SOUTHAMPTON: Facing a Final Hurdle Before the Election

Candidates for Southampton Town Board and the Suffolk County Legislature had their last significant face-off before the election at the Rogers Memorial Library last Thursday evening. The debate was taped for the town's new education and government channel, Sea- TV, and will be broadcast regularly until Tuesday.

The candidates for supervisor, Gary Schwartz and the incumbent, Patrick A. Heaney, were two to face off. While both were allowed to pass on questions to save time for other responses, Mr. Schwartz exercised the option several times. He declined to answer questions posed by the panelists, Joseph Shaw of The Southampton Press and Sue Wilson of the League of Women Voters, regarding beach erosion, the necessity of a town manager, preservation of Native American and Colonial grave sites, and the increased noise in Southampton Town caused by the East Hampton Airport.

His answers on other topics were sometimes perfunctory. He said he would protect drinking water, prevent transfers of development rights outside of school districts, and work with Bridgehampton residents to determine the best use of the so-called Bridgehampton Gateway or Carvel property. On those issues, he offered few details.

Questions on larger themes such as preservation versus development, efforts to address affordable housing, village incorporation drives, and code enforcement received more complete responses. On the first three issues, Mr. Schwartz went on the offensive, criticizing the town's decision to support a senior citizen condominium development of 189 units in the western part of town. He favors minimal development in the town and as much preservation as possible.

On affordable housing, Mr. Schwartz asked, "Where is the affordable housing" in the town that all of the discussion over the last few years has created. He called it an illusion. He also said he was in favor of ensuring that affordable housing remain so permanently.

Mr. Heaney replied that "no one said we've solved the problem," but said the current board was working in an area that had been neglected for 20 years and that it was starting from the bottom up. He said that while New York State law prevented requirements that affordable units remain so in perpetuity, the town had found a way, through revolving easements, to allow permanent affordability that would be held up in court.

Mr. Schwartz said he believed further village incorporation initiatives could be a drain on the town both in taxes and in the possible loss of control in zoning issues and access to beaches or other resources. He would make it a priority to work closely with civic leaders in the eastern part of town to "prevent secession," he said.

As to code enforcement, Mr. Schwartz said he supported a year-round rental law, increasing the number of officers and penalties for violations, pursuing criminal actions against landlords, and more work on summer share violations. Mr. Heaney and his Republican running mates have made similar proposals during their campaign.

Mr. Heaney said the town had cracked down on illegal share houses and "prom houses" during his administration in addition to the proposed initiatives touched on by Mr. Schwartz.

He discussed his creation of new tax districts for coastal property owners for emergencies and preventive measures. He also mentioned the town's lawsuit against Suffolk County to assume responsibility for beach nourishment that the town believes is required as a result of jetties beng installed at Georgica Beach.

Mr. Heaney said he hoped "to cultivate more trust with property owners on the coastline," who have been wary of the town government since the enactment of the Coastal Erosion Hazard Act of 2003. The restrictions imposed on protection and rebuilding as a result of the law led a group of those residents to begin the Dunehampton incorporation drive.

Addressing development pressures, Mr. Heaney said that it was more difficult to develop property in Southampton than in any other town in Suffolk County. He said that the town, through its requested and required reserves for prime agricultural land, does try to "rein in and control development."

His running mate, Chris Nuzzi, a candidate for town councilman, went one step further in recommending that the town amend its code for larger planned development district projects to mandate that units for affordable housing be set aside in any multifamily project.

The candidates also discussed the right to drive on the beach, which could be challenged by a recent lawsuit brought against Southampton Village and the Southampton Town Trustees. Mr. Heaney said that the trustees had "beat back every challenge" to their authority over beach access given to them since the 17th-century Dongan Patent. Mr. Schwartz agreed that a "few wealthy part-time residents" should not be able to take away that right.

The town board candidates, Councilwoman Linda Kabot, Mr. Nuzzi, Michael Pitcher, and Hank Beck, agreed in principle on requiring organic fertilizers on new golf courses, no casinos, the addition of a police commissioner to the town payroll, and borrowing against the Community Preservation Fund to purchase land now as long as it was done responsibly.

The candidates also agreed that the transfer tax could be increased a quarter of a percent to collect money for affordable housing projects as long as the $250,000 exemption level was raised to a level that was more reflective of area market prices.

The idea of dedicating town board members' responsibilities to certain portions of the town drew mixed responses. The Republicans, Ms. Kabot and Mr. Nuzzi, preferred a townwide election and townwide responsibilities. The current organizational chart, Ms. Kabot noted, is divided by subject matter, not region. Although residents might feel more comfortable calling the representative who lives closest to them, Ms. Kabot said, the town board will still refer them to the person responsible for their topic of concern. The Democrats were more open to assigning board members regional responsibilities.