People who attend the Montauk Playhouse’s Senior Nutrition Program are in an uproar over the recent resignation of its executive director, Anna Ostroff, and angrily let the program’s board of directors know it during a combative meeting on Tuesday.
The program is a private, not-for-profit entity that receives an annual grant from East Hampton Town, which Councilman Tom Flight said this week is around $150,000 for 2025. It started in the late 1990s, initially housed in the basement of the Montauk Community Church. At the Playhouse, it operates Monday through Friday from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m., with a hot lunch served at noon. Activities include yoga, crafts, meditation, and music by visiting performers.
Ms. Ostroff, who was hired in April 2024 for the job — described as four hours per day, five days per week — asked for a raise this year and was denied, though board members, who are all volunteers, told Tuesday’s audience of senior citizens that it was more a deferral than a denial. Rather, they said, they’d asked Ms. Ostroff to delay her request pending the next annual grant from the town, the amount of which will not be known for several months.
Around half a dozen residents who attend the program spoke glowingly and emotionally of Ms. Ostroff, unanimously praising her for dedication and enthusiasm. Several accused the board of demeaning her, first by denying her request for a raise, which they said she’d sought due to the town’s high cost of living, and then by changing her job title from “director” to “coordinator.”
Board members disagreed, and denied the accusations.
Ann Peterson read a long statement to the board. “It seems that instead of working together, we have become adversaries,” she said. “How sad is that, since in the end, I think everyone wants what is best for the senior center, and the seniors who take advantage of this program.”
Ms. Ostroff, she said, “was the little Energizer Bunny who never stopped from the time we arrived until we left, doing her required work and looking after our needs.” In Ms. Ostroff, she added, “You had a director who not only did the required job, but went above and beyond that job to make sure we were happy. She sat with us at lunch and heard our ideas, or had ideas she ran by us, trying to make the center more than just a place to go for lunch. Not only did she serve the board, she cared for us in a way no other director had.”
The board, Ms. Peterson said, “should have been thrilled that we were receiving that attention. Instead, it seems that everything was done to ensure that she would leave.”
Last month, after a meeting with the board and Mr. Flight, Ms. Ostroff was offered a 2.5-percent cost-of-living adjustment and agreed to stay, Ms. Peterson noted. But the following week, she said, Iris Mitchell, the board’s chairwoman, “handed me a memo stating that the board had decided to restructure the position with a lesser title. You humiliated Anna and made her feel disrespected. You backed her into a corner and she quit.”
She was surprised to see, in an ad in The Star for Ms. Ostroff’s successor, the job title change from “director” to “coordinator,” said Ms. Peterson.” Chris Herbert, a board member, said, however, that Ms. Ostroff had quit before the job title was changed.
Others underscored their affection for Ms. Ostroff and their disappointment in the board, one woman speaking emotionally about the sense of renewal she experienced in finding “my friend Anna” after mourning the death of her husband for more than a year.
Ms. Ostroff had initially agreed to remain in the position without a raise, she said. “It just feels like you guys don’t care.”
“This is known as the nutrition center,” said John Keeshan, “but it’s not about the food. . . . It’s about the spirit. ‘Food for the soul’ is what this is about, and that’s what brings people here. We had a real bright spot in the Town of East Hampton with this program, every week and every day. It couldn’t have been a better place to go and enjoy camaraderie with your friends and neighbors. . . . If there is the most remote chance that we could bring her back and convince her that we love her and we want her to stay because we need her, I believe we should make that effort. . . . Give us a chance to bring her back if possible, because it’s more for our benefit than hers.”
Ms. Ostroff “was one of the most remarkable women I’ve ever met,” said Helen Searing. “She was selfless, and I’m sorry that she’s gone.”
Lori Hubbard, a local musician, said she was grateful that Ms. Ostroff “brought me to all of you,” and that going to the center was “one of the happiest times of my life.”
Regarding Ms. Ostroff’s wages, Ms. Herbert said that “We [the board] very politely said to her, ‘We cannot give you the raise this year.’ No one said ‘ever.’ “
“We all appreciate her,” Ms. Herbert added. “<I>She’s<P> the one that kicked you people in the ass when she said ‘No, I quit.’ All we asked her for was a little bit of time. Not this year on the raise, next year. That’s all we asked for. And she quit.”
“Would you take her back?” Mr. Keeshan asked the board.
“In a heartbeat,” one member said.
The problem with that, however, is that board members interviewed three candidates, and the position has been filled.
“I think we’ve discussed this long enough,” Ms. Mitchell finally said. “We understand where you’re coming from. I hope that you understand where we’re coming from. We thank you very much for coming, and we will take all your ideas and we’ll discuss it with the board.”
Mr. Flight, who had listened throughout the meeting, agreed that Ms. Ostroff “was a great employee,” but asked the audience to give the new hire a chance. “The hope for Anna is that she can go on to find something that will meet her financial needs. . . . If she can’t make it work on the salary that is offered here, that’s unfortunate.” The councilman said he would support the board’s grant request for the town’s next budget, which will be finalized in November.
Earlier this month, before she resigned from the program, Ms. Ostroff did not return a call seeking comment, nor did Ms. Mitchell on Tuesday.