East Hampton Town officials were on the right track last week when they denied a last-minute request for a permit from the operator of an annual for-profit bicycle ride to Montauk. Unfortunately, with as many as 1,500 participants already having paid up to $300 apiece, officials had little choice but to reach a settlement and allow the ride to go on.

However, the town asked the correct question this time around: Whether big, organized weekend outings with only marginal local benefit should be encouraged. Put another way, the issue was, and is, to what degree should residents have to put up with living in a playground for others.

Most people were only slightly inconvenienced as the Ride to Montauk throngs wound their way east. Still, drivers had to wait on Wainscott Main Street for a turn to get around groups of cyclists, and in some instances, bunched-up bikers swerved into the Montauk Highway traffic lanes. But, unlike last year, there were few calls for emergency assistance.

The intrusions are not limited to roads and bike events, of course. Commercial uses of public spaces are many and include paddleboard outings and kayak rentals at otherwise secluded locations, fitness classes on the sand and in parks, and resorts annexing portions of adjacent beaches for their guests’ exclusive use.

A new town committee has been taking a closer look at permit requests, particularly with an eye toward distinguishing between those that genuinely benefit local organizations and those that make inconsequential charitable donations as a form of cover. One key element of the committee’s work will be to convince officials to resist the temptation to review late permit requests, such as the problematic one from the Ride to Montauk organizers. An encouraging signal can also be found in the recently revised town mass-gathering law, which may soon be used to bring increased scrutiny to crowds at bars and restaurants, particularly outdoors, that are well in excess of those places’ legal maximum occupancy.

We expect to hear “no” a lot more often from Town Hall to requests that might have been swiftly green-lighted in the past. The balance, we hope, may be tipping back toward preserving peace, tranquillity, and less-hectic roads for those who call this place home — and none too soon.

Not to sound ungrateful, but we are hardly alone in thinking that there are some 14 long weeks before we get our town back. An Amagansett innkeeper of our acquaintance said that the weekend just past was the strangest he had seen in more than three decades in business. In Montauk by Saturday noon, there were scores of people drinking on the upper deck at one of the more notorious bars. Traffic was terrible — and dangerous. At a grocery checkout counter Sunday evening, the checker helping to load bags looked on in dismay as six young share-house women, obviously a little tipsy, packed a young man into a shopping cart and tried to wheel him out of the store. It all seems a little too much, and too soon.

It is far easier said than done, but the path toward reclaiming this place for those of us who simply live here is clear: Rein in overcrowded clubs and bars, clamp down on illegal group houses and new developments, and put the brakes on the short-term rentals that only add to the frenetic pace.

If this weekend showed anything, it was that even a good thing can be bad when there is too much of it. East Hampton Town already has too much of too many things. It is time to tip the balance back. Sucking it up until September rolls around again, as one former town supervisor once advised, is no longer acceptable.

The East Hampton Town Republican Committee has come up with an idea worth considering about the Peconic Bay Region Community Preservation Fund, the 2-percent tax on a portion of most real estate sales that is used by the East End towns to buy farmland, other open space, and historic properties. The committee has suggested adjusting upward the preservation fund thresholds to make it easier for homebuyers shopping at the lower end of the spectrum to close deals.

When voters approved the C.P.F back in 1998, two key caveats were included. The intention was that only higher-priced purchases would be subject to the 2-percent tax. In most of the five towns, the first $250,000 of the cost of a house or $100,000 of vacant land were not subject to the tax. The dollar amounts have been fixed ever since.

A huge sum of money isn’t being talked about here. However, with the first $250,000 exempt from the 2-percent transfer tax, buyers of the least expensive East Hampton houses might be responsible for paying less than $3,000 into the fund. A sum of that kind could make the difference between being able to cover closing costs or secure a mortgage. Back when the C.P.F. began, $250,000 could just about buy you a house in East Hampton; today, the absolute bottom of the market is roughly $475,000. Considering this, some adjustment appears overdue, although first-time buyers who meet certain income and eligibility limits already avoid the tax.

Another suggestion from the committee, however, would be counterproductive. It has been suggested that all town purchases with the C.P.F. be subject to optional public referendums. This appears to come as much from longstanding denigration of the value of land preservation as anything else and should be rejected. Getting land buys onto ballots, most likely only in November, could effectively shut the C.P.F. down. Only the most patient landowners are likely to be willing to wait and see the outcome of a vote before opting for a private sale.

Changes in the 2-percent transfer tax would require state legislation. Assemblyman Fred W. Thiele Jr. should follow up on the first recommendation, but leave the second one on the cutting room floor. 

Make no mistake, a significant change in East Hampton Airport policy appears in the offing. After years of confrontation, pilots groups and anti-noise activists are talking to one another at last, with a sense of purpose and optimism about the future.

For far too long, much needed and sensible discussions about noise limits and the size of the airport were close to impossible. Some involved in the debate, including the majority of the previous East Hampton Town Board, clung to the idea that the only way to keep the airfield alive and well was by taking money from the Federal Aviation Administration even though accepting Washington’s money required so-called grant assurances that the airport be operated as the agency saw fit. A number of pilots and owners of aviation businesses, whose livelihoods depend on the airport, believed that the federal obligations were their only hedge against catastrophe. They would tell you in all seriousness that the ultimate goal of the anti-noise movement was shutting the field down altogether.

The old assumptions are now changing, thanks in part to the heavy use of the airport by commercial helicopter companies whose noisy aircraft run passengers in and out of the city at rates running into the thousands of dollars each way. This has made allies of former adversaries. Most of those concerned, including residents and elected officials of other neighboring communities, now agree that helicopters are the real problem and that unless their effects are lessened, public opposition to the airport is destined to reach a tipping point.

In the context of a new, more conciliatory town board, progress is being made. A committee coordinated by Councilwoman Kathee Burke-Gonzalez recently determined that the airport could actually fund itself. This is critical, as several F.A.A. grant agreements are set to expire soon,  which will give the town a better chance of placing limits on helicopters.

A subcommittee of the group Ms. Burke-Gonzalez assembled told the town board that airport income from landing fees, rents, and fuel sales, among other sources, would be enough to cover borrowing more than $4 million this year and even more in 2015 and beyond. The math says that repairs and modest upgrades can be accomplished without taking another cent of Washington’s money, freeing the town from some regulatory oversight and increasing its options on noise control.

Ms. Burke-Gonzalez, in just her freshman year as a town board member, is to be congratulated for making the apparently impossible — getting both sides to sit down together — a reality. The difficult work of coming up with meaningful policy changes is yet to be done, but the groundwork appears to have been set.

    As the United States involvement in Afghanistan winds down, and in the aftermath of the protracted occupation of Iraq, it is as meaningful as ever for Americans to reflect on the contributions of those who wear this country’s uniforms. Monday’s East Hampton parade will stop traffic on Main Street for a brief time, the temporary silence a tribute in a small way to those who never made it home. This year, too, we will think of three men, two who were killed in combat and one who, though not veteran, touched the lives of many who were.

    The path toward a Medal of Honor for Lance Cpl. Jordan C. Haerter of Sag Harbor and Shelter Island, and a fellow marine, Cpl. Jonathan T. Yale of Virginia, who died defending a post in Ramadi, Iraq, in April 2008, remains to be completed. Representative Tim Bishop has put forward a bill in Congress that would honor them for stopping a truck bomb outside Joint Security Station Nasser, saving an estimated 50 marines and 100 Iraqis. It now rests with the House Armed Services Committee. We, like those in the men’s families and many who knew them, hope that the overdue review comes soon and that the bill advances.

    The other person brought to mind this Memorial Day is Chris Cosich, a competitive bodybuilder and personal trainer who founded Honor Flight Long Island, which takes World War II veterans to Washington to visit the military memorials. Over the roughly eight years the organization has existed, it has transported, free of charge, some 1,000 vets to the capital, many for the first time. As the Greatest Generation ages and rapidly declines in number, it is a race against time. Mr. Cosich died of suicide in April, but Honor Flight goes on.

    The South Fork should be proud to have counted such men as Jordan Haerter and Chris Cosich among its residents as well as the marine from Virginia and the many men and women who have served or are serving today in this country’s armed forces. Monday may be the only official day of the year to memorialize those who are gone, but recognition of what they did for others should be eternal.

    A sculptural work evoking the bombing of Pam Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland, in 1988 is without doubt a powerful and deeply moving memorial. But whether it should be installed on public parkland in Montauk is a difficult question to answer.

    The work, called “Dark Elegy,” is by Suse Lownenstein, whose son Alexander was among those killed in the terrorist attack. It is made up of 74 stylized nude figures of women depicted at the moment they learned of the death of loved ones. Real women recreated their physical reactions of loss for Ms. Lowenstein. Created with deep emotion over a period of time, the assemblage has been quietly on display on the East Lake Drive, Montauk, property the artist shares with her husband, Peter Lowenstein.

    Seeking a new, more public home for it, the Lowensteins first approached the National Capital Memorial Advisory Commission in Washington, D.C., but the work was rejected. Last week, they offered it to East Hampton Town and suggested Kirk Park, at the western entrance to Montauk, as its location. They envision the figures, which might be visible from Montauk Highway, surrounded by a 75-foot-diameter circle of dark, shredded material.

    Setting aside for the moment the specific artwork, and acknowledging the reverence with which it was created, the East Hampton Town Board should consider whether the loss of Pam Am Flight 103, which took place so far away and affected people throughout the country, should be permanently memorialized here. If so, a question arises about whether Kirk Park, which is close to the humming downtown and summer night revelers, might invite vandalism and other forms of disrespect. If the Flight 103 memorial were accepted, it would be the largest here, bigger than those to East Hampton’s war dead or those killed in the 9/11 attacks.    We are not sure what the right answer is, but a careful, dispassionate, and thorough process should be pursued before going further.

    With annual school votes on Tuesday, the nearly complete lack of public controversy is striking, especially as two districts are seeking 60-percent support for budgets that will increase the amount brought in by taxes by more than a state-mandated cap. Notable as well is the absence of competitive races for school boards.

    We wonder whether everyone is just too busy now that the South Fork economy is humming again, whether the absence of heat reflects tacit public understanding that the schools are being managed satisfactorily, or something else. One possibility is that the constrained budgets and increased standardized testing have decreased the power of elected school boards, while the ever-increasing consolidation of authority of hired administrators and bureaucrats has diminished what elected overseers can actually accomplish. In many cases, superintendents sit at the head of the table at board meetings, signaling an inversion of the system of checks and balances. Almost no one appears to care that school boards and parents are now taking at best a supporting role in districts throughout the state.

    In East Hampton, voters will be asked on Tuesday to approve a spending plan that increases their taxes by 1.3 percent. This is a modest amount, but it does go beyond the state cap. Our sense is that the district should be given a pass this time around after digging relatively deeply in the search for cuts. However, the district should be forewarned that the next time around residents might demand that it take a harder line on what appears to be excessive administrative costs. The two incumbent board members running unopposed, Pat Hope, a no-nonsense former East Hampton High School teacher, and Jackie Lowey, a parent of two students in the district with a deep and impressive résumé, merit unequivocal support.

    Bridgehampton is the other South Fork district seeking voter approval to exceed the tax cap. No incumbents are running. Michael Gomberg, Jeffrey Mansfield, and Kathleen McCleland are on the ballot for two open board positions. We are impressed by Ms. McCleland’s and Mr. Mansfield’s clear commitment to the school and endorse them over Mr. Gomberg. We are less enthusiastic about the budget’s 8.8-percent tax levy increase. The district administration has said that the additional $1.1 million in the 2014-15 budget is necessary just to keep things where they are. Given that other districts are staying within the cap or close to it, that explanation isn’t quite good enough. Even if the spending plan is approved, however, a serious time of reckoning appears to have arrived for the district. Bridgehampton must quickly begin to explore how to cut non-program costs for the long term, whether by further sharing of services with nearby districts, or even consolidation.

    Despite all the pressures the Springs district faces in terms of a large and diverse student population its spending plan will stay under the tax cap. Teachers and administrators there have done an admirable job doing more with less, but how long that can continue is a worry.

    In Wainscott, voters have the curious pleasure of being asked to return David Eagan, unopposed, to the board. This follows a rebuke from the state comptroller last year over the district’s surplus income and Mr. Eagan’s arrest in February on a tax-fraud charge. He has laid the incident to a mistake, but there is reason for concern; it is not all that easy to get oneself arrested on such allegations. It is notable that residents either do not care or are willing to look past these red flags.

    Montauk has a bit of a competitive race for school board in an election that features a budget that stays well within the state limit. Jason Biondo and Cynthia Ibrahim are battling for one seat. We know Mr. Biondo well, his having been a reporter at The Star for several years. He is both outspoken and deeply involved in the community, which would bode well for his contributions to the district. Ms. Ibrahim likewise has a lot to offer. She has been involved with the Montauk Playhouse Community Center Foundation and is on the PTA. It is an extremely difficult call between two excellent candidates. The budget is actually down about $100,000 from last year’s and should cruise to approval.

    In Amagansett all appears well, with happy parents, no race for board seats, and a budget with only a modest increase that remains within bounds. Sagaponack’s increases are modest as well and stay within the cap. Cathy Hatgistavrou is running unopposed.

    Sag Harbor has three board seats in play, with Theresa Samot and Sandi Kruel hoping to stay on and Thomas Re and Diana Kolhoff opposing them. We are impressed by Ms. Kolhoff’s considerable education and teachers-advocate credentials. Ms. Samot has had three previous terms, and been the board president for three years; we respect her commitment and experience. And its budget also stays within the cap.

    Over all, the complacency sensed around this year’s school votes bodes well for those districts seeking to get above the 60-percent margin and break through the tax cap. Looking ahead, the time will soon come for consolidations. Millions are spent each year on administrative and back-office expenses that could be eliminated as smaller districts are joined into one or two larger systems. A potential benefit of regional school boards is that parents and taxpayers alike would become more engaged and demand greater accountability, better candidates, and more competitive elections.

    In the long run, the ennui that has gripped most districts this time around may be as much a cause for concern as an endorsement of a job well done.

    The juxtaposition between old East Hampton and new could not have been made more stark than the recent news, first reported in the New York Post, that a hedge fund manager had paid $147 million for a verdant 16-acre ocean-view property off Further Lane in East Hampton Village. While the supposed sum Barry Rosenstein agreed to pay for the three lots in the estate of the former owner was stunning in and of itself and a record for residential property, that two 18th-century Dominy family workshops remain there adds a significant twist.

    The Dominys’ rank among early American craftsmen is well known. Working in East Hampton from the pre-Revolutionary War period until the mid-19th century, four generations made household furniture, several of this area’s iconic windmills, and tall clocks, which are particularly well regarded. The East Hampton Historical Society has held several seminars on the Dominys and the Winterthur Museum in Delaware has many of the family’s tools in its collection, displayed in reproductions of a clock-making and woodworking shop that once stood on North Main Street here. The originals, if the Post’s account can be confirmed, are on what is now Mr. Rosenstein’s largest lot.

    As the story goes, Dudley Roberts Jr., himself a wealthy man by the standards of the time, had the workshops moved to the land in 1946, as the other Dominy buildings fell into disrepair and were eventually torn down. The ancient structures that stand there today overlooking the Atlantic are wrapped mostly in blue plastic tarps. What will happen to them now is anybody’s guess.

    There are, of course, plenty of Dominy reminders around — Hook Mill, for one — but it would be nice if these buildings could be preserved in some way, perhaps by the historical society, perhaps offered to Winterthur. With every passing year, appreciation of East Hampton’s material legacy and role in the early years of American commerce seems farther away. If saved and seen by a wider audience, objects from this period can help assure that we continue to know and understand where we came from as a country.

    Although it may seem coincidental that May is Mental Health Month and also the time when New York voters are asked to approve school budgets for the coming academic year, the link between mental illness and school safety is becoming increasingly clear. Unfortunately, school administrators and boards have been slow to catch up, opting for big-ticket expenditures on hardening buildings against the extremely rare chance of an armed attacker and failing to also expand counseling, on-campus therapy, and other programs.

    Nationally and locally, the numbers tell the story. There are almost 1,400 or more suicides reported every year in the United States among high school students and about 1,000 among those in college. This is a genuine crisis. The Centers for Disease Control rates suicide as the third leading cause of death among teens.

    In 2008-9, the latest year for which good figures are available, the National Center for Education Statistics said there were 17 in-school homicides compared to 1,344 suicides of youth between the ages of 5 and 18. These totals are down slightly from the averages of the preceding 17 years for which data is available. East Hampton’s schools mirror the national trends. There were two student suicides in recent years and no murders.

    Those who think about the issues surrounding students’ well-being are increasingly pointing to mental health care as key. They say that if schools and community organizations take on the too-high number of student suicides in the United States every year, they may at the same time prevent a significant portion of the homicides. In other words, if mental health problems are identified and dealt with early on, we may help stop the uncommon but occasionally horrendous assaults.

    Given all this, the focus on bullet-proof doors and surveillance cameras appears misplaced or at least out of balance with the real risks. For an example, we need look no further than the East Hampton district, which put $1.43 million in unspecified security upgrades into its proposed 2014-15 spending plan while at the same time the high school principal’s meager $30,000 request for additional mental health staff was cut to an unacceptable $5,000.

    Assemblyman Fred W. Thiele Jr. was able to have $150,000 set aside in the state budget for mental health services in the South Fork schools. But the money will be spread among a number of districts and, while better than nothing, it is far from enough. Much more time and money must be set aside to get at-risk students the care they need. Every dollar spent for building better walls should be matched by a dollar for making sure every young person has access to the help he or she needs.

    The United States made it official this week in a report that linked global warming primarily to human activity. For every American, a heating planet is reason for concern. Here on the South Fork, where a rising sea level linked to the climate heating up is a real and present danger, concern should be heightened.

    Here are a few of the National Climate Assessment findings: Climate change is already being felt in the United States, including in more-extreme weather. “Multiple lines of evidence” have showed that mankind is the main cause of warming. The 10-year period just ended was the hottest on record, and 2012 was the warmest year in the U.S. ever. Temperatures are projected to increase by a further 2 to 4 degrees Fahrenheit in the coming decades. Heat-related droughts and wildfires are becoming more common. The rate of global sea level rise is accelerating. Marine waters are becoming acidic. Negative effects on wildlife are widespread, but are only beginning to be understood. And agricultural productivity and human health are at risk. The Northeast, the report says, is already being affected by heat waves, extreme precipitation, and coastal flooding and erosion.

    For Long Island communities, particularly those along the shoreline, the effects are already becoming clear — and alarming. Residents and business owners can see the narrowing of beaches here as a direct result of global warming. The choices Americans make are affecting the here and now, as well as the future. The time to act is already upon us.