An East Hampton Village Board effort to reduce the terms of members of the zoning board of appeals and planning board raises two issues that strongly suggest the matter should be abandoned. Appointed boards like these are supposed to be insulated from politics and outside influence; shortening how long members serve would undermine their independence. And, the proposal appears to be at odds with New York State law as well.
Under a proposal now being considered by the mayor and the trustees, terms for both boards would be shortened to three years from the present five. An earlier plan was to cut terms on the appointed boards to a single year, after which members could be reappointed or let go if they, in the opinion of the trustees, did not vote to their liking. It does not take too much thinking to conclude that the term reductions would be bad policy.
As put forth in state law, the rules are easy enough to understand. Term length is determined by the number of board appointees: five members, five years, for example. Zoning boards can have three or five members; planning boards can have either five or seven-year member terms. Which way to go is the local government’s choice, but in any event it must remain within the constraints of the law. From what we can tell, the village attorney should have looked a little deeper into the state’s rules before allowing the term reductions to go to hearing — which they did on July 2, drawing no public comment.
Underlying the proposed shift is the question of why the village would mess around with the boards in the first place. Mayor Jerry Larsen’s assertion that shortening planning and zoning board terms would weed out members who did not serve village interests is implausible and poorly defined. In the absence of demonstrated need, what this seems to be is more of a power grab than anything else.
Since members of appointed boards are supposed to be free from the influence of elected officials, longer terms are one way of assuring that. Shortening the time between reappointments could have the effect of members having to watch their backs for signs of the trustees’ disapproval.
That the change may not be about process and efficiency can be sniffed out in that the mayor and village administrator have very publicly taken sides in some planning and zoning review on matters they absolutely should have stayed out of. Meanwhile, the trustees named the mayor’s wife, Lisa Larsen, who has been active in village matters, to a planning board seat at their last meeting.
In all, it appears that an effort is underway to bring land-use permitting under control of Village Hall. The matter remains open for further review as early as the village trustees’ next meeting, on July 30; we believe it should be dropped in the interim.