Promptly after the hearing closed, and before any decision or even hint of decision was announced, CPW attacked “the behavior of the Supervisor and his allies” and issued a press release calling the Supervisor “petrified,” “pathetic” and “partisan.” In doing so, CPW followed its usual practice of questioning, in advance and with no evidence, the motives of those who might dare to oppose it and making false claims and personal attacks.

It promised to stop the cable and also to make Wainscott bucolic again. But the budget, once released, failed to provide the resources necessary to deliver on the promises, to do any of the things required to control future development in Wainscott. It was to be a village in name only, an instrumentality simply to say no to the cable. But even the exercise of that veto was not funded.

None of these objectives can be achieved through services that C.P.W.’s budget naively assumes will be provided by the town at no additional cost to Wainscott’s taxpayers. These services will be 100 percent the fiscal responsibility of the village.

The village, if formed, will have absolute legal control over access to the beach. It could at the outset, or whenever it needs the revenue and doesn’t want to increase taxes, impose beach user fees on those who are not village residents and even on village residents who cannot easily get to the beach without driving. Reference to the recent kerfuffle over parking fees in the East Hampton Village should make that clear enough.