In his “state of the town” speech last week, East Hampton Supervisor Larry Cantwell made note of the effort to build a medical center on Pantigo Place. Southampton Hospital envisions an emergency room here, with doctors’ offices and related medical services, as it prepares to abandon its existing location and move to the Stony Brook Southampton campus on County Road 39. Patients and health care responders, especially Montaukers, have for years bemoaned the time it takes to get to Southampton Hospital in emergencies, particularly in summer. While that is a serious concern, we question the location and size chosen for a new facility.

Among the most important considerations is traffic and commercial density. The Pantigo Place property is in a portion of town just outside East Hampton Village that is already showing signs of unwanted sprawl. Adding a massive medical building to the mix would have numerous negative effects. Concerns also have begun to be voiced about the considerable amount of wastewater that would be produced, and how it might affect drinking water.

Important to consider as well is that the site is now used for Little League baseball and would require a change from parkland and conservation status to commercial use — setting a risky precedent. The former Child Development Center of the Hamptons charter school property off Stephen Hand’s Path might be a better location. In justifying the need for an emergency room, the hospital says it serves 17,000 patients from East Hampton a year, a figure that is hardly credible. We suspect that money is a hidden factor. East Hampton’s deep-pocketed donor community, unlike Southampton’s, has not traditionally been a strong supporter of the hospital. It is plausible, therefore, that fund-raising is likely to have played a part in recommending a shiny new facility in more or less the very center of town.

East Hamptoners are sure to welcome an emergency medical center, but at a minimum our elected officials should think again about whether the hospital’s grand plan is really right for the place it has been proposed. 

East Hampton Town and Southampton Hospital are moving quickly toward breaking ground on a emergency-care facility, possibly off Pantigo Road just east of Town Hall. Many questions remain, and we are concerned that in the eagerness to get moving, some of the numbers used to justify the roughly $40 million project are being overstated. A hospital adjunct of some kind appears necessary within the town’s borders, especially since Southampton Hospital may be relocated westward in a few years to a new site on County Road 39.

For East Hampton’s ambulance services, a treatment center closer by makes a lot of sense. Even now, a routine trip to the Southampton emergency room takes a considerable amount of time. During the peak season, ambulances frequently have to return east after an emergency with lights flashing and sirens blaring in order to get to another call. Being able to turn an ambulance around at an East Hampton facility and put it back in service awaiting another emergency could mean the difference between life and death.

Location is a question. The hospital administration prefers the town’s 4.5-acre ball field on Pantigo Place over a much larger town-owned property on Stephen Hand’s Path. Whichever site is chosen, it is highly likely that a new traffic light on Montauk Highway will have to be installed. A light controlling the entrance and exit at Pantigo Place may be less disruptive of through traffic, though this would have to be studied closely before anyone could say for sure. 

For patients from Montauk, Springs, and Amagansett, whether going to the new emergency facility in an ambulance or getting there by other means, the Pantigo Place location would be better. It also is important to consider our summer visitors, many of whom stay in motels and other accommodations on Napeague and in Montauk. According to Suffolk County figures, there were beds for about 11,400 motel and hotel guests in East Hampton Town in 2010 — most of them from Amagansett east — an astonishing figure with obvious implications for first responders.

Other numbers warrant more clarity. The hospital has proposed eventually having a 64,000-square-foot building, which would make it among the largest structures in East Hampton Town. Does it really need to be that large? Maybe. Another startling statistic offered by the hospital is 17,000, the number of patient visits to the hospital originating from East Hampton annually, which needs a bit more explanation. It ought to be made clear just how many of those thousands of visits would be handled at a new site and how many would still require going to the hospital in Southampton. It is not clear at this point how either the patient or building plan numbers were arrived at and whether they justify the calculations that led to the East Hampton plan.

Another concern is that the Pantigo Place property is adjacent to a Suffolk County Water Authority well and water tower. What the environmental impact would be of such a massive facility and whether sewage treatment would be adequate to keep chemical and pharmaceutical contamination from reaching drinking or surface waters must be studied.

A $10 million promise of a state grant puts pressure on East Hampton Town and the hospital to get moving on construction as soon as possible. However, making sure the facility is the right size, built in the best location, and would result in only minimal ecological harm should take precedence over haste.

Visitors who passed the green at East Hampton Town Pond on Columbus Day weekend may have been puzzled by its appearance. After an excavation that created several pools, new grass had just begun to appear, and the place almost had the look of an abandoned industrial site.

The intent of those behind the so-called bioswale project, undertaken by East Hampton Village, is good. The depressions are supposed to stop the flow of road runoff during rainstorms from reaching the pond. The pond, in turn, drains into Hook Pond, which has been environmentally compromised for years, with low levels of the oxygen necessary for aquatic life, according to a consultant’s study last year. A similar set of drain pools are being dug behind the Methodist Church to filter water that reaches the pond via the Nature Trail. The bioswales, at a cost of about $100,000, are expected to help remove pollutants.

From our standpoint, though, Hook Pond should hardly have been the first priority. Georgica Pond, which borders on the Town of East Hampton as well as the village, has far more recreational use as a site for crabbing and sailing. At one time it also supported a small commercial fish and crab harvest.

Georgica has had dangerous algae blooms in recent years. The dominant restoration effort there has come from a private group, the Friends of Georgica Pond Foundation, however, rather than government. That said, East Hampton Town’s moratorium on potential pollution-causing industrial and retail development in a portion of the Georgica watershed is smart and timely.

As strange as the village bioswales might seem to visitors, residents also should take note. Voters in the East End towns are going to see a ballot proposition in November asking whether to extend the community preservation fund’s 2-percent transfer tax until 2050 and to allow up to 20 percent of its future income to go to water quality efforts. This is a feel-good measure and very likely to pass. However, the problems with the proposal are considerable, given the vague framework in the enabling state legislation and “trust-us” assurances from officials.

East Hampton’s bioswales may or may not work in the end; they certainly were not among the principal recommendations in the consultant’s 2015 study of Hook Pond. They point to a “Hey! Let’s see if this can work!” approach, which is not sound policy for the water remediation efforts that could unfold if the referendum passes next month. The future of our ponds — and drinking water — is at stake, and the public should keep a steady eye on the proposals officials come up with.

Time was, during the weeks after Labor Day, the leaves magically changed into technicolor and blew down Main Street in a scratchy buzz, but otherwise there was mostly silence.

Although that blessed time is still celebrated in certain ways — champagne brunches on the beach in anticipation of the mass exodus come to mind — fewer people are actually leaving, opting instead to stay put for most of the year or at least 52 weekends. Many are refugees from the city and the suburbs who are attracted to a quieter, yet cultured life. Families, artists, writers, foodies, and other creative types are no longer transients but fully rooted in the year-round landscape.

In addition to peace and quiet, many full-timers are here for the artistic and cultural attractions. In the past few years, longtime museums and venues like Guild Hall and the Parrish Art Museum have expanded year-round programs, new institutions such as the Southampton Arts Center have begun contributing their own full schedules, and the Bay Street Theater has gone from mostly seasonal offerings to live events throughout the off-season.

Fall arts and music festivals have grown out of successful local events, including Sag Harbor’s American Music Festival and Southampton’s SeptemberFest. Throw in the annual Hamptons International Film Festival, and some might even say the South Fork has an arts scene like that of a small city.

What has been called the shoulder season, the first few weeks before and after summer, has been padded all the way through the holidays. It then emerges again, like the groundhog, on or about Presidents and Valentine’s Day weekends.

A quick peek at the region’s cultural calendars shows staged plays and readings, gallery and museum openings, comedy shows, film screenings, theater and opera simulcasts, book talks and lectures, a fully evolved music scene, and so much more.

You say there is nothing to do in the fall and winter? You’re not looking hard enough.

Sea level rise is the single greatest long-term threat to eastern Long Island, yet it is one that our towns and villages are least able to combat for practical and political reasons. 

The problems already confronting property owners and local officials are immense. In many places on the South Fork, beaches are shifting over time at a foot or more a year. This has put even some houses and other structures that were built well back from the water in the 1970s right on the beach today.

Much of the erosion is seen on the bay and Block Island Sound, rather than at the ocean. In bulkheaded parts of Springs, Amagansett, Lazy Point, and on the north side of Montauk, at Soundview from Montauk Harbor to Captain Kidd’s Path, there no longer are passable beaches. The next big trouble spot may be west of Shadmoor State Park in Montauk, where a number of houses loom on a bluff only one or two big storms away from disaster. Then there is downtown Montauk, where a $9 million Army Corps of Engineers project to save a row of motels and private residences may soon be bolstered by a far more expensive effort to pump sand there from offshore.

If that isn’t enough bad news, consider the ecological effects of rising seas, particularly in estuaries. In many places vital marsh habitats cannot migrate landward because they are hemmed in by houses. Additional losses among of these important breeding and feeding places would have dire effects on wildlife. The cause, scientists agree, is climate change, the result of human activity.

Any discussion of climate change cannot ignore Donald Trump and the fact that the president-elect described it as a Chinese hoax and has chosen a notorious climate change denier to lead his remake of the Environmental Protection Agency. This poses a grave threat to international emissions control initiatives, as well as to leadership from Washington on responsive coastal policy. A more forward-thinking president might shift responsibility away from the armor-first Army Corps of Engineers, for example.

Doubts from the top could also have a chilling effect on educators, who might water-down the message that warming is human-caused, helping create an uninformed electorate unlikely to pressure officials to take steps to reverse current climate trends.

The news is not all bad, however. New York is among a group of states taking on pollution from power plants on their own through the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative. The Long Island Power Authority may soon greenlight an offshore wind farm that is expected to generate enough electricity for 50,000 houses, and East Hampton Town has set a goal of meeting all its power needs from renewable sources by 2030. Individual homeowners also can take steps to reduce consumption by switching to renewable energy.

Still, the president and Congress have an essential role in setting the nation’s climate policy. If Mr. Trump’s early signs are an indication of what will be his administration’s approach to climate change, bleak days are ahead.

As to the idea that climate change is a hoax, with consensus among every kind of organization from the National Academy of the Sciences to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to major oil companies including BP and Shell accepting anthropogenic global warming as real and scientifically supported, it is impossible to take the armchair protests of the deniers seriously. They should be given no credence, especially from the White House.

In the race for the New York First Congressional District seat in the House of Representatives, we support Anna Throne-Holst. Given the strong support her opponent, David Calone, had in the Democratic primary among those in local office, she may not be an ideal candidate, but she remains a far better potential representative than the incumbent, Lee Zeldin. 

Chief among our problems with Mr. Zeldin is his early backing of Donald Trump for president. Mr. Trump’s views are far beyond majority Republican opinion on eastern Long Island. That Mr. Zeldin continues to embrace him suggests that he is likewise out of step. 

Mr. Zeldin’s opposition to abortion rights and meaningful gun control demonstrates this, and he has only lately begun to mellow earlier skepticism regarding climate change. He goes even further, however, in stating actual support for Mr. Trump, a bigot and self-absorbed tax cheat. As a congressman, of all people, he must put the United States’ exemplary democracy above craven politics, as have many Republicans of conscience.

Voters should not sit out this contest or mistakenly believe that the skill of Mr. Zeldin’s campaign staff in getting him free media attention through many personal appearances here and on cable news programs indicates real accomplishment. 

Those who dislike much of what Mr. Trump has said or done but still say they will vote for him misunderstand the fundamental nature of the American system of checks and balances. An extremist, Mr. Trump cannot be expected to bring sanity to governance.

Unfortunately, in standing with Mr. Trump, Mr. Zeldin also stands for racism, hatred, and sexual assault, none of which is acceptable and all of which disqualify him, in our view, for another term. 

Two recent bits of news concerning the area’s citizens advisory committees have further added to our sense that the concept needs a little refining. Instances involving the Amagansett and Bridgehampton groups, while unrelated, indicate that they could be stepping beyond their intended role.

Citizens committees were devised some years ago as a means for residents to speak about neighborhood concerns in an informal setting. The goal was to hash out truly grassroots opinion, then relay their ideas to the respective town boards; in many cases, a supervisor or board member would be on hand at their meetings. In some recent cases, however, these committees have become unelected influencers of policy, sometimes improperly communicating with their towns’ planning and zoning boards and meddling in controversies. 

In Amagansett the hamlet’s citizens advisory committee appears poised to have a deciding say on how town-owned property on Montauk Highway will be used. The town bought the parcel, called 555 or Ocean View Farm, using the community preservation fund two years ago. Proposals from private entities for growing crops there or other uses are expected soon. The town board would have to sign off on any deal, but it appears to be shirking its responsibility by offering the committee a decision-making role. 

In Bridgehampton, town planners solicited the citizens committee’s opinion on a commercial expansion, and the committee offered one in a voice vote to be followed with a letter. Then, when the expected letter did not arrive, holding up a ruling on the pending application, it turned out that the citizens committee’s shadowy steering committee had changed the group’s position. That the planners were relying on a definitive view from an essentially ad-hoc group was a mistake. It was made doubly so when the membership’s decision was apparently overruled by an informal leadership subset.

In our view, citizens advisory committees, if they are to persist, should be just that — purely advisory.

One of the perennial problems in East Hampton Town is a kind of amnesia that falls on residents and policy makers alike once summer ends. The cool and quieter days of late September and early October wash away the high season’s many frustrations, and the torments that had marked July and August are forgotten.

We were reminded of this two Saturdays ago during a Concerned Citizens of Montauk forum, at which the conversation focused entirely on what to do about the eroding downtown oceanfront and not about how to tame growth and summertime chaos.

It was a good discussion, to be sure, with a larger and more interested audience than one might have expected in other parts of East Hampton Town. This was likely due to the freshness of the subject matter, as the Army Corps’s sandbag seawall had only recently been exposed by a prolonged ocean swell, but it also came from the impressive level of civic involvement you see everywhere in Montauk. 

Montauk’s problems involve far more than the oceanfront. Indeed, during the 1938 Hurricane, destruction mostly swept in from the north rather than the ocean as the storm passed over Long Island. The Army Corps’s new idea of pumping a larger quantity of sand onto the downtown beach than had been envisioned might help in the short term, but, human nature being what it is, it would take the pressure off and dangerously delay a long-lasting solution.

In the more immediate future, the imbalance between an increasingly corporate tourism economy and the desires of Montauk residents for peace and quiet must be addressed. Years ago, Sag Harbor went through a similar struggle, pitting business owners against ordinary folks who just wanted to continue enjoying their village and to keep taxes modest. For the most part, they got it right. About Montauk, we are not so sure. 

Some years ago, there was talk among some resort operators about incorporating Montauk as its own, stand-alone village in order to evade restrictions on building. Now, as East Hampton Town proves it is ill-equipped to deal with the barrage of new commercial projects and never-ending violations of the town code there, it seems as if they got their wish.

We would like to think that the results of a village bid would be different today. If Montauk were to incorporate, there is a good chance that voters would put in place a mayor and trustees more in line with their views about how the hamlet should be and less inclined to give business everything it wanted — a good question for another day.

As the year draws to a close, it is worth reflecting on the ongoing success of the Peconic Bay Region Community Preservation Fund in East Hampton Town. As of this week — and with several deals pending — money from a 2-percent tax on most real estate transactions had saved 2,063 acres of land from development. The money went for environmentally significant parcels as well as historic sites and properties that provided public access, recreational opportunities, and helped link the town’s growing woodland trail system. 

In November, voters here approved extending the 2-percent tax until 2050 and okayed a measure to allow up to 20 percent of future preservation fund income to be spent on water protection measures other than straight-up land acquisition. These could include rebates to help homeowners replace failing septic systems, which leach contaminants into ponds, bays, and harbors. 

In 2014, the fund brought in a record $32.3 million. With two months left before the final figure for this year is known, the town is on track to pull in somewhere upward of $27 million; in 2015 the year-end total was just under $29 million. Its low point in the past decade came in 2009, when a mere $10.4 million was banked.

The fund has come a long way since the first acquisition, in 1999, but in many ways the goals of the program remain unchanged. That year, the town bought a half-acre on the Sammy’s Beach side of Three Mile Harbor from John and Betty Ulrich for $145,000. The Ulrichs wanted to build a house on a lot that was mostly a saltwater wetland, but the zoning board of appeals did not approve it. Among the problems with the property were that it did not have its own source of potable water. The Ulrichs sought the board’s approval for a well on a property on the other side of Sammy’s Beach Road. Among the zoning board members apparently favoring its public acquisition were Jay Schneiderman, who is now Southampton Town supervisor, and Peter Van Scoyoc, now a member of the East Hampton Town Board.

Watershed protection and its improvement are today still at the top of the priority list for the people who oversee East Hampton Town’s preservation fund. Inner harbor sites, like the one bought from the Ulrichs in 1999, or the roughly 40 properties purchased in a multiyear effort to improve Lake Montauk, are highly desirable. 

Though we remain concerned about the potential for abuse of money for water quality projects, over all, the preservation fund has been an unqualified success, and its extension is good news. We look forward to more and bigger purchases using this powerful program in 2017.

The Maidstone Club has at last, it seems, gone too far, what with a spate of recent projects including a massive new irrigation system and with a proposal now for a new bridge over an upper reach of Hook Pond. The bridge has drawn the attention of no less formidable opponents than the East Hampton Ladies Village Improvement Society’s landmarks and nature trail committees, as well as well-known local environmentalists.

The question is why. The club’s representatives have told East Hampton Village that safety is paramount. We are not buying it — and neither should the village. Pedestrians, golf carts, the club’s greens keepers, and passing motor vehicles have co-existed for years on Dunemere Lane. The village lowered the speed limit there to 25 miles an hour relatively recently, and police frequently hide their patrol cars nearby to catch those who might scoff that particular law. 

Similarly, the club got along just fine since its founding in 1891 — and the first golf rounds three years later — without a major irrigation system. That it now needs to pump water from underground to spread on its fairways and greens has never been adequately explained. Taken with the request for the bridge, it is fair to suspect that something may be afoot.

By itself, the bridge, as laid out for the village zoning board, seems a bit much. It would be 352 feet long and made of steel and timbers, resting on 42 pilings driven into the mud. Sited to the north of an existing vehicle bridge, it would bisect the Hook Pond dreen — a habitat where ducks, swans, herons, and grebes often feed and aquatic turtles are seen from time to time — and destroy the scenic vista.

Among the standards that the zoning board is supposed to consider when granting variances is whether an applicant can solve a perceived problem by another means and whether the hardship for which relief is sought is self-created. Given that there has been golf at the club for more than a century, with players and employees sharing the existing Dunemere Lane crossing, and that the impact of the new bridge on the pond and surrounding wetlands would be substantial, there can be no reasonable basis for the board to approve the project.

“Oh, but we have been such a good neighbor,” the club’s representatives say. Well, tell that to the residents who used to be able to take an off-season stroll along the golf course or fish from one of its existing bridges who are now rudely chased away.

If there is something the club is not telling the board — perhaps that it hopes to host large-scale professional golfing events — it needs to come clean. And those officials and village consultants who may be willing to show deference to the Maidstone’s wealthy members instead of the public or the environment should think again about whose interests they are really supposed to represent.