee,” Ms. Quigley said. Loring Bolger, a member of the committee, said yesterday that the group was still working on the legislation.

    Next, a proposal to add a specific definition to the town code of the term “light trucks” came up. Residents of some neighborhoods have complained about business owners parking work vehicles at their houses, and a town code provision is designed to limit commercial vehicle-parking in residential areas.

    “I think that the last time we talked about it, that some of the board members had wondered about providing someplace for people who had trucks above 10,000 pounds,” Mr. Van Scoyoc said.

    Ms. Quigley said the code change was requested by Patrick Gunn, the public safety division administrator, who said that the law on the books is ambiguous and not easily enforced.

    “So if code enforcement has problems enforcing, it’s because we have laws that we refuse to change because we got off on a tangent,” the councilwoman said.  Board members agreed to have a hearing on the change to consider public opinion.

    A discussion of a new septic system for the Three Mile Harbor Trailer Park in East Hampton provoked an argument. Ms. Quigley and Mr. Wilkinson have endorsed spending almost $600,000 to install a custom-designed system at the park, which is home to 16 families and close to the mouth of Three Mile Harbor.

    It is owned cooperatively by the residents now, but was purchased from the town, which promised to upgrade the septic system. Septic waste constantly overflows, and the system must continually be pumped out. To help out, the town does not charge for dumping the waste at its scavenger waste transfer station.

    The situation has posed a problem across several administrations, with the failure of the first septic system put in by the town, and a reluctance on the part of officials to spend the money needed to rectify the situation, or to ignore it, or to displace the generally low-income residents there.

    Money for a new septic system has been included in the town’s capital budget, and low-cost, long-term loans are available through a state agency.

    Mr. Van Scoyoc and Ms. Overby have suggested that the board look into alternative waste treatment systems, or other solutions, citing the environmental sensitivity of the area and the lack of a guarantee that the proposed new system will work. And Mr. Stanzione said Tuesday that the situation should perhaps be addressed in the context of an overall septic waste management plan for the town, which he is drafting.

    Ms. Quigley expressed frustration with a possible delay. The system that has been designed has been approved by state and county agencies, she said. “We should probably inspect every single septic system along Three Mile Harbor. Let’s do that, and let’s hire someone to help us. It’ll probably take about five years, and who knows what it will cost us — but let’s study it. And meanwhile, what will happen to the health and safety of those people?”

    She urged Mr. Wilkinson to drop the subject. “Let’s just keep it moving,” she said. “It’s so many words — it’s exhausting.’ ”

    “At some point, we have to complete a transaction,” the supervisor said.

    “I don’t want to waste any more time on these issues — the talking,” Ms. Quigley responded. When Mr. Van Scoyoc asked about the deadline for requesting state funding, she interrupted, “I can’t take this; I honestly can’t take this.”

    Another issue that has been deadlocked gained some ground on Tuesday. Following the recommendation of the state comptroller and Charlene Kagel, the town’s chief auditor, Mr. Wilkinson had proposed establishing an audit committee to oversee annual outside audits. It was defeated in a 2-to-2 vote on June 7.

    Proposed members included Mr. Wilkinson, Ms. Quigley, Carole Campolo, a member of the town Republican Committee, and Stanley Arkin, a town resident. Ex-officio members were to include Len Bernard, the town budget officer, Ms. Kagel, and Mr. Gunn.

    “I have some concern about the makeup of the committee,” said Councilman Stanzione. He suggested adding another community member to the mix, “to give the committee some bipartisan flavor.”

    Ms. Quigley said she would rather remove herself from the committee “and allow that spot to be filled by someone from the Democratic Party, if that’s what will make it go forward.” 

    Mr. Van Scoyoc questioned whether any town board members should be part of the group. According to a survey of audit committees in other towns, Mr. Bernard said, that practice is common. “The reason is because the governing board, the elected board, is responsible,” he said, for ensuring that the annual audit is done according to proper accounting standards.

    After holding scheduled public hearings on June 12, the East Hampton Town Zoning Board of Appeals went into a work session and debated the proposed development of three contiguous lots located on the border of the Montauk Downs golf course on South Fairview Avenue, Montauk.

    Thomas Milne, who owns the three properties, had received approval from the town planning board to fold two of the parcels into one larger lot, and was now seeking variances to allow him to build two two-story houses, each about 1,700 square feet, with modest footprints of 950 and 917 square feet.

    On June 5, Mr. Milne spoke on the matter after the board’s public hearing. Billy Hajek of LandMarks planning had spoken for him at the hearing.

    “My grandmother bought a home in Montauk in about 1932,” Mr. Milne said. He grew up there before moving to Queens to raise his own family, he continued, returning to Montauk to buy a house in 1974 and becoming a resident. He eventually sold that house with the goal of building a new one on the golf course.

    “I became entwined with the planning board and the zoning board with wetlands,” he said. “I own the Surfside Inn. Presently, I live over the candy store.”

    The surrounding area is ribboned with wetlands, long stretches of very narrow wild growth. The variances requested may seem extreme at first glance, several being over 50 percent closer to the wetlands than town code dictates, but there can be strong mitigating circumstances in such requests.

    “I don’t need a large house,” Mr. Milne said. “I’ve been an environmentalist my whole life.”

    Brian Frank, chief environmental analyst for the town’s Planning Department, explained that requests for variances along the lines of Mr. Milne’s were, in fact, in keeping with good stewardship of the land. Decreasing the usage from the three houses to which he was actually entitled, to two, would alleviate septic system effects, Mr. Frank said, adding that the planned location of the two houses had been optimized to have a minimal impact on the environment.

    On June 12, the zoning board green-lighted Mr. Milne’s plans, voting 5 to 0 to grant the variances requested.

    The board also considered that night a request to allow the building of a 648-square-foot pool at 79 Wyandanch Lane in Amagansett, with a 148-square-foot poolhouse, on a 6,000-square-foot vacant lot owned by Lewis Meyers, adjacent to a house he also owns. To build the pool and poolhouse, Mr. Meyers needed setback variances from adjacent wetlands and neighboring properties.

    “There was some opposition from neighbors against putting the structure in,” the Z.B.A. chairman, Alex Walter, said as deliberations began.

    “It becomes a question of whether somebody can build an accessory structure on such a piece of land,” said Don Cirillo, a board member, noting that the two neighbors opposed to the variances would have preferred another house on the site, rather than a pool, which they felt was not in keeping with the neighborhood.

    After consulting with the board’s attorney, Robert Connelly, it was determined that, under a local law enacted in 2005, Mr. Meyers was within his rights to build an accessory structure on the property. The board added a caveat that if the property was ever sold as a single parcel, the pool would have to be removed.

    The board voted 5 to 0 to grant the requested variances and a needed natural resources special permit, with that stipulation.

    A building permit for a property on Abraham’s Path in Amagansett that was rescinded, then reinstated, was again rescinded, this time by the East Hampton Town Zoning Board of Appeals. The board voted 5 to 0 on Tuesday night to make the permit issued by the town’s acting chief building inspector, Tom Preiato, null and void, at least for now.

    In November 2010, Ronald Webb, who leases the property with an option to buy, received a permit for a new building that would contain both a commercial woodworking shop and a residence and would be the same size and dimensions as a barn on the property. The land is in a residential zone, but such use would be allowed if it could be established that the barn already there had been in continuous use as a business since before the town’s zoning code prohibited a business on the property.

    A 2008 certificate of occupancy for the barn, issued by Mr. Preiato’s predecessor, the late chief building inspector Don Sharkey, described the barn as being used for a business. Based on this C of O, Mr. Preiato issued the permit to allow for construction of the new building with its dual uses.

    But in August 2011, after an attorney for neighbors argued that the building had not been continuously used as a business, Mr. Preiato rescinded the permit, only to reinstate it a month later, when Mr. Webb’s attorney presented evidence to the contrary. At that point, Mr. Webb began knocking down the old barn and laying a foundation for the new building.

    The neighbors challenged Mr. Preiato’s reinstatement of the permit before the zoning board on April 24. 

    John L. Cirelli, their attorney, argued that Mr. Preiato’s decision was, at best, “based on an an error in fact,” and several neighbors said they had never seen a business operating out of the barn.

    Mr. Webb’s attorney Jonathan Tarbet of Tarbet, Lester, and Schoen, presented the board with several affidavits from local residents arguing that the barn had indeed been used as a business.

    “Show me a canceled check, a ledger book, anything,” Don Cirillo, a board member, had asked.

    Sharon McCobb, another board member, pointed out that the barn wasn’t even wired for electricity.

    Mr. Tarbet maintained that even if the opponents’ arguments were accepted, the appeal had not been made within the required 60 days from the date when Mr. Sharkey issued his C of O.

    Mr. Cirelli countered that if there had been an error of fact there was no time limit on an appeal; however, Mr. Tarbet said that the 60-day rule for appeals in cases where there was an error of fact involved can be waived only by the town. Such an option is not available to the neighbors, he said, as all development would be under a permanent threat of reversal.

    He said last week that his client had moved forward in good faith, expending much time and capital and would have the final word in court, and the final reversal, if the board ignored the 60-day rule.

    In the end, the board ruled that Mr. Preiato’s initial reversal of the building permit was the correct action, and that the neighbors had appealed the reinstatement in a timely manner. Therefore, the building is not entitled to be used as both a business and a residence.

    The board made it clear that the initial building permit issued by Mr. Preiato was in error, as it was based on a flawed 2008 C of O issued by Mr. Sharkey, but that it did not have standing to reverse that certificate.

    “We can’t do anything about overturning an appeal of the C of O because the statute of limitations has run out,” the chairman, Alex Walter, said. “In this case, you have a single structure. We can rule on the building permit that was issued in 2011 because that was a timely appeal.”

    However, Robert Connelly, the board’s attorney, said that “Mr. Preiato can at any time reverse an error in fact,” an action that the board made clear it hopes Mr. Preiato takes.

    Also on Tuesday, the board held a hearing on Carl Darenberg’s request for a natural resources permit to open a small bar at the Montauk Marine Basin. To be run by Lynn Calvo and called the Hula Hut, the bar will occupy a converted 224-square-foot office trailer. The permit was needed because the bar is to be 102 feet from Lake Montauk, where a distance of 150 feet is required.

    The town’s planning board already signed off on the bar, despite some opposition from neighbors, including Robert and Marie Rando, owner of the Montauk Sportsman’s Dock next door.

    The Randos were seated in the audience as Mary Whelan, an attorney representing Mr. Darenberg, told the board that there would be no drainage or runoff into the lake, that any food served would be prepared elsewhere, and that drinks and food would be served in disposable plates and cups.

    “I have been living with Liars’ Saloon, putting up with the noise and public urination,” Mr. Rando told the zoning board, claiming that the Hula Hut was much less than 100 feet from the water.

    While he was speaking, Ms. Calvo could be heard saying, in the audience, “That’s wrong.”

    Mr. Walter showed Mr. Rando a survey, then Mr. Rando handed the chairman several photographs illustrating problems with the screening and other issues.

    “This has been approved by the planning board. This board’s issue tonight is a natural resources permit. As far as the screening between your property and the Montauk Marine Basin, the planning board is the agency. It is not in this board’s purview to go over what the planning board has already approved,” Mr. Walter said.    

    “To calm Mr. Rando’s concerns, I will never be open until 4. I will never be open past 11 p.m. I love Montauk Harbor. I don’t want a late-night bar. I hope someday the Randos will come and have a margarita,” Ms. Calvo said.

    The board approved the permit 5 to 0 at the end of Tuesday’s session.

    Following a failed attempt to gain town board approval to issue a request for proposals to outsource East Hampton Town’s information technology services, the town’s internal audit division has distributed a survey to all town employees to assess the performance of the Information Technology Department.

    Town Supervisor Bill Wilkinson offered the resolution to seek private service providers on June 7, but it was defeated along party lines in a 2-to-2 vote. Councilman Dominick Stanzione was not present at that meeting, but when the matter was raised again at a meeting on Tuesday, he said he would not support it.

    The Information Technology Department provides computer support to all arms of the town, and oversees such things as software licensing.  

    In a letter dated June 12, Chalene Kagel, the town’s chief auditor, asked employees and department heads to anonymously complete the survey, so that the division could issue a report. The survey asks respondents to rate their satisfaction with several aspects of I.T. services, such as response time, professionalism, and ability to solve problems. It asks employees to rate how important various areas are to them and asks department heads to rate how the I.T. Department’s services have “affected the efficiency and effectiveness of your department.”

    Town employees, concerned that soliciting peer review of the department’s performance violated the terms of their union contract, and Ed Pluchino, the acting East Hampton Civil Service Employees Association president, referred the survey to Jay Diaz, a regional labor relations specialist for the C.S.E.A.

    Mr. Diaz said yesterday that town officials are within their rights as managers to survey employees about I.T.’s performance, particularly if they are developing a cost-benefit analysis.

    However, he said, if the information collected is used in any action against employees without a negotiation, the union would step in. “If the survey is used in any way to undermine, diminish, or abolish” jobs, he said, “the union will take action.”  

    Mr. Diaz said he had spoken with Mr. Wilkinson and put him on notice. The union representative had appeared at the June 7 meeting to express concerns about outsourcing the technology services.

    There are four employees in the Information Technology Department. One, Heath Liebman, is the town union president, and another, Kay Hutton, is its secretary. Bob Pease, the department head, is a former union president.

    In another vote on June 7, the board agreed to issue a request for proposals for an outside town justice court prosecutor. According to John Jilnicki, the town attorney, the attorney’s office is looking into having prosecutions done by an independent attorney in order to free up town staff for other town matters.

    On Monday, the United States Senate passed an amendment to the 2012 Farm Bill that will help commercial fishermen obtain disaster relief loans.

    Kirsten Gillibrand, a senator from New York, announced passage of the measure yesterday. Ms. Gillibrand, a Democratic member of the Senate Agriculture Committee, said the amendment had bipartisan support. The amendment adds commercial fishermen to a bill that otherwise provides a safety net to farmers in the event of a natural disaster.

    When a county has been declared a disaster area by either the president or the secretary of agriculture, “producers” in that county can become eligible for low-interest disaster loans through the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Farm Service Agency.

    Under the new amendment, loans may be used to help eligible commercial fishermen as well as farmers, ranchers, and aquaculture producers who have experienced physical losses to structures or equipment. The loans are discretionary and subject to annual appropriations, or done through supplemental appropriations.

     Catherine Casey, who has served for approximately 10 years as the assistant director of East Hampton Town’s Office of Housing and Community Development, has been appointed head of the East Hampton Housing Authority, an autonomous agency that often works with the town to provide affordable housing. She replaces Maureen Murphy, the authority’s longtime director, who has retired.

    Ms. Casey’s appointment leaves the town housing office with three staffers, where it once had six, Tom Ruhle, the housing director, said this week. Ms. Casey had provided mortgage counseling and foreclosure prevention services for town residents, among other duties. In her absence, Mr. Ruhle said, East Hamptoners seeking those services will have to go to agencies in western Suffolk County.

    He said he hoped a replacement for Ms. Casey would be hired. However, he said, with her qualifications and training, “she’s very difficult to replace.”

    “She will make a tremendous addition to the Housing Authority, following in Maureen Murphy’s excellent footsteps,” Mr. Ruhle said.

East Hampton Town

Beach Business

    The East Hampton Town Board has put on hold a number of requests from surf camps and others seeking permission to give classes or tours to paying customers on public beaches. Under current town law, a commercial mass gathering permit is needed to do so.

    In consultation with the town trustees, the board has resolved to develop a policy governing such commercial use of public places, requests for which are increasing. Board members hope to make decisions in early July, and will not issue permits for activities stretching throughout the summer months until then.

Babinski Barn Permit

    The town board voted on Tuesday to issue a construction permit for an already partially constructed barn on the Babinski farm in Wainscott, although members were split as to just how to make a positive determination.

    A town code provision says the town board must sign off on permits for structures on land where the town has purchased development rights, such as the Babinski farm, although planning board approval has already been issued. The town board held a hearing on the proposal earlier this month.

    However, Councilwoman Theresa Quigley argued at a board meeting on Tuesday that the board’s best stance legally was to grant its approval of the permit based on a previous hearing in 2005, when the development rights were purchased.  Though Councilwoman Sylvia Overby and Councilman Peter Van Scoyoc argued that it would be better to base a decision on the recent hearing, a majority of the board voted with Ms. Quigley. Mr. Van Scoyoc abstained from the vote.    J.P.

New York State

Preservation Credit to Increase

    The New York State Assembly has passed a bill to make a historic preservation tax credit more generous, raising the maximum award from $5 million to $12 million. The move is intended to make preserving high-cost properties on the East End and in other high-priced areas of the state more attractive to builders. According to State Assemblyman Fred W. Thiele Jr., the bill is expected to become law.

    For many years a little known fact in Montauk was that parking in the Kirk Park lot was free to residents with an East Hampton Town parking permit and $10 for the day for visitors. When town officials noticed that the large numbers now visiting the hamlet were parking on Main Street and blocking access to some stores, they eliminated the parking fee.

    But the beachside lot, which can accommodate up to 60 vehicles, if not more, remains partially empty most days. Last week, East Hampton Town Councilman Peter Van Scoyoc sent out an e-mail to all members of the Montauk Citizens Advisory Committee asking their opinions of a sign that would bring attention to the lot. A storm of e-mails followed, specifically in response to the plan to include the names of the East Hampton Town supervisor and town board members on the sign.

    Mr. Van Scoyoc asked for objections only since the town would like to move quickly and get the sign put up before the season takes off, with the goals of increasing awareness of the underused ocean beach and a more even distribution of bathers, he wrote.

    The sign would be installed at the northwest corner of the parking lot on South Eagle Street, where a scruff of beach roses is now. Although the forwarded image was a Photoshopped reproduction, Mr. Van Scoyoc said, the sign is black with gold lettering and says “Welcome to Montauk, Kirk Park Beach, Free Parking and Restrooms” and includes space at the top for the town seal, where the names of the supervisor and board members would be included. Many people thought that was fiscally irresponsible, however, since the names would have to be changed often.

    Mr. Van Scoyoc wrote in the e-mail that Supervisor Bill Wilkinson, a Montauk resident, wants his name on the new sign. And where the supervisor’s name is, often the other board members’ names follow, he said.

    Those who replied to the e-mail mostly agreed that the town officials’ names should not be put on the sign. “It makes it egotistically official looking,” said one citizens advisory committee member.

    “If we put names on the sign then we have to put up a new sign every year that there is a new administration. I say no names,” wrote Arlene Brodsky, a committee member.

    “I do not believe any board or supervisor’s name should be added,” wrote John Chimples.

    Councilman Dominick Stanzione, the committee’s town board liaison, wrote, “I want the supervisor’s name on it. It’s tradition! And it’s a good tradition!”

    Lisa Grenci, who until March was the committee’s chairwoman, wrote that she is totally opposed to the supervisor’s name being included and supports a bidding process to make the sign, which brought up another issue: What should the sign look like and should the project go out to bid?

    Harry Ellis, a sign maker in Montauk for more than 20 years and a committee member, said he wanted a chance to bid on it. He said he was the one who made the existing “Welcome to Montauk” sign on the north side of the parking lot on Montauk Highway, the blue one with white lettering that has the Montauk Lighthouse on it.

    Members wrote back and forth about the uniformity of the hamlet’s signs, a point that was commented on by Councilwoman Theresa Quigley: “Whatever that look is, it should be the same for all the signs on town property.” She went on to say that the proposed sign seems fine but is markedly different from other signs, but then those signs, she said, also don’t follow a set pattern.

    Mr. Van Scoyoc could not be reached by phone or e-mail by press time. But Councilwoman Sylvia Overby sent a reply to questions yesterday, saying that town officials’ names are listed on all park properties. The names, she said, are on a nameplate that is easily removed and replaced. The sign, she said, would be made in-house by the Buildings and Grounds Department, which eliminates the need for a bid process.

    In a development demonstrating the influence of national politics on the local scene, Representative Tim Bishop, a Democrat, received the endorsement of John Behan on Monday in La Bodega restaurant in Montauk. Mr. Behan cited the National Republican Congressional Committee’s focus on this district’s campaign as a significant motivation for his decision.

    Mr. Bishop, who is from Southampton, is running for re-election for his congressional seat in the first district of New York, comprising most of eastern Suffolk County. His Republican opponent is Randy Altschuler, a businessman and entrepreneur who lives in St. James.

    Mr. Behan is a former state assemblyman and former East Hampton Town Republican chairman, as well as a decorated Marine Corps veteran. He has been a prominent figure in both local and regional Republican politics.

    In a phone interview on Tuesday, Mr. Behan said that in 2010, when he was the chairman of the town Republican committee, he thought Mr. Altschuler ran a great race. Since then, Mr. Behan has left the committee and has altered his opinion of the candidate, calling him “Houdini” for what he saw as a disappearing act after the last election only to resurface to run for office again. He questioned Mr. Altschuler’s commitment to the district, calling him a “Johnny-come-lately” who moved to the district only to run in it and with no ties to the community.

    Mr. Altschuler has challenged those assertions this week and stated in a mass e-mail that his wife’s pediatric practice in Smithtown and his infant daughter’s birth there were evidence of his commitment to this region. His campaign cast Mr. Behan’s endorsement as a local issue, focusing on his involvement with the town’s Republican committee and his falling-out with its leaders since last year’s town election when the town board candidates Mr. Behan proposed — his wife, Marilyn Behan, and Bill Mott — were rejected by them.

    In a statement, the Altschuler campaign said the endorsement “was really about local politics, and has no impact on the tremendous momentum Randy has right now.” It cited the endorsements Mr. Altschuler recently received from the New York State Independence Party, the Suffolk County Conservative Party, and the Suffolk County Republican Party. Mr. Bishop had the endorsement of the Independence Party in the 2010 election and more than 7,000 people voted for him on that line. He won the last election by only 593 votes.

    Regarding Mr. Altschuler’s campaign. Mr. Behan said his main concern was the involvement of the National Republican ongressional Committee in this district. “Altschuler has a suitcase full of money he is walking around with all of the time. It impresses the [Suffolk County] Republican Committee and the national committee,” which are pleased to have a candidate they do not have to help finance, he said.

    George Demos, who was attempting to run a Republican primary challenge to Mr. Altschuler, suddenly dropped out of the race on May 25 citing the need to focus on his wedding preparations. Mr. Behan called this evidence of “shenanigans” on the part of the national committee. “He didn’t just quit one day. They had to make a big offering to Demos for him to drop out. He was as committed to running as Altschuler and Bishop.”

    He said the Demos campaign was doing well enough to have been a viable challenge to the Altschuler campaign in a primary. “I’m opposed to the national committee telling us who our candidate should be. It’s unsettling,” Mr. Behan said.

    In the last election, Mr. Altschuler initially had the support of the county committee chairman, John Jay LaValle. Mr. LaValle, however, became neutral to negative during the primary race after the state Republican Party chairman’s son decided to run. Christopher Cox, the son of Edward Cox and the grandson of President Richard Nixon, lost the 2010 primary to Mr. Altschuler after he and Mr. Demos split the Conservative and Tea Party votes.

    This year, Mr. Behan said he felt that both of the Republican candidates were running to promote their own status and not out of a dedication to public service. Despite Mr. Bishop’s opponents calling into question his campaign’s employment of family members as consultants in previous elections, Mr. Behan said he believed Mr. Bishop was a dedicated public servant.

    Mr. Behan represented the South Fork in the State Assembly from 1978 to 1995 and helped create its Veterans Affairs Committee. He was severely wounded in combat in Vietnam and served as director of the New York State Division of Veterans’ Affairs from 1995 to 1998.

    In endorsing Mr. Bishop, Mr. Behan praised his commitment to veterans’ issues and his understanding of the concerns of the farmers and fisherman of the East End. “He has a special staff person just on veterans’ issues working with constituents to fight with the Department of Veterans Affairs to get needed benefits. That’s a major position for any elected official to take, to not be ashamed to have a person solely assigned to that task.” He said Mr. Bishop was the first congressman he was aware of from this district to have such a staffer.

    Even after 12 years of retirement from the Assembly, Mr. Behan said people still called him for help with governmental problems. “Whenever I need help on a federal level and call Bishop’s office for previous constituents of mine, the doors fly open. Tim Bishop has helped me on several occasions, even though I was the Republican committee chairman. There were no questions about party affiliation.”

    Despite the national focus on this district, Mr. Behan said he thought residents would continue their tradition of voting for people they respect and who they believe will help their families the most. “It’s the person, not the politics. I think a lot of people feel the same way I do, even if they aren’t willing to say so publicly.” He noted that when Otis Pike was a Democratic congressman more than three decades ago he served on a Republicans for Pike committee, and Mr. Pike endorsed him for the Assembly.

    Mr. Behan said Mr. Bishop is a viable candidate and early polling from the Bishop campaign has shown him with a 17-point lead over Mr. Altshculer. Still, he worried about the Democrat being dragged down by those going to the polls to vote against President Barack Obama. “They’re fed up with Obama and anyone associated with him. I agree it’s time for Obama to go, but not Bishop.”