The East Hampton Town Board acted properly last Thursday in agreeing to the possible sale of bonds to cover the cost of work on a taxiway at East Hampton Airport. However, another airport question — whether to increase the height of its control tower and move it to another position — is far stickier.

Borrowing money by issuing bonds is not the only option for the taxiway project, estimated at $2.1 million. The town anticipates that its airport fund, which is like a separate bank account, will have a sizable surplus, which could pay for the work out of pocket without the expense of interest to bondholders over time. The work, if and when it is approved, would connect two existing taxiways, bringing them up to contemporary standards. It also would cover the cost of replacing directional lighting on the main runway. Both the taxiway and lighting projects are overdue and are part of what should be seen as routine upkeep, which do not by themselves appear to be a back-door expansion of the airport’s capacity.

The tower is another matter. 

In 2012, when the tower was installed in a hasty, secretive deal that was billed merely as temporary, it was pitched by its backers as an experiment to control noise from helicopters. Few really believed that at the time, including the controllers themselves. The doubts have been borne out, as air traffic has, if anything, increased, and the town now has spent enormous sums and countless staff hours fighting aircraft interests and the Federal Aviation Administration for some limits. 

The thinking in 2012 was that restricting access to the airport was the only way to control noise; the same argument was at the core of the town’s more recent shot at regulating the loudest aircraft, which was rejected by a federal court. Today, helicopters and other aircraft are routed into East Hampton Airport by controllers in weather conditions that previously would have sent them elsewhere, anti-noise advocates say.

Now, after helicopters were sent on cloudy days last summer over several Sag Harbor neighborhoods when controllers could not see their approach from the south and southeast, there is pressure from the town airport manager, Jim Brundige, for a new, taller tower to be built on a spot with better sightlines. 

Opponents say that would be premature in light of the noise study being conducted at great expense as a first step toward new rules that might gain F.A.A. approval. East Hampton Airport might not be seen as even needing an air traffic control tower once the so-called Part 161 study is completed. 

That uncertainty might be behind the push for a new tower. Airport interests would certainly like to see the town commit to a new $800,000 tower before a report comes in that might conclude one was counter to noise-control goals. That seems ample reason for the town board to put on ice any further discussion of replacing the existing tower. When airport interests are in a rush to get something done, residents and officials alike are right to be wary.

Moving into the new year and cognizant of changes to downtowns nationwide and locally, the East Hampton Village Board has signaled that it is willing to consider new rules that might bring more life to Main Street and Newtown Lane. This is welcome, though any policy shifts would have to be made very carefully in order to maintain or even improve the commercial district’s character.

One new vision was presented in October to the village board by a group of architects, who offered a sketch of a greener and bicycle and pedestrian-friendly village with more places to live for working residents and centralized cultural attractions. More recently, the board spoke favorably about relaxing the longstanding prohibition on new restaurants or takeout shops. Done thoughtfully, such changes could add vitality to East Hampton Village, serving workers, residents, and visitors alike.

Also in the wind, but to be watched with substantial concern, is a proposal to relax rules about village inns and hotels, one of which seeks a major renovation. Because nearly all of these accommodations are in the designated historic district, the greatest degree of caution is warranted. 

For the most part, village inns and hotels, though few, were established before land-use rules were adopted, allowing them in close proximity to residences and in places where modernization might produce unsightly or overbearing effects on Main Street. 

In recent years, some hotel and inn owners have pushed the limits. In several instances, they have annexed nearby houses or garages, gradually converting them into guest rooms of questionable legality. Though these increasingly corporate businesses have the right to make a profit, they have proven by their own actions to be too aggressive as neighbors. Any zoning code changes they or their advocates suggest should be viewed with healthy skepticism.

Two big — and very different — fund-raising efforts reach important junctures this month. In Sag Harbor, an $8 million goal that would enable a partnership to rebuild the burned movie house and turn it into a genuine arts hub is within reach. In Montauk, the Playhouse Foundation is within striking distance of its target, also $8 million, to add two indoor swimming pools, meeting rooms, and a theater — all very much needed in a hamlet where off-season diversions are limited.

The plan for rebuilding the Sag Harbor Cinema includes a main theater evoking the one badly damaged in a fire almost exactly a year ago. It also calls for a smaller screening room, suitable for classes. It is just as important that it would retain an iconic cultural fixture in a rapidly changing village and stave off the kind of commercial development that might be of little or no interest to residents.

Each is a worthwhile community undertaking that deserves consideration for year-end giving.

The East Hampton Town Board is poised tonight to approve an up-to-99-year lease for a Southampton Hospital-run emergency facility on land it owns off Pantigo Road in East Hampton. Given a number of unanswered — and even unasked — questions, the anticipated board action appears overhasty.

According to a hospital spokeswoman, even the basics of what would be built on the property have not yet been worked out; there is not even so much as an artist’s rendering. This means that at the public hearing tonight, at 6:30, the town board will be asked to make a nearly century-long commitment based only on verbal descriptions of what might be built there. Such a commitment would be an irresponsible example of how to manage public properties.

What is known so far is not much at all. A Little League ball field and a parking lot occupy the 4.5-acre property, which is zoned for parks and conservation. They would be replaced by a 54,000-square-foot building housing emergency treatment and diagnosis rooms and a pharmacy, as well as offices for primary care doctors and specialists. The town’s Planning Department looked at the property and reportedly found it less suitable than another site under consideration, on Stephen Hand’s Path.

As proposed, the hospital adjunct would be a shockingly large building for a town that defines commercial structures over 15,000 square feet as “superstores.” The traffic it would create would almost certainly make a stoplight at the Pantigo Road intersection necessary, adding to an already difficult section of Route 27. Workers and patients would in effect be helping to provide the commercial development of the site, which would then lower zoning standards on adjacent properties. And for what: a satellite of a hospital that itself is a satellite of the major treatment center in Stony Brook, where patients with the most serious conditions would continue to be flown by helicopter. 

The public rationale for the Pantigo Place site is that an emergency room someplace in East Hampton Town will be important after Southampton Hospital eventually moves to a new facility on County Road 39. That is true, but the relatively small property being considered tonight does not appear to be the best choice. 

Some emergency medical personnel have expressed the opinion that Stephen Hand’s Path would be a better location, serving a greater number of people by drawing patients from Sag Harbor and Bridgehampton in addition to East Hampton, Amagansett, Springs, and Montauk. Given the choice, ambulance drivers would head toward where the highest level of care could be found, not away from it by diverting to Pantigo Place.

Underpinning the decision about where to site an East Hampton facility is that the hospital seeks a high-visibility site in order to maximize donations. Indeed, of the estimated $38 million the facility would cost, less than a third has been promised in state funding; much of the rest would have to come from private contributions. Were it built off in the woods somewhere, the facility would be less likely to get a fat check from, say, the comedian Jerry Seinfeld, who has a house less than a mile away from Pantigo Place, as do any number of other 1-percenters.

Given all these questions, and more, the East Hampton Town Board must hold off and know a great deal more about the hospital’s plans before it hands over the Pantigo Place property for almost 100 years.

It is safe to say that few people like the sound of leaf blowers, unless, of course, they are in the property-care business, and then they sound like money. That conflict is at the core of a renewed call for limits, which are now under consideration by the East Hampton Village Board. Residents want less noise, especially on weekends when they are likely to be most irritated by the vexing on-and-off buzz; landscapers say that their work is all but impossible without them.

There is no doubt that the powerful blowers are effective. A few blasts and a difficult-to-rake gravel driveway looks as tidy as the grounds of Buckingham Palace. A single user can clear a leaf-strewn lawn in no time and quickly move on to the next job. That last point is key: If a work crew can tend more properties in a day using loud, polluting, gas-powered devices, there is a strong financial incentive to do so, the effect on air quality and neighbors’ sanity notwithstanding.

There have been efforts before to limit landscaping blowers and other noisy machines. Both East Hampton Town and Village have set hours for outdoor work of almost any kind, and from time to time a contractor or garbage collector is rewarded with a fine for showing up too early in the day. From the continued complaints, however, it is clear that these measures have failed to solve the problem. 

Residents’ expectation of peace and quiet in and around their homes is reasonable, and it is up to government to take the lead in providing it. Left to their bottom-line interests, landscapers and property-care companies will generally opt for the most effective machinery, with noise and air quality a lesser concern. However, if blowers are banned, particularly those with noise outputs above a certain level, the landscapers will figure out how to make a go of it, as they did before the blasted things were invented in the first place. If there is still money to be made taking care of leaves, someone will figure out how to do it, blowers or no.

The most important work in the recent push to improve water quality on the South Fork has been done not by local government, but by a private organization, Concerned Citizens of Montauk, which has taken a science-first approach for more than four years. This is in sharp contrast to the elected officials in East Hampton and Southampton Towns, who have required expensive nitrogen-reducing septic systems for new houses without knowing for sure if they will result in measurable improvement for the environment.

One part of gauging success is knowing what the conditions are at the start. So far, none of our local government boards has embarked on meaningful data collection in the marine environment. Consider that. So far, the empirical information, which comes from a state program, actually shows nitrogen levels well below that considered harmful by the Peconic Estuary Program. Pio Lombardo, a consultant who is the architect of East Hampton Town’s water strategy, dismisses the state results, saying the handful of saltwater test sites were in the wrong locations. He might be right, but he might be wrong. The fact is, no one knows. Yet.

C.C.O.M. stands alone, having been committed to testing many South Fork waters for fecal bacteria for years in partnership with the Surfrider Foundation’s Blue Water Task Force. Several of the sample sites have consistently shown elevated bacteria levels, some in the dangerous range for human contact. Embarrassed officials have pretended that the C.C.O.M. program did not matter and have done nothing in response.

Now, C.C.O.M., working with the United States Geological Survey, has convinced East Hampton Town to come on board in baseline testing of pollutants in Lake Montauk. The data will help define water quality problems and put a system in place to monitor potential improvement. This approach must be expanded, ideally to the entire Peconic Estuary.

It is still a good time to get your flu shot. Speaking in Montauk on Monday at a business conference at Gurney’s Resort, Dr. Thomas McGinn, who oversees physician operations for the giant hospital network Northwell Health, said that influenza cases on Long Island were spiking and that the vaccine offers a needed degree of protection. Although it has been reported that this year’s flu shot is only partially effective, Dr. McGinn said some defense is better than none.

Anecdotally, we have heard that local ambulance crews are seeing an increase in patients with flu symptoms, especially among vulnerable older residents. Practitioners say this year’s strain is especially virulent, knocking down those who are affected for a long and debilitating period. Nationwide, the number of people seeing a health-care provider with flu-like symptoms this year has been the highest since 2003-4. As of last week, the rate of infection was considered widespread in 32 states, including New York, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

In addition to getting a last-minute flu shot, medical professionals recommend a number of steps to decrease the chances of exposure. They are frequent hand washing with warm water and soap and not sharing food, drink, or eating utensils with others. But, get that flu shot if you have not done so already.

The Trump administration’s announcement this week of high trade tariffs on imported solar panels and components continues his war on sensible energy policy and threatens a United States industry that employs as many as 260,000 Americans. The move was anticipated and is consistent with the Interior Department’s recent decision to open many of the country’s coastal waters to oil exploitation.

On Monday, the Trump administration said it would impose a 30-percent tax on solar panels from China in response to what it said was the dumping of below-market-value solar equipment. The White House move also helps prop up the faltering coal industry, which has had a difficult time competing with cheaper fuels, like natural gas, wind, and, yes, solar.

In the long term, domestic panel manufacturers could see gains, but a solar industry group said that 23,000 U.S. jobs would be lost this year alone. The huge growth in the residential use of solar energy has been attributed to the falling cost of imported panels. Take that away, and consumer demand falls, too.

For solar installers, including several on the East End, the tariffs will force prices up. This is likely to depress demand, especially since the generous utility rebates that drove consumer enthusiasm a few years ago have expired and generally have not been renewed. 

Large scale wind-power generation, like the project planned for a site east of Montauk, is near the top of the U.S.’s renewable energy portfolio over all. However, solar home systems remain an important potential source of electricity on the South Fork, especially in summer, when demand skyrockets. Putting unnecessary impediments in the path of those who would like to move away from fossil fuels is a grave mistake.

With the looming threat of climate change — observed here on the East End in the accelerating rate of coastal erosion due to sea level rise — every possible step toward an energy future that is more dependent on renewables is a step that is needed. 

There is a numbing ubiquity to plastic water bottles, despite their general pointlessness and woeful environmental impact. We were reminded of this by a photograph taken at a recent Springs School Board meeting, which showed one Nestlé Pure Life 16.9-ounce water bottle placed in front of each member’s seat. The Springs School Board is hardly the only group at which water in plastic is seen; plastic bottles were deployed at a League of Women Voters candidates’ debate, as they are at many public and private events.

Recycling plastics is known to be worthwhile, but the statistics are not encouraging. According to an academic study last year, nearly 80 percent of the plastics manufactured ends up in landfills or in the environment at large. Health studies have suggested that certain plastics can mimic estrogen as they degrade. Some leach compounds that have been linked to asthma, heart problems, diabetes, and certain forms of cancer. Environmentalists also recommend the use of certified water filters to reduce the chance of exposure to water from the tap.

The Springs School, as with the League of Women Voters and other public and private entities, could help by setting an example of refusing to supply bottled water at their events. Another school, Montauk, has been a leader in this, with a successful fourth-grade effort to get businesses to give up serving drinks with plastic straws. East Hampton Town and Village have banned single-use plastic bags, and a new Suffolk law encourages grocery customers to supply their own bags or pay a 5-cent fee. 

The Springs School’s dozen or so water bottles might not seem worth worrying about, but they are part of what advocates say is a growing crisis. Already, a million plastic bottles change hands each minute around the world, and the shocking number is growing. According to The Guardian newspaper, enough plastic bottles are now sold in a year to reach halfway to the sun if stacked end to end. Some of the world’s discarded plastic ends up in the food chain. 

Schools, above all, should seek to set examples of good stewardship of the planet. Ending the practice of supplying wasteful plastic bottles at meetings is one way to help spread the message that even the smallest steps can make a difference.

A week or so after the second act of the women’s marches in cities and communities large and small across the country, questions remain: Do they matter, and where does the moment go from here?

The total number of participants in the rallies held on Jan. 20 from Maine to Alaska is guesswork, but two academic researchers estimated that, at minimum, 1.6 million or up to 2.5 million people took part. This is about half the estimated turnout for the inaugural marches in 2017, but still. On the South Fork, a march held in Sag Harbor on Jan. 20 drew a crowd in excess of 500, so large that many of those at the edges of the assembly near the foot of Long Wharf could scarcely make out what Suffolk Legislator Bridget Fleming and other speakers were saying.

Such widespread demonstrations of support for a political cause, albeit one that it is hard to define, deserved more attention than it got in many national media outlets. Amid the Russia election investigation and President Trump’s sedate trip to the Davos billionaire’s conference in Switzerland, the press noted the number of marches and quickly moved on. Such is the nature of the warp-speed news cycles these days. But, thinking all the way back a week and a half, as well as recalling the many protests large and small against the Trump administration’s policies and the president’s unfortunate Twitter habit, it seems a sustained movement is underway.

That so many have waved signs and taken public action for more than a year is noteworthy. Their enthusiasm seems to have taken hold and helped galvanize Democrats. This is likely to be the marches’ most important effect.

Representative Lee Zeldin of New York’s First Congressional District is not alone in coming under near-constant needling, online and at public appearances and his Long Island office. His seat will be contested in the November election, and while there appears to be little interest among Republicans in forcing a primary, there already are six declared candidates for the Democratic nomination.

Often in American elections, the outcome is decided not by how people vote but by how many bother to take time from their day to go to the polls or fill out absentee ballots — by who is motivated enough to put down the remote and get up off the sofa, so to speak. At the moment, and for the foreseeable future, the motivation meter is tilting toward the Democratic Party, which is, to a large degree, because people have taken to the streets and are likely to stay there.

Tuesday’s State of the Union speech probably did little to change the political map for 2018. The old fear-mongering about immigrants was there, if tempered from last year’s “American carnage.” Mr. Trump was notably silent on the #MeToo movement — and sexual harassment in general. This is hardly surprising, considering that he is said to have carried on an extramarital affair while his current wife was pregnant with their child, and it was his own recorded “grab ’em by the pussy” remark that led to the now-iconic hats of the same name and arguably to a force that could change the course of history. 

November is really only a few short months away. There is no reason to doubt Americans will stay engaged until Election Day and beyond.