Back in 2010, the Economist magazine observed that railways in the United States were the mirror image of those in Europe. Instead, May 12’s Amtrak crash in Philadelphia underscored the differences, which extend to safety and maintenance. Much has been said since the accident about a system known as positive train control that, had it been in place on that line in Philadelphia, might have spared eight lives. Having been on the same rails recently, we can attest to deplorable conditions in some urban stations and poorly maintained and apparently unsafe conditions along the tracks.

Locally, it is frightening to think that the Long Island Rail Road is at least two years away from installing positive train control. In light of the wildly over-capacity passenger loads on the Montauk Branch on holiday weekends, with all seats filled and hundreds of people crammed atop their luggage in the aisles, even a derailment at a relatively low speed could result in almost unimaginable chaos. If an accident happened on a remote section of track, local emergency responders and medical facilities could almost instantly be overwhelmed.

Of course, it comes down to money. It would cost at estimated $10 billion to install positive train control on all of the country’s railways. Congress set 2015 as a deadline to do so but came up with only about $250 million toward that goal, according to Newsday. Now, some Washington legislators want to delay implementation until 2020. There is also resistance from freight companies, which would bear much of the cost and whose trains run at speeds that would make the system appear less than essential.

The United States’ infrastructure deficit, unlike the rest of the developed world’s, is not limited to train travel. A ride on any of this region’s highways should dispel any lingering doubt. The American Society of Civil Engineers recently gave the U.S. a cumulative grade of D-plus for its roads, bridges, rails, dams, and other essentials, with an estimated $3.6 trillion as necessary to bring it all up to par. And putting off repairs only adds to the cost, as any homeowner can tell you.

The sooner Congress gets serious about infrastructure the better. Delays are deadly.

Voters can go to their polling places on Tuesday to give their respective school district budgets the thumbs-up or down, though the turnout is not expected to be large. In several places — Sag Harbor, Amagansett, and Montauk — there are contested races for school board positions; in others, the incumbents stand unopposed.

Over all, we sense a degree of satisfaction with the schools, the unexpected opt-out test mess notwithstanding. Complacency may come from a feeling of futility; budgets are sharply constrained by a state cap on tax increases, and curriculum largely set by the Department of Education. Disinterest may also play a role. A larger, consolidated educational system here might well spur board of education races and capture public interest, while providing financial and programmatic advantages. That, however, is not on Tuesday’s ballots.

In East Hampton, we are pleased to see John Ryan Sr. seek to return to the school board. The current group appears in lock-step with the district administration too frequently, reflexively defending its missteps, as in a recent spate of criticism from some Latino students’ parents over pressure they thought had been put on them to get their children to take the disputed Common Core tests. It is also vaguely unsettling that the three incumbents, Christina DeSanti, Liz Pucci, and Deme Minskoff, are seeking to retain their seats as a bloc. That alone might well be an argument in Mr. Ryan’s favor. However, his strong advocacy for a fully realized youth aquatic safely program is well worth voters’ returning him to the board for what would be a seventh term. Our picks are Mr. Ryan, Ms. Minskoff, and Ms. DeSanti.

Montauk’s race for one seat pits Carmine Marino Jr., a newcomer, against Diane Hausman, the school board president. Ms. Hausman has been a Montauk School Board member for 20 years. Mr. Marino is a Montauk fire commissioner who has made an issue of the school board’s need for more openness, a valid point. However, Ms. Hausman earns our endorsement in recognition of her experience and steady hand.

While Springs does not have a contested board position, an important referendum will be on the ballot: whether to use $2 million from a reserve fund for reconfiguring vehicle drop-off areas. We support this with misgiving; the last time the district took on a large project of this type, an unsightly and widely hated blacktop bus parking area was the community’s reward. The board must do better this time if the money is authorized on Tuesday, which it should be.

In Amagansett, the choice is between Mary Lownes, a 13-year incumbent, and Steve Graboski, a newcomer. Ms. Lownes should cruise to re-election.

Sag Harbor’s board race is a lively one, with five in the mix for three seats. Right off the bat, we cannot support Tommy John Schiavoni, who as a board member has opposed video recording of the public comment portion of board meetings for the flimsiest reasons. The other incumbent, Chris Tice, deserves re-election. Stephanie Bitis and James Sanford round out a good slate.

Ballot hours vary by district. A list of times can be found in this issue and on school websites. Whatever you decide and whomever you support, please vote.

If they did not know already, long-suffering residents of the East End, frustrated by helicopter noise, now truly know who their friends are — and who they are not.

East Hampton Town officials could find out soon if the set of new restrictions they adopted on the noisiest aircraft will go into effect before the summer season. A hearing is expected today in United States District Court in Central Islip in which opponents of the rules hope a judge will impose a restraining order and call for a trial. If the consortium of commercial interests, backed by the Federal Aviation Administration, prevails, it could be months, if not years, before anyone knows if the restrictions will be upheld.

If nothing else, the East Hampton Town Board’s move in imposing curfews and weekly trip limits on the louder classes of helicopters and fixed-wing aircraft finally made the battle lines clear. On one side are all the elected municipal governments of the East End, the area’s Congressional delegation, and thousands of residents, all hoping for quieter skies. Opposing them are the National Business Aviation Association, the Analar Corporation, Associated Aircraft Group, Heliflite Shares, Liberty Helicopters, Eleventh Street Aviation, Helicopter Association International, Sound Aircraft Services, and, it seems, the F.A.A.

It should also be noted that, publicly at least, not a word has been heard from the supposedly put-upon passengers who would have to find other ways to get to the South Fork. So far the voices that have been loudest are the companies that are unwilling to invest in quieter, if perhaps more costly, aircraft to comply with what are reasonable solutions to a real noise crisis.

East Hampton Town officials must stand tough as the fight drags on.

A bill introduced recently in the New York State Legislature by Assemblyman Fred W. Thiele Jr. to deal with the enduring problem of too little available housing for the region’s work force has a worthy goal. However, it may not be quite ambitious enough. The housing crunch is acute and getting worse. There are just too few reasonably priced, safe rentals to go around. Workers often crowd into illegal group houses, which can have a negative effect on neighborhoods and in some areas cause septic contamination of groundwater, among other effects. People are forced to move away, not because jobs are scarce, but because there is nowhere for them to live, and it is only getting worse.

Several factors have contributed to the lack of starter or lower-end housing, including the conversion of second-floor apartments in commercial districts to office space and the rise of online services like Airbnb, which facilitate short-term rentals at high prices and deplete the availability of year-round residences.

Mr. Thiele’s bill would fund zero-interest loans with a maximum of $250,000 to help those who earn up to 120 percent of the median income, or about $130,000 today, to buy houses. It also would provide money to prod the towns to protect existing work force housing by buying easements and through other means. The fund would be created from a residential construction fee of $10 per square foot, exempting the first 3,000 square feet of floor area. The legislation, like the community preservation fund before it, was designed for the five East End towns and residents in each would have to authorize the creation of respective housing programs in a ballot referendum.

There may be wide support for the idea. In a report delivered to the East Hampton Town Board last year, an official committee recommended the expansion of existing efforts. This might include new zoning rules to allow multifamily residences, subject to income caps, as well as seasonal “dormitories” for some workers. Such changes are necessary, the committee said, because the incentive programs already in the town code have failed to work. Hundreds of names remain on waiting lists for housing, and few new units have been created in the private sector.

One concept floated by the committee is an additional real estate transfer tax, similar to the 2-percent preservation fund levy, to pay for affordable housing. This might be difficult to win support for on the ballot. Instead, an alternative could be reducing the C.P.F. tax by half a percent and creating a new, separate fund specifically dedicated to housing. Combined with Mr. Thiele’s luxury tax on larger house construction, the two sources of income could go a long way toward putting roofs over the regions’ workers’ heads. It is an idea worth a serious look given the seriousness of the crisis.

Eastern Long Island’s own State Senator Kenneth P. LaValle came out of a closed-door meeting on Monday night to express the Republican conference’s confidence in Dean Skelos following the Senate leader’s arrest on extortion and bribery charges. By one measure, Mr. LaValle was just doing his job as the conference chairman, but by another, his business-as-usual statement is an indication of just how inured to tales of corruption the New York State capital has become.

The allegations against Senator Skelos paint a picture of graft intended to benefit Adam B. Skelos, the senator’s son, though, if convicted, both could serve time in prison. According to a Federal Bureau of Investigation complaint, the men obtained payments from two related companies with an understanding that Senator Skelos would use his position on their behalf.

But Mr. LaValle’s G.O.P. should by no means be singled out. One of the companies named in the complaint is known in Albany for making large campaign contributions to both Republican and Democratic legislators, including Sheldon Silver, the former Democratic Assembly leader, who was arrested in February on fraud and abuse of office charges, leading to his resignation from the powerful speaker’s post. According to federal prosecutors, Mr. Silver, one of the state’s most powerful officials, whose influence was only surpassed by the governor’s, received at least $4 million in kickbacks from real estate developers. In recent campaign filings, Mr. LaValle acknowledged receiving $62,500 in contributions from the companies implicated with Mr. Skelos.

It should not be overlooked that the recent allegations come from matters that had begun to draw attention from the Moreland Commission, an anticorruption probe shut down abruptly by Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo, apparently as it began to draw near his allies. The United States attorney for the Southern District of New York, Preet Bharara, has picked up the threads of the commission’s work.

Related and also troubling is that the man who replaced Mr. Silver, Assemblyman Carl E. Heastie, has been implicated in inappropriately enriching himself in the sale of a Bronx apartment that his mother bought using money embezzled from a charity where she had worked. In Mr. Heastie’s case, The New York Times reporters who broke the story said the “carelessness of those involved could be to blame, or something more questionable could have occurred given the Bronx Democratic Party’s influence on the court system and its long history of back-room deal-making.” It is, frankly, surprising that this has not had greater effect. Mr. Heastie has not been charged with any wrongdoing, but the matter calls his fitness to lead the State Assembly, if not continue to be a public servant, into sharp question.

As to Mr. Skelos’s future, Mr. LaValle, according to The Times, said Monday that he should be allowed a “presumption of innocence” and stay on as Senate leader. We disagree. If he is exonerated, Mr. Skelos could seek to return to the post, but while the charges are pending, he should step aside. Mr. LaValle and the Republican conference only bring suspicion and embarrassment upon themselves by refusing to accept the obvious.

It may be a reach for critics of the current East Hampton Town Board to liken what is known so far about the Suffolk County district attorney’s probe into the town’s use of the community preservation fund for a $10 million acquisition in Amagansett to the debacle that brought down the Bill McGintee administration, but it is a big deal nonetheless. The matter points to the slippery nature to which the preservation fund’s wealth has been applied in some instances and the desperate need for legislative clarification.

East Hampton Town bought the 19-acre site last year, intending to see it used for farming. This was after a Connecticut developer proposed a luxury complex for residents 55 and older but ran up against the town zoning code, which did not permit that much density, and strong community opposition. District Attorney Thomas J. Spota has not spoken about it, but speculation is that a barn that was left standing on the property after the town took ownership aroused his interest. According to the law, the preservation fund can only be used for parks, recreation areas, farmland, scenic areas, wildlife habitat, groundwater protection, forests, public access to waterways, and historic preservation.

None of the foregoing would appear to allow C.P.F. money to have been used for the portion of the purchase price the barn represented. East Hampton Town Supervisor Larry Cantwell has said the town might reimburse the fund for that sum or the building could be removed.

By way of comparison, East Hampton Village has wound up owning a newly built house on the Gardiner home lot on James Lane, which was recently acquired with the preservation fund, and has sought bids to tear it down or move it away. A lovely-to-look-at and historic Gardiner family saltbox on the property will remain.

Nor has the town’s approach to the C.P.F. purchase of other sites, including the former Boys Harbor property in Northwest, which contained buildings, and the house and studios of the late James Brooks and Charlotte Park in Springs, been entirely rigorous. Though the town board designated the married artists’ structures historic landmarks last year, that appeared an afterthought.

State Assemblyman Fred W. Thiele Jr. has repeatedly said that the preservation fund should not be used to buy properties with buildings on them. That may be too drastic, but further clarification from Albany is needed on how to handle such opportunities when they arise. Adding language to permit the purchase of buildings used in agriculture would be consistent with the goals of the C.P.F. But right now, it is out of bounds.

It was disappointing, to put it mildly, at a recent East Hampton Town Trustees meeting, for the presiding officer, Diane McNally, to put off responding to a question from the audience about whether it would be okay to record a discussion about the terms of their Lazy Point leases on their smartphones. It should not even have had to be asked.

According to our reporter’s account, Ms. McNally demurred, saying the matter would be taken up when a majority of the members were present. Only five of the nine-person elected board were there that night, with attendance apparently an ongoing concern, while the audience spilled into the hall. As Ms. McNally waded into a quagmire, appearing to seek to block the legally permissible recording of a public meeting, the trustees’ lawyer, John Courtney, was silent.

On Tuesday night, the trustees were expected to decide whether official videos should be made of their meetings. They already make audio-only recordings for in-house use, and we hope they quickly find a way to make even the most rudimentary arrangements for videos. But in the meantime, they should not appear even in the slightest to oppose the public’s own recording efforts.

The town trustees simply need to get with the times. Arranging for video recording, showing up for meetings, and moving to a larger room where the public can be accommodated comfortably should not be considered optional. If members of the public want to record the proceedings themselves, asking the trustees for permission is really only being polite.

As Baltimore erupted this week after the death of yet another person of color at the hands of police, it has become ever more clear that the ill treatment of minorities by police, particularly young black men, is not limited to any one city or town.

Eric Garner, Michael Brown, Tamir Rice, Akai Gurley, Freddie Gray — the names of the dead have become too familiar, and the carnage too widespread for their deaths to be considered anything less than a national crisis. Localized responses will continue to be inadequate; what must follow now is a top-to-bottom rethinking about law enforcement with serious attention given to the hiring and promotion practices of police departments, as well as how they are organized and overseen.

Officers’ rage, and perhaps fear, seems to play a big part in these confrontations turned deadly. A common thread running through many of them is that they initially involved the victim’s running from police or resisting arrest. Activists have begun to frame this as “running while black.” And this seems to be what brought on Mr. Gray’s death, as well as that of Walter Scott, who was shot eight times in the back in South Carolina.

In March, President Obama spoke about a White House task force that recommended changes, including independent investigations of the use of force by police and an overhaul of the criminal justice system. That did not go far enough, however, failing, for example, to call for the widespread use of police body cameras and other measures to assure police accountability.

Make no mistake, this is a state of emergency that goes far beyond Baltimore. The strongest possible national leadership is needed at this point, from Mr. Obama and Congress alike. Baltimore’s problem is America’s problem, no matter how removed some of us may feel.

Heaven help Montauk if it gets another Surf Lodge, Beach House, Ruschmeyer’s, or Solé East. Each of these booming high-season hangouts, once modest hotels, were expanded to include sprawling outdoor venues far in excess of their capacity in terms of guestrooms and floor area. To cite but one example, the Montauk Beach House grew out of the 30-something rooms of the Ronjo Motel to host gatherings for as many as 300 people, according to a former promoter there. This may have been legal, which we have doubted, but it was wrong for the area and for East Hampton Town’s commitment to its zoning laws. Now, with summer 2015 fast approaching, the town board has been thinking about what would happen if other motels and resorts went the same way.

One approach getting the board’s attention is to try somehow to block or limit the addition of drinking and dining facilities to the town’s roughly 70 hotels, motels, and inns. Though state court decisions suggest they could not be entirely stopped, the town might well be able to craft rules capping the number of patrons or tying the maximum to the number of rooms. But this approach would not necessarily help with the bars and restaurants, many of which have eagerly allowed patrons to spill onto patios, parking lots, and lawns, vastly increasing capacities and alcohol sales receipts — think Sloppy Tuna and Memory Motel in Montauk and the suddenly hip Moby’s last year in the shadow of Town Hall. Then there has been Cyril’s Fish House on Napeague, where beer and mixed drinks have been sold in the state highway right of way for years.

The right tools might well be already in hand, however. The town’s public assembly law acknowledges that large gatherings can disturb the peace, interfere with roadways and cause a strain on police and emergency services, and create excess noise, septic flow, and need for garbage disposal and litter removal.

As far as commercial premises are concerned, the law prohibits the sale of food or beverages from an unapproved location, like a pop-up outdoor bar, without a special, one-time permit. It goes further, banning the use of outdoor areas for business purposes unless they are included in the customary or approved use of the premises. And there’s more: Commercial assembly requirements are triggered when guests park vehicles on any public street, highway, right of way, or other off-site location due to lack of on-premises space. And even more: Permits for commercial gatherings in non-commercial areas can be sought only for events that truly benefit bona fide charitable organizations or those at which nothing is sold.

From where we sit, town officials are ready to take on the most excessive for-profit outdoor parties that mar many a summer night. The only question is if they will have the courage to do so.

One wades into the maelstrom swirling around the Common Core tests with extreme trepidation. The battle lines are sharply drawn, with parents and teachers who favor the opt-out position quick to vilify those who may not quite agree, and vice versa. A year ago, the war drums against the tests barely registered on the South Fork; now New York State leads the country in the depth of the refuse-the-tests movement and in some school districts here more than a quarter of students are sitting out the English language arts and math tests. As school administrators and parents look ahead, much thought will have to be given about how to proceed.

The position against allowing one’s children to take the tests appears to come from two converging directions. Some parents are understandably concerned about the amount of teaching time and homework dedicated to the exams. Teachers cite similar issues, but they also object to a bid by Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo to tie their performance evaluations to their students’ scores. State Assemblyman Fred W. Thiele Jr. has been among the critics, calling the implementation of Common Core a disaster and saying the New York Board of Regents and the commissioner of education should be held accountable.

Those favoring the tests say higher educational standards are needed, that schools should work on how the tests are implemented rather than throw out the baby with the bathwater. While the teacher-evaluation component may be an unfair shortcut favored by bureaucrats, they argue that for the most part the tests, as tough as they are, are worthwhile, objective measures of student learning. They say the skills required to do well on the tests are precisely those that will guide young people throughout their academic years. Furthermore, they say the precedent set by allowing students and their parents to pick and choose among requirements could lead to chaos. In their view, teachers and their allies have enflamed parents’ anxieties.

We were intrigued by the approach of an Amagansett School District administrator who tried to defuse some of the heat by introducing the tests as just part of an otherwise ordinary week. This de-emphasizing seems a good way to go, and it may already have paid off: Only a small fraction of the district’s kids refused to take the English assessment this time around.

A bill backed by Mr. Thiele and now on Governor Cuomo’s desk would decouple the Common Core tests from teacher evaluations. This alone could encourage teachers to reconsider why and how the tests are given and help get schools back in the business of education.