Dead Trees
Montauk
February 10, 2025
To the Editor:
Many people have mixed feelings about cutting down trees. They appreciate trees’ beauty and the shade they provide, but sometimes they want to remove them. Perhaps they want to create space for new construction or a garden plot. It is easier for people to feel comfortable about taking down trees when they learn that the trees are dead or dying.
But environmental scientists have been developing a greater appreciation of dead trees. When trees are alive, they absorb considerable amounts of carbon dioxide. When they die and decompose, they continue to store most of this carbon, and it eventually enriches the soil and nourishes plants. By keeping carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere, the process helps limit global warming. When, in contrast, dead trees are sawed down, carbon is released into the air.
Like mature trees, dead trees support a great variety of animal life. We commonly see numerous insects in deadwood and hear the rapping of a woodpecker on a dead tree trunk. According to a May 31 National Geographic article, more than a thousand wildlife species in the United States depend on decaying wood for food and shelter.
I have heard tree service personnel say that dead trees belong in forests, not in towns and private yards. It is true that if a tree falls in a residential area, it can cause problems. It’s also true that some residents don’t find dead trees esthetically pleasing.
But dead trees contribute to wildlife diversity and restrict global warming. If our community will preserve these trees whenever possible, we will be taking a step to protect nature at a critical time. And we might inspire others to follow our lead.
BILL CRAIN
East Hampton Group for Wildlife
Coach Conner
East Hampton
February 5, 2025
Dear Editor,
John Conner has now pegged out and left us bereft. John was my speedwork coach in my early 60s. I took up running for the first time at the age of 56. Howard Lebwith, our deceased mensch, said I should try running to lose weight when I was 40 pounds overweight and destined to follow my uncles into an early grave from heart disease. Howard wanted to save me. Not John.
In my first running experience with Howard, we ran from the stoplight in the center of the village to the library, and after that I had to go home and get in bed. My wife helped me lose 20 pounds and that made it possible to run with Howard, who was 16 years older than me in his 70s. Our first race together was the 10K Sound to Bay. I struggled to finish; Howard won his age group.
After a few years of moving my mile times down closer to eight minutes, I went out for a run in Springs with Howard. He stopped to talk to John, and I kept going, which John noticed. You can’t interrupt serious training to talk.
John was first and foremost a serious runner and coach.
At some point, word went out in the running community that John was doing track work at the high school. I showed up. In my early 60s I was something of a joke to the other runners who were half or more my age. John treated me as just another runner. He made sure I didn’t go out with the short distance sprinters in the first group, sent me out with the less-trained younger runners and women and laid down the rule — two minutes for the lap, no faster and no slower.
Coach watched as I got my time down to a consistent 1:25-to-1:30 lap. I eventually hit 1:15. This speedwork improved my 10K to a 7:30 mile and my half-marathon to a 7:50. For a runner in his 60s this is graded a B+.
In my 60s I time-qualified my way into both the Boston and New York Marathons. When East Hampton had its marathon and half-marathon (a course I designed) I beat the local jocks 10 years younger than me in the half. This was due to Howard and John and Annette McNiven, my running partner. When I ran with the women either here or in Colorado I was their rabbit.
As an elderly runner, John was phenomenal, an inspiration and competitive beyond his age group.
Coach Conner respected dedication and hard work. In fact he demanded it. For me, an egghead not a jock, he knew I was a B+ runner and would never win a competitive race. But I won my half-marathon age group, finished ahead of a Boston Marathon winner when we were both 68 in a 12-mile race in New London, ran up Mt. Washington in the company of some of the best aging Boston marathon winners as an equal, and beat Billy O’Donnell, my jock nemesis in the Great Bonac, after years of being teased by him playfully in local races.
“Fiondella, you’ll never beat me,” Billy would say as he ran backward in front of me in race after race. Until I did and then he smiled.
John was a runner’s runner and a runner’s coach. He may have been surrounded by local jocks who admired him as a winner but if you were a serious runner, someone who trained hard and listened to what he said, he was your coach.
I miss him as I miss all the other great athletes I have known here. Mostly through the Old Montauk Athletic Club, which John’s widow, Henrika, kept solvent for years after Charlie Whitmore, Howard, and John started it up. I once asked Andy Neidnig, in his late 80s at a local race, what he thought about when he went out in a 5K by himself. He said “all those I ran with who are gone.”
With a heavy heart for our loss,
PAUL FIONDELLA
Emphasis on Numbers
Springs
February 9, 2025
To the Editor,
What’s wrong with East Hampton’s “public hearings”?
On the surface, East Hampton’s public hearings appear to be a cornerstone of democratic engagement. Residents, civic groups, and businesses are given an opportunity to voice their opinions, fostering a sense of participation in local governing. However, a closer examination reveals a system that often falls short of its promise, prioritizing what is most popular and/or what has the strongest backing over thoughtful, decisive leadership.
While public hearings are intended to allow the community to shape policy, they can become a convenient tactic for elected officials to avoid taking a firm stance. Instead of championing what they believe is best for East Hampton, politicians can use these hearings to gauge public sentiment and avoid making difficult, potentially unpopular choices. The focus often shifts from the substance of the debate to the sheer number of attendees and who they represent.
This emphasis on numbers creates a system where those with the resources to mobilize large groups — be it powerful business interests or well-funded advocacy groups — wield disproportionate influence. In a town like East Hampton, where the interests of residents can clash with those of developers and large corporations, this dynamic is particularly troubling. The danger of seeking out what is most popular in policy-making becomes apparent, with decisions swayed by the loudest voices rather than by what is truly in the long-term interest of the entire community.
This isn’t to suggest abolishing public hearings. They are a valuable tool for gathering diverse perspectives and community input. However, a crucial element is missing: the clear vision and leadership of our elected officials. Public hearings should not be mere popularity contests that seek compromise. They should be a forum for informed decision making, where our leaders articulate their positions, explain their reasoning, and present a clear vision for East Hampton’s future.
Consider the recent discussions surrounding residential zoning laws. Preserving the character of our hamlets is essential to maintaining East Hampton’s unique appeal. Yet, instead of advocating for a robust solution that balances residents’ needs with the preservation of our cultural heritage, the town’s approach often seems to prioritize compromise over substance. The focus shifts from what is truly best for the town in the long run to what will appease the most people, regardless of whether it represents the most sustainable or thoughtful approach.
We need elected officials who are willing to take a stand, even when it is difficult. While we have seen such courage on certain issues, like the recent stance on the deportation of undocumented individuals, this same conviction seems to falter when it comes to issues like zoning regulations and the protection of our water resources, which are critical to protecting the very fabric of our community. East Hampton’s leaders need to be clear about what they believe in, not just how they hope to appease different factions. They must have the courage to advocate for policies they believe will truly serve the best interests of our town.
Public hearings should be a platform for robust debate, but they are no substitute for our elected officials to demonstrate leadership. The town board must stand up, take a position, and defend publicly what they believe is the right path forward for East Hampton. Only then can we move beyond a system that prioritizes popular opinion over thoughtful, long-term solutions, and toward a form of management that truly serves the best interests of the entire community.
FRANK RIINA
Motives and Methods
Amagansett
February 8, 2025
To the Editor:
It is a forgotten principle of American local politics that an elected representative not only is the voice of the voters to the body to which they are elected; it is also their job to protect those voters. In college, I worked part time in Elizabeth Holtzman’s congressional district office in Brooklyn, taking calls from constituents and attempting to help with every kind of problem to build trust and good will in the community. An extraordinary and little-remembered story about one-term President John Quincy Adams: After his defeat by Andrew Jackson (the proto-Trump), he served the rest of his life as congressman for a Massachusetts district. He could have retired, but his was a life of service, and he could not disregard that the people of the district had sought him out and asked him to be their voice and defender.
I detect no trace of that fealty in our town board or the local Democratic machine. As human beings in the world, I believe most of us are (or should be, some relinquish the skill) able to detect honesty, compassion, and loyalty in other people. No constituent writing to The Star in recent years has described any of the old-timers on the town board as having any of these qualities.
The citizens advisory committees are a small case study of the town board’s relationships with its constituents. They were created as an institutional microphone amplifying the needs and views of the voters to the board in a safe, informal, back-channel context: It was easier to show up at a C.A.C. meeting and talk to neighbors and one town board member as liaison than to speak to the entire board, on television, in the public portion of a meeting.
I was intrigued by Alexander Peters’s letter in last week’s Star, describing (in passing) what seems an exemplary instance of communication at a C.A.C. meeting: “One of the reasons Tom Flight voted against the Monroe resolution exempting Ms. Burke-Gonzalez’s pet [Senior Center] project from all town zoning and planning laws was that he is the town board’s representative to the Amagansett citizens advisory committee, where he asked 14 senior citizens how they felt about the project and every one of them said they were against it.”
Wow. Read that twice. It is a very rich sentence, and can stand some unpacking. Then contrast the behavior of the two old-timers who previously served as liaison to ACAC: Former Supervisor Peter Van Scoyoc, who once shouted me down at a meeting at which I had been invited to speak on a topic inconvenient to him, and David Lys, who was accused by a committee member in a letter to this paper of similarly autocratic and disrespectful behavior. Or consider the case of Wainscott, where a member who was a notable public gadfly to the board was “fired” from the C.A.C. (can you say “First Amendment retaliation”?).
However (pulling the camera back from close up to a Google Earth view), there is a more existential issue. Years ago, I invented (or possibly appropriated) a saying expressing a moral high ground principle: “In order to salute a flag, you have to know what it stands for.” What does the local party, or the town board, collectively stand for? I haven’t a clue. “There are no issues, only interests.” The town board, at a moment of extreme peril in which Trumpean initiatives can do substantial local harm (immigration agents deporting critical local workers, or Elon Musk cutting off funding to badly needed local nonprofits like the Retreat) is as invisible as always on national issues.
But there are poker “tells” as to what to expect. Local politicians cannot be expected to protect us against the president when they behave like him: Mr. Van Scoyoc and Mr. Lys shouting, Ms. Burke-Gonzalez claiming that critics of the senior center were lying, and the village’s First Citizen accusing some of his own citizens (and voters) of being criminals. Also, consider the repurposing of a far-right Republican, David Lys, as a Democrat, without any attempt to claim that he has had a change of heart or principles.
The fact that the two newest board members are showing some independence and values is fascinating. If Voldemort and the party are unchanged in their motives and methods, the consequence will be that the newbies will either soon be tamed — or eliminated at the next election. As someone who seeks to live as if I were an optimist (you can read that twice, too), I would like to believe that the incipient values of the newest members will somehow infect the old-timers (or more likely, be visible among the people who eventually replace them in the Democratic Party). But, as I wrote last week, there is more of a chance that the entire structure will be washed away in the storms to come, like the tons of sand being poured to reinforce Montauk beaches.
For democracy in East Hampton,
JONATHAN WALLACE
Had Nothing to Do
Amagansett
February 6, 2025
Dear David,
As a member of the Amagansett citizens advisory committee and present at the meeting referred to by Alexander Peters, I’d like to correct his reference to Tom Flight’s vote on Monroe and the “show of hands” by members of the committee. First, Mr. Flight’s vote on Monroe had nothing to do with the discussion at ACAC that evening. I will leave his reason for voting as he did to him, although it has been explained publicly. Second, the members of ACAC that evening indicated that they had some issues with the design and plans currently being proposed for the senior center but were not “against” the building of a new facility.
I believe it’s important that the readers understand the reality rather than the implication inherent in Mr. Peters’s letter.
Best,
DAVID HILLMAN
Absolutely No Data
Springs
February 9, 2025
To the Editor,
I found your interview of the town supervisor addressing some of the many issues facing the new Center for Modern Aging and Human Services of interest. As someone who has critiqued these plans for over a year now, it’s surprising how the town administration keeps coming up with new excuses for this inefficiently designed and exorbitantly priced project.
It’s hard to understand why the cost has gone from $8 million a decade ago and still only $10 million three years ago — yes, that is the budget the town board gave their high-priced, out-of-town, and even out-of-state architectural consultants to work with just three years ago. They were told then it would most likely cost $16 million, but how did that become $32 million just last year right after the local election results were announced and still $30 million today after a few minor cuts were made?
Part of the problem is the town mistakenly gave these new architects a contract fee based upon the total cost of the project, so naturally its cost tripled in just a few years. The architects alone will get paid close to $3 million as part of the $9 million just in “site preparation.” How come there isn’t better transparency on this amount that is larger than the original total budget?
To justify this, the town now compares this type of project to spending at local schools. However, the high school has over a thousand students, Springs School over 700, why would anyone compare those operations to a facility that might get 40 or 50 visitors — at best — a day?
Few seem to remember that the town spent six years reviewing plans and getting various committees to approve designs for an 18,000-square-foot (more than 50 percent larger than the current facility) new building that New York State contributed $300,000 to for building designs. Sadly, after all that time, the main person overseeing this project didn’t realize it didn’t conform to town building codes. Was a new, more competent manager with actual building experience put in place then? No. So it’s not surprising that today we now have 22,000-square-foot plans that don’t conform to building codes either, despite buying a new lot three times the size of the current one.
Instead of admitting their multiple errors, the town board decided to spend the last year fighting their own Planning Department, ignoring the complaints of two past town board members, several current heads of local community committees (all from the same political party I might add), dozens of concerned citizens who have complained at town hearings, written letters, and even spent their own money on three different full-page ads in this paper.
What are some of the complaints? One, there is absolutely no data to suggest the facility’s size needs to be increased by 50 percent, let alone by 100 percent. While the town points to the 2020 Census data, that survey was likely distorted by the pandemic, but even if it wasn’t, current usage data has not gone up. In addition, there’s little land left to build on in the future that would allow for the town’s population to increase significantly.
More important, given the serious problem of affordable housing in the town — there are over 3,000 people on waiting lists for this service — many of the people in the future who would use a senior center will likely be forced to move away.
Given how poorly the town has addressed the affordability issue in the past decade (fewer than 100 units built), combined with the fact that they mistakenly want to focus on building individual homes in the future for this purpose, they are sowing the seeds for a senior facility to have even less usage down the road than today.
Another complaint is that despite increasing the size by 11,000 square feet, the architects couldn’t even find the space for a lounge and library area like what the current facility offers. Moreover, the town wants to cut back on offering adult day care that was offered before the pandemic. Besides not planning an area for this important service, the town now claims it would be too expensive. That’s rich coming from an administration that has refused to address the true costs of the project. Not only are they going $20 million over a budget from just a few years ago, but they won’t discuss what the long-term financing costs will be. Given that the vast majority of the funding will be with debt, my guess is there could be another $20 million in interest costs potentially. If I’m correct, that means taxpayers will be on the hook over the long term for $50 million for a facility that may have even fewer users.
Money clearly is no concern for the current administration, and our supervisor’s new mantra is, “When we build it, they will come.” If your background is in advertising, I suppose adapting a tagline from a popular movie from decades ago makes sense. Unfortunately, in the real world, there is no data to back up this poorly designed vanity project that will needlessly cost tens of millions more than it should.
BRAD BROOKS, C.F.A.
Keep Growing
East Hampton
February 8, 2025
Dear David:
How proud to read in the Feb. 8 issue of The East Hampton Press that the town supervisor, Kathee Burke-Gonzalez, reiterated that while the town is bound to cooperate with federal authorities, the police department would not be enforcing immigration policies. I assume the school districts of East Hampton have similar policies and are well supported to prevent anyone from entering a school illegally.
In 2001, the Town of East Hampton was one of the first towns on Long Island to take action to welcome newly arriving immigrants and especially the vulnerable children of immigrants by making the John Marshall and Springs Schools available after the regular school hours, from 3 to 6 p.m. every day.
This program was called Project MOST (Making the Most Out of After School Time).
Immigrant children, as well as local children, found an inspiring use of the empty school buildings after school to learn and grow and experience all the best in one another. The children supported one another while playing and learning together. The children willingly accepted the greatest challenge that could possibly be thought of, namely to relate to one another and love one another.
By extension, parents were supported with the hardships of the immigrant struggle: food-related hardships, bill-paying hardships, crowded housing and a lack of health care.
This was a unique and entire community response by the Town of East Hampton, school districts, private philanthropy, as well as many other people who accepted the challenge and risk to be in touch with another human person, albeit different from me culturally, in language, and adjustment issues.
There is no doubt that this leadership on a whole-community level helped mitigate enormous barriers that immigrant children and parents face: stress disorders, educational problems, substance abuse disorders, and lifelong feelings of alienation.
There is no doubt that the East Hampton community over these past 24 years has grown around this issue. The town can continue to grow together as a community individually and through its not-for-profit organizations and experience the truth of our human potential, namely, that we can care for one another on a relatively large scale.
Keep growing and be proud!
TIM BRYDEN
Founder and former executive director
Project MOST
Missing Gift Card
Amagansett
February 9, 2025
To the Editor,
On Feb. 13 last year, the Amagansett School interim superintendent Richard Loeschner offered a $25 gift card. This was on Parent Square for the snowman-making contest. This was one week after filing a 3020A against the principal, Maria Dorr. Over what? A gift card. Was this the missing gift card? It appears as an inside joke in plain sight.
Our resident police sergeant school board president just gave a speech last meeting, in my opinion, trying to silence free speech. From my perspective to stymie speech and allow only board-approved words to be spoken. This is right on the heels of Holocaust Remembrance Day. I will remember the name Karpinski shows up 539 times on the victims and survivors list.
Still here,
JOE KARPINSKI
Funding Throttled
East Hampton
February 9, 2025
Dear Editor,
Seven years ago, my cancer was detected early. I’m still here, so I guess that makes me a survivor. For now.
I didn’t vote to have funding for cancer research throttled. But that’s what we’ve gotten in this “shock and awe” stage of government “reform.” I don’t know, but I’ve never had much luck repairing anything with a sledgehammer. This is what happens when you reduce governing to World Wrestling Entertainment stagecraft: flash, bang, and a pileup of unintended consequences.
Stony Brook University is a fine, local research institution. According to National Institutes of Health documents, it received something like $65 million in N.I.H. grant funding last year. That’s a lot of scientific and medical research on hold until we figure out just what’s going on with the drastic assaults on government funding. That money has a “multiplier” effect. Beyond science, it generates jobs and contracts that reach well beyond the university.
We don’t need this clown show. It’s easy to pick on “elite” universities. If we want government reform, however, it makes sense to carefully evaluate programs and avoid unexpected repercussions. That doesn’t seem to be the method or mind-set here.
LEONARD GREEN
A Sacred Principle
East Hampton
February 6, 2025
To the Editor,
The recent decision to strip churches, schools, and hospitals of their historical role as sanctuaries for undocumented immigrants undermines our nation’s moral and legal traditions.
aSanctuary is not merely symbolic, it serves critical humanitarian purposes. Among them, churches, schools, and hospitals provide food, shelter, medical care, and legal assistance to those in need, fostering community stability. By removing sanctuary protections, we risk driving undocumented immigrants further into the shadows, making them more vulnerable to exploitation and less likely to report crimes or seek help, thus endangering entire communities.
Targeting “sacred spaces” erodes public trust in institutions that have historically acted as moral arbiters. Immigration enforcement in churches, schools, and hospitals undermines their perceived neutrality and disrupts their vital social roles. In our lifetime, almost all United States immigration authorities have respected these spaces, recognizing their symbolic importance.
The decision to revoke sanctuary status reflects a dangerous shift toward prioritizing strict immigration enforcement over humanitarian values. It disregards the principle that moral law sometimes transcends human law — a belief central to religious traditions worldwide. It is a step backward for justice and compassion, ignoring centuries of tradition while jeopardizing societal cohesion and safety.
Our responsibility is now to speak up to community officials and leaders and insist that no churches, schools, or hospitals in our community be subject to incursion by immigration authorities absent a judicial warrant!
On behalf of Concerned Neighbors of Long Island,
JOAN CASPI
FRED DOSS
TIM FRAZIER
JOAN OVERLOCK
JUDITH SCHNEIDER
TESS WACHS
NORBERT WEISSBERG
First Time
Montauk
February 9, 2025
Dear David,
I want to take this opportunity to thank the Make America Great Again folks and their supporters for creating a new precedent in American history: For the first time in our history they have elected a convicted felon and sexual assaulter as president of the United States of America. This might be a wonderful inspirational message for our youngsters in school, who are always searching for great role models. Not quite sure if Donald Trump and his South African immigrant boyfriend actually fit the model, but time will tell.
Cheers,
BRIAN POPE
Set Them to Litigating
North Haven
February 10, 2025
Dear David:
Trump said he wouldn’t be a dictator, “except on day one.” Really? Only half the country voted for this sarcastic quip, but we all got stuck with it — along with his unelected “fuhrer” Elon Musk wielding his DOGE thing (best pronounced “dodgy”). No surprising promises there, as D.J.T. is known for in-your-face outrageous crazy talk that proves to be the only truth that comes out of him.
Mr. Trump’s term is now 21 days old and it looks like his criminal dictatorship is a lasting concept. We could see his quip, “shoot somebody in the middle of Fifth Avenue” become official protocol. Let’s be honest, by stopping the United States Agency for International Development and National Institutes of Health he is actually killing people!
Are we just going to watch and grumble as our country and democracy crumbles, and defenseless people die? Are we going to waste our time, treasure, and energy marching and donating to our pet causes again or are we ready to do real battle now? Democracy remains our best weapon, not violence.
Unfortunately many decent folks have been driven into desperation. Some already wish for his natural demise as the solution or, worse, some hope for an assassination. We must never joke or encourage those things because we do have ethics, and a strong legal system still standing, if we choose to use it.
We should engage all the best legal talent we can muster and set them to litigating each and every abuse that is being perpetrated. There are so many constitutional crimes underway since Jan. 20, we have plenty of articles of impeachment to throw at him. We might hesitate knowing he has dodged conviction on two impeachments already, but both won a permanent record of the facts, and will follow him into history.
We can build on his impeachment history and eventually succeed with a conviction. This old tyrant is physically and mentally deteriorating. Already some of his once-loyal sycophants are so shocked at recent behavior they are quietly seeking a way out from under this runaway menace.
The fable of the spider and the web tells how persistence and commitment can achieve success. We must try and try again to achieve this success. It can be done. We have some time to do this.
I was working in Washington, D.C., when plans were set to strip Richard Nixon of his crooked accomplices, like Vice President Spiro Agnew (Oct. 10, 1973), and the famous Saturday Night Massacre (Oct. 20, 1973), making it easier to get rid of Tricky Dick himself (Aug. 9, 1974).
We don’t give up. We fight for what is right and to honor those who created democracy and those who fought for it before us. Theirs were bloody wars, but if we act now ours will be courtroom wars.
Good luck and godspeed,
ANTHONY CORON
Had I Known
East Hampton
February 8, 2025
To the Editor,
Had I known I could have bought the United States government — the whole thing — for $288 million plus $1, I would have done it.
I missed the flier announcing the auction.
TOM MACKEY
Word of the Month
Montauk
February 10, 2025
Dear David,
President John F. Kennedy created by executive order in 1961 the USAID. President Trump, the Department of Government Efficiency. Being that executive orders created these departments, please advise those from Congress screaming only Congress can dismantle said departments, your microphone is loud enough, why are you all screeching at the top of your lungs?
Why isn’t President Trump allowed to streamline our spending? President Biden did whatever he wanted to do and that was okay.
The following is some and only some of taxpayers’ money being abused: $1.5 million to advance D.E.I. in Serbia’s work force; $70,000 for a production of D.E.I. musical in Ireland; $47,000 USAID wasted for a transgender opera in Colombia; $32,000 a line item for a transgender comic book in Peru; $15 million for condoms for the Taliban; $446,700 to promote expansion of atheism in Nepal done through the State Department; $14 million in cash vouchers for migrants at the southern border, through the State Department. $20,600 for a drag show in Ecuador, through the State Department.
Is everyone in agreement this is a huge waste of money? If so, why are the democrats calling, “This is war,” gathering in numbers to scream, “We will not put up with Elon Musk. No one voted for him.” Who voted for Anthony Blinken? And there’s a few more of Joe Biden’s cabinet members not voted for.
The word of the month, unconstitutional, will come out of the mouths of all against Elon Musk. It’s a constitutional crisis: How much money will be spent on waste instead of taking care of Americans?
In God and country,
BEA DERRICO
—
Secretary of State Anthony Blinken was confirmed by the United States Senate. Ed.
Nothing to Do
Montauk
February 10, 2025
To the Editor,
I am hoping The Star can reprint the letter (Oct. 17) from our friend Bea, where she explains that Donald Trump has nothing to do with project 2025. I’m sure cooked properly it will go well with her plate of crow.
MIKE SKARIMBAS
Useless Rolls
Plainview
February 10, 2025
To the Editor,
I question and fear what Donald Trump might ever do for the current and/or future inhabitants of Gaza, considering what he did to/for the desperate United States-citizen Americans of Puerto Rico after the island was devastated by Hurricane Maria: blithely throwing useless rolls of paper towels to them in an amusing-only-to-him game of catch.
RICHARD SIEGELMAN
The Long Game
East Hampton
February 9, 2025
Dear David,
I shared your relief as I read in last week’s Mast-Head column, “A Better Life,” that local officials offered reassurances they would not become “willingly adjuncts of ICE” and its deportation policies. A very brief respite for the moment, but there’s a long game that President Musk and his bromance acolyte, Donald Trump, are playing. They want to once and for all undo the 1930s-’40s New Deal reform policies and social programs (extended during the 1960s) that helped bring millions of Americans (predominately white Americans) into the middle class and a chance to live a better life. The rich and powerful corporate elites have been divided on this for decades. Star readers should ask themselves or ask their grandparents how many of these programs aided their own successes and upward mobility. I’d bet the beach house and ranch that it’s well over half.
Many joined with President Roosevelt to support these programs — many probably believing his warnings that if they didn’t, their own futures and lives would be in jeopardy. Capitalism, they came to believe, could be saved only in this way. Others seethed over the years, never giving up the fight, and threw their support and resources into the presidential campaigns of Republicans like Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, George W. Bush, and Democratic neoliberals like Bill Clinton, who they felt would best champion their causes. In Musk-Trump, they’ve found their promised land.
The Democrats have turned into an enfeebled, conflicted, voiceless facade of themselves. The opposition to the oligarchs and authoritarian right has no coherent vision or spokesperson.
Bernie Sanders has found his voice again (now that the election is over), and Cornel West of the Justice For All Party, who won a tiny fraction of the presidential vote, stand out as keepers of the flame of what truly made America great and prosperous.
One day after the Star column, Fox News Digital published an article that again raised questions about East Hampton politicians, business leaders, village chamber of commerce leadership, religious leaders, school administrators, police officials, and their ability to not fold in the face of what we all know will be a continuing onslaught on the great majority of us, especially on those most vulnerable in our community. These are our civil servants and community leaders who work for us. We pay their salaries and frequent their businesses, schools, churches, and synagogues. They are what the term says — here to serve the people under civilian, citizen control. People are not here to serve the police, Big Brother, some private security system’s profits, private funding groups, rich corporate businesses (let’s hear it from our village chamber of commerce), the richest man in the world or any would-be political king or political party. Faith leaders have pledged to serve their congregants, particularly the ones who are most fearful and most at risk — not some church or synagogue board or bureaucracy more concerned with public relations.
I invite all Star readers to read the Feb. 8 Fox digital piece for themselves. The piece is titled, “Wealthy beach town run on migrant labor says enclave handcuffed by blue state’s sanctuary law.” It contains excerpts from The Star’s editorial, and quotes from Mayor Larsen, Village Police Chief Erickson, and East Hampton Town Police Chief Sarlo.
Here’s a quote from Chief Sarlo. “I haven’t seen an ICE agent in this town in I can’t tell you how long.” In one exchange he reportedly pointed to his gun and told residents that law enforcement officers do not interfere with each other’s lawful duties. “People who wear this and put this on don’t interfere with other people who wear this and put this on because then people die.” “You don’t step in front of an ICE officer in uniform with a gun and a badge who’s taking his actions. That’s for attorneys to get involved in and that’s for policies and procedures through the state to get involved.”
Chief Erickson is reported to say that police departments in New York are handcuffed by the state’s sanctuary laws — but they (the police) are not turning a blind eye to migrant criminals. Mayor Larsen seemed more concerned with preventing any “chaos” that could grow out of confusion about enforcement in the community than with discussing the rights of those who might be deported: “Law-abiding migrants should still call police to report any crimes or emergencies without fearing deportation. Criminals, however, will be arrested.” Mr. Larsen, again, said one concern is that people who may fear deportation would avoid reporting crimes like extortion and robbery, allowing thieves to prey upon them and remain on the streets.
Martin Luther King Jr. gets the last quote: “There must be recognition that societies are kept stable and healthy by reform, not by the thought police.” To all our East Hampton ministers and rabbis — how about that for a sermon? The M. and T. boys are playing the long game. We have to be prepared to do the same.
Stay strong,
JIM VRETTOS