Work has been under way this year on the South Fork to clear debris from streams in the hope of increasing the population of alewives, an oceangoing fish that spawns in freshwater. These efforts are extremely important, not just for the species, but for improving the overall health of our treasured ecosystems.

    Historically, alewives were thought to have spawned in nearly every pond here they could reach, rushing up rivers and streams in early spring. Now their runs are limited to a few places, and poor water quality, physical obstructions, and overfishing have hurt their numbers. The New York Department of Environmental Conservation considers the alewife a species “of concern.” Fishing for them is prohibited in several states.

    Like menhaden, alewives are a key prey species for  larger and more commercially and recreationally sought fish, such as striped bass. They are also food for herons and other birds that lurk along the migratory streams. The fish that don’t survive and don’t get picked off by predators sink to the bottom of their spawning ponds and, as they decompose, release carbon and nutrients to replace those lost as waters flow to the sea.

    Public officials and citizens whose properties border ponds and streams should find out what they can do to help. Restoring the alewife should be a goal all of us can get behind.

   If they have not already done so by the time you are reading this, the East Hampton Town Planning Board is about to vote to increase traffic tie-ups on Montauk Highway in Wainscott. An investor in commercial real estate bought the former Plitt Ford dealership there in September 2010 for $3.9 million, and he has gotten the town to think positively about his plan to redevelop it into a far more intensive retail space. Little analysis of the new store’s impact on nearby residences or the vehicles passing the site has been conducted. This should have occurred, and it bodes ill for the kind of scrutiny future highway-side commercial projects will receive.

    Whether by design or happy accident, the developer neutralized would-be opposition by hinting that a high-end food market, like Whole Foods or Trader Joe’s, might be in the cards. That apparently sounded good to a lot of people as well as the planning board, and the board is set to approve a high-traffic use to replace the nearly no-impact businesses that had been there for many years. Privately, the property owner has been saying that it looks as if he is about to sign a deal with the CVS drugstore chain, which takes the bloom off the rose a little. (CVS apparently would give up its site and overcrowded parking lot next to the East Hampton Post Office.)

    Unfortunately, a “hub” store, such as the developer plans, will add to year-round congestion at an already jammed section of Montauk Highway. Vehicles headed east stall there on Fridays, while the westbound trade parade backs up traffic on weekdays at around 4 p.m. Let’s face it, this area of Wainscott already has poorly thought-out commercial development, too much blacktop, and inappropriate signs. The planning board is on its way to making it worse.

    It has fast-tracked the redevelopment by deeming it insignificant in terms of the effect on the environment, including traffic. Under the State Environmental Quality Review Act, the board could and should have asked for a thorough study of what the project, if approved, would mean for its surroundings. Instead, it ruled that it would have “no impact.” The traffic study that was done and the state’s response to it were inadequate.

    One solution is not unprecedented: This would be for the Town of East Hampton to buy the property using money from the community preservation fund, level the buildings, and shrink the parking lot to make it a park, either by restoring the land to a natural state or by planting grass and trees. This was done to good effect at the former Mark R. Buick property on Pantigo Road in East Hampton Village. Of course, such action is highly unlikely, since the owner has indicated no interest that we know of in unloading the property, and the current town board is more interested in economic development than environmental preservation. But we can hope. Wainscott deserves better.

   Summer swimming season is a couple of months away, but something crossed our minds the other day that might be worth considering — in-season ocean safety courses for adults tailored for those from away.

    East Hampton’s public beaches are well served by outstanding lifeguards. A crack ocean-rescue squad can rapidly reach others in distress when called. A junior lifeguard program each year trains scores of kids in being safe around the water. And yet, despite all this, there remain blank spots on the miles of beaches where there are no lifeguards.

    Offering free and frequent, basic instruction to resident grown-ups and summer visitors about what to do in a waterside emergency — and how to avoid them — would not be a bad idea.

   What is unfortunate about the Montauk Ronjo (now the Beach House) controversy is that it has happened at all. The fact that it has points less to politics, as Supervisor Bill Wilkinson calls it, and more to a judgment gap in Town Hall in which flawed decisions can be made casually.

    Back in February, a company headed by Chris Jones, of last year’s aborted Music to Know concert, and Lawrence Siedlick, a big-check donor to local and national Republican campaigns, paid $4.2 million for the Ronjo motel and an adjacent lot. The properties were clearly bisected on official maps by an alley owned by the Town of East Hampton. At least on paper, the alley starts on South Edison  Street and doglegs around to South Elmwood Avenue.

    Over the years, however, the Ronjo was expanded onto the town alley. Recent aerial photos show a couple of outbuildings or sheds in the middle of it, as well as a corner of the motel’s pool deck and a part of a parking lot. How this was allowed to happen and over what time span no one, or at least no one who wants to speak out, seems to know. But for all intents the one-time alley was appropriated as part of the motel grounds; a tree was even planted on one end of it. Nearby Montauk businesses use another part of the alley for back-door access, deliveries, and to get to off-street parking, but what was mapped as access from the east is blocked.

    Mr. Jones and Mr. Siedlick apparently knew they were buying two separate parcels of land; transfer documents filed with Suffolk County indicate this fact. Nonetheless, a few weeks after the closing, they, or a representative, apparently got Mr. Wilkinson to agree to sell them a portion of the alley for $35,000.

    Much has been made of a statement by Mr. Wilkinson that he arbitrarily came up with the $35,000 figure. East Hampton Democrats have seized on it, saying there was no way to know for sure if the price was right. Given the expansion of the Ronjo onto the alley, it is hard to know its fair-market value.

    The deal was approved 3 to 2 on March 6, along party lines. East Hampton Democrats have mounted a petition drive, demanding that the resolution authorizing the sale be overturned or put to public vote. An appraisal paid for by the opponents of the deal by a respected local expert put the alley’s value at $184,000; another one, paid for by Mr. Jones and Mr. Siedlick, came in far lower, at $22,500.

    In comments at a recent town board meeting, Mr. Wilkinson said the town attorney had told him that an appraisal of the roughly 3,700-square-foot portion of the alley the new owners want title to was not necessary. This could be true if you don’t look all that closely, but local governments are obligated to get the best prices they can when they sell assets and to avoid the appearance of favoritism. Clarified state law on how local governments divest assets may be in order here. Already, the Town of East Hampton is embroiled in a lawsuit challenging its effort to sell Fort Pond House, again in Montauk, which some have said may be an improperly shuttered and dumped public park.

    The Ronjo dispute is surely political, but that does not mean appropriate procedures were followed. That many of the petition’s 644 signers do not live in Montauk, as the supervisor has protested, is a red herring. All town residents have an interest in how Town Hall is managed and especially when it comes to selling public property.

    The town attorney’s office, which allowed the town board under Mr. Wilkinson to blunder into Mr. Jones’s failed Music to Know concert, appears to have done it again. It is a serious disappointment that its lawyers didn’t speak out about an arrangement that was so primed to blow up in Mr. Wilkinson’s lap. Impulsive in his eagerness to do what he can for what he perceives is beneficial for taxpayers and local businesses, the supervisor is going to do what he is going to do. It is up to the town’s legal team and land-use professionals to make sure he does it in a way that is squeaky clean, not a jumbled-up mess in which numbers are pulled out of the air. No one in Town Hall, it seems, has had the nerve to object when obvious trouble looms. Agree with his policies or not, the supervisor deserves better, and it is not fair for him to take all the blame.

    What is regrettable is that the solution appears simple: The town could throw out the resolution to sell the property to Mr. Jones and Mr. Siedlick and seek an appraisal of its own. Another route, one that has not been discussed as far as we know, would be for the town to grant the motel owners an easement over the disputed property — in which no money changes hands. Though perhaps not the bloodbath the Democrats might be hankering for, it could be a satisfactory alternative.

    Resolving the Ronjo tangle will be the easy part. Providing the structure and openness that will make competent decision-making in Town Hall the rule will be a long-term project.

    The New York State project to install light-up crosswalks in two locations on East Hampton Main Street is a welcome experiment. But experiment it is — and pedestrians will still need to keep their wits about them.

    No one can know until the work is done how drivers, especially those unfamiliar with the village, will react. Nor will the new crosswalks address the bigger problem of walkers darting across the street near the movie theater or making the Starbucks sprint in the morning while traffic is at its highest.

    East Hampton Main Street is more a slow-speed, four-lane highway than a rural road. Drivers who obey the law and stop for crossing pedestrians block the view for other motorists, as well as the people on foot, and near-accidents are the rule. The light-up crosswalks may help, but then again, they may not. The Federal Highway Administration has reported that the rate of injury is actually higher in crosswalks on multi-lane roads.

    One significant risk is that pedestrians will gain false confidence from the new lights and start their passage without being certain they are being seen by oncoming drivers. Caution is key, no matter how fancy the technology.

   By a 3-to-2 vote, the East Hampton Town Board further consolidated power in the town budget office in the name of budget restraint early this month. Supervisor Bill Wilkinson, who led the party-line vote, explained that eliminating the town personnel officer would save $170,000. Len Bernard, the budget chief and Mr. Wilkinson’s appointee, will now be the only town official sharing hiring, firing, and, presumably, disciplinary matters with the supervisor. That’s not a good idea.

    East Hampton Town personnel issues have already been highly politicized. Late last year, for example, the Republican-dominated board failed to take action when a town employee was caught on video using a Highway Department truck to run over and remove roadside signs promoting the election of a Democratic candidate. Just last week, the town’s top building inspector apparently was hustled off on an unplanned vacation after a dressing down over having issued a stop-work order the supervisor didn’t like. Town Hall has been described for some time as having an unpleasant atmosphere in which Mr. Wilkinson frequently huffs about “subordinates” and how they should toe the line — as he sees it.

    One would think, therefore, that town officials would be especially sensitive to placing too much unchecked authority in the hands of two closely aligned individuals, especially when one is a political appointee who could be expected to keep an eye on making the boss happy. Lest East Hampton residents need any reminding, former Supervisor Bill McGintee and Mr. Bernard’s immediate predecessor as budget officer, Ted Hults, were responsible for a town deficit of some $27 million, which is still being paid down. It took months of forensic accounting to figure out what, acting exclusively, they had done, and the town’s bond rating, ability to pay for future projects, and credibility paid the price.

    No matter how much confidence Mr. Wilkinson has in Mr. Bernard, and vice versa, and how much money the two may try to save, a system of checks and balances is warranted. Having a career personnel officer, who reports to the town board as a whole, is one way to keep watch on lapses in judgment and untoward influence.

   There were congratulations to go around at an April 3 East Hampton School Board meeting at which it was announced that the district would be able to put its 2012-13 budget to voters while staying within a state-mandated 2-percent cap on the increase in the tax levy. Numerous cuts, especially to personnel, have resulted in a $62.8 million spending plan that stays within the cap. Voters are expected to look favorably on these results when they go to the poll on May 17.

    In Springs, however, there was less celebration at last week’s meeting. Popular programs, including some sports, staff, and funding for Project MOST, an after-school program, are on the chopping block as that district’s board struggles to keep the tax increase low. Staying within the 2-percent cap means that the board can ask voters to approve no more than a $24.6 million budget for 2012-13.

    For any of the districts, going above the 2-percent ceiling would require winning more than three-fifths of the vote on May 17, an apparently impossible task. Difficult decisions are being made to get to the point where approval is merited. The members of both districts’ boards are to be commended for the difficult work they are doing.

   You know it is going to be a crazy summer when the New York news media start up with their East Hampton stories in April. Scratch that — March, when coverage of the final 2012 sales of the village’s $325 beach-parking permits went big.

    Curbed Hamptons, a Web-only venture, was first out of the gate with news of a record early sellout. The New York Post upped the ante on April 9 by obtaining village records naming the lucky 2,900 who scored the strictly limited nonresident stickers, a few movie stars and famous rock ’n’ rollers among them. Larry Cantwell, the village administrator, told The Post that he had taken hundreds of calls from people about the then no-longer-available permits. “They tell me they’ll pay whatever we want for them,” he said.

    Reading these accounts, it seems the village is leaving chips on the table, so to speak. Next year, East Hampton officials could set aside a few permits and conduct an auction once those remaining are gone, with the proceeds earmarked for public works and preservation.

    If celebrities, congressmen, and federal judges, as Mr. Cantwell told The Post, think the sky’s the limit when it comes to parking at Georgica, Main, Wiborg’s, Egypt, and Two Mile Hollow, why not help separate them from their money if there is good to be done with it?

   By executive order last Thursday, New York Gov. Andrew P. Cuomo set into motion a state health care exchange, something mandated under the Obama administration’s Affordable Care Act. The exchange, and similar ones in a growing number of states, is intended to bring much-needed competition to the insurance market and help millions of uninsured Americans get coverage. Had New York failed to act, the federal government would have stepped in to impose its own version of an exchange, provided, of course, that the law survives the Supreme Court.

    Starting on Jan. 1, 2014, New Yorkers and others will be eligible for federal tax credits and incentives for participation. The exchanges have been compared, at least hypothetically, to online travel sites where consumers can shop for the best deals. The owners of small businesses will be able to customize plans to suit their employees’ needs rather than continue to struggle with a system in which terms and higher and higher premiums are dictated by insurance companies.

    The reason Mr. Cuomo went the route of issuing an executive order is that New York Senate Republicans, who tend to oppose what they call Obamacare, made any hope for action on an exchange in the Legislature unlikely.

    From a political point of view, it may not be a winning strategy for Mr. Cuomo’s opposition to spend its energy putting “Obama” and “care” in front of multiple audiences. While no doubt arousing a portion of the Republican voting base, it may not really help the party when the governor is up for re-election. His opponent will be at risk of a moderate or swing voter having the perception reinforced that the state Democrats and the president are the candidates who care about health and the uninsured.

    At any rate, any reasonable program will have to be better than the usury that defines private and workplace health insurance in the State of New York now. We welcome the exchange. Good going, governor.

    If nothing else, the two forums that have been held recently about East Hampton Town’s scavenger waste plant on Springs-Fireplace Road are putting the matter of the long-term quality of our groundwater back into the public dialogue. This is important for several reasons, not the least of which is that thousands of residents depend on shallow, private wells for potable water, and many of them are highly vulnerable to contamination.

    As to the plant itself, it was closed as a treatment facility last year after the town was cited by the State Department of Environmental Conservation for illegal discharges and other violations. Since then, East Hampton Town Supervisor Bill Wilkinson and Councilwoman Theresa Quigley have been a two-vote bloc pressing to sell the plant for $300,000. A quick sale was thwarted, however, and the dissenting board members have embarked on a fact-finding effort to figure out what to do in a serious, measured way.

    There are two major questions. The first is whether the Town of East Hampton should reopen the multimillion-dollar plant and to what end. It could be run as a waste-holding and transfer station, or it could be fixed up, at a cost so far unknown, and run as a treatment facility. The other big issue is what the town will do in the long term about water quality and septic waste, particularly from home systems.

    Increasingly, scientists and others are realizing that failing and outdated septic systems are not just a threat to drinking-water aquifers but to surface waters — our bays and harbors — as well. Developers and some environmentalists say that small, decentralized sewage plants are the answer, but, while the technology may be promising, there is a high degree of risk.

     Such new systems may be expensive or complicated to maintain, and there is little that local governments can effectively do, given their limited staffs and resources, to make sure they function properly. Speaking earlier this year about wastewater, Bob DeLuca, the president of the Group for the East End, said that municipal treatment facilities tended to “do better” at protecting the environment than private plants. Government accountability, he said, made the difference.

     The organizers of a Town Hall meeting Saturday about the waste plant and related issues, Sylvia Overby and Dominick Stanzione, are on the right track in trying to develop a long-range strategy, based on groundwater testing and the best available science. This is a major issue for the Town of East Hampton and one that is not going to go away by selling the Springs-Fireplace Road facility for a paltry $300,000.