The arrival of Labor Day heralds the launch of campaign season, and with a contested nomination for a seat on the East Hampton Town Board, Democrats are wasting no time. Councilman David Lys, appointed to the town board in January to fill the seat vacated by Peter Van Scoyoc upon his election as supervisor, and David Gruber, a former candidate for supervisor who recently formed the East Hampton Reform Democrats, will debate on Tuesday, nine days ahead of the Sept. 13 primary election that will decide the Democratic Party’s nominee. 

The East Hampton Group for Good Government is hosting the debate at 7 p.m. at the Emergency Services Building in East Hampton. Arthur Malman, its chairman, will moderate the 90-minute discussion. It will begin with each candidate delivering a two-minute opening statement. “The two candidates will talk to one another about several questions that the G.G.G. will share with them and the audience in advance,” Mr. Malman said in an email on Monday. “They are encouraged to politely interrupt each other to clarify or disagree.” Ten to 15 minutes will typically be allocated for each of the questions. The debate will conclude with two-minute closing statements. LTV will record the event for rebroadcast on channel 20 and on its website. 

Water quality, sea level rise, affordable housing, the East Hampton Airport, energy self-sufficiency, a living wage, and recreational facilities are among the topics to be addressed, according to a brochure issued by the G.G.G. yesterday. 

The winner of the Sept. 13 Democratic primary will face Manny Vilar, the Republican Party’s candidate, in the general election on Nov. 6. But Mr. Lys, who changed his party affiliation from Republican to Democratic last year, has moved to ensure a place on the ballot regardless of the primary election’s outcome: Last week, he submitted petitions to the Suffolk County Board of Elections offering himself as the candidate of a newly created independent political party, the East Hampton Unity Party. Provided his petitions are validated, he would face Mr. Gruber and Mr. Vilar in a three-way race should he lose the primary election. 

The East Hampton Independence Party nominated Mr. Gruber, who co-founded the East Hampton Conservators and was a founder of the Hayground School, as its candidate. That line on the ballot will be blank, however, following a ruling in State Supreme Court on Friday that invalidated nominating petitions gathered for him. That decision is covered elsewhere in this issue. 

The Reform Democrats, which Mr. Gruber describes as a caucus within the Democratic Party, sponsored a Springs Community Food Festival featuring food trucks and live music at Ashawagh Hall last Thursday. Rallies for Mr. Lys’s campaign are scheduled for Wednesday at the Montauket in Montauk and Friday, Sept. 7, at the Neighborhood House in East Hampton. 

Former supervisor Larry Cantwell issued an endorsement for Mr. Lys’s candidacy on Aug. 17, citing his roots in the community, his five years on the town’s zoning board of appeals, and his leadership roles in the Amagansett Life-Saving and Coast Guard Station Society and Citizens for Access Rights. “David Lys shares my values, Democratic values, and most importantly the values of the people who live and work in our community,” Mr. Cantwell said. 

Mr. Lys’s appointment to the town board, and an internecine dispute over selection of a new leader of the Democratic Committee to replace its retiring chairwoman, Jeanne Frankl, have caused acrimony and a schism within the party. Mr. Gruber formed the Reform Democrats in June, after the Democratic Committee passed over his candidacy for councilman in favor of Mr. Lys. Its members are also seeking election to the Democratic Committee, a vote that also takes place on primary day.

“My basic message is that this town board majority needs help in getting its job done,” Mr. Gruber said on Monday. “On the important issues that face the town, they are not getting the job done.”

While local races in the Sept. 13 Democratic primary are drawing most of the attention here, several other important contests will be on the ballot, including for governor and state attorney general.

Applications for absentee ballots must be postmarked by next Thursday, or applied for in person by Sept. 12, which is also the last day to postmark an absentee ballot. Someone other than the voter may deliver the ballot in person by Sept. 13.

The deadline for voter registration for the primary has passed.

Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo, who is seeking his third term in office, will face the actor Cynthia Nixon in the primary. Mr. Cuomo, who grew up in Queens, the son of New York’s former Gov. Mario Cuomo, was an assistant district attorney before being named Housing and Urban Development secretary under President Clinton. He was New York State Attorney General before becoming governor. 

His policies are generally progressive. He supports a $15 minimum wage, free college tuition for lower and middle-class students, and strict gun control laws. On local environmental issues he supports funding clam-spawning sanctuaries on Long Island, has increased funding for the Long Island Rail Road, and has championed the building of 11 mixed-income multi-family rental buildings in Speonk.

Ms. Nixon, who grew up in Manhattan and at one time had a house in Montauk, does not have previous experience in politics. She campaigned in favor of same-sex marriage in the state and has supported the issue throughout the country. She has centered her primary campaign on her progressive values. She too has expressed support for additional L.I.R.R. funding, and calls for transitioning to 100 percent clean energy by 2050.

Lieutenant Governor

While Gov. Cuomo faces a challenge from the left by Ms. Nixon, his lieutenant governor, Kathy Hochul, also faces primary opposition. Her challenger is New York City Councilman Jumaane Williams, who, like Ms. Nixon, is running as a progressive alternative.

Ms. Hochul, who was Mr. Cuomo’s running-mate in 2014, is touting the administration’s record. She has blasted Mr. Williams for his opposition to abortion and same-sex marriage, and criticized his personal finances. She has the endorsement of the State Democratic Party, Planned Parenthood, and a number of labor unions.

Mr. Williams, who represents the 45th Council District in Brooklyn, supported Senator Bernie Sanders in 2016 when he ran against Hillary Clinton in the Democratic presidential primary. Like Ms. Nixon, Mr. Williams says the Cuomo administration is not progressive enough on economic issues. He agrees that he personally opposes abortion, but says he does support abortion access. Ms. Nixon has endorsed his candidacy, as has theˇWorking Families Party,ˇOur Revolution, and the New York Progressive Action Network.

Attorney General

Zephyr Teachout, one of four candidates in the Democratic primary for state attorney general, is running a campaign focusing on corruption and resistance to President Trump’s policies. A professor at Fordham Law School and a political activist, her 2014 book “Corruption in America” sold many thousands of copies. She ran for office that same year, for governor, losing to Mr. Cuomo in the Democratic primary.

If elected, Ms. Teachout has promised to sue fossil fuel companies and distribute the damages to victims of climate change, including shoreline East End communities. As attorney general, she said, she would pursue corruption on all levels of government — state, city, town, and village. “The corruption in New York government isn’t just in Albany,” she said. “It’s happening across the board.”

Leecia Eve, a former aide to Hillary Clinton and Mr. Cuomo, is also running for attorney general on the Democratic line. As an aide to Senator Clinton, she focused on homeland security issues, and later worked in state government, advising Mr. Cuomo on economic issues. She now oversees Verizon’s government relations in the tri-state area. To date, corruption has been a main issue of her campaign.

Letitia James, the New York City public advocate and Mr. Cuomo’s favored candidate, is another attorney general hopeful. Born in Brooklyn, she served on the New York City Council before assuming her present job. Her rivals have hounded her regarding her ties to Mr. Cuomo, and for commenting that she would not want to be known as “the sheriff on Wall Street,” which she later clarified. Ms. James, like her rivals, also touts her progressive platform.

Lastly, incumbent Rep. Sean Patrick Maloney is running two campaigns at once: one for his House seat representing residents of the Hudson Valley, and, more relevant to Suffolk County voters, one for the Democratic nomination for attorney general. Before first winning his House seat in 2012, he served as an aide to President Bill Clinton, then later as an advisor to Governors Eliot Spitzer and David A. Patterson. 

He has pledged to fight against the policies of President Trump, crimes on Wall Street, corruption, and climate change.

Suffolk Courts

The Democratic primary race for County Surrogate Court judge includes one candidate, Tara A. Scully, who already has the Republican nomination. Ms. Scully, the daughter of Peter Scully, a top aide to County Executive Steve Bellone, has served as president of the Suffolk Women’s Bar Association. She practices law in the field of wills and estates, the purview of the Surrogate Court. Claiming that the Surrogate Court judgeship has served before as a sinecure, she has pledged to root out corruption as a priority.

Theresa Whelan, also running on the Democratic ballot, served a term as judge in the county family court, and last year was re-elected for another 10 years. She has the support of Richard Schaffer, the Suffolk Democratic chairman. She too is a past president of Suffolk’s Women’s Bar Association.

Several months after they asked East Hampton Town for $30,000 to collect data aimed at protecting fishing grounds and compensating commercial fishermen when they are unable to work, that request has still not been granted, the director of the Long Island Commercial Fishing Association and the liaison chosen by East Hampton Town’s fisheries advisory committee to communicate with Deepwater Wind complained to the town board on Tuesday.

While the liaison, Julie Evans, and Bonnie Brady of the fishing association addressed the board, Deepwater Wind, the Rhode Island company planning to construct the 15-turbine South Fork Wind Farm approximately 30 miles off Montauk, is in the midst of a projected four-month survey at the site and along the transmission cable’s route to shore. 

Commercial fishermen are mostly opposed to the wind farm, fearing damage or destruction of fishing grounds and potential alteration of migration patterns caused by the electromagnetic frequency emitted by its transmission cable. 

A “mariners briefing” dated Tuesday and posted on Deepwater Wind’s website states that “all mariners transiting or fishing in the survey area are requested to give a wide berth to survey vessels as they will be limited in their ability to maneuver and towing gear out to 300 meters behind the vessel.”

Ms. Brady told the board that the purpose of a fisheries representative is to develop a mitigation-monitoring plan with a Deepwater Wind representative. “Unfortunately,” she said, “when it comes to Deepwater, their communication as far as the survey is ‘Get out of the way,’ and outreach is ‘Get out of the way now.’ ” Commercial fishermen who work in the survey area are now restricted, she said. “For how long? Who pays that? If you’ve got a day’s pay and have made that same day’s pay over the course of the last 10 or 20 years, and suddenly you can’t fish because the survey boat is there,” a mitigation plan is not only needed but should have been in place prior to commencement of the survey. 

Ms. Evans was named the fisheries advisory committee’s liaison to Deepwater Wind in March. In July, the company began its survey, which includes drilling core samples 180 feet below the surface at the fertile fishing grounds of Cox’s Ledge. “Unfortunately for the fishermen I speak to, they’re very confused,” she said. “This budget would make it possible for us to let them know what’s going on with certainty.” 

Councilman David Lys, the board’s liaison to the fisheries advisory committee, asked if the advisory committee could accomplish the study, or if the town should issue a request for proposals in order to “get the best document possible to protect our town’s interests” as Deepwater Wind’s proposal for the wind farm is scrutinized by state and federal permitting agencies. The town will participate as interveners in the Article VII review process under the state public service law. “I am an advocate of getting this plan started . . . but I just need to know the objectives and end result,” he said.

A lengthy discussion followed on the sort of details that might be collected, for example, who is fishing in a particular area and when, what and how much they are catching, how are the data to be compiled, and who would benefit from the study. 

“For the people fishing in that area,” Ms. Brady said, “they know they’re going to be compromised.” Vessel trip reports are proprietary, she said, but “anyone that wants to be compensated if they’re going to lose fishing time” has a powerful incentive to volunteer data. 

A part-time employee, Ms. Brady said, could collect such data and determine appropriate compensation based on time lost to Deepwater Wind’s survey and subsequent activity. Such a study, Supervisor Peter Van Scoyoc said, could also inform Deepwater Wind as to when not to disturb an area based on factors such as seasonal migration. “We’ll figure out who the fishermen are, what they fish for, what they catch, where, and when,” he said. “That makes complete sense to me.”

Board members agreed that a request for proposals should be issued to identify a candidate versed in statistical data collection and scientific research, and asked Ms. Brady and Ms. Evans to help with its development.

The East Hampton Town Board will continue hearing a proposal tonight to abandon the ownership of an unopened road between Cranberry Hole Road and Abram’s Landing Road in Amagansett while accepting a permanent scenic, conservation, and trail easement over the road, which is part of the Paumanok Path, a hiking trail that runs from Rocky Point to Montauk Point State Park. The board will meet at 6:30 at Town Hall. 

When the board first heard the plan, on Aug. 2, David Buda, a resident of Springs, voiced strong objection to it. The board, he charged, was “actually considering giving away a valuable asset,” for no compensation, to “a very well-heeled landowner” of an adjacent parcel. 

That owner is apparently the billionaire investor Michael Novogratz, a former hedge fund manager and partner at Goldman Sachs, who purchased, through a limited liability corporation, the five-acre parcel for $3 million earlier this year. His motivation, Mr. Buda asserted, is to maximize lot area, thereby altering required building setbacks and lot coverage allowance in his favor. “To do so at no cost,” Mr. Buda told the town board, “is incredible.” 

In an Aug. 3 email to the board, he wrote that the property, at 58 Cross Highway East, was purchased with the intent to relocate the residence of the late architect Francis Fleetwood from 85 Oceanview Lane, also in Amagansett. “That property was purchased in July 2016 from the Estate of Mr. Fleetwood by another entity under common control: Novofam, L.L.C.,” he wrote

Should the board approve a resolution to exchange ownership for the easement, it would “severely limit the public’s right to use this public highway,” Mr. Buda said, with restrictions on vehicles that could traverse the road and the hours in which the public could access it. 

It wasn’t ironclad proof, he agreed, but Mr. Buda said that a 1914 “Town Highway Book” indicated that the road was opened that year. He cited testimony from Rick Whalen to the planning board in May. In his Aug. 3 email, he said that Mr. Whalen, vice president for trail planning of the East Hampton Trails Preservation Society and a former assistant town attorney, “unequivocally stated” that the section of Cross Highway in question “is a town highway,” further citing both the road’s physical characteristics and photographic evidence. “There is no good reason to consider abandoning a town highway that’s been in existence since 1914,” Mr. Buda said, “even if only used now primarily for trail walkers.”

Supervisor Peter Van Scoyoc disagreed, stating that the 1914 document “hardly demonstrates” its present status. Councilwoman Sylvia Overby referred to certification from a title company, provided by the property owner, confirming ownership of the land underlying the road. That is not title certification, Mr. Buda countered. “What it says is, he couldn’t find any record of there being a town highway. . . . There was no deed because in 1914 there was no requirement that there be a deed of dedication to the town. . . . I’ve looked at the deed to the owner. The deed does not in any way include or guarantee ownership of the road.” In fact, the deed description excludes the road, he said. 

Steve Latham, an attorney representing the property owner, said that the road had never been opened, that there was no evidence of ownership conveyance to the town, and that the trails preservation society was happy with the proposal. “I think that we’ve submitted more than ample proof that the procedures we’re using are proper,” he told the board at the Aug. 2 meeting. 

But Councilman Jeff Bragman was adamant that the hearing be kept open. “I’d just like to understand the facts before I make a decision on this,” he said. “Call me curious, I just want to know what this is.”

The Democratic Party primary election next Thursday will determine not only the party’s nominee for the fifth seat on the East Hampton Town Board, but also the membership of the town’s Democratic Committee, which, atypically, is hotly contested this year. In every one of the town’s election districts, each of which has two seats on the committee, there are primary challenges.

A fight to determine the successor to Jeanne Frankl, the committee’s chairwoman until her retirement earlier this year, opened a chasm between establishment party officials and a group that has come together under the name “East Hampton Reform Democrats,” the latter group charging that Ms. Frankl had underhandedly maneuvered to ensure the outcome of her successor’s selection. That, the group charges, is emblematic of a broader culture of “bossism and cronyism.” 

David Gruber, who sought but did not win the Democratic Committee’s endorsement as its candidate for the town board, is the Reform Democrats’ candidate. He will face Councilman David Lys, who was appointed to the board in January, in the primary election. 

The Democratic Committee as currently constituted has seized on an Aug. 24 State Supreme Court ruling that nominating petitions for Mr. Gruber’s appearance on the Independence Party ballot were invalid due to fraudulent signatures, including that of a deceased person, to discredit his candidacy. 

“This level of deceit is astounding and unprecedented in our town and David Gruber has to take responsibility for it,” Cate Rogers, who was elected to succeed Ms. Frankl, said in a statement issued last weekend. “His campaign’s use of the ‘moral compass’ symbolism for his hostile takeover attempt of the East Hampton Democratic Party is clearly a farce.” 

In their own messaging on social media and in mailings, the Reform Demo­crats hit back, telling voters that they “are committed to breaking the monopoly of a small group of Democratic Party insiders on party nominations” with open screening of prospective candidates and party conventions. “That way, elected officials will no longer be beholden to party insiders who now exercise unhealthy influence over appointments and decisions by boards, such as planning and zoning, that are supposed to be fair and independent, serving the public.

Days before Thursday's Democratic primary to determine the party's candidate for a seat on the East Hampton Town Board, the East Hampton Reform Democrats and their town board candidate, David Gruber, have falsely accused David Lys, the East Hampton Democratic Committee's nominee, of lying about his write-in vote for president in the 2016 election. Mr. Lys stands by his statement, and information from the Suffolk County Board of Elections backs him up.

In an editor's note on a letter in the Aug. 30 issue of The Star, Mr. Lys said he had cast a write-in vote for his father, Hakim Lys, in 2016, and had not voted for Donald Trump. An editorial in last week's paper repeated that statement, calling Reform Democrats' assertions to the contrary false.

As evidence of their claim, the Reform Democrats have disseminated a vote tally from the Suffolk County Board of Elections in emails and on social media. Below the Republican, Democratic, and third-party candidates' names and the number of votes each received are 12 write-in candidates and their vote tallies. Hakim Lys is not among them.

An email sent by the Reform Democrats on Monday morning bore the headline "David Lys Misleads East Hampton Star About His Presidential Vote in 2016," and went on to state that "The official Suffolk County Board of Elections tally for the 2016 Presidential Election shows that NO ONE voted for Hakim Lys, David Lys's father, in all Suffolk County." A copy of the final results for the Nov. 8, 2016 general election is included. 

However, the evidence they offer is a "half-truth," Mr. Lys said on Tuesday. Mr. Lys stands by his statement and is "disappointed by their actions," he said. 

In two separate calls to the board of elections on Monday, officials explained that the list presented by the Reform Democrats was not proof that no one wrote in Hakim Lys's name. Those listed on the final-results document had probably notified the board of elections of their candidacy, one said. "If you notify us, you get your name printed," said the official, who did not want to be named. As an example, she said that Mickey Mouse, a perennial write-in candidate, is not listed in the 2016 results.  

Votes for such candidates "would be considered a scattering," said another official, who also asked not to be named. That official agreed to speak to the commissioner and endeavor to provide the names of those grouped under the "scattering" umbrella.

Mr. Gruber said on Monday that an official at the board of elections first read the names of write-in candidates receiving votes to him over the telephone. "I said, 'Okay, thank you, that gives me the information I need,' because I did not hear Hakim in the list. Then I said, 'Please, I need you to send me a document that says this, because nobody is going to take my word for it.' They did."

The board of elections' final-results list, which the Reform Democrats offered as proof that Ms. Lys was lying, lists 4,087 scattering votes countywide.

In an email on Tuesday morning, Cate Rogers, chairwoman of the East Hampton Democratic Committee, wrote that she, too, had called the board of elections and was informed that "the only names that you see on that report as write-ins are official write-in candidates. Official means that the board of elections received a letter from the state stating that the candidate is a recognized candidate for write-in. All other names: Mickey Mouse, Barack Obama, David Lys' dad, Hakim Lys, and any other random name are reported in the 'Scatterings' column. In Suffolk County there were thousands of 'Scatterings' as you can see," she said. A 2016 election report for East Hampton Town lists 85 votes under the "Scattering" column. 

"This attempt to say that David Lys is a liar is so blatant and egregious and if the truth still matters in our world then this should be exposed," Ms. Rogers said.

Mr. Lys also referred to the 85 scatterings in East Hampton on Tuesday. "My write-in would be part of that scattering on there," he said.

The Reform Democrats, he said, are offering as evidence "a form that shows individuals who wanted to put their write-in names on the ballot. I did not do that for my father. It was a decision I did at the ballot booth. I would be classified in there as a scattering. That was not shown" on the Reform Democrats' messaging, he said. "They are trying to call me a liar. I am not."

$3 Million for Dredging

Representative Lee Zeldin recently announced that he secured $3 million in federal funding to dredge 2.7 miles of the Long Island Intracoastal Waterway. Over 57,000 cubic yards will be dredged to re-establish its 6-foot depth. The dredging follows emergency dredging of Moriches Inlet, which began on Aug. 15 at a cost of $12.25 million. 

Mr. Zeldin also announced that he has been endorsed for re-election by 17 labor unions,  including police, construction workers, firefighters, carpenters, transport workers, plumbers, and steamfitters. Pat Dolan, president of Steamfitters Local 638, said, “We need a congressman . . . representing us at home, a congressman who will continue the fight for union members.”

Call for Closing Sand Land

Assemblyman Fred W. Thiele Jr. has called for closing the Sand Land facility in Noyac, which  has leached iron, manganese, thallium, sodium, nitrate, ammonia, and radioactivity into the groundwater, according to a recent study. The Town of Southampton had already determined that the polluter’s activities are illegal. Referring to the State Department of Environmental Conservation, Mr. Thiele said, “The D.E.C. must get its head out of the sand. No more permits. Shut it down.”

Mr. Thiele also announced that he had received a 100 percent score for votes in the 2018 legislative season from EPL/Environmental Advocates, a statewide organization. The legislation included bills on climate change, renewable energy, and clean air and water, among others. “Our key industries on eastern Long Island cannot thrive without a healthy environment,” he said.

An interfaith forum on morality will proceed as planned Monday night, but one of its invited guests, Representative Lee Zeldin, will not be there. 

The forum, at 7 p.m. in Fellowship Hall at the Hamptons Methodist Church in Southampton, was to feature Mr. Zeldin and Perry Gershon, his opponent in the Nov. 6 election to represent New York’s First Congressional District. Participating clergy, all representing houses of worship on the South Fork, extended invitations to the congressman and his challenger last month. 

The forum, according to the July 19 invitation from Rabbi Jan Urbach of the Conservative Synagogue of the Hamptons in Bridgehampton, who initiated the event, is “to enable you to share with voters your views on significant moral issues of the day and the moral dimensions of government policy.” Five dates in August were offered. 

“Recognizing the incivility that characterizes much public discourse today — of concern to all of us as clergy and we trust to you as well — we will use our authority as clergy to ensure respectful and open discourse, and an opportunity for each of you to be heard,” the invitation said. 

Five days later, another email was sent to Mr. Zeldin, whose campaign had not responded. “Our congregants and parishioners have expressed great enthusiasm at the opportunity to hear from both you and Mr. Gershon about your values and moral convictions, as well as the way each of you approaches the moral/ethical dimensions of the policies you support and oppose,” it read. “They are anxious for genuine conversation, hungry to hear elected officials and candidates focus on morality, and looking to us as religious leaders to assist in elevating public discourse. We know that you have often lamented the lack of civility at in-person forums, so we trust that you will welcome this opportunity to participate in a high-level discussion moderated by a diverse group of interfaith clergy, representing a wide variety of faith traditions.” 

On July 25, Chris Boyle, of Mr. Zeldin’s campaign, responded, saying that he was working to coordinate debates and forums. He asked that Rabbi Urbach fill out a request form, for which a link was provided, “and we will get back to you as soon as we can.” 

Five days later, Rabbi Urbach sent another email to Mr. Boyle stating that she had still not received a reply. “We have done everything possible to take Mr. Zeldin’s schedule into account, but if we don’t get proposed dates from you, we will need to schedule it regardless,” she wrote. Finally, the clergy set a date for the forum. 

Mr. Gershon had responded immediately and offered several possible dates, according to a release issued by the clergy. Mr. Zeldin, the release said, “passed up the opportunity to suggest dates and once a date was set indicated he would not attend.” The sponsoring clergy expressed disappointment at the congressman’s unwillingness to engage, and continued to welcome and hope that he would reconsider.

Katie Vincentz, Mr. Zeldin’s communications director, contacted Rabbi Urbach. “The congressman looks forward to impartial fact-based debates prior to the election,” she wrote. “Due to your frequent political attacks against the congressman, via public statements, on social media, at protests, in front of his office, in meetings directly with the congressman, and elsewhere, it is extremely unlikely that you would be impartial.”

Rabbi Urbach has been critical of Mr. Zeldin. In a social media post from July 2017, for example, she wrote, in part, that the congressman appeared at the South Fork Natural History Museum’s annual gala in Bridgehampton “to glad-hand. But he hasn’t shown up to oppose climate change deniers, protect the [Environmental Protection Agency], and actually preserve our environment.” 

The forum, Rabbi Urbach said in an email on Tuesday, “is sponsored by a large and diverse coalition of mainstream congregations, with questions formulated and posed by their clergy; it’s not about the personal views of any one person. The format is specifically designed to provide a balanced, nonpartisan opportunity for the candidates to share their moral commitments with voters. Our goal is to bring issues of morality, character, and ethics into the public conversation, and everyone involved genuinely wants to hear both candidates’ approaches.” 

To enable the candidates to offer their most thoughtful responses, and in the hope that Mr. Zeldin would be reassured and change his mind, the candidates will be given the questions in advance, the rabbi said.

Correction: The forum will take place on Monday, Aug. 27, not Friday, Aug. 24, as originally reported. 

East Hampton Town Councilman David Lys, who was appointed to the town board in January and must stand for election in November, submitted petitions to the Suffolk County Board of Elections on Monday offering himself as the candidate of a newly created independent political party, the East Hampton Unity Party. 

Mr. Lys, who changed his party registration from Republican to Democratic last year, faces a Democratic Party primary challenge from David Gruber, who recently formed his own party called the East Hampton Reform Democrats. Appearing on the newly formed Unity Party line, Mr. Lys said, is a means to “give myself ballot access in November” should he lose in the Sept. 13 Democratic primary. Though he said he is “fully committed and determined to win” that contest, he is also “ fully committed to maintaining my town council seat by all means possible.”

With his name on a Unity Party line, he would still face Mr. Gruber, along with Manny Vilar, the Republican Party’s nominee for the seat, in the event he loses in the primary election — provided the Suffolk County Board of Elections validates his petitions, that is.  

Nick LaLota, commissioner of the Board of Elections, said yesterday that Mr. Lys had filed about 420 signatures, 100 more than required to put himself and the Unity Party on the ballot. 

Amos Goodman, chairman of the East Hampton Town Republican Committee, which has mounted a court challenge to the Independence Party’s petitions for Mr. Gruber, said yesterday that he has not challenged Mr. Lys’s petitions but “it is something I am looking at. If I get a copy of it, which I think is going to be today, there has to be 350 green signatures,” meaning signatories cannot have signed any other nominating petition. Given how many petitions have already been circulated for the various political parties, “I personally think it will be tough.” 

“From my perspective, I think a potential three-way race means Gruber wins, because I think Lys and Manny in that instance would split the moderate vote to David [Gruber]’s benefit,” Mr. Goodman said. “That’s why we’re fighting so hard to challenge Gruber’s Independence Party petitions. We don’t want a three-way race. We’re not looking to suppress votes or cause problems. I don’t want to be the ‘petition hall monitor.’ We just want to take a look. We’ve had, in past years, our own petitions scrutinized. It’s appropriate, in the proper way, not in the court of public opinion, or in trying to smear. I’ve never done that.”

The move also allows Mr. Lys, who cannot vote for himself in November because of his recent change in party affiliation, “to interact with a large voter bloc. They’re all extremely excited by what I was doing” on the town board. “I was very, very bolstered by the support I received from hundreds of people.”

“The way I looked at it,” Mr. Lys said, I wanted to make sure that I have done everything possible” to prevail in the Nov. 6 election.

Over the objections of East Hampton Town’s disabilities advisory board, a site plan for a new commercial building in Montauk that designates a separate, back-door entrance for disabled people was endorsed by the town planning board in a straw poll earlier this month. The approval came despite a statement from the chairman of the disabilities board, Glenn Hall, that the proposed back-door ramp would violate the federal Americans With Disabilities Act. 

The issue was back on the planning board’s agenda at its meeting last night. According to Job Potter, the board’s chairman, the straw poll vote was likely to be revisited due to a finding by David Browne, the town’s chief fire marshal, that the ramp would not comply with New York State’s building code.  

Whether or not the site plan goes forward, Mr. Hall said that his board, which has been scheduling meetings with town board members and other officials, will begin taking steps to “fix the system,” so that the concerns of handicapped people are given more consideration in the government’s decision-making processes.

An early site plan for the two-story building at 87 South Euclid Avenue included a handicapped-accessible switch-back ramp leading from the parking area, which is at the front of the building, to the main door. That plan was approved by the planning board on Jan. 25, 2017. 

Upon excavation of the property, Kathleen Semergieff, one of the building’s owners, said it had become apparent that that placement of the ramp was not feasible due to the incline of the parking area. “The lot was way, way, way, too steep,” she told the planning board on July 25, explaining that a change was necessary because if the plan were left as initially approved “no one in a wheelchair would be able to get out without rolling backward into the street.” 

Having the ramp lead to the back of the building, Ms. Semergieff said, would make the incline less precipitous. 

Before granting the modification, the planning board asked the disabilities advisory board for its opinion. Mr. Hall wrote back on Aug. 6 that making disabled people enter the business through the rear door would amount to “back of the bus” and “separate but equal” treatment, which, he said, was clearly in violation of the law. Nevertheless, in a 5- to-2 voice vote, the board approved the modification.

Mr. Hall was so outraged by the results of the July 25 straw poll that he began an effort to stop construction from moving forward. 

“This is a civil rights issue,” he said. A back-door ramp, he said, violates the Americans With Disabilities Act, which states that a handicapped-accessible route coincide with or be located in the same area as the “general circulation path.” Furthermore, pointing out that the proposed building has three doors, he said the back-door ramp would be breaching a provision that 60 percent of a facility’s public entrances be handicapped-accessible.

Mr. Hall said he had hastily organized a meeting of the disabilities advisory board on Friday to discuss the matter. In attendance were several town officials, including Kathee Burke-Gonzalez, a board member and the group’s liaison; Tom Ruhle, the disabilities coordinator, Tom Talmage, an engineer, Marguerite Wolffsohn, planning director, and Michael Sendlenski, the town attorney. Mr. Hall said that Mr. Sendlenski had agreed at the meeting that the ramp in question would be illegal.

That assessment was contrary to the advice provided to planning board members by their own lawyer, John Jilnicki, who indicated that the issue fell into what Mr. Potter described as a “gray area” of legality. 

Explaining his reasoning, Mr. Jilnicki said this week that he viewed the back-entrance access for people with disabilities as comparable to the front entrance because both would open up into the same large commercial space, albeit at opposite ends. Convenience-wise, he added, a straight ramp to the back entrance would ultimately allow for a shorter traveling distance than a switch-back ramp to the front.

The fire marshal’s office regularly provides guidance on planning board matters, and Mr. Browne, who had earlier alerted the board to accessibility issues with the site plan, informed the members that the ramp to the back door would likewise violate a mandate of the state’s building code that “at least 60 percent” of all public entrances be accessible. 

At Mr. Hall’s urging, Richard Whalen, an attorney for the East End Disabilities Group, an advocacy organization, had also pointed to the state code’s 60 percent rule in an Aug. 16 letter to the board.

“We have to change the way the planning board gets their instructions,” said Mr. Hall, who believes that if the members had been better versed in the A.D.A.’s requirements, the site plan modification would have never been approved. 

“The good news is, this is raising people’s consciousness,” he said. To make town officials even more aware, he said, he will recommend to the town board that planning board members be required to attend classes on the A.D.A.