Braved the Cold
East Hampton
January 1, 2026
Dear David,
A heartfelt thank-you to everyone who came out today to brave the cold and take the plunge for such an important cause. Your courage, generosity, and community spirit made a huge difference. Because of you, our local food pantries will be able to help families in need and keep shelves stocked for those who rely on them.
Whether you plunged, donated, volunteered, cheered from the sidelines, or helped spread the word, today was a powerful reminder of what can happen when a community comes together with full hearts and a shared purpose.
We are so grateful for every single one of you.
VICKI LITTMAN
Chairperson
East Hampton Food Pantry
Especially Grateful
East Hampton
December 30, 2025
To the Editor,
The holidays, a time for celebration, can be difficult for our Meals on Wheels homebound clients. That is why we are especially grateful to three community groups who unfailingly continue to provide holiday meals for our clients.
On Thanksgiving Day, the First Presbyterian Church of East Hampton prepared turkey dinners with all the trimmings for our many clients. On Dec. 14, the Springs Fire Department prepared a special holiday meal. And on Christmas Day, our friends at American Legion Post 419 in Amagansett also prepared and packaged a complete holiday meal. Our dedicated volunteers picked up and delivered the meals.
We are grateful to these folks and to all of you who faithfully continue to support us during difficult times.
On behalf of the Meals on Wheels family, our very best wishes to you and to all the members of our community for a wonderful new year.
Very truly yours,
TRACY BROXMEYER
President
‘Our Beacon’
Bayport
December 30, 2025
Dear Editor:
One of the joys of litigating civil rights matters arising in town has been meeting local senior citizens who have fought injustice on a broader scale.
One night at Jules Feiffer’s house (with Jules and his wife, my client Joan Holden hosting), I met Peter Weiss and his wife, Cora. Cora’s recent death was eloquently covered in your recent article. In passing, the article briefly mentioned Peter’s death a month before. While Cora was a force of nature, and certainly worthy of the tribute accorded her by The Star, I wanted to give my two cents on the privilege of being in a community where I would come to know Peter Weiss.
When we first sat down for dinner that night, Peter mentioned his decades-long board affiliation with the Center for Constitutional Rights. That made me sit up, as the center’s work has been unequaled for decades in exceptional advocacy for human rights.
Frankly, as the night wore on, I was humbled to be sitting at the table. Peter came to the United States as a 16-year-old Holocaust refugee. Later, he served in the U.S. Army as a military interrogator preparing the cases for the Nuremberg Trials. It was the beginning of a legal career opposing brutality and championing accountability.
In starting the Center for Constitutional Rights, Peter mentored a thought center for American legal thought. In hundreds of briefs to the federal courts and the Supreme Court, the Center for Constitutional Rights argued Peter’s concept that American constitutional rights govern standards for American behavior, both at home and throughout the world. In expanding that concept, Peter attacked Apartheid in South Africa.
Later, in the landmark case of Filartiga v. Pena-Irala, Peter got the U.S. Second Circuit Court of Appeals to brand a Paraguayan official responsible for torture of a dissident “an enemy of all mankind.” That was Peter’s brilliance. He saw American constitutional rights against torture and injustice as self-evident universal rights.
In Peter’s view, the U.S. Constitution, like the Declaration, saw those rights as God-given. It follows that the creator would not want the U.S. courts, having been granted statutory authority by Congress, thereafter imposing limits on those protections to a restricted class of only American victims or American actors.
As the center indicated following his death, Peter “was the best of who we are, our heart, our compass, our beacon.” I was, in turn, privileged to know him.
LARRY KELLY
Peace to All
East Bay, Calif.
January 3, 2026
Dear David,
Keeping up with your paper from the other coast, my favorite “hometown” newspaper for over 35 years is still a comfort while navigating a new area. Things are always on my mind, and pen finds paper.
I agree with your editorial last week. Stephen Miller is some kind of recurring nightmare. Jeez, what happened to him as a child to make him so hateful? Guess he was “carefully taught,” as the song goes. These terribly insane guys gotta go. Enough already.
I loved Baylis Greene’s yule log story. I do remember watching the ol’ burning log on our TV in Brooklyn in the late 1960s and 1970s.
We had no fireplace, so it was a cardboard one, with paper bricks and a foil flame and Christmas bulb behind it, that we erected ourselves from Christie’s toy and department store on Avenue N. We loved that thing. And the yule log on Channel 13 every Christmas Eve; it played on and on, a backdrop to the four-fishes dinner we had with my grandma, Nunziata, at the head of the table. No octopus, no scungilli, but baked lobster tails, fried shrimp, baked littleneck clams from Sheepshead Bay, and fried sole. Cold, cooked shrimp for starters with Mom’s homemade cocktail sauce — secret ingredient: Heinz chili sauce, never ketchup. Chili sauce makes it pop.
On New Year’s Eve, Mom made her baby spareribs with another secret sauce: Vermont maple syrup and chili sauce with an added touch of a little cooked garlic. Yum, melt-in-your-mouth ribs, perfect with a cocktail. Again, the yule log played on the TV in the background while everyone ate and chatted, hours before the ball dropped in Times Square. Good times.
“Lemon and Licorice,” Bess’s column last week, was brilliant, too. The “empty stocking” discovery on Christmas morning is truly a letdown. I was always conscious of putting some little trinkets inside for my family.
My husband as a kid got oranges in his stocking. But then his mom (Santa) tied candy bars to their tree. Wow. I put a personalized guitar pick in my husband’s stocking this year. Then we forgot about the stockings, after presents. They hung this year in the window on cranks. No fireplace here. Our old East Hampton house had one. Good stuff. Memories. Anyway, he found the guitar pick a few days later when I realized he hadn’t mentioned it. Surprise.
My sisters and I didn’t have stockings growing up until the 1970s, when I insisted we get some and hang them from our cardboard mantel on the “fireplace” in the porch/piano room. That’s where our Christmas tree went up every year. That was also the year I, as the eldest daughter, got my sisters to rally for a real tree. Mess of falling needles aside, we won. Now it was Christmas.
The letters were very good this past week. Timely, succinct, in your face, and funny.
I’m so glad George Watson is okay. Perhaps he should stick to his red sports car. Careful, George!
Happy and healthy new year to you. And peace to all this year, everywhere.
Sincerely,
NANCI LAGARENNE
In Reply
Montauk
January 5, 2026
Dear Editor,
In reply to George Watson’s letter, Dec. 25: I will try harder next time.
MARSHALL (MCDONALD) PRADO
Common Ground
East Hampton
January 5, 2026
Dear Mr. Editor,
I hope you and your boat are all settled in for the long winter’s nap.
I was captivated by Jonathan Wallace’s letter in the Dec. 18 edition. It was a very kind and informative letter; most of his are.
He seems to have labeled me as right wing. For the record, I label myself an independent conservative, if there is one.
What was really nice to see is that no matter the political flavor, we had common ground concerning the 79-unit condo plan and Jonathan pointed that out. My reason was not the “capitalist developers” but the sheer size of the project.
I am not an expansionist. If the Building Department halted all building permits, I would be thrilled. Currently creeping down Three Mile Harbor Road at 23 miles per hour is not the high point of my day. And so, thank you, Mr. Wallace, for your kind words. We do have common ground in most likely many areas. Also, I don’t label you a “pin head.” Sorry. The pin heads are the constant Trump-bashers, week after week — enough.
Don’t these people have a life? Kids, grandkids, local issues, some sort of life!
Best regards and as always, yours to command.
JEFFREY PLITT
Artificial Turf
Springs
January 5, 2026
Dear Editor,
I was dismayed to read in The Star that the board of education is planning to raise money via bonds to install artificial turf — plastic — for playing fields for the high school. This is a bad idea, since artificial turf can be hazardous to the people who play on it and damaging to the surrounding environment in a number of ways.
There have been extensive studies published in the scientific literature that demonstrate a variety of problems that turf fields cause.
They get very hot on sunny days and players have been burned by them. They have less “give” and are more solid; when someone falls on them, more injuries result to players than on natural grass fields.
Then there are the environmental effects. With wear and tear, the plastic “grass blades” shed plastic fibers and microfibers, and when it rains, they wash into the nearby waterways, estuary, or ocean and cause harm to the aquatic organisms living there. Reports have noted green-colored plastic fibers that cannot have come from any other sources.
Underneath the green “turf” is a layer of crumb rubber, which is usually produced from old tires. This material also releases microplastics with use. In addition, it contains some extremely toxic chemicals that will be washed into nearby waterways during rainfall. Among these is a chemical called 6PPDQ, which is extremely toxic to fish and caused mass death of salmon in the Pacific Northwest.
I can document all of this further if anyone wants.
The town should treat our high school athletes and the environment better than this.
Sincerely,
JUDITH S. WEIS, Ph.D.
Left Guessing
East Hampton
December 29, 2025
Dear Editor:
Last week’s article framed the South Fork’s Flock cameras as a question of police necessity. But it overlooked more fundamental issues regarding the database’s accessibility: who controls it, who can access it, and why we’re left guessing. When I personally asked Mayor Jerry Larsen and Assemblyman Ted Schiavoni about Flock’s database a month ago, neither even knew this system existed.
East Hampton Village and the Suffolk County sheriff deployed a powerful surveillance system without meaningful public debate, independent technical review, or clear data-protection safeguards. Flock’s camera database system doesn’t just capture license plates; it archives when and where vehicles appear.
That information reveals our daily behaviors: from A.A. attendance to who prays at which synagogue to what time you drop your kids off at school. Flock openly sells this data to others. Their public patent even describes their ability to identify and archive individuals outside vehicles (U.S. Patent No. 10,795,933, Section 51).
Meanwhile, United States Senators Ron Wyden (Oregon) and Raja Krishnamoorthi (Illinois) requested that the Federal Trade Commission investigate the company for unnecessarily exposing Americans’ sensitive data.
Independent security researchers have documented dozens of vulnerabilities in Flock’s database. Stolen Flock log-in credentials appeared for sale on the darknet. Flock does not require two-factor authentication for database access. Devices run discontinued operating systems and transmit unencrypted data.
Flock’s own webpage confirms that East Hampton Village police grant access to this data to around 300 external agencies nationwide. That’s a lot of ways into a database tracking our lives that is way less secure than your Netflix account. It will make us less safe from identity theft and a more fearful community.
Suffolk County has not publicly disclosed who can access our information, for what purposes, or how often. Meanwhile, the Associated Press, the A.C.L.U., and the Electronic Frontier Foundation reported that Flock’s national network is being used to monitor peaceful protest activity and for immigration enforcement, sometimes by agencies logging in remotely using another person’s password.
If this isn’t a privacy concern, please share with the editor every address you visited this month, along with time stamps. If you’d feel weird sharing that information with strangers, then I share your concern.
I support using this technology to fight crime but use it correctly.
All of the successful police cases cited in the article could have been achieved using automated license plate readers cameras owned by East Hampton Village and/or Suffolk County, with data stored securely under local control, with transparent oversight by public officers, rather than by for-profit, venture capital-backed data brokers.
Instead, residents’ data is accessible far beyond the East End, paid for by thousands in our taxes to a multibillion-dollar Silicon Valley company backed by Andreessen Horowitz — the same investors have financed other data-privacy failures, such as Facebook’s Cambridge Analytica scandal and Coinbase’s more recent data breach.
Better systems are possible. New Hampshire and local communities across the United States are increasingly requiring public access logs, independent audits, and strict local control over the sharing of this identifying information.
If the Suffolk Sheriff’s Department system is as responsible and secure as promised, then accountability would be a feature, not treated as a bug. Life on the East End is expensive enough. We deserve to know who’s watching our families. If leaders can’t answer that simple question, they should let us opt out and not hide from the terms and conditions.
CHRIS AJEMIAN
Regulating A.I.
North Haven
December 29, 2025
Dear David:
Regulation of artificial intelligence will be a critical issue this year. Our government should lead in protecting public interests, rather than commercial profitability.
We live in a world where a tree is worth more dead than alive. We live in a world where a whale is worth more dead than alive. As long as our economy works in this certain way, and corporations enjoy unregulated profitability, this will continue.
We are that tree; we are that whale. We are the victim of this increasingly unchecked corporate profitability. If corporate control of A.I. is allowed, it will be a real threat to us rather than a potential benefit.
Corporations continue to be focused on lax regulation, enabling maximum profitability. Corporate boards are profit minded for shareholders and want self-regulation to achieve maximum profits.
The Supreme Court got the Citizens United decision very wrong, in that a corporate entity is not an actual citizen entitled to all the constitutional rights of flesh-and-blood citizens. Corporations are only a legal creation to limit an individual or a group of individuals from direct liability and taxation.
Corporations do not deserve unlimited freedom of speech, political influence, or profitability. We citizens do deserve this and need to reassert our constitutional powers. Thoughts for the new year.
ANTHONY CORON
Need New Leadership
East Hampton
December 22, 2025
Dear David,
Mayor Larsen gets it right (Dec. 13, “Able to Vote”) when he says, “Many East Hampton residents are not affiliated with a political party when it comes to voting as they value independence and local decision making.”
According to the board of elections and a Star Nov. 8, 2023, article (“Democrats Win Big in East Hampton Town,” Christopher Walsh), there are 9,954 registered Democrats in the town against 3,843 Republicans. “Blanks,” or registered voters who are unaffiliated with a party, number 5,470, and another 1,034 fall into the “others” category, voters registered with a party that is not on the ballot line.
In the mayor’s logic, people should register in the Democratic Party for the Democratic primary to be held on June 23, since the winner almost always wins the general election. Not being registered in the party in the primary means you’ll be “excluded from the election that determines who governs the town.” Wrong.
As Christopher Walsh pointed out, “The elections bring a lackluster 2023 campaign to a close, the results predictable given the Democratic Party’s overwhelming advantage in voter registration.”
That’s what predictably will happen again if we follow Mr. Larsen’s advice: local government of the compromised and entitled, waiting for what they see as their inevitable anointment to power. Mayor Larsen would have us squelch dissent and challenges in the primary process needed to solve community issues.
We need new and energized leadership in East Hampton that the Democratic establishment hasn’t provided for years. Whatever ails democracy can be cured by advocating more democracy, not less.
Open up the primaries! Do the math — can you say Mamdani? That sort of energized candidacy would win easily here (as it did in New York City). You might even get a few disgruntled Curtis Sliwa votes as well! That would be a campaign and election that matter.
Mayor Larsen’s cynical attempt to stifle our local democracy may very well end up costing him his own position, as it did his Democratic Party establishment comrades, Andrew Cuomo and Eric Adams.
Sincerely,
JIM VRETTOS
Decision to Run
East Hampton
January 4, 2026
Dear David,
I am writing to share with the residents of East Hampton why I am running for town supervisor.
When someone chooses to seek public office, one of the first and most important steps is to develop a clear platform, an honest explanation of what they stand for, how they intend to lead, and what they aim to accomplish. As my campaign is now fully underway, it is important to clearly explain my reasons for running and the experience I bring to this role.
As mayor of East Hampton Village, I have learned that good government is not complicated, but it does require discipline, transparency, and leadership. My administration focused on controlling costs, respecting taxpayers, improving public safety, strengthening community services, and enhancing quality of life. We accomplished all of this while keeping taxes low. We worked collaboratively, planned carefully, and delivered results.
Unfortunately, the direction the Town of East Hampton has taken has raised serious concerns for many residents. Any one of the following missteps could stand alone as a platform issue: increased taxes and piercing the tax cap, millions of taxpayer dollars spent on the airport litigation, ongoing disputes over truck beach access, the purchase and handling of 66 West Lake Drive, the escalating costs of the senior center, Cantwell Court, emergency services, and more. Taken together, they reflect a troubling pattern of poor planning, costly decisions, and a lack of accountability.
My decision to run is not about politics; it is about performance. It is about restoring confidence in Town Hall, making responsible financial decisions, supporting our employees, and ensuring that taxpayer dollars are respected and well spent.
I have spent nearly 40 years in public service, including my time as mayor and more than three decades in law enforcement. I have a proven record of leadership, fiscal responsibility, and community engagement. I know how government works, and I know it can work better in the town.
The Democratic primary election will be held on June 23, and I look forward to engaging with voters in the months ahead. I am running for town supervisor because I believe East Hampton deserves strong, steady, and experienced leadership, and because I am committed to doing a better job for the community that I love.
Respectfully,
JERRY LARSEN
Pumpkin Town?
Amagansett
January 2, 2026
Dear David,
I am writing to express my concerns regarding the recent discussions at Town Hall about changing the review process for farmland construction projects in East Hampton, as well as your editorial. While the idea of creating a new zoning category for agriculture and reducing permit fees may seem appealing, we must approach these changes with caution and consider the broader implications for our community.
One troubling aspect of this conversation is the idea of providing worker housing specifically for farm employees. As many businesses in East Hampton, such as Citarella, employ numerous workers and face the same housing challenges, why should agriculture be given special consideration in this regard? Allowing for worker housing solely for farm workers sets a dangerous precedent and raises questions about fairness and consistency in our zoning policies.
Moreover, the proposal to exempt large barns — some up to 3,000 square feet — from stringent planning board reviews is alarming. Why should farmers receive exemptions that other businesses do not? Farmers often benefit from grants and tax write-offs, effectively positioning themselves as significant commercial enterprises. This inconsistency in treatment is not only unjust but could lead to unchecked development that undermines the character of our town.
We must also consider the potential consequences of relaxing zoning regulations. Do we want East Hampton to become like Pumpkin Town in Watermill, or face the sprawling development seen in Riverhead, with oversized barns scattered across the landscape?
The recent summer circus events at Amber Waves already highlight the growing strain on our infrastructure and the impact of unchecked development. This property has been embroiled in legal issues in Town Justice Court for over two years, and if zoning reviews are eliminated, we risk losing the essential safeguards that protect our community.
While the desire for streamlined processes is understandable, it should not come at the expense of oversight and community input. As we contemplate these changes, let us remain vigilant and ensure that any modifications serve the best interests of all residents, preserving the unique character of East Hampton for generations to come.
JILL DANIS
Middle of Winter
Amagansett
January 5, 2026
Dear David,
I agree with your editorial regarding zoning changes pertaining to farmland. Some farms have become among the most-successful local businesses, evolving into large, commercial operations that generate millions of dollars in revenue. Many other local businesses would welcome the same flexibility in our comprehensive plan and zoning codes to expand and increase their revenue, yet those opportunities are not equally afforded.
This proposal is particularly concerning because it is being advanced in the middle of winter, when many residents who live near these farms are not present to provide meaningful input. If approximately 1,400 acres of farmland will be affected, then all surrounding residential property owners should be formally notified before any zoning or comprehensive plan changes are considered.
It is also deeply concerning that town board member Ian Calder-Piedmonte is serving as liaison on this issue while also being a co-owner of Balsam Farms, which could benefit directly from these changes. I believe even the appearance of a conflict of interest raises serious questions about transparency, fairness, and public trust, and warrants heightened scrutiny and appropriate recusal.
Sincerely,
ANGIE SULLIVAN
Maintain Oversight
Amagansett
January 1, 2026
Dear David,
I read your recent editorial regarding the proposed changes to the review process for the farmland construction project with great interest. You rightly emphasize the importance of maintaining rigorous oversight in land use and zoning regulations, especially concerning our agricultural resources. I want to add my perspective to this vital discussion.
I have addressed the East Hampton Town Board twice regarding the approximately 1,452 acres of farmland in our community, specifically requesting information on the development rights, restrictions, and covenants associated with each parcel. Unfortunately, my requests went unanswered, which raises significant concerns about transparency and accountability by this town board in decision-making regarding our valuable farmland.
Your editorial hits the nail on the head when it asserts that thorough review processes are necessary. Farms are not just quaint operations; they are successful commercial businesses that are expanding into retail spaces to reach consumers more effectively. Examples like Balsam’s retail space in Montauk and Amber Waves’s retail space in East Hampton illustrate this trend.
Given the size of the agricultural land at stake, a robust site plan review is essential to ensure that development aligns with community standards and preserves the agrarian character that many of us value.
Additionally, I am concerned that the town board liaison to the Agricultural Committee, Ian Calder-Piedmonte, is a partner in Balsam Farms — a point Ian has never made during any town board meeting holding this discussion. This raises potential conflicts of interest, particularly if eliminating site plan review results in greater financial gain for him.
It is perplexing that the town board would consider such significant changes to the review process, change fee structures, or advocate for work force housing without having concrete data on what these farmers are actually requesting. Such changes should not be made in a vacuum or without clear community input and support.
Moreover, I find it troubling that Amber Waves, a so-called nonprofit teaching farm, charges $9 for every student taken there on a class trip. This raises questions about the motivations behind such fees, especially when the educational experiences should be accessible to all students. How commercially greedy can one be to charge money to schools, especially the Amagansett School children, which is right down the block from the farm?
Thank you for shining a light on this crucial issue. I hope the town board will take these concerns seriously and engage with the community in a meaningful way before making any sweeping changes to our land-use policies. As you so succinctly stated, “East Hampton should not be taking development cues from the rest of Long Island.”
RONA KLOPMAN
Weaken Oversight
East Hampton
January 5, 2026
Dear Editor:
Many of the newly proposed changes to the review of agricultural activities appear to be unnecessary and seem likely to weaken oversight on preserved farm fields.
Over the years, East Hampton has managed a workable balance between protection of farming and preservation of farm fields and open-space views. The proof is visible in our landscape, and that framework should be maintained.
Both local law and State Agriculture and Markets Law define agricultural production as a commercial or business enterprise. At the same time, farming is amply protected in our local right-to-farm law, which wisely subjects farming activities to zoning, site plan approval, and other permit regulations.
Many of the recently discussed concerns are not new; while I was a town board member, I was the liaison to the agriculture committee, which considered these issues at length. The town board followed up by consulting with the planning director, Marguerite Wolffsohn. Working together, adjustments were made to application requirements, which reduced survey costs and fees for minor applications.
Agricultural lands are different from residentially zoned properties. Residential districts create more uniform lot sizes and setback requirements. Accessory uses and activities tend to be more predictable.
In contrast, agricultural buildings and structures are not always unobtrusive. They can vary widely in size and impact and require site-specific review. New techniques, such as vertical farming and hydroponics, require industrial-size structures. In a nearby town, the planning board is currently reviewing a 32,000-square-foot cannabis “greenhouse,” which more closely resembles a factory.
East Hampton should continue to support and encourage dialogue with farmers who work the land. Under no circumstances should the town retreat from careful zoning review which has preserved our rural character through the years.
JEFF BRAGMAN
Exist for a Reason
Springs
January 5, 2026
Dear David,
I write in support of your recent editorial urging caution over proposed changes to how farmland construction projects are reviewed in East Hampton.
The broader proposals now circulating raise serious concerns. Exempting agricultural buildings from planning board site-plan review and removing the architectural review board from oversight of non-public barns would be a mistake. These review bodies exist for a reason: to preserve the agrarian character of our town and to ensure that development on publicly preserved farmland is thoughtful, orderly, and respectful of surrounding properties.
Equally important is the continued requirement for up-to-date surveys. Surveys are not bureaucratic excess; they are essential tools to confirm that structures are properly sited, comply with zoning setbacks, and have not been built without approval. Eliminating or weakening survey requirements risks legitimizing violations after the fact and undermines fair enforcement for those who have followed the rules from the start.
Much of this land was protected with public funds long before today’s farming trends took hold. The community therefore has a legitimate interest in how it is developed. Allowing unrestricted placement of large structures or seasonal hoop houses — without reliable documentation, meaningful neighbor input, or review — risks exactly the kind of piecemeal development these safeguards were designed to prevent.
The suggestion that East Hampton should model its agricultural development rules after the rest of Long Island, like Riverhead, is particularly troubling. East Hampton has long set itself apart through careful land-use planning and a commitment to preserving its unique rural identity. Diluting those standards would erode the very qualities that make this community special.
A lengthy or complex review process is not, by itself, justification for weakening zoning laws. Any relaxation of land-use regulations should demonstrate a clear, broad public benefit — not simply convenience. Once protections are rolled back, they are difficult, if not impossible, to restore.
Thank you for highlighting the long-term consequences of these proposals and for advocating a balanced approach that supports agriculture while protecting the community’s shared investment in its land.
Sincerely,
PAT GRANFIELD
Cannot Telescope
Springs
January 5, 2026
Dear David:
The East Hampton Planning Board announced at its Nov. 19 meeting its intention to approve the application by Elite Towers and the Springs Fire Department to relocate the existing 150-foot tower to the center of the Fire Department property, subject only to the comments from the community to be made at a public hearing to be held on Wednesday.
The purpose of this letter is let you and the general public know that the attorney for Elite Towers has made false statements to the planning board, assuring them on numerous occasions that Elite’s existing, 10-year-old tower is a modern, state-of-the-art tower, which, if stressed by strong winds or seismic events, will not fall over because it is designed to telescope into itself instead. (The tower has never been put to use because the zoning board revoked its building permit shortly after it was erected in 2015.) But this cell tower cannot telescope under any circumstances because it was never designed to do so.
We are certain this is true, based not only on what cell tower engineers and contractors have told us, but also because Tanya Negron (who owns Elite Towers) stated at the Dec. 16 meeting of the Springs Citizens Advisory Committee that this tower cannot telescope. There is a YouTube recording from the Springs Citizens Advisory Committee in which Tanya Negron and Ian Calder-Piedmonte, David Buda, and Krae Van Sickle all state in unison that the Elite Tower cannot telescope.
Now that Elite’s owner has gone on record that the tower cannot telescope, there can be no denying that the planning board predicated its approval based upon false assumptions.
Because the public hearing is imminent, it is crucial that the planning board and everyone else understand that Elite attorney’s reassurances were false. Please watch this video from the April 2, 2025, planning board meeting showing Elite’s attorney Greg Alvarez convincing the planning board that the fall zone is no longer relevant because this tower will never topple over because it will telescope into itself.
While Elite’s attorney, and not the planning board, is responsible for perpetrating this falsehood, now that the planning board knows about it, it is incumbent upon them to veto this tower, otherwise they too will become responsible for the perpetuation of a tower which is far from the “safe, no-brainer relocation” which Elite’s attorney has led them to believe.
Yours truly,
JONATHAN COVEN
Proposed Tower
Springs
January 4, 2026
Dear David,
With regard to the proposed Springs Firehouse cell tower scheduled for consideration by the planning board on Wednesday, I want to begin by making one point absolutely clear: My objections to the Springs Firehouse tower in no way diminish my respect for the critical and courageous work performed by the Springs Fire Department.
The men and women who serve there deserve the benefit of the doubt when pursuing what they believe is necessary to protect the community. That benefit of the doubt, however, does not require the suspension of all scrutiny.
While additional cell bandwidth can marginally improve local service, the existing civilian cell service in Springs is already more than adequate, and, in fact, superior to service in many other areas on the South Fork. The more compelling motivation for this tower is plainly the financial gain derived from lease revenues. That is not an appropriate way for a public service organization to meet its funding needs. Fire district budgets should be supported collectively and transparently through proper taxation, not by erecting industrial infrastructure in the middle of a densely populated residential neighborhood — particularly one of scenic and historic significance.
There are many reasons this tower should not be approved. At the top of that list is the lack of demonstrated need.
Emergency communications and public safety: One of the most frequently cited justifications for the tower is that inadequate cell service poses a public safety risk in emergencies. That argument no longer reflects current technology.
All flagship smartphones sold in 2025 and 2026, including iPhones and Google devices, are equipped with emergency S.O.S. features that connect directly to 911 via satellite networks, independent of cellular coverage. In addition, home Wi-Fi networks allow for reliable cellular calling, including 911 calls, even in areas with weak reception.
Rather than approving an unnecessary tower, why isn’t the town investing resources in educating residents about the emergency capabilities already built into their phones?
Day-to-day cell service in Springs: I personally conduct extensive, ongoing, real-world testing of AT&T reception throughout Springs and north Amagansett. I am able to maintain phone conversations everywhere I travel. Like any place in the world — including downtown Manhattan — there may be occasional, isolated dead spots, but those are the exception, not the rule.
I also regularly ask residents about their experience with cell service in Springs. The overwhelming consensus is simple: “The service is fine.” This includes parents who were once concerned about missing calls from schools and now report no issues.
When compared to Sag Harbor, Georgica, Sagaponack, East Hampton Northwest, or parts of Wainscott, cell service in Springs is incomparably better.
This raises an essential question: What “acceptable standard” of service is the planning board using? If one carrier performs less well than another, should the burden fall on an entire neighborhood to accept a 150-foot tower — or on individual users to switch to a provider with stronger coverage? Does the marginal benefit to some truly outweigh the significant and permanent harm imposed on others?
The role of the emerging mesh network: According to a recent Newsday article, hundreds of relay antennas are currently being installed throughout Springs and Northwest Woods as part of a new civilian mesh network. Why not wait to evaluate how this network improves any remaining service gaps? And if limited dead zones persist, why not address them with additional low-impact relay antennas rather than a single, visually dominant tower?
Public safety risks and visual impact: The physical risks associated with cell towers are not hypothetical. East Hampton recently reduced the required fall-zone radius from twice the height of a tower to just one times its height, a decision that can only be viewed as contrary to public safety.
Under the former, more reasonable, standard, between 11 and 15 residences would fall within the Fire Department tower’s danger zone. Was this regulatory change arbitrary, or was it made in response to industry pressure?
At least one large panel from a similar monopole tower at the town dump flew off during an ordinary windstorm — not a hurricane or nor’easter. Testimony from the tower company was contradictory regarding whether these towers telescope inward during failure. Evidence suggests they do not. When these towers fail, debris travels.
Visually, the proposed tower is especially egregious. The surrounding land has been substantially cleared, leaving the structure fully exposed. It will be visible from multiple locations of historic and scenic significance, including Accabonac Harbor and Gerard Drive.
The Crandall Street precedent: The proposed Springs Fire Department tower fares poorly when measured against the standards applied in the Crandall Street case, where a tower was denied despite far fewer impacts.
At Crandall, only one residence was slightly within the two-times-height fall zone. At the firehouse site, up to 15 homes would be affected. The Crandall tower was surrounded by dense woods and invisible to the broader community; the firehouse tower would stand in the open. Crandall was not visible from any historic or scenic areas; the firehouse tower would be.
Most important, when Crandall was under review, the Camp Blue Bay tower did not yet exist, and the need for improved service in Springs was far greater than it is today. Yet that tower was denied. Given this precedent, how can the firehouse tower possibly be approved? Any such approval would represent an arbitrary and unequal application of the law.
The Crandall denial also revealed that community outrage — not objective service need — was the determining factor. That outrage reflected demographics and process. More year-round residents lived near Crandall. By contrast, many residents near the firehouse site are part time or may feel they lack the agency to speak out. Others have simply been worn down by years of stop-and-start proposals, illegal construction, non-enforcement, and re-applications.
The need for transparency and due process: The public deserves a genuine opportunity to evaluate this proposal after receiving complete information. At a minimum, the following should be made available at least one month before any approval vote: existing coverage maps, projected coverage from the proposed tower, the minimum service standards being sought, expected improvements from the mesh network, and whether additional relay antennas could resolve remaining gaps.
There is also a fundamental unanswered question: What “extra” emergency service is the Springs Firehouse seeking beyond the townwide emergency system that is already being upgraded? Why would the new infill relay system be insufficient for the department when it is deemed sufficient for all other emergency operations?
Enforcement of the law: Finally, this application should not even be under consideration. Why has code enforcement allowed the existing, unapproved tower to remain standing? Why has the planning board not required its removal before entertaining a new application? This disregard for the law sets a dangerous precedent.
The planning board should deny the Springs Firehouse tower and require that any future proposal meet the same standards of necessity, safety, legality, and fairness applied elsewhere in East Hampton.
KRAE VAN SICKLE
Show Hatred
Montauk
January 5, 2026
Dear David,
America has freedom of speech and press, with many other freedoms, which citizens have enjoyed. Some of these rights often get abused.
Editorials written for The East Hampton Star show the purest hatred for most or all Republicans. Hatred is an awful thing and also very biased.
These editorials have never written a single story against Democrats, even when said people are guilty of crimes, even when some have proven to be for themselves and couldn’t care less about the U.S.A.
Fairness is important and should be executed in your writings, but hatred is your line.
In God and country,
BEA DERRICO
Department of Injustice
East Hampton
December 31, 2025
Dear Mr. Rattray,
Let’s call Donald Trump’s Department of Justice what it really is: the Department of Injustice. Under Trump’s direction, the Department of Injustice seeks criminal charges against the administration’s perceived enemies, while it shuts down criminal investigations into its financial supporters. Just look at what Todd Blanche, the second highest official at the department and Trump’s former defense lawyer at his New York criminal trial, has done.
Mr. Blanche has led a massive remaking of the Department of Justice, shifting the emphasis from longstanding priorities. For example, a month after his appointment, he ordered an end to all investigations into crypto companies, dealers, and exchanges launched during President Biden’s term. He also eliminated an enforcement team dedicated to looking for crypto-related fraud and money-laundering schemes. According to legal experts and former federal ethics officials, Mr. Blanche’s directives, while he still owned significant crypto investments, violated the conflicts of interest law and his ethics agreement.
Like Mr. Blanche, Trump also has perverted the course of justice. Under the Biden administration, the D.O.J.’s National Cryptocurrency Enforcement Team, as it was called, conducted a probe of Binance, the world’s largest cryptocurrency exchange. The investigation found that Binance failed to report and prevent suspicious financial transactions for Hamas, Al Qaeda, and other terrorist organizations. The company’s founder, Changpeng Zhao, was charged with violating U.S. money-laundering laws. To settle the case, Zhao pleaded guilty, resigned as company chief executive, and was sentenced to four months in prison in April 2024.
Although Zhao had completed his four-month sentence, Trump issued him a pardon in October after Binance enriched a Trump family business. Binance had used a stablecoin developed by Trump-owned World Liberty Financial to fund a $2 billion deal. Although Trump’s pardon came after Zhao’s release from prison, the pardon removes the restrictions that had prevented Zhao from any future financial ventures. Zhao is undoubtedly aware that if he undertakes such ventures, the Department of Injustice won’t be investigating them as the Department of Justice once did.
SALVATORE TOCCI
A Tyrant
East Hampton
January 5, 2026
To the Editor,
I stand in defense of Denmark and in defiance of the demagogue leading our country off a cliff.
A tyrant is loose in our land and only we can stop him.
TOM MACKEY