Just Too Easy

It’s just a little too easy to pile on to local government for what many consider to be over-regulation. What better sport than to poke fun at official sourpusses who get their kicks from throwing a wet blanket over live music and outdoor store displays?

East Hampton has borne the title “the Village of No” since the 1990s, when the ad man Jerry Della Femina managed to turn a citation for an outdoor pumpkin display at the Red Horse Market into a fount of free publicity and the rallying cry for a brief political career. A similar citation this year — given to a shopkeeper for setting plush stuffed animals out on the stoop of a toy store, to attract customers — will undoubtedly renew accusations that the village just outright opposes anything that can make people happy.

At the same time, East Hampton Town is undergoing criticism that its music permit laws — which tie revocation of music permits to not-directly related offenses like overcrowding and zoning violations, potentially punishing musicians for the sins of others — prove that it, too, just plain hates to see anyone having some fun.

The overall picture is more nuanced than many critics will admit, however. In the case of the town’s music permits, linking revocation to offenses like fire code violations is seen by some as the only way to prevent nightclub owners from shrugging off fines for violations as just another cost of doing business. And the motive isn’t Grinchiness, but a desire to answer perfectly legitimate complaints about noise and other quality-of-life issues by some town residents, as well as to protect the safety of the patrons of venues that offer music.

There is a similar lens to shine on the citations for the displays of stuffed animals, which at first glance of course seem ludicrous. Beginning almost a century ago, the village, and especially the LVIS, were pioneers in preventing commercial encroachments like billboards from swallowing what today is still an attractive place with an aesthetically pleasing and historically respectful feel. Requiring the Design Review Board’s approval of signs in general, and preventing merchants from displaying their wares outside their shops, could be seen as a part of this effort — although, of course, it might at this point be too conservative and worthy of discussion.

It’s certainly possible that the town and the village are both being over-vigilant in how they attempt to prevent private enterprises from hurting the public good. That’s worth talking about in earnest, and trying to rectify if it’s true.

What is of little value, though, and what degrades the level of constructive conversation, is to demonize town and village officials in their efforts to preserve a quality of life.