A shark tournament that promises to be "environmentally sensitive" - a source of protein for the poor and data for scientists, not to mention big bucks to its winners - will be held tomorrow and Saturday from the Star Island Yacht Club in Montauk, the club's 11th annual tournament.

Luck is sure to play a larger role in this year's contest than before. New Federal shark-fishing rules will severely limit not only the number of sharks brought in to weigh, but the number caught.

That is because fishermen must now stop fishing once they have caught their new two-sharks-per-day limit. Previously they could continue to fish, but had to release the catch.

Bag Is Halved

Sharks are managed by species, and the species are broken down by category. The combined bag limit from the large coastal, small coastal, and pelagic categories was reduced from four sharks per day to two as of April 2.

Nancy Kohler, a marine biologist and shark specialist with the National Marine Fisheries Service, said that in addition to the impact on catch-and-release fishing, the new rules would probably limit the number of smaller sharks, especially makos, brought back for consumption.

The reduced bag limit is part of the 50-percent reduction in shark landings ordered by the Fisheries Service. The new rules altogether forbid the harvest of the great white, whale, basking, sand tiger, and bigeye sand tiger species, by either commercial or recreational fishermen.

For great whites, the rules instead establish a catch-and-release fishery - difficult to imagine.

For The Needy

Last year, anglers on 180 competing boats brought 60 sharks to Star Island's scales. Cash and prizes worth $125,000 were awarded. Over 350 sharks were tagged and released, and 1,200 pounds of shark meat were bagged and distributed to the needy. The Long Island Council of Churches will again be the distributor.

Scientists from the Fisheries Service laboratory in Narragansett, R.I., will be on hand to measure and study the catch when it comes in, starting at about 3 p.m. each day. Fishermen can enter their boats right up to the captains' meeting at 6:30 tonight at the Star Island Yacht Club. The fee is $500 per boat.

"The era of wanton destruction of sharks is over," said Sam Gershowitz, president of the Yacht Club. "As sponsors of one of the largest shark tournaments on the Eastern Seaboard, we believe we have an obligation to create a profoundly different kind of program that demonstrates just how environmentally aware the fishing community has become."

AMAGANSETT

McBride to Yorke Rhodes and Elizabeth McBride, Osprey Road, $250,000.

Solomon estate to Gary and Paulene Bencivenga, Montauk Highway, $1,440,000.

BRIDGEHAMPTON

Collins to Robert and Aldith Asselberg, Kellis Pond Lane, $435,000.

Shanholt to Crystal Lake Enterprises Ltd., Noyac Path, $950,000.

Mathew to Steven Raftopoulos, Butter Lane, $310,000.

EAST HAMPTON

Field to John James and Kimberly Hoppes, Dominy Court, $365,000.

McClure to Arthur Bradley, Blue Jay Way, $240,000.

Higgins to Michael Findlay, Two Holes of Water Road, $296,000.

Narvesen to Sam and Marilyn Linder, Blacksmith Path, $485,000.

Bushman to Peter Karl 3d, Three Mile Harbor Road, $170,000.

Nobles to Mary and Cecil Quillen 3d, Cedar Street, $312,500.

Blecher to to Larry and Maria-Luisa Loeb, Farm Lane, $349,000.

McCrone to Kenneth Clark, Rolling Woods Court, $406,000.

Flanner to Michael and Lynne Brown, McGuirk Street, $211,000.

MONTAUK

Badaloto to John Drobecker, South Federal Street, $229,000.

Marine Midland Bank to Harold Simon and Amy Coombs, Brisbane Road, $230,000.

Walsh to Thomas and Ann Connors, DeWitt Place, $208,000.

Bodek to Vito Costanza, Bryan Road, $285,000.

NORTHWEST

East Isle Custom Bldrs. Inc. to Michael and Sara Shaw, Hand's Creek to Ely Brook Road, $265,000.

Ryan (trustee) to Sean and Carole McCarthy, Swamp Road, $750,000.

Belas to Nancy Fedder, Hand's Creek Road, $215,000.

Lederman to Sharon Friedland, Landfall Road, $280,000.

Kellman to Thomas Brennan, Two Holes of Water Road, $605,000.

NOYAC

Murphy to Martin and Elizabeth Tener, Noyac Path, $184,000.

SAG HARBOR

O'Hear to Thomas Merrick, Island View Drive, $250,000.

Fedele to Frank and Denise Festa, Crescent Street, $425,000.

Davies 3d to Melanie Fleishman, Atlantic Avenue, $207,000.

Boone Jr. to C. Ray Langston 3d, Shaw Road, $800,000.

SAGAPONACK

Lustig to Zodiac Homes, Town Line Road, $155,000.

Zodiac Homes to Douglas Dodds and Jeffrey Mexicotte, Town Line Road, $503,000.

Vassel to Rectory Realty Assoc., Sagaponack Road, $575,000.

SPRINGS

Robertson to Hugo and Maria Pineda, Montauk Boulevard, $154,000.

WAINSCOTT

Scarlata to Adrian Leibowitz, Windsor Lane, $314,000.

WATER MILL

Borkoski to Torino Corp. Inc., Old Mill Road, $1,137,000.

Castro-Magana to Stephen and Fidelita Weis, Reed Pond Court, $250,000.

Linh Nguyen, a Lynchburg College sophomore who is among the standouts on that school's cross-country team, was asked following Sunday's Berry Blast 5K in Amagansett if he had won, as was expected.

No, said Nguyen, good-naturedly. He finished fourth. He had been passed, he said, "by a little guy in a hat," and then not long after by another little guy without a hat.

The little guys, as it turned out, were two speedsters from Kazakhstan, a state that had formerly been part of the Soviet Union, who are based for the summer in Riverhead. Neither the winner, Sergei Polikarpov, nor the runner-up, Yury Tarasov, speaks English, but a third runner in their group, Gennady Sivitsky of Moscow, relayed the news that Polikarpov is Ka zakhstan's champion in the 5K, the 10K, and the marathon, and that Tarasov is the former world junior cross-country skiing champion.

Race To The Swift

Polikarpov's winning time of 15 minutes and 47 seconds was, said the race director, Bob Beattie, "incredible," though not unique for this neck of the woods. Bob Nugent, who now lives upstate, Kevin Corliss, who now lives in Minnesota, and Keith Field, who won the recent Potatohampton 10K, were all capable of a similar 4:55-per-mile pace, he said.

"The thing was," Kevin Barry, Nguyen's former coach at East Hampton High School, said later, "Linh said those guys weren't really pushing."

The race, which drew 275 entrants - a large crowd for a first-time event - grossed about $10,000 for Cancer Care Inc., the Woodbury-based service agency that works with cancer patients and their families. "It looks like East Hampton will get a Cancer Care office," Beattie said with satisfaction.

Koncelik Tops Women

The women's winner Sunday was Burke Koncelik, a top masters competitor from East Hampton, who finished 10th over all in 18:08, topping Maria Sacani (18:58) of Hampton Bays.

Two of the race's senior runners - John Conner, of Springs, who topped the 60-to-69-year-old division in 19:51, proof positive, he said, that he'd ridded his system of Lyme disease, and Andy Neidnig, a 77-year-old Sag Harborite - have on their summer agendas national and international competitions. Conner will compete in the 800 and 1,600-meter races in senior regional and national meets, and Neidnig has signed up for several events in the world veterans games, which are to be held in Durban, South Africa, next month.

"If I can't run," said Neidnig, who has been plagued with numerous physical problems in the past several years, "I'll have a good time."

Fifth Avenue Goal

Conner's ultimate goal this year, he said, is the George Sheehan Memorial mile, one of the Fifth Avenue Mile events in New York City at the end of September. "I finished fifth last year, and third the year before that. I want to win it this time."

Another sexagenarian runner, Howard Lebwith, the Springs dentist who bicycled across the country last summer, is planning to run the 7.7 miles up New Hampshire's Mount Washington later this month. "But I'm a little worried," said Lebwith, as, before the race, he perused some recent newspaper articles from that state reporting snowdrifts on Mount Washington of from 15 to 20 feet and the road as being impassable beyond the halfway point. He would ordinarily be happy to plant the Peconic County flag at the summit, he said, in reply to a question, but, citing the very real possibility of hypothermia, added that "I won't be able to carry any extra weight."

Age-Group Winners

Besides Polikarpov, Koncelik, Nguyen, Sivitsky, Conner, and Neidnig, other age-group winners Sunday were Craig Gaites (17:33), 16-18 males; Tony Venesina (18:47), 50-59 males; William O'Donnell (18:01), 40-49 males; Chris McLaughlin, 12-and-under males; Jane Jansz (20:47), 19-29 females; Erin Brown (20:59), 30-39 females; Jean Weinberg (21:20), 16-18 females; Kathleen McGuiness (21:45), 40-49 females; Jean Wolfe (25:23), 50-59 females; Caitlin O'Donnell (30:24), 12-and-under females, and Judith Opshal (34:42), 60-69 females.

The secret settlement of Jerry Della Femina's civil rights lawsuits against East Hampton Village has ended up costing taxpayers $42,500. This figure was revealed in documents obtained Monday by The Star under the State Freedom of Information Law.

The money, paid to the National Casualty Company, one of the village's insurance carriers, includes a $10,000 deductible. The remainder is the village's share of the final settlement.

The sum appears to represent the village's out-of-pocket expenses in defending itself against the ad man's two lawsuits. Beyond that, its overall significance remains cloudy, as a result of a gag order imposed on the usually talkative Mr. Della Femina, village officials, and their lawyers by Federal District Judge Arthur D. Spatt.

Documents Obtained

The documents obtained by The Star show the village's liability carrier picked up the entire tab for its lawyer's bills and may or may not have contributed an additional amount to pay some or all of Mr. Della Femina's bills too.

The Star asked Judge Spatt for a copy of the stipulation of settlement on April 14. While court records normally are public documents, the judge instead sealed the stipulation the same day, at the village's request.

The $42,500 payment does not include earlier costs incurred by the village in arresting and prosecuting Mr. Della Femina and his partner in the Red Horse Market, David Silver. The initial charges, in 1993, were mere violations of zoning, involving a display of pumpkins, hay bales, and flowers the village deemed an illegal sign.

Violations Dismissed

In all, there were 27 related violations cited and all were eventually dismissed. Mr. Della Femina, who later ran unsuccessfully for Village Board, filed the lawsuits, one challenging the constitutionality of the village sign law and the other demanding $500,000 in damages for wrongful arrest and malicious prosecution.

At first, all three of the village's insurance carriers denied coverage. The documents released Monday show that, for a time, Janine Broomhall, a Nassau County lawyer hired to defend the village, billed the village for half her fees and National Casualty for the other half.

But, the papers show, in September 1995, the carrier reimbursed the village for $5,819. This represented every penny it had paid Ms. Broomhall for its defense and indicated that National Casualty had agreed at some point to cover the village entirely.

Legal Bills

A spokesman for the carrier, Chris Behymer, said lawyers for his company advised him that National Casualty also should comply with the gag order, though it was not a direct party to the suits. As a result, he declined to say how much the village's legal defense or the settlement had cost altogether.

He did say, though, that a municipality's legal bills typically are covered 100 percent by liability insurance once the deductible is met. He added, however, that some policies do not pay damages to plaintiffs who successfully bring charges such as malicious prosecution.

That may mean that National Casualty agreed to defend the village but would not pay the portion of the settlement related to Mr. Della Femina's bills, which may or may not suggest that Mr. Della Femina received a $32,500 settlement from the village.

Silence Maintained

Citing Judge Spatt's gag order, Mayor Paul F. Rickenbach Jr., Village Administrator Larry Cantwell, and Ms. Broomhall declined to answer any of The Star's questions, as did Mr. Della Femina's lawyer, William W. Esseks of Esseks, Hefter & Angel.

Mr. Della Femina, not to be silenced entirely, did have a comment:"I'm happy and I'm sure the village is happy this is over. I don't want to say much more and risk being held in contempt of court. It's not the court I hold in contempt." He added that the village "should always remember this and try to settle these things early on."

He had long contended he would not settle out of court for anything less than his legal bills. In December 1994, after the violations were dismissed but before his two suits moved into high gear, Mr. Della Femina said those bills came to $30,000.

Evenhanded Rule?

Wainscott

June 9, 1997

Dear Mrs. Rattray:

Your statement "Village Z.B.A. members appear to shoot from the hip - or vote from the gut - and then figure out how to justify what they have done" seems right on target. Your analysis of the causes and effects of such behavior, is, however, as deeply flawed as it is intemperate.

You gratuitously inflame prejudice against "an influx of wealthy people" but ignore the fact that people who came to East Hampton much earlier are the true masters of "efforts to bend the Village Code to their will." The Z.B.A. has at times acted arbitrarily and capriciously, treating similarly situated people very differently, favoring those who preceded "the influx" and disfavoring more recent settlers. Consider, for example, the actual cases, all decided by the Z.B.A. within the past four years, of three neighbors who asked for variances from Village Code Section 57-6 that were identical except for the size involved.

In the case seeking the largest variance, the Z.B.A. gave the owner (a longtime village resident who'd owned the property for many years) everything he asked for, allowing him to expand by another 232 square feet ,or nearly 10 percent, while asking that owner to pay only half the "mandatory" variance fee of $5,000 per 200 square feet fixed by Village Code Section 57-7C (2) (e) [2], even while the Village Administrator, Larry Cantwell, cautioned the village attorney, the Village Board, and the Z.B.A. in writing that there was no legal basis to waive "the correct fee of $10,000."

In the second case, the Z.B.A. also allowed the owner (who hadn't owned his property nearly as long as in the first case) to expand by almost 10 percent, but insisted this owner pay the full variance fee.

For the third neighbor, however, the newest of the three, the Z.B.A. voted to deny a variance only one-fourth the size of the 232 square feet given at half-price in the first case, even though this third neighbor offered to pay the full variance fee.

Does that sound like the even-handed rule of law? Is there any doubt such selective application of the zoning rules is a major reason why property owners appearing at the Z.B.A. have been forced to seek the protection and advice offered by attorneys and other land use consultants?

You complain "Z.B.A. members . . . seem ill-equipped to handle the charge," but inexplicably exclude Joan Denny from your complaint. Why? You have previously reported applicants find her to be singularly rude. She has made no secret of her bias against those who invest in East Hampton property. Are those the attributes that make a person well-equipped to be a Z.B.A. member?

The Z.B.A. does need change. It needs to avoid giving the impression that "old-timers" are somehow entitled to more favorable treatment than "newcomers." It needs to have all its members make decisions logically and impartially, with due regard for precedent and consistency, neither favoring nor disfavoring any applicant based on perceived wealth or family history any more than race or religion would be considered. The Z.B.A. would be helped in this regard if your pages did not foster an "us versus them" mentality. As you rightly say, the time for change is now.

Very truly yours,

DAVID FINK

This Stuff Kills

Southampton

June 9, 1997

Dear Editor:

Efforts to "fix" the atomic water disaster at Brookhaven National Laboratory - an essentially unsolvable problem given present technologies - are about to create a major ecological crisis on the East End. A cancer-causing radioactive fog is descending upon eastern Long Island as you read this letter. The potential for a Hamptons Chernobyl with major increases in breast cancers, brain cancers, leukemia, and melanoma are real and need to be dealt with immediately.

Tritium-contaminated water that is highly dangerous to public health, but relatively contained for the shortrun as a slow-moving plume, is now being pumped to an exposed basin where it will rapidly evaporate in the summer heat. Not only does this present a more substantial threat to the people living around Brookhaven Lab than does the polluted wells they can no longer drink from, it exposes many more people over a much greater area to nuclear material known to cause cancer and birth defects.

Local winds are going to bathe central Long Island and particularly the East End in a toxic nuclear soup. During periods of rain, this "fallout" will increase to even higher levels. In the 1950s, the area downwind from atomic tests became known as the "Leukemia Belt" because significant increases of cancer, particularly in children, occurred. The health impact of radiation in the environment is quite clear, and it is essential that we focus on this threat rather than on the damage-control-generated issues of lab management or job losses among nuclear scientists who made a bad career choice.

The technique of redistributing radioactive water from a limited area to "everywhere" gives the appearance of doing something. It is politically expedient, but healthwise it is a major error in judgment. Proposals to use this same surface-pumping strategy to deal with tritium contamination of water at other sloppy and mismanaged nuclear sites in the U.S. were scrapped because of the danger to public health - a wise move considering that many of the workers hired to clean up tritium-water at these same facilities subsequently developed melanoma.

On Long Island, the permits were issued in a matter of weeks after public awareness of the ecological crisis at Brookhaven became widely known. There is no substantive environmental impact analysis of what this aboveground pumping approach might do to us. One only has to look at the extreme levels of cancer around Three Mile Island after the accident there to get a sense of what these "safe" nuclear technologies can bring to unvigilant residents of surrounding communities.

Brookhaven scientists, ever active in defending their jobs and continuously telling us they are objective truth-seekers, have little to say about the health effects of evaporating atomic water over our neighborhoods and loved ones. Instead, the media is full of self-serving articles about how important their work is to humanity.

No one really knows what they do with most of the $415 million a year they spend of our money, and the only people who have put forth the view that the work of Brookhaven's scientists has any real significance or value are the scientists and public-relations cronies on the lab's payroll.

The real issue at Brookhaven is not whether the scientists get to keep their jobs but about whether we get to keep our lives. It is important that we judge our representatives in Washington on how they come up on this issue. A position to continue running Brookhaven's reactors, no matter how the politicians package it, means there will be more breast and other cancers occurring on Long Island in the future.

I've read about Brookhaven scientists' efforts to map Lyme's bacteria with atomic physics, but I really wonder how important this is. Personally, I think they should begin to map the levels of leukemia and brain and breast cancers downwind from the reactors they run and then explain why these rates are so high and continue to grow every year. What they need to do is to prove to Long Islanders that their two reactors will not cause us harm. They know this is impossible, so, instead, they distract us with tales of heroic medicine or nuclear mappings.

And, if one can judge the present by the past, one might ask: How much of note have these people really given us for all the taxpayer money they've spent? They've turned the Peconic River into a radioactive sewer and the lab into a Superfund site; our groundwater and our air are tainted with deadly substances. And now that the public is on to them, they turn up at every hearing to promote their "good works."

Does anyone who doesn't work at that lab really believe that the mapping of bull sperm is more important than not exposing our children to materials that can bring them an early death and take them away from us forever? How much longer can lab advocates argue that the two nuclear reactors at Brookhaven are for our good and that somehow the benefit of what they do goes beyond their paychecks or the support of some outdated cold war project? How can people with such an appalling environmental track record continue to command our respect and how can Senator Al D'Amato and Representative Michael Forbes continue to let these reactors poison us?

If all you Brookhaven Ph.D.s really want to benefit us, get into wind or solar power. And surely the people you'd get to hang out with would be more fun than that atomic bomb crowd you work with now.

If folks at the lab really want to show us how useful its scientific expertise can be, they should put the scientists to work on determining the impact on us of continuing to send radioactive substances and other chemical carcinogens generated by the lab into our air. There are lots of studies to show that this stuff kills people, so, perhaps, Brook haven scientists can show us how dumping it into the atmosphere of central and eastern Long Island will not cause us serious harm. Then even I would agree that they can perform miracles.

RALPH J. HERBERT

Associate Professor of

Environmental Studies

Southampton College

Please address correspondence to [email protected]

Please include your full name, address and daytime telephone number for purposes of verification.

Study Touts Alternative Modes

With summer traffic increasing by 8 percent every year and roads that are already pushing capacity, East Hampton Town must encourage the use of alternative modes of transportation. That is the crux of the long-awaited transportation update to the Town Comprehensive Plan, which was unveiled to the Town Board on Friday.

The study, commissioned in 1995, is the first update of the transportation section of the Comprehensive Plan in 31 years. The study notes that traffic on Montauk Highway had doubled between 1966 and 1982 and had tripled between 1982 and today. On some back roads, traffic has quadrupled over the past 30 years.

In the face of such figures, the study's consultants, L.K. McLean Associates of Brookhaven, also confronted the town's traditional public consensus against solutions such as a highway bypass, additional traffic lanes, traffic signals, and encouraging back-road bypasses.

No New Ferry

"In this context, the town must, therefore, look to other modes of travel, particularly rail and bus, to accommodate summer traffic conditions and thereby attempt to manage the overwhelming demand on its roadway system," the study states.

The recommendations of this study to a large extent echo the findings of another transportation report issued this spring, done under the auspices of the East End Mayors and Supervisors Association.

As expected, the newest study also recommends against any new ferry service in the town. The prospect of a Montauk-to-Connecticut car ferry was one of the key factors in commissioning the traffic study.

Grading The Roads

The study looked at the roads servicing the three potential ferry locations discussed in the past several years: Napeague Harbor at Promised Land, Fort Pond Bay at the Duryea complex in Montauk, and Lake Montauk. At no site would the existing roads and intersections be suitable to handle the volumes of traffic associated with a car ferry, the study concludes.

"A new ferry has the potential to cause a significant degradation in levels of service at roadway intersections providing access to a new terminal site," the study states. "In many cases, these levels are already poor." The study notes that Cross Sound Ferry's current Orient Point to Connecticut service carries 800,000 people per year and 320,000 vehicles.

Ferries aside, the study also recommends against any "major developments" that would have the same impacts on "levels of service."

On Verge Of Failure

The term "level of service" is used throughout the study and is a principal basis for the recommendations. Using industry guidelines, roads and sections of roads are rated on their ability to handle their volumes of traffic. The level of service is that rating. Like a report card, roads are graded from "A" (optimum) to "F" (failure).

In the peak season, almost all of Montauk Highway up to Napeague is rated at an "E" or "E-."

Giving an overview of the study to the Town Board on Friday, Raymond DiBiase of McLean Associates noted that, if traffic were to increase just 5 percent a year, the Wainscott portion of Montauk Highway would reach an "F" rating by 2002 and Amagansett's stretch of highway would fail by 2004. Conditions at an "F" level of service are essentially "stop-and-go," Mr. DiBiase explained.

Summer Traffic Year-Round

"Conditions are such that there isn't very much capacity left in the summer," he added. The study notes that summer traffic is not just a three-month phenomenon anymore. In Wainscott, for, example peak-hour traffic in April was found to be 84 percent of the peak-hour traffic in August.

A number of improvements could be made to Montauk Highway and other problem roads themselves, the study explains. Repaving the highway, installing left-turn lanes and wider shoulders where appropriate, improving clearance at some railroad underpasses, and improving safety at high-accident locations would all help, the study notes.

Shuttle Urged

But the town's main objective will need to be reduce the volume of traffic on the roads, the consultants conclude. More use of trains, buses, bicycles, and other modes of transportation is crucial.

The study recommends the creation of a shuttle bus service that would run between the town's hamlet centers and beaches and operate from "fringe" parking areas, away from the main routes.

The Town Board had been on the verge of setting up a pilot shuttle bus program this summer but has decided to hold off (see separate story on page 1).

The study recommends bus service for the entire area be addressed in a separate study, addressing such ideas as the shuttle service, a dial-a-ride service, and coordination with railroad stops and timetables.

Separate Rail Study

To make better use of the railroad system, the consultants also recommend conducting another separate study, in conjunction with the Long Island Rail Road, addressing rail service throughout the South Fork.

Still in draft form, the transportation update began with the formation of a technical advisory committee, including representatives of the Town Board, Village Board, Town and Village Planning Boards, Town Planning Department, and the Town and Village Highway Departments, as well as the Long Island Rail Road and state and county officials.

Public opinion has been sought throughout the process, including visits by the consultant with the town's five citizens advisory committees.

Other recommendations in the study include:

Establishment of a bicycle route system. The study supports the already proposed bike route along the railroad right-of-way as well as building new bike lanes on Route 114, Three Mile Harbor Road, and Montauk Highway from Amagansett to Montauk. More bike racks and lockers would help encourage bicycling.

Seek Public Funds

Pursuit by the town of "its fair share of public funding" through Federal and state transportation improvement projects to implement the recommendations of the study. Also, it should encourage public/private partnerships for some certain road improvements.

Implementation of specific safety improvements at 28 accident-prone spots.

Better coordination of stops and timetables among existing public transportation systems to encourage their full use.

Implementaton of educational programs on bicycle and in-line skating safety, as well as the benefits of non-auto modes of transportation.

No expansion of the airport, other than previously approved projects

Fringe Parking Lots

Concentration of more intense land uses near existing downtown business areas to help bring cars off Montauk Highway and encourage village centers as stops for pedestrians and rail and bus service.

Consideration of "fringe" parking lots, served by shuttle buses. Suggested locations included Town Hall on Pantigo Road, the airport vicinity, and in Amagansett, either by the train station or using the existing lot.

Installaton of sidewalks where needed, especially in residential areas where pedestrians use the roadway.

Copies of the transportation update are available for review at the Town Clerk's office, the Town Planning Department offices, and the Town Supervisor's office.

Protests Detour Shuttle Bus Plan

A plan to run a shuttle bus between East Hampton Town Hall, two town beaches in Amagansett, and East Hampton Village this summer was abandoned Tuesday in the wake of protests from members of the Amagansett Citizens Advisory Committee.

The shuttle bus was to have been a pilot project aimed at determining whether people in East Hampton would use alternative modes of transportation. It was designed to help town residents get to the beach without having to battle for a parking space on busy days. The bus was one of the many solutions to East Hampton's ever-increasing traffic problems suggested in the recently completed townwide transportation study.

Object To Route

The now-defunct plan called for a 20-to-25-seat bus to run in a continuous 50-minute loop on weekends throughout the summer, with stops at the Town Hall parking lot, East Hampton Village, and the Atlantic Avenue and Indian Wells beaches in Amagansett.

Some Amagansett residents were miffed at the idea of buses traveling up and down their "quiet, residential" roads to get to the beaches. They objected that the route planned for the pilot study would only serve to increase crowds at the already busy Indian Wells and Atlantic Avenue beaches.

"Let them wake up early [to find a parking spot] like everyone else," one Citizens Advisory Committee member said at a meeting on the transportation study Friday.

The committee called for the town to exclude the beaches from the route or to cancel it altogether. Excluding the beaches, said Supervisor Cathy Lester, would render the study useless. After considering the group's objections, the Supervisor wasn't willing to spend $10,000 on the project, though she maintained it was a good idea.

Bus For Employees

If the limited route planned for this summer had proven successful, the town might would have looked to include additional routes in the coming years to help shuttle people from remote, underused parking lots around the town to more congested areas where both parking and traffic are problems. These would include not only beaches but the East Hampton Village and Amagansett business districts.

The pilot plan had called for an additional bus, paid for by East Hampton Village, to run between the long-term parking lot on Lumber Lane Extension and the Reutershan parking lot in the village core, for two hours at the beginning and end of the workday.

This bus, East Hampton Village Mayor Paul F. Rickenbach Jr. had hoped, would have encouraged town residents employed by village businesses to use the more distant lot rather than the overly crowded Reutershan lot.

Point Of Contention

The fact that Mayor Rickenbach did not want the bus to make stops at village beaches had been a point of contention since the plan was introduced last month. Some on the Town Board, including Thomas Knobel, felt the exclusion of village beaches was unnecessarily pushing the whole focus of the route into Amagansett.

The village may still be interested in the bus for employees, but Ms. Lester said she doubted that it would happen.

Councilman Peter Hammerle, who also supported the pilot project, has repeatedly pointed out that the two beaches in question, while they may be located in the hamlet of Amagansett, belong to all town residents and, in the case of the Atlantic Avenue Beach, are used by many visitors as well.

Busier Than Usual

Atlantic Avenue Beach will likely be even busier than usual this year, shuttle bus or not. This week East Hampton Village eliminated daily parking at Main Beach, making Atlantic Avenue the only spot with a pay-per-day lot between Montauk and Sagaponack Main Beach.

Visitors unwilling to buy a $150 season sticker to park at village beaches will probably flock to Atlantic Avenue now, but they will not be getting there in a shuttle bus.

Catherine Cahill and Roger Walker, East Hampton's two Town Justices, have both declined to preside over a case of alleged harassment brought by a Montauk resident against a town employee.

Mr. Walker told The Star Tuesday that he had received a compromising telephone call from one of the two parties, while Justice Cahill, in a written statement dated June 2, said she recused herself "in order to maintain the judicial integrity of this court."

Harry Ellis of Montauk filed the complaint that led to the charge against Gilbert J. Mabry of the Town Sanitation Department. On March 8, after he objected to Mr. Mabry's telling him he could not dispose of brush at the Montauk transfer station, Mr. Mabry cursed at him, according to Mr. Ellis, and a shoving match ensued.

"Improper" Or "Innocent"?

Justice Walker told The Star that "Mr. Ellis called me at home" before a June 4 court date and talked about the case. Mr. Walker said he had advised Mr. Ellis to put his concerns in writing and send the letter to Ms. Cahill, the administrative justice, and to the Suffolk County District Attorney.

Mr. Walker called Mr. Ellis's phone call "improper and unethical," saying he felt it had compromised his position as the judge in the case.

"It was an innocent call," Mr. Ellis said in response this week. "I am the victim of a crime, and the town has lost sight of that."

Another Call?

Mr. Ellis claims Mr. Mabry's boss, David Paolelli, also telephoned a judge.

"Someone told me" Mr. Paolelli called Justice Cahill, said Mr. Ellis, who is a member of the East Hampton Town Architectural Review Board and chairman of the Montauk Citizens Advisory Committee. He declined to name the source.

"I have never spoken to any judge about this matter," responded Mr. Paolelli. "I'm surprised to hear it."

Mr. Ellis said he had in fact complained about Mr. Paolelli to Town Supervisor Cathy Lester on April 9, and had not received a response. He provided The Star with a copy of the letter.

"Mr. Paolelli has influenced, prejudiced, and compromised my criminal complaint," Mr. Ellis wrote.

"I'm appalled that the town has done nothing to follow up on a complaint by a citizen against a town employee," he added this week.

Ms. Lester said she has passed along all correspondence in the matter to the office of the town attorney, Robert Savage. Mr. Ellis also provided The Star with a brief letter he received, in turn, from Mr Savage.

"Impropriety"

Meanwhile, Justice Cahill, citing Mr. Ellis's allegations, stated in recusing herself that the "independence of the East Hampton Town Justice Court has been negatively impacted."

"The appearance of impropriety has been created by these alleged involvements of town officials, and the reporting of same in the local papers," she wrote. "Both the impartiality and the objectiveness of this judge might reasonably be questioned."

Steven J. Wilutis, the Commack attorney representing Mr. Mabry, described his client as "outraged" at Mr. Ellis's allegations and the fact that the case must now be sent to another court. He said he thought Mr. Ellis did not want the case heard in an East Hampton setting, and had achieved his objective by "unethical" actions.

A Different Court

Mr. Ellis acknowledged that he preferred a different venue, saying East Hampton Town had injected itself into the judicial process and that a trial could not be fair.

As evidence, he cited a recent Town Board offer to pay for one of three attorneys to represent Mr. Mabry. Mr. Mabry did not accept the offer, instead retaining Mr. Wilutis.

Of Mr. Paolelli's actions in the case, Supervisor Lester said, "Personally, I do not think they were improper. . . . Mr. Mabry was working as a town employee" when the alleged incident occurred.

The Supervisor said she had heard from Montauk residents who would like to see Mr. Mabry return to work at the transfer station there. While the case is pending, he is at the East Hampton recycling facility.

Mr. Wilutis said the harassment charge had no merit and that he intended to ask that the case be dismissed as soon as a new venue is chosen.

Most bumper stickers are meant to trumpet a favorite cause - freedom in Tibet, the election of so-and-so - or to toss a humorous comment a fellow driver's way.

But one seen increasingly around town is of a different ilk: a quiet, simple statement printed boldly in black and red that no doubt has puzzled, and perhaps inspired, a reader or two.

"Good Fathers Are Good Men," it says.

The stickers have been given away free at Springs stores - including the Maidstone Market, Barnes Store, and the Springs General Store - for about a year. There will probably be a few more seen on the roads after Father's Day this weekend, as children visiting those places and the Corner Store and the Upper Crust Bakery in East Hampton have been encouraged to take one home as a gift for Dad. They will also be distributed at Maidstone Park on Saturday from noon to 3 p.m.

The bumper stickers were created by Art Klein of Springs, a writer who until now has remained behind the scenes. He is the author of "Dad and Son," a memoir, he said, about "being male," and his experiences fighting a debilitating muscular disease and at the same time raising his son.

"I literally woke up one morning thinking about the joys of the role of raising children," said Mr. Klein, who has a girl as well as a boy. Trying to sum up his book very simply, he coined the words "Good Fathers Are Good Men."

A friend designed a layout, another friend in Chicago agreed to print them, and the stickers went into production the very next day.

Mr. Klein estimated there are "probably 1,000" around East Hampton.

Notices posted on the Internet have yielded about 10,000 requests for more, which Mr. Klein has mailed out at his own expense. His goal is to have one million out in the world. "I don't know if it's reachable," he said.

Whether he meets that goal or not, the messages are refreshingly thoughtful for some, and for him, a "really fun and gratifying thing."

Beach lovers who don't happen to live in East Hampton Village - but who were looking forward to lazy summer weekends at its Main Beach - are in for a shock.

In its second move in as many months aimed at bringing parking problems under control, the East Hampton Village Board decided last Thursday that daily paid parking at Main Beach on weekends and holidays - a longtime option for nonvillage residents - is no more.

Only village residents with a beach sticker, or nonvillage residents willing to pay an annual $150 permit fee, will be allowed to park cars there at peak times this summer.

Those without permits may continue to park at Main Beach on weekdays, however, for a $15 fee.

Into The Streets

Explaining the move, Mayor Paul F. Rickenbach Jr. said the village's "public beaches commingle with residential areas" that are "not equipped for parking."

The ban on prime-time daily parking is an "interim step" to be evaluated at the end of the summer, the Mayor said.

Village officials said they had been observing the situation for some time, and that as many as "a couple of hundred cars at a time" can overflow the Main Beach lot and line up along elegant residential Ocean Avenue and Lily Pond Lane.

"Obligation"

Jennifer Tarbet, the manager of Main Beach, reported Tuesday having met with Village Police Chief Glen Stonemetz and Larry Cantwell, the Village Administrator, to discuss the "heavy growth" of traffic over the last three years.

"We are under an obligation to those with seasonal passes," Ms. Tarbet said.

"The guy from Ronkonkoma won't be able" to drive out here for the day, echoed William Heppenheimer, a board member, at last Thursday's meeting, referring to what village officials called "a proliferation" of out-of-town beachgoers.

The board's decision had not been expected, and its suddenness surpris ed some observers because the matter had not come up in public session.

However, Mr. Cantwell confirmed that the "growing problem" had been under discussion "internally" for some time, with village officials "strug gl ing with how to manage it."

"Wow!" said John Ryan, who runs the Amagansett Beach Association's private club at Indian Wells Highway, on hearing the news.

"The village likes to be exclusive," said Mr. Ryan. "I'm sure glad I'm not a day-tripper."

He predicted that Amagansett's Atlantic Avenue beach, which also offers parking on a daily basis, would catch a powerful wave of sun-worshipers who might have gone to Main Beach for the day, although, he said, "It's too crowded there already."

No Lifeguards

Mr. Ryan said he was concerned that parking problems at Main Beach might compel beachgoers with permits to park at village beaches that have no lifeguards, such as Two Mile Hollow, as an alternative.

"That would mean too many unprotected swimmers," he warned.

Last year the village sold roughly 2,200 beach permits to nonresidents, Mr. Cantwell said, and collected some $70,000 in daily parking fees at Main Beach. By eliminating daily parking there on weekends the village stands to lose about $35,000, he said.

Parking is by permit only at the other ocean beaches in East Hampton Village: Wiborg's, Georgica, Two Mile Hollow, and Beach Lane.

To hear George Simpson tell it, he is an entrepreneur whose business of supplying assessment data to appraisers and real estate agents has been jeopardized by the Town of East Hampton's unwillingness to supply him with the public records he has requested.

But according to Supervisor Cathy Lester, Mr. Simpson has been a thorn in the town's side who is demanding information it has no way of providing him.

Last week, Mr. Simpson, who balked in July 1996 when the town asked him to pay $500 for computer tapes of its assessment records, won a round in court.

In an opinion ordering the town to reduce its fee to $37.90, State Supreme Court Justice Mary Werner expressed her "grave concern" about the way the town dragged its heels and stated there was "no sincere effort" on its part to figure the proper fee until "forced by the court" almost a year after Mr. Simpson's request.

Not Satisfied

"More repugnantly," she wrote, the town chose to ignore Mr. Simpson's request "because certain town officials and employees did not like Mr. Simpson and his attitude." She said the town's conduct was "frivolous" and threatened future sanctions if it did not make a greater effort to accommodate Mr. Simpson.

"Nobody should be treated this way," said Mr. Simpson, who lives in Hampton Bays and runs Office Management Systems Corporation from his house. "They just did it because they are petty bureaucrats who relish their power."

Insufficient Data

Although the court has ruled in his favor, Mr. Simpson is still not satisfied. He said he has received only part of the data he has requested and has vowed to drag the town back to court.

"I got only one tape, about 10 percent of what I got from Southampton," he said. "At the last minute they came in and said, 'We don't have all the data you think we have,' " he said. "They claim they can't get it out of the computer."

That is the case, according to Fred Overton, the chief Assessor. While Southampton updated its records several years ago as part of a townwide reassessment, East Hampton has been doing it on a piecemeal basis as time allows.

"We don't have a program to extract that information," he said. "It's there for us to read, but it is incomplete." Because it is incomplete, the town's computers are unable to transfer it to tape, he added.

Although Mr. Simpson has offered to pay the town up to $10,000 to create a program, Supervisor Lester said the actual cost would be closer to $750,000 when the time of employees, who would have to enter the data, was added to the total.

Will Lower Fee

"We are not required by law to create documents for an individual," Ms. Lester said.

While the court denied Mr. Simpson's request for damages, he claims the delay will cost him up to $340,000 in future revenues. "My business was delayed a whole year," he said. "If you get in the market a year late, it just kills you in the computer business."

But Mr. Overton pointed out that Mr. Simpson had never been denied the information. "I don't want to tell anyone how to run his business," he said, "but if a $500 fee meant $340,000 to me, I would have paid it."

The town had been charging the fee for other firms which seek the record for years. "I think the fee was set in the late '80s," said Mr. Overton. "I will now reset it to comply with Judge Werner's decision."

Personnel Costs

She ruled that the town had overcharged Mr. Simpson for the electricity used to run the programs and unfairly required him to pay a computer maintenance fee, which should be considered a fixed cost to the town.

Furthermore, she ruled the town was unjustified in requiring Mr. Simpson to pay personnel costs because Bonnie Englehardt, the assistant, who spent the five and a half hours it took to process the data, had received time off in lieu of overtime. But the judge ruled the town can charge an hourly rate if an employee opts for overtime pay to process future requests.

In court, the town "tried to get the cost up to $500," said Mr. Simpson. "Any dope could see they were lying." He fought the fee, he said, because he plans to seek regular updates of the town's records, "and it adds up after a while."

Got Mad, Not Rude

Mr. Simpson claims he was not rude to town employees. "I got their dander up because I wouldn't do what they wanted me to do," he said. "Yes, I got mad at them, but I should have gotten mad at them, and the judge agreed with me."

Still, Mr. Simpson admitted he called Robert Savage, the town attorney, "a horse's ass" in court because he failed to process his requests through the Freedom of Information Law for a detailed breakdown of the town's bill in a timely fashion and also refused to meet with him. "If that isn't a horse's ass, I don't know what is," he said.

He also had choice words for Supervisor Lester. "She's an honestly stupid woman," Mr. Simpson said. "She has trouble understanding the most basic concept." He described Councilman Tom Knobel as "the village idiot" because he refused to intervene on his behalf.

"You can see how obnoxious he's been with the town," responded Ms. Lester.

Asked To Leave

And Mr. Overton said he had to ask Mr. Simpson to leave the Assessors office once when he became disruptive. "He started to give an employee a hard time," he said. "He wanted to barge behind the counter and go into the computer room."

Mr. Simpson said town residents should question how much it cost taxpayers to defend the case. Gary Weintraub, the town's lawyer, "didn't know what he was doing" in court, Mr. Simpson said. Ms. Lester said the town had not yet received a bill for Mr. Weintraub's services.