From the moment we heard about an East Hampton Village government dream of owning some or all of the Main Street inns we were wary, which might be an understatement. The idea coming out of Village Hall is that the Town of East Hampton would use money from its community preservation fund (a portion of which is set aside for village use) to acquire inns as they become available. Overseeing the inns would be the village's responsibility. The village would seek the highest bidder for the day-to-day operation of the inns. The plan seems to be that the village would keep the fees charged to the operators. East Hampton Village officials have said that public ownership would be a way to control how the inns are used, for example, setting limits on alcohol sales. It is a tidy concept on the surface, but there are genuine concerns when one digs down.
In a letter to the town, East Hampton Village Mayor Jerry Larsen made a curious argument that if the inns were to remain in private hands, they would be off limits to the public, his implication being that they are accessible now despite already wallet-busting prices for meals and overnight accommodations. "Ensuring that these properties remain accessible to all residents is essential to preserving the character of East Hampton," as he put it, was as fine an example of government double-speak as we have lately heard. The mayor's definition of accessibility appears to be quite different from that of a majority of residents.
Underlying the village's request is an apparent concession that current zoning laws are inadequate and not up to the task of protecting the community's best interests. If that is the unspoken belief here, then the answer is stricter rules, not a shift in ownership. Keep in mind that neighbors' complaints about amplified music from the inns seem to be mostly ignored. It is hard to imagine that the village would want to get tough with its own tenants. And maintaining historically significant properties demands a lot of money. A sensible approach is to keep the inns in private ownership. That way, upkeep costs are the operators' problems.
One of the other issues was explained by Assemblyman Fred W. Thiele Jr., who was widely credited as being the author of the community preservation fund law. Mr. Thiele observed that income from the rental of preservation fund property would most likely have to be returned to the fund itself and not used for general government expenses. Offsetting village taxes with inn lease payment would be a legal long shot, in that case, should the village have that intention.
If the village really wants to do something high profile to preserve East Hampton's "character," it might instead ask to tap the preservation fund to make an offer for a Toilsome Lane property at the moment slated for development as a brew pub. With the buildings on the former Diamond's warehouse site razed and the site planted with grasses and trees, it would be a welcome green space at an otherwise crowded corner.