And there you have it: Scarcely half a year since the downtown Montauk sandbag seawall was installed by the Army Corps of Engineers, a minor late-summer storm called Hermine underscored the recklessness of the effort.

By Tuesday morning, with the post-tropical cyclone in the Atlantic about 100 miles off eastern Long Island, several rows of the plastic-fabric bags had been exposed and hundreds of tons of sand, which had been trucked in at great expense to keep them buried, had been washed away at the Royal Atlantic Motel. 

Just to the east, a concrete-block access built by an Army Corps contractor hung in pieces. Snow fence meant to keep beachgoers away was dangling, and, for a considerable distance, hundreds, if not thousands of sprigs of beach grass that had been planted in the false hope of stabilizing the artificial dune were gone.

Gone soon, too, will be hundreds of thousands of dollars in East Hampton Town and Suffolk County taxpayers’ money. Under an agreement with the Army Corps, it is up to local government to maintain the seawall and keep it from certain destruction. No clear understanding of the folly’s actual cost is yet known.

There will be a chance for East Hampton residents to actually make their opinions known in person at an Army Corps hearing at the Montauk Firehouse on Sept. 28. The hearing, on its $1.1 billion Fire Island to Montauk Point Reformulation Plan, had been scheduled before Hermine intruded. 

A cynical observer might note that the meeting had been scheduled during the peak of the Atlantic hurricane season when pressure for short-term solutions would likely be high. 

This is not incidental for the Army Corps, a reactive agency that has proven incapable of long-term coastal policy. Its plan for the Montauk seawall, as well as its proposed budget to replenish the beach in front of it with trucked-in sand in the future, demonstrate fundamental incompetence. 

Also deserving criticism are  the East Hampton Town Board and Suffolk Legislature, whose members almost without exception believed the corps’s assurances. Equally guilty are town staffers who knew the project violated several laws but did nothing to stop it, as well as State Department of Environmental Conservation and State Department of State officials, who looked the other way. 

The key failure was to ignore multiple laws regarding the shorefront, which require that most projects, including the Montauk sandbags, are to be allowed only on a temporary basis. There has never been any dispute about that. In fact, Brian Frank, the top East Hampton Town environmental analyst, pointed out in a 2014 letter to the corps that state and town laws might have to be changed to bring the seawall into compliance. Mr. Frank’s observation was never acted upon, and he did not raise the issue again.

Make no mistake: Montauk’s ocean beach is a disaster, and the fault lies in years of ignoring the inevitable forces of nature and, foremost, the Army Corps. Federal leadership is desperately needed, but the corps, compounded by local wishful thinking, has proven it is the wrong agency for the job.

Election Day might seem a way off, but the deadline to register to vote is just about a month away, on Oct. 14. Perhaps the easiest way to get the registration process started is by phone. The New York State Board of Elections has a hotline, 800-FOR-VOTE, which takes requests for applications that are sent by mail. Simple, too, is the State Department of Motor Vehicles’ website, which has a page where those with New York driver’s licenses, learner’s permits, or non-driver IDs can sign up to vote as long as they provide the last four digits of their Social Security numbers. Libraries and local government offices frequently will have application forms on hand as well.

Another option comes from the League of Women Voters of the Hamptons, which will hold voter sign-ups at post offices from Westhampton to Montauk and on the North Fork on Sept. 27. Registration forms and other election material will be available, as will advice for those who need help with the paperwork. Absentee ballot applications must be mailed by Nov. 1.

With a close race on Nov. 8 between Representative Lee Zeldin and his challenger, Anna Throne-Holst, every South Fork vote and every voter will count. Also of note locally this year is that Hillary Clinton, who represented New York in the Senate and vacationed in East Hampton or Amagansett for quite a few seasons, will top the Democratic ticket as the first female candidate for president on a major political party line. 

Those who dislike Mrs. Clinton may be eager to select someone else, be it Donald Trump, the Libertarian candidate, or even Bernie Sanders as a write-in candidate. Whatever your point of view, whether left, right, or center, the election is going to be exciting, and important. Don’t let missing the Oct. 14 deadline to register stop you from casting your vote.

Drivers passing the former East Hampton Bowl property on Montauk Highway have been doing double takes in recent days as the steel frame for a hulking new building was erected nearly atop the roadway. According to East Hampton Village, the structure is to be leased to CVS, the pharmacy chain, and meets all zoning requirements. Expect things to look even worse as the frame is sheathed and an approved 24-foot-long illuminated corporate sign goes up.

We would have hoped that in the wake of the HomeGoods store in Wainscott, a debacle if ever there was one, village officials might have taken a look at the law and asked themselves whether changes were necessary. At least East Hampton Town may be on a path toward changes that would restrain future big-box store developers in the parts of Wainscott under its jurisdiction and other commercial areas. 

The new CVS store is the product of good intentions to be sure. Years ago, zoning laws were written to place parking at the rear of new commercial construction in both the village and town. This was intended to avoid what was known as strip-zoning, in which streetscapes become barren swaths of asphalt and freestanding signs, with rows of businesses constructed at some distance off in the rear. As a tradeoff perhaps, property owners were allowed to jam their structures nearly up to the property lines, with sheer, vertical walls extending high. 

Design failures like HomeGoods and the new CVS, which juts much farther out toward the roadway than its neighboring buildings and makes that portion of Montauk Highway canyon-like, are the result. It is so bad that at least one village official, shocked after the beams went up, asked the Building Department whether the building had been properly sited. It had been, and it was perfectly legal. The new CVS runs the risk of devaluing the Red Horse complex across the street by creating a significant aesthetic conflict as well as traffic tie-ups and additional congestion.

What has to happen now mirrors to some degree the initiative under way in the town to understand what is possible in the hamlet centers under current zoning. East Hampton Village must take a hard look at where additional CVS-style boxes could be built and move rapidly to make future ones impossible.

Stuart Vorpahl, who died in January, used to talk a good bit and with great common sense about the rights of East Hampton residents. Among them was the free use of the beaches, as spelled out in the Dongan Patent, a Colonial-era agreement.

Were Stuart alive today, he might be appalled by the East Hampton Town Trustees, who have been scuttling away crab-like, and as fast as possible, from what he believed. In a recent dispute among neighbors of the Driftwood Shores development in Springs, the trustees seemed more interested in figuring out who on paper “owned” a portion of beach than in upholding the centuries-old patent, which has been understood to guarantee townspeople the right of passage and other uses of the beach.

Similarly, the East Hampton Town Board has signaled that it, too, believes ownership trumps tradition in having looked to condemn portions of the Napeague oceanfront so that trucks can continue to park there in the summer. It would seem to us, and to Mr. Vorpahl, we believe, that the right was sacrosanct no matter what a contemporary title document might claim.

Time was when it was universally understood that the seaward boundaries of almost all properties in town were the beach-grass line, regardless of modern-day surveys claiming otherwise. Now the trustees and Town Hall seem to believe that whatever is stated on landowners’ paperwork is the final word, the Dongan Patent be damned. Stuart would be appalled. 

To some degree, our elected officials are being influenced by the courts in tilting toward explicit beach ownership boundaries, but in doing so they are setting a risky precedent. They may be unintentionally siding with property owners by considering current title documents and surveys the determining factor. If so, this could carry a high cost — ultimately limiting the public’s access to areas clearly owned and under the control of local government. 

Mr. Vorpahl’s message over the years was clear and consistent: Fight for all of the beaches. Officials should continue to keep that in mind now that he is gone.

Americans are used by now to the too-fast-to-think ecosystem that is Twitter, the online forum in which posts are limited to 140 characters and in which the like-minded essentially echo one another in endless spirals of wit, while antagonists go for sharp rejoinders. Twitter is also a place where politicians sometimes lay bare their odder passing thoughts. Such was the case on Monday when Representative Lee Zeldin made an almost incomprehensible comment following the capture of the man suspected of the recent Manhattan bombing. In its entirety, Mr. Zeldin wrote, “Suspect in custody. You are welcome, Colin Kaepernick.”

Mr. Kaepernick is the San Francisco 49ers football quarterback who has declined to stand for the national anthem in protest of police shootings of people of color. Figuring out exactly what Mr. Zeldin meant by his post is difficult; even he probably does not know. That did not stop plenty of people from going to Twitter to turn his point around, however.

One reaction read, “13-year-old Tyre King shot down by police from behind in cold blood. Thanks, Lee Zeldin.” Others made the point that Ahmed Khan Rahami, the terror suspect, was taken alive, unlike the many black, unarmed Americans killed by police. Another Twitter user offered “. . . if only Kaepernick had stood for the anthem these past two weeks, we could have caught the terrorist three hours sooner probably.”

Mr. Zeldin’s outburst mirrors the recurring bombast on Twitter from Donald Trump, who has made a campaign out of this kind of drivel. The comment can be heard as a kind of racist code, intended to speak directly to an embittered, paranoid fringe among First Congressional District voters. In a statement, Mr. Zeldin subsequently defended his post, saying, “I unapologetically love our country and our heroes who defend us. I’m insulted and disgusted when someone refuses to say the pledge or stand for the national anthem.” 

We have previously criticized Mr. Zeldin for jumping on the Trump bandwagon and called him unfit to continue to serve in Congress. He has shown that to be the case once again.

If the striped bass population is in decline and what anglers, commercial harvesters, and regulators should do about it is a question worth asking as the fish head into their fall runs. 

There are many in the sportfishing world who believe stripers should have game fish status, that is, no commercial harvest for sale. Others, notably including charter operators who depend on the fish for a significant part of their business, say the fishery is fine and should continue as is. And there are others who would like to see it become a catch-and-release-only fish.

There is little doubt that striped bass numbers along the Eastern Seaboard as a whole are in decline. The combined commercial and recreational take approached five million fish in 2015, according to federal figures. Additionally, the National Marine Fisheries Service has said that the number of female bass spawning stock is falling and approaching a danger point. Still, an Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission committee concluded last fall that striped bass was not being overexploited and did not make huge changes in size limits or quotas.

On the Atlantic Seaboard most of the striped bass take is by recreational anglers; commercial boats kill only about a quarter of the total each year, and, already, stripers cannot be sold if they are caught in federal waters, that is, beyond the state three-mile limit. 

Among the groups pushing for game fish status is Stripers Forever. It sees a shift toward ever-smaller fish as an indication that the species is in trouble in the Atlantic. Its view is that the commercial take should be eliminated coastwide, preserving a limited harvest for anglers’ personal use. As has the commercial fishing industry, Stripers Forever has challenged regulators’ figures, alleging they are a mixture of statistics and conjecture, particularly regarding released fishes’ mortality rates. 

As scientists, state officials, and advocacy groups battle it out, however, individual sport anglers should take steps to reduce the take. This means not always hauling home keeper-size stripers when they are landed and being as careful as possible to reduce the death rate among those thrown back. Books, tackle shop operators, and the internet can all be sources of how to improve the bass’s chances. Doing what we can to help assure the species’s survival for the long haul is the right approach.

It was doomed from the start. Anything with the word reformulation, even in 1960, must have been unlikely to inspire confidence, much less beat back the sea. But carry on the Army Corps of Engineers did — and for 53 years. Its effort to build erosion control and hurricane protection structures between Fire Island and Montauk Point was never going to work for a variety of reasons — reasons that should have been understood then, but most certainly are now.

That the Fire Island to Montauk Point Reformulation Study is old enough to sign up with AARP should be enough to compel Congress to revisit its suggestions for the Long Island shoreline. For one, climate change as the result of human activity was scarcely even a passing thought then; today, the United States military considers it among the greatest threats to global security. It is wrong that the Army Corps, which knows only how to build walls, and not such good ones at that, remains the country’s primary agency as far as the coast is concerned. 

Underscoring just how outdated the Fire Island to Montauk Point study is, its first environmental impact evaluation was begun in 1978 when Jimmy Carter was president. The study is finally said to be complete, and it was to be discussed at a meeting at the Montauk Playhouse last night. There was not going to be much to talk about, however, as the corps’s $1.2 billion proposal already appears set. Apparently, Congress isn’t watching.

In its final form, the study does little immediate harm but as long-term policy it is a disaster. It calls for placing sand on the downtown Montauk ocean beach every four years, as well as on the Wainscott and Sagaponack beaches. But what it would not do is far worse — and that is really the fault of Congress and the White House for failing to provide the right leadership.

What is needed today is a coastwide program of retreat. This would mean spending federal money not on sand and sandbags, as at Montauk, but in moving structures back from the beach. In their place, experts argue, natural-like protective dunes should be created. Because of its mindset, as well as that 1960 mandate from Congress, we know today that the Army Corps is incapable of a flexible approach to shoreline management that is in harmony with nature, rather than in opposition to it. 

If American taxpayers’ dollars are going to be spent along the coasts, it is only fair that they be allotted in the most sensible way possible. So far, we have seen only parsimonious measures that will only lead to the need for far greater expenditures later.

A plan being put forward by the East Hampton Town Board to possibly convert the Child Development Center of the Hamptons, a now-closed charter school, to a senior citizens center is interesting, but might not be as attractive as first thought.

At a recent meeting, the board reviewed a consultant’s report that found the Stephen Hand’s Path, East Hampton, building in good condition and suitable, with relatively modest changes and expense for upgrades, as a replacement for the town senior center on Springs-Fireplace Road. There would even be space available for other community uses, perhaps including the East Hampton Food Pantry. 

The wild card is the cost. Although the town owns the underlying site, the building is owned by the nonprofit agency that ran the school. Once the potential purchase price is known, it might no longer seem like much of a bargain.

Another issue is its location. According to the town’s Department of Human Services, visitors to the existing senior center like where it is, near the town’s population center. Expecting them to be as eager to travel nearly to Wainscott might be a stretch. The main roads that patrons would use to get to and from the new center — Montauk Highway and Route 114 — have considerable traffic problems at times, which should be a consideration.

Town officials are right to consider the C.D.C.H. site, but should proceed with caution. In the end, the better option might be to build anew on Springs-Fireplace Road.

Much as we like the Hamptons International Film Festival and the action it brings at this time of year, one aspect deserves more attention: Main Street in East Hampton Village.

Even before the festival’s opening night, it seemed as if the jaywalking Olympics has come to town. Moviegoers and festival staff seem to think nothing of sauntering across the street’s four lanes, more or less from in front of Starbucks to the Regal Cinema, and dashing back again.

Factor in low light at evening screen times — and the fading eyesight of many of us drivers of a certain age — and there is the risk of a real life tragic ending, one we have seen here before. This is despite a traffic light at Newtown and Main Street and two nearby crosswalks fitted with buttons that instantly trigger flashing yellow lights to warn motorists that someone is about to cross their paths.

No solution is perfect — and jaywalkers are going to do what jaywalkers are going to do — but it seems to us that the village police, working with the film festival, should take the situation a little more seriously. At a minimum, temporary signs should be placed on Main Street at the obviously tempting spots, directing pedestrians left and right to the crosswalks. It is baffling that something this simple has not been tried before.

One other thought: The good intentions of some drivers, particularly those in the middle lanes on Main Street, who stop to let pedestrians cross, are an invitation to disaster when an unwitting motorist is approaching in the outside, or right-hand, lane. Too frequently, the person on foot is obscured by the Good Samaritan’s vehicle and emerges suddenly into the path of a second driver. Those Star readers inclined to stop to allow jaywalkers to finish their risky crossing should think twice and at least make sure no other vehicles are approaching.

But back to the main point: With extra foot traffic during the festival, an effort should be made to make sure more people use the crosswalks — and keep safe. Here’s to happy endings for all!

For all the attention being paid to the hamlet studies being conducted about commercial centers in East Hampton Town, there is reason for worry that larger issues could be overlooked.

Led by Dodson and Flinker, a consulting firm brought in by the town board, officials and residents have been looking at business sections in Amagansett, East Hampton, and Wainscott, and were to have started gathering information in Montauk this week. The work was commissioned to fill out the town’s comprehensive plan, a kind of a master policy and vision document last updated in 2005. And therein lies the problem.

Though the comprehensive plan was intended to be useful for 20 years or more, enough has changed in the last 11 years to make the existing plan seem obsolete. To cite but a few examples of how different things are today: In 2005 online vacation rental websites were barely functional; today they are the basis of a booming sub-economy. In 2005, Montauk had yet to become “hip” or subject to very deep-pocketed corporate development pressure. Additionally, concern about waterways and the airport had nowhere near today’s fever pitch. We can’t help reminding our readers (even though they know) that traffic was only a fraction as bad as it is now, and there were still a few affordable places for year-round residents to rent if they looked hard enough.

The hamlet studies so far seem to be most concerned about traffic and aesthetics and how far one has to walk to shop. This could change, of course, as the consultants begin to study what they have learned in their weeks here and report back. However, it’s hard to escape the feeling that, given all the new realities, these individual efforts will, in the end, produce little of lasting value without a new look at the overall town comprehensive plan.