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.

    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.

A citizens group that advises the Southampton Town Board on matters concerning the hamlet of Bridgehampton has mobilized to fight a new CVS pharmacy at the intersection of Main Street and the Bridgehampton-Sag Harbor Turnpike. Southampton Town Planning Board review may delay what appears inevitable, but from our perspective the property is a perfect candidate for public acquisition using money from the  Community Preservation Fund.

For an example of how this could be in the community’s best interest, Southampton officials could take a look eastward. East Hampton Village bought the former Mark R. Buick car dealership at the corner of Accabonac and Pantigo Roads some years ago and removed the building. The result is a wide green lawn at the village’s eastern approach, a far-better outcome than the commercial shopping center that had been planned. And a CVS just happens to be nearly across the street, adjacent to the post office, with all the attendant traffic confusion and the bicycling death of a teenage girl in 2013.

Developing the Bridgehampton site to the extent apparently now planned would be terrible. The intersection is already one of the most dangerous in that part of town. It would be a shame to allow a commercial building to denigrate the aesthetic improvements at the Topping Rose House and, slowly, across Main Street at the Bridgehampton Historical Society’s Nathaniel Rogers House. Seen from the Ocean Road side, the now-vacant lot  would be welcome open space.

Southampton Town has, unfortunately, allowed Bridgehampton’s western approach to become an ill-managed  jumble of shopping centers and development, which incidentally already has a Rite-Aid pharmacy. The town now may have a chance to protect and enhance the other end of the hamlet. That opportunity should not be squandered.

—

An earlier version of this editorial misidentified the Bridgehampton parcel's owner as Leonard Ackerman of East Hampton. Mr. Ackerman sold his interest in BNB Ventures, the partnership that controlled the property, to Paul Kanavos and Adam Raboy of Flag Luxury New York City in 2012.

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.

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.

    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.

    By now local school boards are deep into the annual budget-writing season, and once again we hear that tax increases must be kept below the 2-percent cap. We believe the time has come, however, for boards to deal head-on with the state-imposed curb by bringing spending plans that would result in exceeding the cap to voters, if necessary, or by taking serious steps toward reducing costs by consolidating districts.

    Some history is necessary to understand the precarious place our schools are in thanks to the cap. In 2011, then-new Gov. Andrew Cuomo and state legislative leaders forced through a measure to provide tax relief to suburban homeowners. They had a point: New York had, and continues to have, some of the highest property tax rates in the country, although taxes on the South Fork are generally far less than in other parts of Suffolk.

    The rules now hold the increase in the amount brought in by property taxes for any local government in the state to 2 percent year-over-year or to the rate of increase in the consumer price index, whichever is less, although the cap is subject to some carve-outs. Schools and municipalities can increase property taxes beyond the cap provided that they do so with 60-percent approval. This would be relatively easy for a five-member town board, for example, in which taxpayers have no direct say on budgets, but it is tough for school districts, which must present their spending plans to the voters every spring. Very few have attempted to exceed the cap, as it has turned out.

    At the time the cap became law, education groups decried what they said would be negative effects on some programs and classroom quality. These fears now appear to be coming to pass. To some degree, districts stole time as the inflation rate remained flat during the Great Recession. Now, however, with costs of all sorts rising, notably salaries and utilities, pressure is increasing to find even more cuts to stay within the cap.

    The effects of the 2-percent cudgel already can be seen, both on educational quality and in terms of Mr. Cuomo’s presidential ambitions, in which he is hoping to avoid the label of a tax-and-spend Democrat. In his 2014 State of the State address, Mr. Cuomo repeated the tax-cutting theme, pointing out that there are more than 2,000 separate taxing entities in the state and calling for spending reductions.

    Locally, there are several examples of how the tax cap is crimping programs and harming kids. This year, the cap is set at a miserly 1.46 percent because the increase in the consumer price index is lower than 2 percent. In Springs, the board is deciding whether to skip a needed purchase of computers for students. At East Hampton High School, there have been cuts in art, home, and career classes. Middle school classes in East Hampton are packed, with as many as 30 students to a room in some cases — more than can be adequately taught, according to some teachers. And at the John Marshall Elementary School, kindergarten field trips and programs for advanced students have been eliminated, along with some take-home projects and Spanish instruction. This is not sustainable.

    The quality of education provided to this community’s children will only suffer as the years go on unless something is done. Further cuts to classroom activities, essential equipment, and extracurricular programs would gravely weaken the educational system itself. We believe school district voters would support well-presented programs even if they mean a tax increase that exceeds the onerous state limit.

    But if South Fork school boards cannot muster the courage to ask voters whether to exceed the cap, they must look for an alternative, and it appears that the only other option is pursuing an inevitable course toward consolidation.

    The East Hampton School Board announced last week that it is likely to seek voter approval to exceed the state cap on tax increases for 2014-15. The move is not entirely unexpected, and appears justified, at least for the coming year. But this should not be the end of the discussion about taxpayer support of public education.

    Thanks to holding expenses in check for several successive years, the district has been able to meet the so-called 2-percent cap, but there is very little left now to cut from the budget in East Hampton — or in other large South Fork districts that have met the cap. Students already seem to have been negatively affected. Going further would mean seriously undermining educational quality.

    As we have noted before, the pressure comes from the top, specifically from New York Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo’s often-stated interest in property-tax relief. As Mr. Cuomo sees it, the state has too many small taxing entities, which results in too much money coming from state residents’ pockets. The governor believes that trimming school spending through shared services is the best way to meet the challenge.

    On eastern Long Island, where the schools take in the largest portion of the money raised by taxes, the governor’s ideas for reform appear to have plenty to recommend them. Each of the often small districts seems top-heavy with administrators pulling in six-figure salaries and ample benefits. While some resistance is to be expected from those who might see their fiefdoms reduced, a new, hard look at consolidation, particularly at the top of the pay scale, should be taken.

    Voters, we suspect, will be supportive of districts that seek to go above the tax cap this year, and perhaps for one or two more cycles. Beyond that, however, patience as well as wallets will begin to get thin. Looking toward the long term, seeking ways to reduce the administrative costs of education by consolidation is something that must be considered.

    Perhaps the single most important story in any recent Star was the one that appeared on the front page of last Thursday’s edition about the desperate need for adequate mental health services for school-age children.

    Think about what that means for a moment. What pediatricians, teachers, school nurses, administrators, and others are saying is that there are more kids at risk here than there are practitioners able to help them. This must change — and fast.

    School officials here would be the first to admit that there is a crisis under way. With few other choices for care, the East Hampton School District has referred 20 students with apparent suicidal thoughts to Stony Brook University Hospital in the last year and a half alone. Three South Fork students have killed themselves since 2009, and countless other forms of harmful behavior are reported, including substance abuse, eating disorders, and self-mutilation among students as young as 12.

    The problem also extends beyond the school’s reach. Medical professionals and those in related fields have been talking for some time about how to respond. As with nearly everything, however, money has been lacking. State Assemblyman Fred W. Thiele Jr. is helping the East Hampton High School principal, Adam Fine, with a new approach that might provide funding for better and more abundant mental health services for the region’s youth. The energy and flexibility of private-sector groups should be tapped as well.

    This is a matter of the highest priority, and those working toward solutions are to be supported and commended. The kids need us; we must do everything and anything we can to help.

    It is quite the wonder why two members of the last East Hampton Town Board were so vehemently opposed to an independent study of the unused Springs-Fireplace Road wastewater treatment plant now that a report on what should happen there has been released. As it turns out, their pet project to privatize the site would not only have cost the town a great deal of money, but would have contributed to groundwater contamination rather than alleviated it.

    Former East Hampton Town Supervisor Bill Wilkinson and Councilwoman Theresa Quigley had tried and failed to push through a deal in which the town would have paid for expensive repairs plus a monthly fee in an unusual lease-to-buy handoff of the plant to a private firm. To make the figures work, the company would have accepted out-of-town sewage in addition to local waste.

    At the time, other board members cautioned that the whole wastewater picture needed to be reviewed before a decision was made. They stopped the proposed deal, and Mr. Wilkinson, who was ready to sign it at a February 2012 meeting, was livid.

    Now, the authors of the report say the best bet would be for the town to permanently close the plant, which has been operating as a money-losing transfer station, and put the savings of up to $50,000 a month toward more ecologically and financially sound projects. This is good advice, and confirms observations made by the town budget advisory committee, environmentalists, and others that the supervisor and Ms. Quigley should have better understood what was a stake before attempting to rush into a disasterous contract.

    The report contains several options for the road ahead, but the one that appears to have the most support is shutting the plant altogether. Rebuilding it could run $5 million or more, and annual operating costs could exceed $1 million. Instead, the report says, money might be directed to the doing something about the unknown number of under-performing individual septic systems in town.

    Prior efforts at providing incentives for upgrading residential cesspools, for example, have been under-funded and of limited effectiveness. Incentives are well worth considering, as upgrades would both save money and help protect drinking water and the environment.