Dear David:

I write this in my private capacity and not as a representative of the town or the town planning board, which I chair.

On March 4, Supervisor Peter Van Scoyoc rejected the petition authored by the Citizens for the Preservation of Wainscott to incorporate a 4.4-square mile portion of Wainscott. New York Village Law 2-208 requires that “If no proceeding be instituted to review such decision within thirty days after such filing of the original copy thereof, the decision shall be final and conclusive.” That deadline passed last week, and no proceeding was instituted, thus ending C.P.W.’s second incorporation effort.

But rather than fade away and allow the hamlet to heal, it seems that C.P.W. is hell-bent on dragging Wainscott through another round of divisiveness. In an email to supporters that it published on Sunday, C.P.W. ignored the myriad significant failures of its petition and launched yet another partisan attack with the false claim that the “Supervisor manufactured minor technical issues.” C.P.W. promises a new petition later this year. It seems quite clear that C.P.W. knows the supervisor’s decision was correct and that a challenge to it would have failed in court.

It is a shame that C.P.W. continues to manufacture a controversy and promises to resume its selfish, narrow-minded agenda, with a dose of politics added. But C.P.W.’s latest, highly public failure has made it clear to those of us who call Wainscott home that regardless of how much C.P.W. tweaks its petition’s language or trims its village’s boundaries, incorporation remains a bad idea. No amount of C.P.W.’s deceptive emails can change that.

Very truly yours,

SAMUEL KRAMER
Wainscott, NY

a letter to the editor of the East Hampton Star