Archive for the ‘2011 Meetings’ Category

Report Bridgehampton CAC meeting October 28,2011

Posted in 2011 Meetings | Comments (0)

1,  The abundance of variances granted by the ZBA  a resolution:

SUBJECT: A Unanimous Resolution Passed by the Bridgehmpton CAC on October 24, 2011 Presented in the form of a letter to the following:

Southampton Zoning Board of Appeals, Southampton Town Board, & Southampton Town Attorney

IN RE : Application by Todd and Sandra  Kramer, 110 Bridge Lane, Bridgehampton, NY 11932

The issue here is the process that the ZBA takes or fails to take in matters of this sort. We understand that in this instance either the former or the present  owner had obtained a previous variance and did not comply with its terms. In that case, if the ZBA is going to consider another variance without dealing with the alleged violation of the first variance, then that is an issue that the Bridgehampton CAC could comment upon.

Therefore the Bridgehampton CAC is taking this opportunity to communicate with the Southampton Town Board and discuss a possible amendment to the Town Code that would provide, in essence that, if a variance is granted and the owner does not comply with or violates the variance, then any further relief requested by that owner must be accompanied with a detailed explanation of why the first variance was not complied with or why the owner violated the variance, and the ZBA shall not (mandatory language) process the request for a second variance until it has satisfied itself ( after a public noticed hearing ) that the owner acted in good faith ( or adhered to some other requirement imposed by this amendment to the Town Code.)


The members of the CAC  had invited Ms. Kabot to address the meeting about her candidacy in the upcoming election for Supervisor. Ms. Throne Holst requested that she be able to present the outlines of the proposed 2102 Town Budget. We were grateful for and fortunate to have a substantial representation from the membership  of the Watermill CAC attend this meeting.

The CAC suggested that Ms. Throne Holst make her presentation during the first portion of the meeting and requested that Ms. Kabot  follow after. The meeting was not scheduled as a forum on the election, and all of those that attended  were delighted to express our unanimous gratitude to Ms. Throne Host, Ms. Graboski, and Ms. Kabot  for the invaluable service and contributions they have made to all the residents of our Town. The economic plight that Southampton faces today was recognized by these  three early on. The planning and budget adjustments necessary  to cushion the impact on our community have been shared by all three. The job continues and we expressed our committee’s strong support for whomever is successful in the upcoming election.

3.  The Supervisor’s Proposed 2012 budget: The main details of the budget are well presented on the Southampton Town’s website, along with the main thrust of the presentation made by the Supervisor at this meeting. The CAC was supportive of the proposed budget and of the administrative changes planned by the Supervisor.

There was some discussion concerning the  proposed reduction in the membership of the Planning Board and the ZBA.

The CAC understood that the budget presented to date was only preliminary. One issue that arose  concerned the proposal to use anticipated Community Preservation Fund revenues from future years as a basis for borrowing up to about $100,000,000 in purchasing power in order to acquire additional  land portions. This proposal was echoed by  Ms. Kabot, although she proposes  a $50,000,000 limit in anticipated purchasing power. Members of the CAC expressed their concern about this form of financing  and suggested that the policy be vetted by experienced, independent sources.  The members pointed out that in the event of insufficient future revenue to cover past or current contractual obligations entered into by  the Community Preservation Fund, the taxpayers of the  Southampton will inevitably be obligated to make up any shortfall, a questionable risk in unsteady economic times.

4. Ms. Kabot   made a presentation that described her background as the most recent former  Supervisor, She   supported and praised  the present Supervisor for her budgetary proposals. Ms. Kabot remarked that during her term  as Supervisor, her team had initially identified many of the budget deficiencies that the present administration now is  addressing. Although the weakness of the economy played a  part in causing the present budget crises, it is clear that excessive spending and borrowing  by previous administrations was at least equally culpable. “The can had been kicked down the road” for years.

Report Bridgehampton CAC meeting of September 26,2011

Posted in 2011 Meetings | Comments (0)


The following summarized public notice appeared in the September 15 issue of the Southampton Press: “Notice of special election Bridgehampton Fire District on October 18, 2011.  A special election  will be held at the Firehouse, 64 School Street, Bridgehampton  between 6PM and 9PM . Voters eligible to vote  in elections within the fire district may vote  at this time. “

Proposition Summarized: Shall the bond resolution of the Bridgehampton Fire District, adopted September 7, 2011 authorizing the acquisition of a parcel located at 2339  Montauk Highway (Present location of Pulver Gas)   $3,900,000 including financing through a 25 year bond paid for by additional tax levies from taxpayers of the fire district be approved.  A public hearing is reported scheduled for  Friday October 14 at 5:00 PM on this issue.

Following is a  CAC report on this issue following the September 26, 2011 meeting:

Mr. Halsey presented the following Press Release :

Purchase of Pulver Property Main Street, Bridgehampton, NY

The Bridgehampton Fire District has entered into a contract to purchase the neighboring Pulver Gas Property for the sum of $3,900,000.00. An informational meeting will take place at the Bridgehampton Fire Department on Friday October 14th at 6PM. A special public vote to approve the purchase will take place at the Bridgehampton Fire department on Tuesday, October 18th from 6 to 9 pm. All registered voters in the Bridgehampton Fire District are eligible to vote .

Plans for the property, if purchase is approved, have not been made as Pulver Gas will maintain their existing lease at the location for two years. However future use will be for the Bridgehampton Fire Department as the Fire Department has out grown its current facilities  and the opportunity to purchase this adjoining property with access to Montauk Highway could not be declined by the District.

Any further questions should be addressed at the public meeting on October 14th.

A thorough presentation was made by the commissioners on the proposal. A sense of urgency was emphasized by them for fear  the property might be purchased by another party. The Commissioners stated they had signed a purchase contract in July of 2011, the expiration date to be upon completion of the October 18 vote and closing to follow on December 15, 2011 pending a positive vote result on October 18.

Comments and questions from members of the CAC followed the presentation:

First: The CAC members present expressed  their complete support for the Fire Department and their unanimous gratitude for its volunteer members’ services to the Fire District community over many  years.

Second:  It was the sense of the CAC that the Commissioners should undertake a longer period of public information and discussion – beyond  that offered  in the press release –   before a vote on the purchase of the Pulver property is registered  by the voters. The CAC felt that the press release’s  single planned public hearing followed by a vote four days later offered too short a period for public consideration prior to the voters’ commitment either way. The CAC  opined that the Commissioners would be well served,  prior to  any public meetings,   to submit  general plans for the uses of the expanded property, including  estimates for the execution of those plans, as well as the costs involved in the purchase.

Third:  In the opinion of the CAC the commissioners’ chances for a positive vote by the fire district eligible voters would benefit by full disclosure of the liabilities taxpayers of the fire district could expect to face  from the purchase as well as the liabilities from future construction of facilities.

Following a full and open discussion, the meeting was adjourned at 8:45 PM.

Report on Activities and Resolutions at the CAC meeting August 22, 2011

Posted in 2011 Meetings | Comments (0)

1. The CAC particularly welcomed Nancy Graboski to our meeting. Her attendance always helps our understanding of town related issues. Much more, Nancy has always been a valuable advocate when puzzling issues have arisen concerning Bridgehampton and she well represents our hamlet when we need help in resolving issues with the town.

2 Discussion about the congestion at the end of Lumber Lane/ Montauk Highway : Even closing the beverage store hasn’t helped, though the Nat’l Grid work at this the busiest possible intersection in Bridgehampton  over the busiest week of the summer was incredibly insensitive and  really caused a dangerous traffic situation at this location. . Beyond the Nat’l Grid fiasco …during the 2011 tourist season the traffic congestion has reached a crescendo which doubtless will be somewhat relieved after Labor Day. On the other hand any relief from heavy summer traffic will be somewhat diminished by the opening of a new school year and its resulting flow of young pedestrians through this dangerous intersection. In addition, based upon two applications for extensive development which have been approved by the Planning Boards and ZBA, during the coming year we expect large construction projects on the East and West sides of the intersection at Bullshead Inn and the Starbuck/Prudential/Beverage Store  sites.

In the opinion of the majority of the CAC the following analysis offered by Ian MacPherson accurately describes present traffic conditions at this location not withstanding a more moderate quantity of traffic after Labor Day. “It is immediately evident from the traffic flows and also the dual use of [cars in line awaiting light changes] that it is quite extraordinary that anyone can get through without having an accident. In the North to South direction you have traffic from Lumber Lane and the [ Prudential] parking lots competing with traffic from the Sag Turnpike [ for permission to move in response to] any of the three lights on to the Montauk Highway. In addition this traffic is crossed by additional [backed up] traffic [waiting to ] come from Montauk Highway and from Ocean Road seeking to go North on Lumber Lane as well as traffic from the Prudential parking lot also seeking to go North on Lumber Lane or [passing across two lines of competing traffic to go North on the ] Sag Turnpike. Members of our committee will be meeting with Tom Neely early this week, September 12, 2011 to discuss our thoughts on ways to alleviate the constant threat of accidents at this intersection.

3  Report on the latest developments in our efforts to revive a sailing program at the site of the old Mecox Yacht Club. In early September came  a positive ruling from the Town’s Conservation Board on the application for a “wetlands permit.” It was hoped that the Town Board would follow up by issuing a license to proceed, but the “neighbors” to the property have  hired lawyers and issued a law suit against the Town and the Conservation Board ruling and incidentally listing the wonderful volunteers who have been pursuing this project . The CAC pointed out in their meeting that limiting water rights of our residents and their guests   is certainly not in the interests of our community nor is it probably in the interests of any community when the exclusion is aimed solely to  the benefit of a vocal, litigious  minority. The CAC once again unanimously supports the efforts of the Mecox Sailing Program proponents  and hopes the Town Attorney  office will vigorously defend  the Conservation Board ruling in the matter.

4   Steve Long , the Director of the Children’s Museum of the East End presented a detailed proposeal for a walking trail project within the boundaries of  the CMEE property on the Sag Turnpike. The trail proposal comes with both a shorter  distance and longer distance option. The trail will carry younger children through a safely constructed “nature walk” as they  explore the environment of the lovely wooded area surrounding the museum . The CAC applauded the idea and suggested that CMEE  start with a beginning trail even before the full funding of the larger option is realized. It is no surprise that CMEE has already received indications of support from our community, including the environmental leader, The Group for the East End,. Happily the proposition is already in front of the Town Board and it is hoped that the Department of Land Management will aid and abet this worthy project.

5   There is a need for the information data concerning  residents of Bridgehampton especially their street delivery house  numbers to be listed and available on the  Main  Suffolk  County Post office data base  to ensure the residents  receive appropriate  UPS. FEDEX, et al deliveries . However, as with all beaurocratic matters, the solution is not that simple. It would behoove Bridgehampton residents to pursue package and special mail delivery options with the Post Office directly. Our problem is  that we do not have home delivery, so that the Post Office doesn’t handle issues that require our street addresses and at times the information required by carriers for street deliveries does not come  from the Post Office without a lot of fuss.

As always , suggestions for topics will be welcome as will all folks who have an interest in the comings and goings of Bridgehampton. One agenda item already proposed is a program to restore/replace the wounded and aging roadside tree population of both Bridgehampton and Sagaponack . Many of these fine trees have suffered mightily over long years. They need an active program to determine their health and to remedy any  dangerous chance of their falling over our power lines and onto vehicles, homes, and passing pedestrians.

Activities and Resolutions at the CAC meeting June 27, 2011

Posted in 2011 Meetings | Comments (0)

1. Proposed addition to the physical plant of the Bridgehampton fire Department. Bridgehampton Fire Department Commissioners, Steve Halsey, Cliff Foster and Fred Wilford discussed with the CAC  a potential plan to enlarge and improve the Fire Department plant facilities , referencing  reports in the Southampton Press that were published during the past 4 months. Mr. Halsey stated that the  newspaper reports were premature and reflected only possible solutions to what is a present day overcrowding of Fire Department office facilities at its Bridgehampton site. He said that the sole alternative being considered at this time is limited to confidential inquiries that are under way for a possible  purchase of the present Pulver Gas office building  and its  property located to the West of the  Firehouse surrounding the Bridgehampton Community House property on the Montauk Highway in Bridgehampton. Mr. Halsey remarked that there was no present need for expansion to the vehicle storage and maintenance facilities beyond those provided in the present structure. In addition to providing additional office space Mr. Foster indicated the  vacant portion of the Pulver property could provide an area for necessary rainwater drainage emplacements. The three commissioners  bore witness to  the vastly increased number of emergency calls annually answered by the Ambulance/Fire Department beyond the volume  of comparative calls run when  the  construction of the present facility was planned   about 30 years ago.  Resulting increased volumes and  mandated increases  of  reporting,  filing  and other administrative  requirements have severely taxed the present facility . The commissioners also pointed out that the present facility over-crowding could have a limiting influence in attracting necessary new members to its volunteer  roster.

Mr Halsey said that if a purchase of the Pulver property seemed possible, it would be first necessary to submit   the proposition for that purchase  to a public vote by the eligible voters within  the Bridgehampton. fire district. Should that vote result in  approval for  the purchase, including the costs, of the Pulver property and in the event the purchase was  accomplished , the Commissioners would then undergo the planning and would produce a proposal for  a renovation program for the purchased property. It would then be necessary to present this second proposal and its costs  to the voters of the Bridgehampton Fire District for their consideration and approval .  The members of the CAC asked a few questions for clarification and then thanked the Commissioners for their report. The CAC invited the Commissioners to pay a return visit when their plans were ready for submission to the voters in the Fire District.

2. Application for changed usages for the Corrigan Garage/Car Rental Agency/ used car lot location.. Attorney for the owners, Dennis Downes, presented.  This piece of property has historically housed the Corrigan garage and more recently a Hertz Rental Car  business. The owners wish to remove the structures housing these businesses and propose to erect a building that would house two retail businesses. To do so the Southampton ZBA will be asked to change the present use  permits for the location. Mr. Downes sought the support of the CAC for pursuing this application. The sense of the CAC was to support the change of use application and will send a letter to the Planning Board and to the ZBA stating so.

3. Hearing on August 18th, regarding  a variance for the Sand-Land sandpit on Middle Line Highway. Since this is right on the border of Noyac and Bridgehampton, our CAC  invited  Sherry Kiselyak  from the Noyac Advisor to attend this meeting.

The hearing for a variance is for Sand land, the present owner,  to continue to have its illegal buildings remain in their current location, which is about 80 feet closer to their Bridgehampton Residential neighbors, than Town Code allows.  These five buildings were probably  built without any permits several years back.   If this variance application were granted, this would be a serious blow to all of the Bridgehampton neighbors, who oppose San Land operating cement crushing and wood processing facilities on the premises.  Sand Land ONLY has a permit to operate a “portable sand screening facility.” In a presentation to the CAC the  position of the adjoining neighbors was presented: that the business is a huge, loud nuisance and is operating illegally. The Bridgehampton CAC sense is that the business may be illegal as presently constituted but a realistic approach to minimizing the disturbance to the neighbors would be to enter discussions quietly with the owners of the business. The Bridgehampton’CAC’s sense is that, regardless of whether the Sand- Land business is being operated without proper permits, a diligent effort should be made on behalf of the affected neighbors and the owners of the business  to reach an agreement on how the business may be operated ,( including any necessary modifications to current practices). so as  not to cause any unacceptable noise, smell, or other aggravations  to the neighbors. It was also the sense of the CAC that even if the necessary variances and permits are granted, the continuous operation of the business as it is presently conducted is unacceptable.

4. The traffic circle at Scuttlehole and Mitchell Lane continues to be un- landscaped unlike similar traffic controlled areas in Southampton. In addition it is not clear how the plans for widening portions of Scuttlehole Road  will impact the traffic problems in Bridgehampton. Emma Clurman of our CAC has agreed to confer with Alex Gregor and the Town Dept of Transportation about both of these issues.

outstanding issues updates:

A. From Jeff Mansfield: Mecox Yacht Club :Over the past two years, we have collected hundreds of signatures on a petition to the Town of Southampton asking that it use the old site of the Mecox Yacht Club, which is now Town Parkland, as a venue for a sailing association to benefit the members of our community. We have organized a letter writing campaign, and induced a large number of supporters to attend public hearings on the matter. At the behest of the Town, we have submitted a 100 page proposal outlining the general boating facility, and sailing school we hope to re-establish. We have formed a not for profit corporation, the Mecox Sailing Association, and have Officers and Directors who are willing to serve. We have drafted a set of by-laws and association rules. We have hired legal counsel, and an environmental consultant, and have met with Town officials and residents of Bay Lane on numerous occasions. We have hired a licensed surveyor to delineate the wetlands and the site of the proposed venture. We have applied, along with the Town, to the DEC for a “Wetlands Permit.” Finally, we have fully researched our Insurance needs, and we have applied for 501(c)(3) charitable status from the IRS

While we have made considerable headway, including the gaining of support from both the Bridgehampton and Water Mill Citizen Advisory Committees, the process has been slowed by a small number of Bay Lane residents. This group opposes our venture, and has hired lawyers and specialists that confront us and the Town at every turn.

The latest public hearing on the matter was on Tuesday, June 14th. In short, the Town is still waiting to hear back from the DEC on our application for a “Wetlands Permit.” Without this permit, the Town cannot move forward in granting the Mecox Sailing Association a licensing agreement. The Town is also applying for a permit from the Conservation Board. A Conservation Board public hearing will take place at Town Hall on Wednesday, July 13th at 7:30pm. Our hope is that both permits will be granted by the next Town Board meeting on the matter, which is scheduled for Tuesday, August 9th at 1pm. If you are able to attend the July 13th Conservation Board hearing to express your views in support of the Mecox Sailing Association, it will be most appreciated.

While we are frustrated at the protracted nature of our progress, we realize that the Town is moving deliberately because of the opposition’s repeated, and very real threat of legal action.

B. MIACO (Bullshead Rennovation)The Chair reported that as of June 27,2011 no building permit applications have been filed for this site.

C. BHHS Rogers House Renovation progress. The Chair invited all to visit the well progressing restoration of the exterior of the house. It looks terrific.

D. BNB Ventures :   THE Chair reported that a demolition permit application was filed with the  Town Building Dept on June 22  presumably for the demolition of the beverage store at he intersection of Lumber Lane and  the Montauk Highway.… Progress at last.

Activities and Resolutions at the CAC meeting on April 25, 2011

Posted in 2011 Meetings | Comments (0)

1 The Bridgehampton Historical Society  invited us to meet at their restoration site (The Nathanial Rogers /Hopping House ) . Director Eilertsen guided the group through the history  of the house and described the financial progress to date for funds to pay for the restoration  of the house. He said that through  the efforts  of  Southampton  Town , New York State, and the generosity of many supporters from the community, work had started at the site. He expects that the exterior of the house will have been restored and protected by the end of the summer. The next stage will be to secure the finances needed to  complete the restoration of the interior. The house is a valuable historic asset. With its surrounding open acreage, it will  be the eastern gateway to Bridgehampton hamlet

2 Dr. Lois Favre, Superintendent Bridgehampton School District and Business Manager, Robert Hauser,  discussed  the 2011 proposed school district budget . In spite of its  small enrollment the school is mandated by New York State to adhere to programs requirements , staffing provisions ,  and facilities practices that are the same as those mandated for higher enrollment institutions . A comparison of relative cost burdens shows   that  the Bridgehampton School District , in spite of  its small  enrollment, suffers financially. At the same time it appears  it is  the position of the Superintendent, the School Board, and School Business Department that there are no meaningful areas of the Bridgehampton School District expenditures for the year 2010 that can be reduced in the2011 proposed budget without damaging the quality of education provided  presently to its approximately 180 student population  enrolled in classes K-12. The effect upon Bridgehampton School District taxpayers is that a no increase of services 2011 budget , called a “roll-over budget”,  will require a tax increase of  5.6%  on all Bridgehampton tax payers.. Although the school has a high per student cost, resulting from its low student enrollment,  the assessment rate for Bridgehampton School District taxpayers is lower than in other Southampton Town  K-12 school districts, as well as in school districts further west  on Long Island.

The Bridgehampton CAC was supportive of the School District presentation. Comments from members emphasized their hopes that the school would broaden programs that would benefit graduates as they move on  into higher education and career roles.  There were offers from members to volunteer their services as tutors and mentors to the school

3 The US Post Office maintains a database that online vendors use and that credit card companies use to verify addresses  for various reasons. The Bridgehampton postal district has no RFD services. Therefore inaccurate or simply no information about certain streets and home addresses can be found in the database. .

The CAC voted to contact the regional USPS office (in Happaugue) and ask that the data base relative to Bridgehampton’s Postal District be corrected and updated. Vice Chair , Steve Steinberg , offered to pursue this resolution.

4—A frustrating traffic/parking  situation  exists at the two Town Beaches in Bridgehampton — The CAC members expressed dismay  that the present parking regulations and fees continue to restrict the ability of Bridgehampton residents to reach the beaches even though they pay  property taxes to do so and pay a fee for an annual permit. This problem has existed for years. Jeff Mansfield has agreed to  pursue this issue along with the support of  Councilwoman Nancy Graboski.

5. Citarella Parking on Hildreth Lane  . There is a traffic problem on this two lane road for two reasons. First there are no signs that limit parking along the road in spite of the continuous passage of vehicles  by-passing their need to travel  through the main hamlet of Bridgehampton. Second employees of the Citarella  shopping center/café use the sides of Hildreth Road to park their cars  because of the huge patron demand on the complex’s  sole existing parking facility. The resulting traffic demands on Hildreth Road  are at their highest at exactly the same periods that the parking demands on the Citarella parking lot hit their zenith. The CAC requests relief  from this problem by the posting of limited or no parking signs along this vulnerable traffic location. This effort will be pursued by Alejanndro Saraleguia and Christine Smith with support by Councilwoman Nancy Graboski.

6.  Councilwoman Nancy Graboski reported there are planned  upcoming votes scheduled by the Town Board concerning amendments to the present practice of issuing PDD variances throughout the Town. Members of the Bridgehampton CAC have historically been  critical of the use of PDDs throughout the town of Southampton and particularly  as they may impact the hamlet of Bridgehampton. Although the Town is taking steps to make this process more palatable, records show that the use  of PDDs has been discouraged and opposed by the Bridgehampton CAC consistently for the past 15 years . In fact the practice has been debated in  many meetings at intervals throughout this time span. Never has there been a positive resolution passed by present  or past Bridgehampton CAC boards that supported or advocated the use  of PDD legislation  by the Town Board. The present Bridgehampton CAC once again voiced this position in its April 25, 2011 meeting


Posted in 2011 Meetings | Comments (0)

Our agenda opened with a discussion and  a presentation from Libby Hummer, representing The League of Women Voters, concerning a proposal to create  a Town Manager system of government  as part of the Southampton Town Government. Ms. Hummer distributed a pamphlet  listing the purposes and administrative basis for  “The Council Manager Form of Government”: Based on the discussion at our meeting I have taken the liberty of   summarizing   and enhancing  portions of the pamphlet below.

“The (Southampton ) Town Board is  (Southampton Town’s) legislative body, its members are the community’s decision makers and are elected to establish the policies that provide needed services. (The Town Board originates the budget) and ultimately “approves the budget, determines the tax rate, is responsible for planning of major projects with long term considerations such as community growth, land use development, capital financing, and strategic planning.

“The (Town) Manager  form of government combines the strong political leadership of elected officials with the strong managerial experience of a professionally trained administrator hired by the (Town Board) to oversee the delivery of public services. The manager’s duties are defined by the (Town Board) and may include:

Serving as the (Town Board’s) chief advisor

Preparing the budget for the (Town) Supervisor’s approval

(Employing and Discharging) department heads- supervising day-to-day operations

Formulating and implementing all personnel policies

Negotiating contracts with employees

Enforcing local laws and ordinances

“The consensus among elected officials (of municipalities presently using the services of a Town Manager) was that there is a clear net gain from having a professional manager. Today approximately 4000 local governments operate under the (Town) council-manager system”.

“The manager may make policy recommendations to the Town Board , but the (Town Board) is responsible for  all policy determinations.”

“New York State Town Law states “Any town may, by local law, establish the office of town manager- (and may have the office) revoked.”

Ms. Hummer indicated that  Town Manager programs often  result in cost savings well beyond the financial burden that comes with adding  an additional executive level The experience and expertise of a professionally endowed Town Manager) usually results in   a more efficient, more productive town government.  Administrative turnover is reduced and personnel recruitment becomes less political. In general the office is not part of Civil Service; it is appointed by the town board and reports directly to the town board.

Mrs. Graboki offered  some comments on this subject: the concept of a town manager was originally discussed during the Thiele administration in the 1990’s ; the office of General Services Administrator was instituted  In many ways its role can be described as similar  to the role of Superintendent of a school district. In Southampton  Richard Blowes was appointed General Services Administrator ; his effective career in this post resulted in  the continuity  of service in  many of the critical  Town Government departments through the frequent changes of administration . Mrs.  Graboski  endorsed  having the Town Board investigate the Town Manager concept and remarked that the present time seemed ripe for doing so.

Following the presentation and discussion , the CAC unanimously recommended that the Town Board research the proposal for a Town Manager role in the government of Southampton Town.


Pamela Giacoia is the Director of Senior Services for the Town of Southampton, which includes our facility at 585 Sag Harbor Turnpike. In recent years the attendance at this facility has fallen somewhat, in spite of  the expansion of services provided by  the Senior Citizens’ Programs that are increasingly available to our older residents. Ms. Giacoia came  to our meeting to discuss the programs available and to confer about encouraging more members of the large senior population on the East End to make use of the Bridgehampton facility.

There are three Senior Services Centers in Southampton Town ; the other two are located in the midst of larger and more concentrated populations in Flanders/Riverside and Hampton Bays. They are simply more visible than the facility in Bridgehampton and hence have  a larger attendance. The CAC suggested to Ms. Giacoia that her department enlist aid  from  local residents who are or have been members of the public relations and advertising communities to design a program aimed at informing our resident seniors about the  rich programs offered by the Senior Services Department, particularly at this  Bridgehampton Center. An information program would probably  require some funding which the CAC suggests might be provided by businesses located in the Town of Southampton.


The CAC discussed the problem of snow removal from sidewalks and curbs in front of commercial  establishments in Bridgehampton. During the recent storms, portions of the hamlet center’s sidewalks and curb cuttings were dangerously covered with snow and ice well beyond 24 hours following the weather disturbances .The CAC pointed out that many  communities require that all public sidewalks and curb  entrances be freed of snow and ice impediments by the establishments’ managements immediately following winter storms. The committee asked whether Southampton has  a similar code policy. Mrs Graboski  offered to research  this matter.


At the CAC’s March 28 meeting there will be a discussion of the present property taxation system as it pertains to Bridgehampton, led by Jeffrey Vogel.  Members of the town government will also discuss its proposals for revision of the 100% Reassessment Policy