SAGAPONACK: Village Petition Is Okayed, Litigation anticipated from rival group

Southampton Town Supervisor Patrick A. Heaney last Thursday deemed a petition by Sagaponack residents to form their own village to be "legally sufficient." His determination allows them to proceed with a vote of all Sagaponack School District residents on whether or not to incorporate.

Even though Sagaponack residents might be considering a site for their village hall or fantasizing about being mayor, between sips of celebratory champagne, there is a caveat. The supervisor's decision is subject to judicial review and can be challenged as to whether the decision is legal, based on insufficient evidence, or contrary to the weight of evidence.

"Get prepared for more litigation," Mr. Heaney said as he finished reading his decision to Sagaponack representatives.

The acting Southampton town attorney, Steve Brown, who has had health problems recently, said dryly that he hoped to "stay alive as long as the case continues." He added that those opposed to the decision had 30 days to file a legal challenge with the town clerk.

Once any legal challenges are resolved, the residents of the proposed village will have 40 days to vote on whether to go ahead with it. Mr. Brown said he was confident that the petition would be upheld.

Among those who might mount a challenge are the proponents of the village of Dunehampton whose own petition was rejected by Mr. Heaney last year. Lawyers representing Dunehampton's supporters took the matter up to the State Court of Appeals, which recently declined to hear the case. They have until Aug. 1 to challenge the Sagaponack petition, and only people living within the boundaries of the Sagaponack School District can do that.

Thomas Butler, a partner in the law firm Chadbourne and Park in New York City who represents Dunehampton's supporters, said they were reviewing the Sagaponack decision and considering their options. They plan to make a statement soon, he said.

A challenge on their part would be a pre-emptive strike defending their own petition for a village with roughly the same boundaries. It was filed under the name of Southampton Beach (Mr. Heaney deemed their Dunehampton petition insufficient, so they have filed a second one).

The petition for Southampton Beach will be eligible for consideration now that Mr. Heaney has made a decision about Sagaponack's petition. However, without the beachfront that would lie within a Sagaponack village, Southampton Beach would not have the required land or population to incorporate.

Sagaponack residents were among those who challenged the original Dunehampton petition, and tried not to repeat the mistakes made there - including the names of people who had died, for instance, or who were not permanent residents. "And they still met the test," Mr. Heaney said.

The push for a Sagaponack village was at first a defensive measure against Dunehampton's attempt to carve off its coastline, but Alfred R. Kelman said the mission had now united the community "to move forward as one village."

"The insular nature of Sagaponack and our community spirit was aroused by the aggressive action to redraw historical lines," he said.

Mr. Kelman said a Sagaponack village would "continue under a similar manner. There's no mystery here." The residents would decide what their relationship would be to Southampton Town, but would not form "a runaway village" and presumably would continue to use the town's services under contract.

But those details have not yet been discussed, according to Janice Kelman, Mr. Kelman's wife, who said there would be a series of meetings to decide them.

New zoning laws could be one of the changes on the horizon, however. Mr. Kelman noted that the hamlet considered incorporation when Ira Rennert's humongous house was approved by the town, but the consensus was not there.

"Residents who did not want to separate realized the lesson" when they were unable to stop the house, and also when they saw the "snake-like map of Dunehampton." They started to come around to the idea, Mr. Kelman said.

While Sagaponack residents were guarded about the legal challenges, they could not suppress some excitement. Noting the Aug. 1 deadline for a challenge, Ana Daniel said it would good to have the incorporation vote in August because of the higher seasonal population.

Perhaps thinking about the Dunehampton proponents who tend to be second homeowners, too, and presumably would vote against the Sagaponack incorporation, Mr. Kelman said he would prefer September.