Reading the tea leaves, it appears that East Hampton Town may be advertising for a town manager some time soon. Such was the unmistakable impression at a meeting Saturday at which the advantages of such a position were extolled. Hosted by the Group for Good Government, the League of Women Voters, and the East Hampton Business Alliance, a compelling, if mostly one-sided, take on the issue was heard.

    As described at the meeting, a town manager would take over administrative responsibilities, leaving policy, vision, and lawmaking to the five-member town board. Proponents said that removing management duties from the supervisor and town board members would help attract superior candidates to public service, candidates who might otherwise be put off by the day-to-day grind.

    Ideally, a town manager would be apolitical and protected from the political winds while coordinating the various town departments and enforcing local laws. That the presumptive Democratic nominee for supervisor, Larry Cantwell, was the East Hampton Village clerk, then its administrator — essentially, village manager — for 31 years in all is a case in point. Speaking at Saturday’s forum, he said he believed the concept would work if gradually scaled up to Town Hall.

    A strong argument is easy to make for the stability that a manager’s office could provide, especially when many, many town governments have come and gone. The caveat, however, is that despite best intentions, the concentration of authority in any single person has an inherent risk. Moreover, having seen in the last few years how difficult a few vindictive people on a town board can make the lives of staff who have earned their displeasure, we are unsure of whether a manager’s objectivity could be protected. By one calculation, a manager’s post in the wrong hands could be just a sharper needle with which a supervisor or town board could prick staff members.

    The town now has a cadre of department chiefs who, to differing degrees, have been subjected to undue influence. At the same time, a relatively recent reorganization that put Bill Wilkinson confreres in charge of the Building Department, Fire Safety Department, Ordinance Enforcement Department, and the animal control unit has not resulted in obvious improvements. Would a town manager be able to have a positive effect on these departments, or in the conduct of the town attorney’s office, which has been rather shaky of late?

    Despite these concerns, however, East Hampton residents should be in favor of further exploring the concept. In his remarks Saturday, Mr. Cantwell said a safe course might be for someone already working for the town to gradually take on the role of manager. This may be a good approach to something that sounds good but may prove difficult to implement.

   Now in its second season, the Montauk Beach House, a hotel, bar, and music venue, remains in the news for good reason: How the modest former Ronjo Motel turned into a far larger business complex with only the barest of planning review is a key question for East Hampton Town officials — and the electorate.

    The Beach House is hardly the only example of a land-use and zoning process run off the rails in town. Cyril’s Fish House on Napeague, where patrons and taxis use the state right of way as if it were private property, has been allowed to operate a restaurant and bar despite numerous citations. The Inn at Windmill Lane in Amagansett has been allowed to expand twice, including into a historic district building, without the required site plan review. The Panoramic View in Montauk was converted and expanded without authorization from the town planning board. And it was only under pressure that town officials reversed their position on the Dunes, a high-priced alcohol and drug rehabilitation facility in Northwest Woods, which apparently was operating illegally on a parcel zoned for residences. Don’t try any of this at home, however; in each case the operators were well-connected, extremely well-funded, or both.

    Town officials, notably the top building inspector, Tom Preiato, are beginning to take a tougher, if overdue, line on the Beach House. When the property was the threadbare Ronjo, it boasted 33 rooms and few other amenities. Now, after a multimillion-dollar renovation, the Beach House has only 32 rooms, but it has an outdoor bar, a cafe, clothing boutique, membership pool club, and live music acts and D.J.s, which pull in, by even the owners’ cautious statements, as many as 300 to 400 people a day.

    The conundrum at the Beach House is that it occupies a site where these uses are prohibited under present zoning. It doesn’t even have a town music permit. The Ronjo was allowed to persist as a nonconforming use because it pre-existed zoning. Under the town code, however, any expansion whatsoever is supposed to be subject to strict review. Nor has the Beach House’s vastly expanded operation triggered the town’s parking calculation, by which it would either have had to provide ample spaces for its patrons or pay into a fund earmarked for that purpose.

    This all appears to have been made possible by a compliant Town Hall, which has looked past these issues and the fact that the place doesn’t even have a valid certificate of occupancy, without which it should not have opened its doors. There has even been an allegation of what might be called witness-tampering, in which someone with knowledge of the entertainment at the Beach House was dissuaded from speaking at a town planning board hearing.

    You can be sure that other East Hampton Town motel or resort business owners are watching closely to see how far the Beach House owners can push things. It would be a lucrative precedent if its expansion were allowed to stand. Conversely, those concerned with how the town enforces its zoning laws, quality of life issues, parking, traffic, and noise should be demanding a stronger hand. This gets at a fundamental question about who town government is for: residents or those who just want to make a buck. No one, no matter how well they are able to play the system to their advantage, should be above the law.

   Earth-moving began this month on a long-delayed project to do something about persistent water pollution at Havens Beach, the Village of Sag Harbor’s sole bathing beach. This is good news — sort of. Unfortunately, it appears that after more than 25 years of unfulfilled promises and false starts, the work is not likely to be completed in time for the beginning of the swimming season.

    Officials have been aware of water-quality problems at Havens Beach, and the nearby creek that drains into it rainwater and runoff from a wide watershed of houses, roads, and businesses. Traces of human and animal waste have been detected there over the years, though until recently the village failed to alert the public to the potential health risk. For example, it would send its lifeguards home for the day during County Health Department-mandated closures, but post no signs or give other warnings.

    With bulldozers beginning site preparation on a $374,000 effort, the hope is that an artificial wetland and filtration sponges will stem the contamination. One concern is that the village chose a low-ball bid from a contractor who has been linked to several questionable coastal projects and received a record fine from the State Department of Environmental Conservation for improper dredging in Montauk.

    Though residents should be happy that the project has begun, close attention should be paid as the work moves along. Equally important will be a commitment of money and attention to make sure the wetland and filters are maintained and remain effective over the long term.

   Having watched the workings of school boards here for as long as we have, one thing has become obvious: The chummy closeness between elected board members and district administrators is not necessarily a good thing. With this in mind, the over-arching yardstick, if you will, with which we think voters should measure candidates for the boards in Tuesday’s votes is independence. The question should not be who is easiest to get along with. Rather, it should be who is most likely to maintain sufficient distance. Nor should voters view polling as a popularity contest; the most well-known or likeable person may not necessarily be the right one.

    Election to a school board is just the beginning. For those who are successful Tuesday, the work will begin when they are sworn in. Board members find themselves asked to balance among taxpayers’ interests, the needs of the district’s children, and mind-bogglingly complex state and federal rules. Add to this the difficulty inherent in responsibility for personnel, athletics, transportation, and school buildings, and you have what sounds like a full-time job.

    Given the tasks board members are asked to master — and the nearly never-ending roll of scandals, lawsuits, or parent outcries — it is a wonder that anyone at all would stand for election. In fact, we have thought for some time that the structure of school boards in New York State should be overhauled to assure that the policy-making efficiency of elected officials is insulated from the day-to-day fireworks that tend to otherwise consume them. That is a matter for another day. For now, those who do choose to run are to be commended in the strongest terms. On to our recommendations.

    For the East Hampton School Board we endorse Wendy Geehreng and Richard Wilson. Ms. Geehreng works part-time as a pediatric nurse-practitioner and sells real estate here. She is the parent of four children in the district and is smart and energetic. Mr. Wilson taught science in the Sag Harbor schools before retiring. That background, his focus on academics, and his interest in strengthening East Hampton’s already impressive technical and scientific programs makes him a compelling choice.

    In Springs, Jeff Miller and Adam Wilson get our support. We have known Mr. Miller for many years in his capacity as an East Hampton Village employee and as a former chief of the Springs Fire Department. He has strong ties in the hamlet and the ability to look at things with a discerning eye. Mr. Wilson, as a Little League coach and board member, has demonstrated his commitment to Springs and its future generations.

    Montauk presents a tough call with Lee White and Honora Herlihy facing off for one open seat. Mr. White is a member of the East Hampton Town Zoning Board of Appeals, where he has demonstrated fair-mindedness and impartiality. Both he and Ms. Herlihy have two small children at the Montauk School. Because we know him better and have confidence in the job he could do on the board, Mr. White gets the edge from us, but only just.

    In Amagansett, Bridgehampton, Wainscott, and Sagaponack the races for school board are uncontested.

    As to the school budgets, the state-imposed discipline of the 2-percent cap on tax-levy increases has appeared to work. Each of the districts within The Star’s coverage area has held its 2013-14 spending plan down in order to keep the tax-levy increase to a single-digit, although some mandated expenses are exempt from the calculation. This is a remarkable turnaround from pre-tax-cap days, when year-to-year hikes of 10 percent or more were common. At this point, there is little opportunity for boards to change the numbers. A defeat in any district would mean the failing budget is put before the voters a second time. If defeated again, state law would require adoption of a severely bare-bones budget. Most districts held ostensibly public budget work sessions during the spring, which few residents attended.

    It should be noted that in too many instances the boards, including East Hampton’s, flatly violated a state law that requires copies of documents under discussion to be provided to those in attendance, including the press. Even after this was pointed out by The Star and other newspapers, boards continued to break the law.

    This should give residents pause and underscore the need for independent-minded candidates who are willing to defy administrators when they seem to be in the wrong. In the end, it is the public’s business they are elected to conduct. 

   Like a missing tooth in a boxer’s smile, a gap in the notably verdant farmland along the Sag Harbor Road in East Hampton is a telling sight. This year’s potato crop is leafing out around the one-acre plot off Route 114 near Stephen Hand’s Path, but only a few weeds have sprouted in what is an abandoned and forlorn pit. Just how this hole came to be is no mystery: It was caused by a thoughtless road-drainage project. What is unacceptable and murky, however, is that nothing has been done to restore the site or to make amends for it.

    The hole is on what was top-quality farmland for which the development rights had been sold long ago to Suffolk County — a key and limiting point which was ignored when the East Hampton Town Board hired a contractor to dig a pit there to alleviate flooding. The problem came when county officials found out the work had been authorized without their consent. The project came to a halt, but not before the town’s contractor reportedly hauled away a layer of prime topsoil — a layer estimated at five feet deep which county taxpayers had already paid for — and sold it to a client.

    Suffolk officials learned what was happening in July, well after an engineer drafted the plan for the work, the town hired a contractor, and digging began. The county quickly served legal notice on the Town of East Hampton, reserving its right to sue, and demanded that the parcel be restored. Suffolk Executive Steve Bellone condemned the ham-handed project in a press release, saying a countywide referendum would have been required to authorize the dig had it gone through proper channels. East Hampton Town also would have been required to secure approvals from the state and Suffolk Farmland Commission, but they were never sought.

    Though she claimed that she was ignorant of the county’s purchase of the development rights on the Route 114 parcel, East Hampton Town Councilwoman Theresa Quigley, who spearheaded the project, apparently had been party to an e-mail in which that fact was pointed out. Indeed, the county’s partial ownership of the land was no secret; it bought the development rights in 1988, and the designation has appeared on official tax maps ever since. In response to criticism, Ms. Quigley said she could have been set up by someone within Town Hall eager to see her fail. But, even were the foregoing true, it would not excuse the fact that nothing has been done to correct the situation.

     After the county began making noise about the bungled affair, the contractor pulled out its equipment and left. For almost a year now the hole has been a daily reminder for many of those who pass it by every day of East Hampton Town officials’ intransigence and persistent refusal to admit mistakes. And while the town dithers, county taxpayers, who paid to keep the land in agriculture forever, should be demanding to know when farming there will return.

   One of the quirks of this admittedly quirky newspaper is that we leave the S off Ditch Plain in what we write. Almost everyone else calls that stretch of Montauk beach and the surrounding area Ditch Plains; we do not. To sharp-eyed readers this may seem to be a mistake, and, in fact, in conversation around the office the staff has been known to succumb. However, it was deemed long ago that the plain upon which the ditch or ditches were, was one, not many. Hence, it is Ditch Plain, not Plains. Or maybe it should even be Ditches Plain, really.

    Historical sources vary on this, as you might imagine. However, Jeannette Edwards Rattray, the publisher of The Star and a local historian, in her 1938 “Montauk: Three Centuries of Romance, Sport, and Adventure,” lists the plain without the S. Official records in the National Archives concerning the Life-Saving Station there do not show the use of Ditch Plains until after World War II. The 1940 Census left off the letter as well.

    So from whence came the S? Like many other linguistic additions and subtractions, it probably has a lot to do with where we live. People here speak in a mash up of the Long Island accent and the old, Bonac way. Whether or not The Star’s preference for Ditch Plain ever wins out, we’ll keep with it, at least for the foreseeable future, no matter what anyone says.

   One thing should be clear to anyone in the audience (or watching on LTV). After yet another East Hampton Town Board meeting turned debacle it is more than time for Supervisor Bill Wilkinson and Councilwoman Theresa Quigley to call it quits. For all intents and purposes, they already have.

    Considering the evident contempt with which they greet those with whom they do not agree, or whom they perceive as adversaries, and that both appear to be itching for their terms to end at the end of this year, resignation would be appropriate and the best thing for the Town of East Hampton.

    We do not make this recommendation lightly. Nor do we expect either will at this late date suddenly heed our advice. Because board meetings are dysfunctional as well as embarrassing when they are in the room, however, little to nothing will get done in Town Hall while they remain in office.

    Yet there is more: Mr. Wilkinson’s leading the way on demoralizing town employees, weakening zoning, allowing code enforcement to slow down, promoting blatant cronyism, encouraging the apparently illegal expansion of erosion-control structures, and abandoning key infrastructure spending have set him up for an arguable legacy as the worst East Hampton Town supervisor of all time. If you take away the much-vaunted Wilkinson “miracle”: restoring town finances after the discovery of a giant internal deficit — which was actually put in place in a state-approved plan well before he took office — there is not much in his record on the positive side of the ledger.

    As to Ms. Quigley, she has been prone to divisive outbursts, threatened to walk off the job, personally managed poorly thought-out projects, and has seemed only interested in serving the interests of those constituents whose political outlooks mirror her own. Note her “yes” vote recently, with Mr. Wilkinson, on an absurd plan that would have allowed a problematic Napeague bar and restaurant in a fragile environmental area to legalize its many illegal additions and make it permanent as a source of perennial litter and traffic problems.

    Mr. Wilkinson and Ms. Quigley have so damaged the once-proud Republican Party brand in East Hampton that the only person said to be considering a run for supervisor is a partisan activist who may well be the supervisor’s last remaining public supporter. Just about the only thing Mr. Wilkinson and Ms. Quigley could do now to salvage what is left of their reputations, and help their party’s prospects in November, is to step aside.

    At a May 16 town board meeting, Mr. Wilkinson and Ms. Quigley made it clear they were counting the days till their terms were up. We think they should go one step further. If nothing else they owe it to the voters who expected, wrongly it turns out, that they could do the jobs they were elected to do without drama, condescension, or anger. If they do not want to be there, East Hampton Town residents and taxpayers should not want them there either.

    Thanks for the effort you’ve put in, folks, voters might say, but now it’s time to go.

   Much has been made about the Town of East Hampton seeking money from the Federal Aviation Administration to help pay for projects at the airport. According to both those who favor taking aid from Washington and those who do not, the funding comes with strings attached: The airport must be operated in the way the agency likes — and with only a minimal degree of local control. However, there seems to be what might be called a moral and ethical dimension to the question of what it really means to accept financial help from outside.

    It is understood that by taking federal money, which ultimately comes from United States taxpayers with a dollop from fees on regulated air carriers, East Hampton Town is beholden to interests beyond its borders, whether they are the owners of private aircraft with out-of-town addresses or helicopter and jet companies based elsewhere. But by the same calculus, the interests of the non-flying public who live in Southampton Town, Shelter Island, and on the North Fork must be taken into consideration. Call it a good-neighbor policy; by welcoming federal money to run its airport, East Hampton must likewise look well past Town Line Road when considering the facility’s use and impact.

    One of the great puzzles in the airport debate is why the owners of small, private aircraft have thrown in their lot with those who make money from essentially open access. Perhaps they fear that local — read political — control, would be tantamount to inadequate maintenance and safety. Nevertheless, it is unfortunate that the mom-and-pop pilots who call East Hampton their home field are carrying water for the brash industrialists and care-nothing helicopter companies who want to keep things the way they are, even if it means ignoring the clear public demand for noise abatement.

    Unfortunately, the inadequacy of meaningful noise-reduction strategies has made the prospect of shutting down the airport, which was once unthinkable, something that now seems possible given the right combination of residents’ outrage and politics. Heading off such a regressive outcome should be a top priority for officials, and the sooner they start taking the complaints of those who live under the aircrafts’ paths seriously, the sooner solutions will be found that all of our communities can live with.

   Sag Harbor voters will choose a mayor and two board members on Tuesday at a pivotal time for the village. 

   Four candidates are vying for mayor: the two-term incumbent, Brian Gilbride, Pierce Hance, who held the post in the 1990s, Sandra Schroeder, who was the village clerk for many years, and Bruce Tait, the chairman of the village’s harbor committee. For us, the choice comes down to Mr. Hance or Mr. Tait; Mr. Gilbride has been too divisive a figure to stay on.

      The core issue is the police force and whether to keep it, eliminate it, or cut it back to a few officers backed by patrols from a neighboring town or county force. Shutting down the force has been among Mayor Gilbride’s top concerns, ostensibly over its cost to taxpayers and stalled contract deal. Mr. Hance has said his experience with a prior police negotiation over money would have avoided the present bitter stalemate. Mr. Tait has expressed support for the department, saying essentially it needs enough officers to do the job.

      Another matter on which Mr. Hance has spoken out is open government. Under Mayor Gilbride’s watch (with the mute and puzzling acquiescence of State Assemblyman Fred W. Thiele Jr., who moonlights, inappropriately in our view, as the village attorney), meetings have repeatedly been held that violate the spirit, if not the letter, of the New York Open Meetings Law. This disdain for public process is unwelcome.

    Four men are running for two places on the Village Board, including two who previously held village elected positions, Ed Deyermond and Bruce Stafford, and an incumbent, Ed Gregory. For their role in allowing the police matter to get out of hand and in excluding village residents from observing key decisions, Mr. Gregory and Mr. Stafford should not be returned. This leaves Mr. Deyermond, who has considerable government experience as a South­ampton Town assessor and Sag Harbor mayor, among other roles, and Ken O’Donnell, a business owner, as better candidates.

    The mayoral choice, between Mr. Hance and Mr. Tait, is a difficult one, but the edge goes to the latter for his nonconfrontational demeanor and longstanding interest in the environment, community, and waterfront.

   New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg has the right idea about sea-level rise, global warming, and the threat of catastrophic storms. East Hampton Town, and to a similar degree other local governments, have so far pretended these problems do not exist, although they may simply be paralyzed by their enormity. The discrepancy, however, is startling.

    Last week, Mr. Bloomberg announced an expensive and ambitious plan to protect the city, drafted in the aftermath of Hurricane Sandy. Long Island’s South Fork towns and villages should also be leading the way on preparations and planning for what appears inevitable for coastal communities, but they are not.

    To get an idea of what our officials should be doing, it is illustrative to look at what the City of New York has been up to. As soon as 2020, city planners said in a recent report, annual average temperatures could increase by three degrees, with a 10-percent jump in rainfall. Sea level around the city could rise more than two feet by the middle of the century, and as many as 800,000 people could soon be living in 100-year flood plains, the report said.

    Vital in the city’s response — and that of the East End towns and villages — will be protecting houses and infrastructure, such as electricity, fuel supplies, and transportation routes. The city’s report contains 250 specific recommendations, including flood walls, levees, and new dune and wetland systems. Early estimates are that the full project would cost at least $20 billion. Money would be made available for the owners of private properties to improve foundations, reinforce walls, and move mechanical equipment out of surge plains. Also included are suggestions about how to assure food supplies, functioning utilities, and health care.

    As Hurricane Sandy showed, the difficulties largely came in the storm’s aftermath — even here, more than 100 miles from where its eye made landfall. For towns like East Hampton, where beaches are key to the dominant second-home economy, saving houses must be balanced with preserving beaches. So far the scales have been tipped too far toward waterfront property owners at the expense of public access, and ad-hoc solutions have been discussed in the absence of an overall plan. East Hampton Town officials have gone one step further, essentially agreeing to toss out the Local Waterfront Revitalization Plan, which was the result of years of careful study.

    At a national level, Congress and the White House must increase funding for the Federal Emergency Management Agency to help improve its flood maps and provide incentives and aid to those municipalities and homeowners unable to afford adequate preparation. Equally important, Washington must do more to address greenhouse gas emissions, a primary cause of sea-level rise and climate change. Without a two-pronged approach — smart anticipatory steps and cutting carbon dioxide and other pollutants — coastal areas such as our own will be among the first to suffer.