An allegation of antisemitism arose during an Aug. 11 East Hampton Village Zoning Board of Appeals meeting that included a public hearing on the Jewish Center of the Hamptons’ application to add an outdoor pavilion with an amplification system and lighting to its Woods Lane property.
At a previous hearing, the discussion had been about decibel levels and wonky mathematical formulas (“the inverse-square law”) relating to sound. However, when Rabbi Josh Franklin stood to speak, math wasn’t on his mind.
“We’ve come a long way since our founding in 1958, overcoming adversity and discrimination in our community,” he began. Of the pavilion plan itself, he said, “We’ve satisfied concern after concern — and until recently, I at the very least respected the concerns of those who were against our request for a variance. But then we received a copy of a letter sent to the Z.B.A. on July 16 from neighbors, that presented to us as thinly veiled antisemitism.”
The letter in question, from Elizabeth and Justin Sautter, who live across Woods Lane from the center, raised concerns about “noise pollution” emanating from the proposed 3,000-square-foot outdoor pavilion. Noise has been the main concern of other neighbors as well, along with an increase in traffic.
“We found it disturbing how the writer of the letter lumps the activities of Chabad of the Hamptons, another Jewish house of worship, together with the Jewish Center to describe problems caused in the neighborhood,” Rabbi Franklin said. “We are not the same, by the way, inasmuch as Protestants and Catholics are not the same.”
The paragraph that most disturbed him was this:
“My previous career was as a director of catering at the Waldorf Astoria in NYC. We held many weddings. Jewish weddings are predominantly on Sundays. They are traditionally very large, elaborate affairs that include most of the community. Vendor set up is extensive. These events were always lots of fun, delightfully celebratory and I enjoyed facilitating and working with the families to create these lifetime events. They are appropriate in a hotel setting, but NOT in a quiet residential community.”
The description of a Jewish wedding as “elaborate,” said Rabbi Franklin, “is not only a mischaracterization, it perpetuates the stereotype of Jewish people as ostentatious, showy, or excessively focused on wealth or material displays.”
“It matters little that the author tried to frame his veiled Jew hatred by saying ‘These events were always lots of fun.’ If you’re still not seeing it, then I suggest you go reread the letter and replace the word ‘Jewish’ with ‘Black’ and see how it reads.”
“We are asking that we be treated fairly. We ask that you see through the antisemitism when rendering your decision.”
Jameson McWilliams, an attorney representing neighbors on Borden Lane, who live closer to the Jewish Center, seemed taken aback. “I have not read that letter,” she said, before reiterating that her clients seek to continue being good neighbors with the center. They want to take care of any issues that might arise from the pavilion now, she told the zoning board, rather than see it become an enforcement issue later. “We have reached substantial agreement with noise levels,” Ms. McWilliams said.
The center’s acoustical engineers had worked together with SoundSense, an acoustical engineering firm hired by the Borden Lane residents.
The bigger problem for the Borden Lane group, said the lawyer, is that the Jewish Center does not want the agreed-upon noise limits to apply to non-religious special events. Alex Balsam, the synagogue’s attorney, had said there should be no cap on such events.
“We believe the board should either disallow the pavilion for non-religious special events, or should limit the applicant to a set number of such special events,” said Ms. McWilliams. Without a limit, she said, mitigation for noise must be offered.
Ms. McWilliams also asked that SoundSense be able to check and approve the noise levels coming from the pavilion before the Building Department issues a certificate of occupancy.
Mr. Balsam objected. “We don’t think it’s kosher, and we know kosher, to give the objector’s agent the ability to stop the issuance of a C.O. by making their consent prerequisite to that C.O.,” he said. However, he added, the center will apply for a special permit for any non-religious event requiring additional amplification.
“Will the pavilion’s amplification system be the only system used for an event at the pavilion, is that what I heard you say?” asked Philip O’Connell, a Z.B.A. member.
“No. I said if we are proposing to use a different amplification system, and the event is non-religious, we will come to the village for a special-event permit,” said Mr. Balsam.
Special-event permits are issued by Marcos Baladron, the village administrator, after consultation with other department heads.
In a letter to the board, Ms. McWilliams questioned “whether a special permit can be granted at all for unlimited outdoor events at the pavilion where the sound could reach 106” decibels.
After the lawyers had their say, two neighbors stood up to speak, both focusing on the antisemitism charges.
“Our concerns about noise coming from the pavilion are legitimate and have nothing to do with antisemitism,” said Michael Sprung, a Borden Lane resident. “I am Jewish. I would only want the expansion of Jewish services, especially with the rise in antisemitism. So why can’t we just agree for the Jewish Center to use only the newly installed sound system we’ve all agreed to? For all of their wonderful Jewish events.”
James McMullan, vice chairman of the board, acting for chairman John McGuirk, who recused himself (along with Joe Rose, a board member), gave two weeks for the sides to agree on acceptable sound levels at the pavilion. A motion to close the public hearing passed with a unanimous vote.
