A Suffolk County effort mandated by the state is underway with the goal of reducing property taxes or eliminating tax increases by getting municipalities in the county to coordinate or eliminate duplicated services and to make purchases together for better prices.

To help develop a plan to be submitted to the County Legislature, County Executive Steve Bellone has set up a series of community meetings to solicit ideas and public opinion.

A meeting will be held at East Hampton Town Hall at 11 a.m. on Monday. It will be followed by a meeting that night at 6 at Southampton Town Hall, and others in Babylon and Huntington on Tuesday and July 18.

The effort is required under a tax savings initiative included by Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo in the recently approved state budget. It requires each county across the state to empanel a committee comprising town supervisors and village mayors that will identify, propose, and implement programs to “save taxpayers money through shared, coordinated, and more efficient services between local governments within the county.”

The state has required savings plans to be submitted to county legislatures by Aug. 1, with public hearings and a vote on the plans by mid-September.

Counties that create successful plans may be eligible for one-time state grants matching the net amount of savings achieved by implementing their plans.

According to a state press release, property taxes are the largest tax burden for New York taxpayers. The typical taxpayer, it says, pays 2.5 times more in property taxes than in income taxes.

A state website contains information about the program.

Zach Cohen, who is seeking to run for a seat on the East Hampton Town Board on the Democratic Party ticket, filed a petition with the Suffolk County Board of Elections on Tuesday to participate in a primary election that would be held on Sept. 12. Mr. Cohen’s petition has 835 signatures; 353 were required.

The East Hampton Town Democratic Committee formally nominated its candidates for townwide offices on May 17, passing over Mr. Cohen in favor of Kathee Burke-Gonzalez, a Democrat on the town board who is seeking re-election, and Jeffrey Bragman, an attorney and newcomer to politics. Barring a successful legal challenge to Mr. Cohen’s petition, a primary among the three candidates, and any others who filed a petition for candidacy, is likely.

Mr. Cohen, of Springs, ran a close race for town supervisor in 2011, losing to Bill Wilkinson, the incumbent, by just 15 votes.

“Collecting signatures over the past month required building a new organization of committed volunteers,” Mr. Cohen said in a statement, “but our supporters have been amazing. My wife, Pamela, and I are in awe of the people who put in hundreds of hours to achieve this first step toward victory in September. The feedback from our volunteers was also invaluable and has helped us to further understand the concerns of our Democratic Party electorate. I am encouraged that support increased as we went forward, and I apologize to those who expressed a desire to sign but whom we could not contact in time.”

Jeanne Frankl, the chairwoman of the East Hampton Democrats, said yesterday that the party is prepared for a primary, in which it will support Ms. Burke-Gonzalez and Mr. Bragman. “We’re disappointed that Zach did not accept the decision of our screening panel that felt that Jeff Bragman was a better candidate for this time,” she said, “particularly since we feel we’ve done a lot with Zach over the years. But we’re Democrats, and we believe in participation and elections.

Tiina Laakkonen and Jonathan Rosen face an uncertain future in their effort to expand Tiina the Store, their Amagansett Main Street retail shop, after the site plan, reviewed by the East Hampton Town Planning Board on June 14, seemed to raise more questions than it answered.

The meeting was particularly lively, with an unusual discussion of the relationship between the planning board and the town’s architectural review board, which had already ruled on the matter. In addition, the restaurant at the Montauk Manor was allowed to expand in a decision made somewhat on the fly. There had been considerable review of that proposal and objections heard at the board’s recent meetings.

The owners of the retail building at 216 Main Street that houses Tiina the Store want to increase its size by 1,605 square feet after taking down 765 square feet of it, and also to demolish a separate 937-square-foot building on the lot.

The obstacles are several, according to Eric Schantz, a senior planner for the town. First, he told the board, the property is in a historic district zoned for residential and limited business use. Limited business does not include retail, but Christopher Kelley, an attorney representing the owners, told the board the retail use went back to before the town code was adopted, making it legally grandfathered. However, it was pointed out that in 2007 the use changed from retail to office, suggesting that the owner at the time, Marie Hayden, may have abandoned the right for retail use. The board asked the applicants to seek clarification from the town’s head building inspector.

The Amagansett Historic District comprises 32 sites, along with a cemetery. Robert Strada of Strada Baxter Design, a firm working with the owners, explained the project to the board. He first quoted a 1989 document written by Robert Hefner of East Hampton, a historic preservationist, who said what was known as the Charles Canfield house was a “non-contributing factor in the historic district.”

Mr. Strada said asphalt-asbestos shingles on the building would be replaced by cedar shingles and that existing windows added in the past that clash with the building’s Greek Revival style would be replaced to be more appropriate.

“It is very massive,” Patti Leber, a board member, said of the proposed new look. Kathleen Cunningham said, “My main concern is that if we don’t support L.B.O. requirements, we are creating a really big structure.” She asked what would happen when it eventually changed hands. “It’s not what we need.”

The biggest question, however, was whether the removal of the back building was in keeping with the historical nature of the neighborhood, where barns or sheds, or even stores, would often be at the rear. Board members agreed there is distance between the back and front buildings. Mr. Schantz had recommended that they bring in an outside historian to assess the proposal. Mr. Kelley suggested Mr. Hefner, but Job Potter, the planning board chairman, said Mr. Hefner was not interested in filling that role.

An unusual aspect of the planning board’s review is that the applicants have already obtained approval for the design from the East Hampton Town Architectural Review Board. Ian Calder-Piedmonte, a planning board member, was critical of the process, with other board members agreeing. Diana Weir was concerned that they might not be able to contradict the A.R.B., but the board’s attorney, John Jilnicki, said that if the planning board approved a site plan that deviated from what the A.R.B. had signed off on, the applicants could go back to the architectural panel.

The board agreed to explore the idea of bringing in an expert consultant.

In agreeing to allow the restaurant at Montauk Manor, La Fine, to expand, the board noted that it was contingent upon approval of the septic system already in place by the Suffolk County Department of Health Services.

Several residents of the Manor had spoken out against the proposal at a public hearing last month. Marc H. Schneider of Schneider Buchel, representing the Manor, said in response at the time that opponents of the expansion, from 35 seats to 83, were “disgruntled.” He also had told the board that the septic treatment system would be able to handle the additional flow.

The board had indicated its willingness to approve the site plan from La Fine, which will place additional tables in the lobby of the Carl Fisher-era building, as well as on a patio that is replacing a bocce court on the eastern side of the building.

As for the septic situation, the board had asked Mr. Schantz to get a copy of the permit for the system. This week, Mr. Schantz told the board the Manor had a septic permit from the state, which is different from the county’s, and that it was good through 2025. However, on Monday, Mr. Schantz said in an interview that final county approval of the expanded restaurant’s flow into the septic system had yet to be obtained.

The language approving the restaurant’s site plan states that food and beverage service is “limited to the interior areas of the restaurant as well as to the areas designated for seating on the patio, and the approved lobby areas, as illustrated in the approved seating chart with the exception of during special events specifically allowed by a mass gathering permit.” Such permits would cover events in tents, and a La Fine brochure promises to hold such events to between 400 and 600 patrons.

While the board worked on the language, Mr. Schneider, who was on hand, tried to interject another location in the Manor where food and beverages could be consumed: around the indoor and outdoor swimming pools. “This should have come up before now,” Nancy Keeshan, a board member said, shooting his suggestion down. The rest of the board agreed and nixed adding the pools as approved areas for customers of La Fine.

East Hampton Town’s proposal to institute new standards for wastewater treatment — requiring the installation of new technology systems that remove much of the nitrogen that seeps into and pollutes ground and surface waters — and a proposed rebate program that would help residents pay to switch out old systems got widespread approval at a public hearing before the town board last week.

Under the proposed law, installation of one of the new nitrogen-reducing systems would be required for new construction, when undertaking a substantial expansion, when an existing system fails and needs replacing, and when commercial sites require new site plan review.

After a pilot program to test various septic waste systems that use the new technology, the Suffolk Health Department has approved five different systems for use; approval of others will be forthcoming after more testing is completed.

A county website, ReclaimOurWater.info, has details about the newly approved systems, and more. Training in their installation and maintenance is being offered to local contractors.

Under East Hampton’s proposed rebate program, property owners in designated water quality improvement districts, and those who meet certain income criteria, would be eligible for rebates that could cover the entire cost of installing a new system, up to $16,000, while others could receive 75 percent of the cost.

The new low-nitrogen systems cost an estimated $14,500 to $17,500, compared to the approximately $8,000 cost of a conventional system.

A county rebate and loan program with the same goals of having property owners replace wastewater systems with new technology will be launched on July 1, providing grants of up to $11,000 and low-cost loans of up to $10,000. The town is coordinating its efforts with the county, and residents could apply to both programs to get the maximum benefit of up to the full cost of a new system.

Speakers at the hearing gave the town board a thumbs-up for shifting toward alternatives to the outdated septic systems now in use.

“I want to applaud the town for showing great leadership,” said Kevin McAllister of Defend H2O. Addressing threats to water quality from septic waste “will take a long time,” he said, “but this is an excellent start.”

“If we do nothing, we are continuing to threaten the human, environmental, and economic health of the town,” Laura Tooman, the executive director of Concerned Citizens of Montauk, wrote in a statement presented by Bill Akin of Montauk.

While there will be a learning process, “this is not rocket science; it really isn’t,” said Kevin McDonald of the Nature Conservancy. Low-nitrogen systems have been successfully installed in numerous nearby states, he said. Judging by recent fish kills and algal blooms, “it’s really, really clear that we have a problem,” he said.

Once the new law and rebate program is in place, said Jeffrey Freireich, the executive director of the East Hampton Business Alliance, education will be key. The public should be fully informed, he said, about the requirements and about the new systems — their installation cost, maintenance costs, and limitations.

In a press release earlier this month, the East Hampton Environmental Coalition, comprising 26 organizations, said that “the Town of East Hampton has acknowledged the scientifically proven link between our declining ground and surface water quality and our antiquated, failing cesspools and septic systems. Harmful algal blooms, closed shellfishing areas and beaches, and polluted drinking water can no longer remain the norm.”

Following voters’ approval last fall of an amendment allowing up to 20 percent of the community preservation fund to be spent on clean water initiatives, the coalition said, the town has “delivered and is now on the cusp of providing a substantial public investment in critical water quality infrastructure.”

A changeover to more effective waste treatment “will have a major impact,” on the health of bays, ponds, and groundwater, said Sara Davison, the executive director of Friends of Georgica Pond. Her organization will encourage all pond-front landowners to participate, she said.

Several speakers at last week’s hearing had suggestions and questions about aspects of the laws, while supporting them in general.

Peter Mendelman spoke on behalf of his family, which owns several marinas, their business, Seacoast Enterprises, and a trade group, the Association of Marine Industries. To ensure the money available for rebates do the most good, he said, rebates should be focused on properties that potentially do the most harm to water quality, such as houses or businesses that are occupied or frequented year round, versus those that are used only seasonally.

David Buda, a Springs resident, urged a close look at the maps of targeted areas, questioning why some locales near the shore were omitted.

Both Mr. Freireich and Britton Bistrian, an Amagansett planning consultant who took the training being offered and became a certified installer of the new low-nitrogen waste systems, urged the board to discuss considerations for those midway through the construction approval process, to enable them to proceed under the existing codes.

Mr. Cantwell said at the hearing that the public participation and comments were welcome and appreciated by the board, “as we move forward on this really exciting and cutting-edge program.”

Board members agreed this week to have the town’s Natural Resources Department and other staff look into the issues raised, and to discuss the draft laws again at a work session in July.

The expansion of the restaurant at the Montauk Manor, La Fine, was opposed by some of the condominium’s residents during an East Hampton Planning Board hearing on May 17. The application was revisited June 7 and was expected to be acted upon by the board at its meeting last night.

 La Fine, an Italian restaurant, seeks approval to increase the number of seats from 35 to 83, and to allow them in the Manor’s lobby and on a patio that overlooks Fort Pond Bay.

A brochure in the Planning Department file reads: “La Fine wants to recreate Carl Fisher’s vision from the 1920s. His grand centerpiece will once again become a reality as the Manor’s new event space will be the buzz of the East End once again.” It goes on to say, “Our most popular option is erecting a tent on the Montauk Manor’s great lawn overlooking Gardiner’s Bay with a breathtaking background for your special celebration.” The tent, according to the brochure, “can hold up to 400 guests for sit-down dinner and up to 600 guests for receptions.” The planning board does not consider tents when it considers site plan approval because they are considered impermanent.

In any event, the use of the lawn for what the town code calls mass gatherings would be a matter for the town board, John Jilnicki, the planning board’s attorney, said. Nevertheless, Ian Calder Piedmonte said it was important to define where food and beverages could be consumed, especially outdoors, and where they would be restricted.

 Edna Steck, a longtime Montauker who lives at the Manor, said on May 17 that the expansion “needs to be revised and scaled down.” Another resident, Robert Gunyan, said the sewage treatment plan was “fragile.” Sewage treatment also was a major concern of Laura Tooman, the head of Concerned Citizens of Montauk, in a letter to the board. “The applicant should produce evidence that the current system is functioning properly,” she wrote, to handle the anticipated increase in flow.

Sewage treatment was clearly a planning board concern, although septic systems are overseen by the Suffolk County Health Department. Randy Parsons, a planning board member, said, “I would like to open the lid on the sewage treatment problem.”

While the imagery may not have been agreeable, the thought behind it was. Job Potter, the chairman, said he would like to see the Planning Department review the system, and the board agreed that the applicant should obtain calculations from a certified engineer showing that the Manor’s sewage treatment plant could handle the potential increase in flow.

The residents who spoke also said public notice of the hearing had been inadequate. Mr. Jilnicki said the Manor had properly met state law requiring public notice and that any question of inadequacy was between the condominium board and the residents.

Marc H. Schneider of Schneider Buchel, representing the Manor, said the residents who spoke against the proposal at the public hearing were “disgruntled,” and echoed that on June 7. He also said none of those who opposed the expansion would be directly affected by it, that none lived adjacent to the proposed restaurant areas. He also said the Manor needed “a functional, viable restaurant.”

Three water quality improvement projects in Springs are set to become the first to be funded by the community preservation fund, after voters last fall approved using up to 20 percent of the fund to save ground and surface water from pollution. Until now, the fund had been earmarked solely for land preservation.

A pilot program would use seaweed, or macroalgae, to trap nitrogen in Accabonac Harbor where Pussy’s Pond flows in. Very high concentrations of that nitrogen, which comes from septic waste, were found entering the harbor by surface water and submarine groundwater discharge during a recent Accabonac Harbor survey. The seaweed would be grown on frames placed in the water and would take up nitrogen; it would be periodically harvested and its growth rate and nutrient content analyzed.

The seaweed project was among a number rated by East Hampton’s water quality technical advisory committee, established to vet and make recommendations to the town board about C.P.F. water quality projects. It received a perfect score.

Also recommended during a presentation this week for the town board by Christopher Clapp, the committee chairman, was the installation of underground filtration systems, called permeable reactive barriers, at points around Hog Creek to remove nitrogen from groundwater before it flows into the creek, and replacing storm drains on Parsons Place near Ashawagh Hall and Accabonac Harbor, where existing drains that are clogged or in need of repair allow rain runoff to flow directly into the harbor.

All three projects are ready to be put out to bid, and would be the subject of public hearings once cost estimates come in.

Engineering plans and design specifications are needed to ready a number of other conceptual projects that would either treat wastewater, address pollution from stormwater or agricultural sources, restore aquatic habitats, or treat and monitor groundwater.

A request for proposals from technical consultants will be sent out so that those projects can be moved forward.

“It is worth noting,” Councilman Peter Van Scoyoc said at the board meeting on Tuesday, that a pilot project installed last year at Pussy’s Pond, where bioswales (trenches to catch, hold, and filter pollutants from water) and plantings were put in had “significantly reduced the nitrogen” in the pond.

Up to $6 million could be spent this year from the preservation fund on water quality projects, according to the present preservation fund balance, Scott Wilson, the town’s director of land acquisition, said yesterday.

The East Hampton Town Trustees’ harbor management committee met yesterday with officials of Deepwater Wind, the Rhode Island company that seeks to construct the proposed South Fork Wind Farm approximately 30 miles off Montauk. The committee plans to reconvene for another discussion with Deepwater Wind representatives next Thursday.

Rick Drew of the trustees said that the group is doing the necessary research in order to form an opinion and issue a position on the proposed wind farm. Many commercial fishermen and their representatives have vocally opposed the project, fearing a negative impact on habitat, migratory patterns, and other disruptions to their livelihood.

“We’re trying to understand the project better,” Mr. Drew told his colleagues at the trustees’ meeting on Monday. “We’re really doing some homework so the board has information.” After next Thursday’s meetings, he said, “we would like to prepare somewhat of an executive summary document we can share with the board and public of our findings. . . . I’ve got a pretty large dossier on the project, which I can share with the board when we get close.”

Clint Plummer, Deepwater Wind’s vice president of development, attended the trustees’ April 24 meeting and answered questions from them and from many commercial fishermen. He plans to continue a dialogue with the trustees and the public at a meeting next month, Mr. Drew said. The group is scheduled to meet on July 10 and 24.

In other news related to the proposed wind farm, the Long Island Federation of Labor held a meeting on offshore wind last week, at which the Workforce Development Institute presented its study “New York State and the Jobs of Offshore Wind Energy.” Some 30 union representatives attended, and all were supportive of offshore wind development and its potential to create local jobs, according to Gordian Raacke, executive director of Renewable Energy Long Island, an advocacy group based in East Hampton, who attended the meeting.

A forthcoming addition to the municipal parking lot behind Amagansett Main Street was the focus of Monday night’s meeting of the hamlet’s citizens advisory committee, whose members wound up agreeing that what the lot really needs, besides more parking spaces, is a timed ticket machine like those in East Hampton Village.

Before the meeting was over, however, the chairwoman, Vicki Littman, announced that she was stepping down and, after considerable back and forth, Jim McMillan was elected to replace her.

“Right now, the lot is not efficient,” said Supervisor Larry Cantwell, who reports back to the town board on the committee’s concerns. “People park illegally and don’t worry about it. You have a central business district parking lot that’s essentially used for long-term parking.”

Weekenders who ride the Jitney often leave their cars in the lot until they return, committee members said, and the situation is exacerbated during the summer when spots at nearby beaches fill up early and latecomers use the Main Street lot.

Tina Piette asked Mr. Cantwell why the town’s seasonal traffic control officers do not ticket overtime vehicles. “Trying to enforce timed parking in a parking lot, marking tires, is not as simple as you might think,” he replied. “It wasn’t until the village put in ticket machines that it really worked.” The supervisor was the East Hampton Village administrator at the time.

Currently, the Amagansett lot has about 155 spaces. The northeast corner, where land is being purchased, will have about 40 more, Mr. Cantwell said, which will be for “employees all day long, and for people who live in apartments” nearby, with identifying stickers. Most of the remaining spaces will have a two-hour limit, he said, except for long-term parking, whose duration has not been determined. “We need to decide. Overnight? Three days?”

The design of the addition is complete, he said. All that remains is to “close the transaction,” meaning the purchase of the land itself. It was unanimously resolved to recommend the installation of a ticket-spitter. Use of the redesigned lot will remain free.

A discussion of the recent hamlet study report on Amagansett was postponed until next month, following Mr. Cantwell’s suggestion that committee members take time to watch the June 3 proceedings on the study on LTV and “see if we can build a consensus of opinion on what the committee supports and what not.”

“I think some of the recommendations should be weighed up,” he said, citing both a proposed “east side business district” and the central core. Members agreed to put off the discussion and to invite a representative of the town’s Planning Department to their next meeting, July 10. 

With only the election of new officers remaining on the agenda, the evening appeared to be winding down, but appearances proved deceiving. 

Ms. Littman announced that she has a busy time ahead, with a daughter applying to colleges, and would be stepping down after two years in office. Suiting action to words, she took a chair in the audience, after which the meeting was opened to nominations for chairman, vice chairman, and secretary.

Rona Klopman and Kammy Wolf were duly renominated for second terms as co-secretaries, and unanimously elected. When it came to vice chairman, however, Ms. Piette intervened, questioning whether there was a quorum of voting members in the room. Betty Mazur, a former chairwoman, commented that “the problem with C.A.C.s is that if we have too many members, and they don’t come, we don’t have a quorum.” (Amagansett has 38 members, 18 of whom were there.)

“I would like a list of names,” Ms. Piette said. “No,” said Ms. Mazur. “Robert’s Rules says you don’t give the names.”

Ms. Piette then took strong exception to the election itself, saying there should have been more notice that one was to take place that night and suggesting it be postponed until July. Members had been sent emails with the evening’s agenda four days before, and she implied that was not enough time for some who might want to run to plan to attend.

Carl Hamilton, alone in the back row, stood up and proposed a compromise: Nominations tonight, elections next month; anyone interested could come then and be nominated as well. The motion was seconded and voted on, but it failed, 9 to 5, with three abstentions. Quickly then, Ms. Littman was nominated for vice chairwoman and elected, 16 to 1.

Mr. McMillan, the current vice chairman, had just been nominated for the top job when Mr. Hamilton stood again and nominated Ms. Piette. Debby Pratt seconded, and now there was a contest.

“Because two people are running, we are having written ballots,” Ms. Mazur said. Paper was torn up, pieces passed around, and someone appointed Supervisor Cantwell counter-in-chief.  This time the vote was 12 to 6. Mr. McMillan was elected the new chairman of the committee.

East Hampton Town and Friends of the East Hampton Airport have submitted legal briefs to the United States Supreme Court in the matter of East Hampton Town’s petition asking the court to review an appeals court decision against the town last fall. The nation’s highest court is expected to announce whether it will do so by the end of this month. At issue are the laws the town enacted in 2015 restricting the use of East Hampton Airport in order to reduce aircraft noise.

The appeals court decision struck down three regulations: an overnight curfew, with extended hours for noisy planes, which was in effect for two summer seasons, and a once-a-week limit on takeoffs and landings by noisy planes, which had been blocked from the start after aviation interests filed suit.

In April, the Supreme Court ordered the aviation group to file a response to East Hampton’s petition. The group asked for a three-week extension of the deadline for submitting the brief, to June 9, and the town opposed that request, asserting that the group should not be able to use an extension or waiver to push the matter into the Supreme Court’s next term because of the injunction in place preventing enforcement of the town’s regulations. The Supreme Court granted an extension until May 30, and the town’s law firm, Quinn Emanuel, filed its response within a week in an effort to make sure the petition goes before the court during its present term rather than the next one, which begins in October.

“The town board is pleased that the Supreme Court will be taking a serious look at our petition this month,” Town Councilwoman Kathee Burke-Gonzalez, the East Hampton Town Board’s airport liaison, said in a press release last week.

“Memorial Day weekend air traffic noise was unbearable for many residents here on the East End — destroying the peace and tranquillity they have a right to expect in their own homes. We are committed to fighting for local control of our municipal airport so that we can manage the airport in the best interests of our community, striking a balance for those affected by excessive aircraft noise and the flying public.”

Meanwhile, town officials in Southold, where residents have been affected by noise from helicopters flying to and from East Hampton Airport, sent a letter this spring to the Federal Aviation Administration asking for a change in the mandated helicopter route.

In a response dated May 16, the F.A.A. denied Southold’s request that the agency stop requiring helicopters to fly the so-called “North Shore route” along the northern border of Long Island, and instead mandate that flights to or from the South Fork use a South Shore route.

Mark Rowan, who has invested heavily in Montauk’s Fort Pond neighborhood in recent years, was back before the East Hampton Town Zoning Board of Appeals on Tuesday in another attempt to replace four small cottages at 80 Firestone Road, next to the Montauket and just down the road from Duryea’s, which he also owns, with three larger, far more upscale structures offering spectacular views of the bay.

According to the town’s head building inspector, Ann Glennon, he needs variances from the Z.B.A. to build close to what she determined last August was a bluff crest, a natural feature that is perpendicular to the shoreline. Mr. Rowan appealed her decision to the zoning board.

John Whelan, the board’s chairman, recused himself from the matter because of his affiliation with the architectural firm designing the project, Stelle Lomont Rouhani Architects. When it came time to vote on Mr. Rowan’s appeal, the board split 2-2. Since an affirmative vote was needed to overturn her finding, the appeal failed. Mr. Rowan has since sued the board under a New York State law facilitating challenges to a municipal agency’s decision.

Since then, Joel Halsey, representing Mr. Rowan, has found additional documents in the town’s files pertaining to the property, resulting in Tuesday’s reopening of the hearing. Mr. Halsey argued in part that the town has not always classified the geographic formation in question as a bluff, and seemed to imply at one point that Brian Frank, the town’s chief environmentalist, had dissembled in his presentation.

Mr. Frank, who again argued that the town has been consistent in its approach to the topography, took exception to Mr. Halsey’s comments. The two men had worked together in the Planning Department for 10 years. “I would much rather think that you disagree with me than that I bamboozled you,” he said.

In the end, the board agreed to allow both sides more time, and to continue the public hearing on Aug. 1.