Letters to the Editor: Truck Beach 12.10.15

Problem on Napeague

Amagansett

December 7, 2015

Dear Editor:

I was very disappointed to read Town and Country Real Estate bigwig Judi Desiderio’s commentary on the lawsuits in Napeague. While she tried to take a local-as-she-can-be view on the lawsuits, unfortunately she sided with the homeowners and their money. 

Part of the problem on Napeague lies in the business she runs. I remember watching a town board meeting and listening to the bayman Stuart Vorpahl say that real estate brokers told the new buyers of land in Napeague that they buy the house, beach, and ocean all the way to Portugal. What Ms. Desiderio didn’t mention is how much business she does in the Napeague area, and so in turn do the rest of her agents. Her siding with the wealthy homeowners against local traditions and the public’s right to beach access sounds more like a ploy to get more commissions than find an alternative. 

But also, lo and behold, just before her commentary was another lawyer and brother of a manager of a local real estate office, Larry Koncelik. What’s his personal gain, I have to wonder? Because it became truly apparent during his sister’s town legacy there was always some angle at personal gain. Does he truly believe that the uses and public access on the beaches on Napeague are not long-lasting traditions worth protecting, or is it simpler than that? More like he has clients who are plaintiffs, or, even more plausible, he is buying a weekend house on Napeague. Either way, I think his commentary was biased and based on uneducated knowledge of the lawsuits.

I am disappointed in both of the mentioned letter writers for how easily they let their own opinions be dictated by making a buck instead of taking a moment to check all of the facts in the ongoing litigation.

SYLVIA LONG

Why Should I Move?

Springs

December 6, 2015

Dear Editor,

I would like to respond to the exaggerated statements recently made by the newly formed group, SAFE, in regards to activities on Napeague Beach. 

I have grown up in this community and feel blessed to be able to have my two children grow up in this community. I have been going to this beach for over 20 years and have never once felt as though I am putting my children in danger by going to this beach. I consider it a family tradition to enjoy this beach on the weekend with my family and friends, sharing experiences I can only hope one day my children will also enjoy. 

To imply that children are in danger of being killed on this beach is a shameful assumption. The homeowners should be ashamed of themselves, instilling fear into everyone with their only goal being creating a private beach. They ask us to move to another beach. Why should I move? I enjoy this beach and I have no problem enjoying it alongside the homeowners, if they can share. 

However, I am not lucky enough to live on the oceanfront or within walking distance of the ocean as the homeowners on this stretch of beach do, so the only method of getting to this beach is by four-wheel drive. My family and friends work all summer long and look forward to weekends where we can get together and enjoy our most treasured asset, our local beaches. 

Regards,

NICOLE CASTILLO

Access in Perpetuity

Montauk

December 6, 2015

Dear Editor,

Citizens for Access Rights would like to formally congratulate the newly elected town board and board of trustees. We would like to thank both boards for your work in protecting public beach access. We look forward to your continued support and protection of public access to the beaches of East Hampton.

In light of the formation of user groups such as SAFE, we hope that you will recognize their stance as what it is — an attempt to privatize a public beach enjoyed by families for generations. The plaintiffs’ lawsuit clearly states that they wish “that it be adjudged and finally determined that the trustees and the town and all persons claiming under them or under either of them be forever barred from all claims to an estate or in subject property.”

The decisions that will be made by the newly elected town and trustee boards in the Napeague Beach lawsuits will set a tone for generations to come. CfAR wishes these boards to jointly and adamantly defend these lawsuits and take all actions necessary, including condemnation, to ensure traditional uses of the beach and the public’s access in perpetuity. 

CfAR is not, and has never been, interested in discussing or considering any changes to existing legislation pertaining to beach access. CfAR is steadfast in its support of the town board condemnation plan, which will preserve access points and help keep our beaches public. Contrary to information being disseminated, CfAR believes the costs associated with condemnation will be negligible and not burden our fellow taxpayers. The area being considered for condemnation cannot be developed and is, in fact, submerged periodically throughout the year.

CfAR was formed in response to the pending lawsuit, and the resolve of our members has not wavered. As a result, the beach at Napeague is one of, if not the, cleanest and most cared for stretches of beach in East Hampton. The pride shown by our members in this regard is a direct result of their sentiment and determination to prove that the trustee-owned beaches are not only safe for our families, but represent an age-old tradition that we anticipate the new board will continue to recognize.

Again, congratulations to the new town and trustee board members and we look forward to working with you as we have in the past.

Regards, 

HEATHER McCORMACK