In states dominated by one party, especially when that dominance emanates from a giant metropolitan area, you get periodic efforts to break up the state so as to allow the dissident regions to have their own way. Often this is about ideology, although it can also reflect urban vs. rural concerns. California sees this. And New York does, too, with a renewed such effort the topic of the article below at a political website. The NY scheme would separate all of Long Island into a governing region. With that part of the state recently evolving back into being a Republican stronghold, there’s a partisan cast here. But Long Islanders know that “home rule” historically has had other implications. On the eastern half, in Suffolk County, various pushes for secession of the farthest reaches into a “Peconic County” occurred for decades prior to the Millennium. Initially these were prompted by a Suffolk governing structure that favored the western towns, though all were still heavily agricultural. After that was reformed, fear of a development wave sweeping east into the picturesque two forks (including “the Hamptons”) led to new activity into the 1980s and ’90s. The bid for Peconic County finally was quelled by the state allowing enactment of a real estate transfer tax, beginning in 1999, in the Peconic areas to fund open-space preservation. The Suffolk strife may have ended, but the desire to keep governments closer is always an active one.
‘Moonbeam’ as an American Master
My adult life coincided with Jerry Brown’s political career, so I was interested in the PBS American Masters documentary that aired last night. Some reactions: 1) A politician is an unusual inclusion in Masters, as opposed to the American Experience show. I wonder what explains this.* 2) This documentary, at 90 minutes, has less drag than the customary 120 minutes, at Experience. 3) For that or other reasons, two significant omissions occur. First, in describing Brown’s decline in popularity during his “first second term” as California governor (1979-1983) the filmmakers do not mention the reaction to “Jerry’s judges” and their leftward bent on criminal and other cases. This was symbolized by Rose Bird, whom he appointed state chief justice. She and two associates justices ultimately were removed from the bench in an extraordinary election in 1986, part of a popular revolt that gripped California during that decade. Second, in stressing his maverick (or “Moonbeam”) tendencies, the film overlooks his alliance with public-employee unions, particularly during his latter terms as governor (2011-19) and including, most notably, the prison guards. This concession to a key element in the recent one-party Democrat dominance in the state is a notable part of the Jerry Brown saga. (I noted that a labor group helped fund the production.) “TV” documentaries lack a real-time feedback function, which would have been useful here. –Sept. 16, 2023
* Subsequently, I read in the LA Times that Masters is devoting this season to “thought leaders.”
16 Lucky Homeowners Coming to East Hampton
The trickle of new “affordable” or workforce housing on the South Fork of Long Island continues–16 units (with a name!) being built in East Hampton, as this article from the local Star explains. This project predates the imposition of a new transfer tax on million-dollar–meaning nearly all–home purchases. That levy will raise maybe $50 million a year toward affordability measures, as I noted in a post in early 2022 on the history of such housing efforts in the Hamptons. The tax was approved last November in all of the East End towns on Long Island, so there is at least general political will to have more intensive home development…somewhere in the towns. So as market prices in this luxury enclave continue to rise, a few service workers or other favored parties will slip in. But this will be the biggest local issue of the next 10 years, just as efforts to protect the area’s waters from septic and other contaminants dominated the previous decade.
New Town Housing to Be Christened ‘Cantwell Court’ | The East Hampton Star
The Local Columnist as Media Signal
Back when the newsrooms of daily papers were shy about advancing a political agenda, one good clue about the outlook of ranking editors could be read from their primary local columnist. As those winds blew, so sailed the top news brass. At the New York Times, little such divining has been needed for quite a while; nonetheless, it’s notable that progressive Ginia Bellafante occupies this role each weekend. Her latest is a timely example. Dismissing expressed sentiment that sometimes-violent disorder has risen in New York City, she cites the familiar FBI stats on major crimes (declining since the pandemic) and then harkens to the early 1980s, when similar (misplaced?) fears gripped Gotham. Bernard Goetz was hailed in some quarters, at least initially, as a subway “vigilante” for shooting four would-be muggers. Bellafante then writes: “Three months ago, Daniel Penny’s chokehold killing of Jordan Neely, a 30-year-old homeless Black man he encountered on the subway, drew comparisons with the actions taken by Goetz, so many years ago. The aftermath, however, was very different. Many were outraged by the ex-Marine’s response.” She does not say that the “encounter” followed the deranged Neely’s loud and perhaps threatening rants inside the subway car (see earlier “disorder”). She implies that New Yorkers overall had shunned Penny; in fact, “many” there and elsewhere have rallied to his cause after the (progressive) Manhattan DA charged him with manslaughter. A legal defense fund is said to have collected $3 million. Regardless of whether Penny, like Goetz, will eventually face punishment for a perceived overreaction, the local columnist for the Times has betrayed a certain view of civic insecurity that is representative of her newsroom but not necessarily a majority in her metropolitan area. https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/04/nyregion/new-york-crime-bernhard-goetz.html
When Suffolk County Got Its Foothold on Open Space
A big contributor to the preservation of open space on eastern Long Island during the critical early boom years of luxury development—1967 to 1999—was the Suffolk County, N.Y., parks department. It was no coincidence that this happened then: the parks authority had only recently been created. It is a reflection of the era that was ending in the mid-1960s that Suffolk was without a parks agency. So much of the vast non-village stretches of the East End were just wooded acreage or bayfront–there for the using–that formal recreation planning was an afterthought.
This transitional period concluded with creation of the Community Preservation Fund in 1999, from a property-transaction tax that allowed East End localities to buy public space routinely. Before that, special initiatives or land donations were required except where New York State had corralled park space under master planner Robert Moses. The localities had looked after their fisheries and waterfowl areas, and by the 1970s Suffolk County took an active role in farmland preservation, but through mid-century the backwoods were an organized retreat primarily for hunting groups and scouting organizations (see below). It took a changed emphasis to reset the area’s future.
Today, nearly 60 years after Suffolk County opened its parks department, it has some 50,000 acres of recreational open-space under its management alone. (Thousands more acres on the East End are held by other public agencies and nonprofits.) Suffolk’s government may have more such land in its hands than any county in the U.S.
Suffolk Parks kicked into gear after the passage of a New York state parks bond issue in 1960, which led to funding at the county level for several big “active” parks (campgrounds and other hardscape). These were around significant water bodies in the rapidly populating western half of the county as well as three in the eastern—Sears-Bellows in Hampton Bays, Indian Island in Riverhead and Cedar Point in East Hampton town. (The state, decades before, had created that type of park at Hither Hills near Montauk, and at Wildwood, in Wading River.)
Significantly, that was a model not to be followed in most later county parks on the island’s South Fork. Rather, as development there accelerated into the 1970s and particularly the 1980s, a different approach to parkland took hold, featuring parcel preservation with only light or passive usage. This typically means minimal parking lots and garbage collection, and often no lighting or plumbing. Such “carry in, carry out” recreation offered better protection for surface and ground waters, which were seen to be threatened by the surrounding construction activity.
An early major example was Montauk County Park, on the former Indian Field near Big Reed Pond and Gin (bay) Beach. Led by deputy parks commissioner Edward V. Ecker (a past East Hampton supervisor), Suffolk County moved to create the big reserve in 1971. First it had to resolve ambitions in some quarters for an expansion of the adjoining Montauk Airport operation—ultimately it was kept as a mostly quiet strip. (The park later went through a period renamed for Theodore Roosevelt, whose Rough Riders had convalesced at the site in 1898, but under community pressure had the Montauk moniker restored.)
Numerous county, state and town preservations in the succeeding three decades hewed to this natural approach. A variation occurred at Shinnecock East County Park, at the tip of what is now called Meadow Lane as it reaches the Shinnecock Inlet in Southampton. There, according to retired Suffolk Parks official Bill Sickles, an informal and increasingly chaotic camping tradition on what was a public-works area for “inlet stabilization” was transformed by the county into a popular RV-only paved lot that doesn’t include public restrooms or other shared facilities.
The result from that ‘60s-onward push is a county that, for all the frequent contemporary complaints about traffic, McMansions and lost rusticity, is laced with green on any map. Especially is this true in its eastern half. Had actions not been taken when they were, the East End would be a less desirable—and, yes, cheaper—place to live.
As an aside, another distinguishing characteristic of Suffolk County parks is that until lately they have rarely been named after public officials, even those who were involved in creating them. (The current county executive is cited on the sign boards at park entrances.) There were a few exceptions: the Lee Koppelman preserve at Montauk’s Hither Woods (he was a county planning chief who was involved in negotiations to acquire the property from a developer); a nearby bay-beach spot named for the aforementioned Edward Ecker; and the Stephen Meschutt Beach Park where the Shinnecock Canal empties into Peconic Bay (he was a Southampton town supervisor). But two of Suffolk County’s most avid champions of parks and open space during the critical years described here, county executives John V.N. Klein and Peter Cohalan (who ousted Klein, on an unrelated issue), are not commemorated in this way. Their roles, like many of the legacy preserves they championed, remain understated. –7/24/23
The Scouts as Preservation Pioneers
Prior to the formation of local public parks departments, scouting organizations established prime campgrounds on the East End. Probably the most notable was the Suffolk Boy Scouts parcel at Baiting Hollow, in western Riverhead town. That facility waxed and waned over the 20th century, but is still in active use. (A nearby retreat for the Nassau County scouts, the John Schiff reservation—nee Camp Wauwepex—was established about the same time, in the 1920s, but has been shrunken and less utilized since the 1970s.) In 1959 the Suffolk scouts acquired another grounds, Camp Wilderness in Yaphank, until finances demanded a sale in 1972 to the county, which opened Suffolk’s Cathedral Pines Park on the site. The Girl Scouts of Nassau, meanwhile, maintained Camp Tekawitha in upper Hampton Bays from 1939 until it fell into disuse and was bought by the town of Southampton in 2006 for what is now Squiretown Park. Earlier, the girl-scout Camp Barstow at Miller Place was obtained by the county for what is now Cordwood Landing Park. But Camp Blue Bay on Gardiners Bay in East Hampton, opened in 1946, remains busy with girl campers. –Thanks to Mayra Scanlon of Southampton’s Rogers Library for research assistance
DeSantis and the Shareholder Torts
Stock investors are familiar with the tort lawyers who seek them out for class-action suits whenever there’s a big disappointment or drop in share prices. Usually the pests go away, sometimes because they are paid by the target companies to do so. Ron DeSantis’s latest tilt at “woke” business practices reminded me of them. As governor, he has summoned Florida’s investment authority to review its pension holdings in AB InBev, possibly for legal action. The company’s sales and stock price have fallen after a young marketing executive tried to broaden the image of its Bud Light beer by “inclusive” promotions, notably with a transsexual influencer on social media. This has proven to be one of the most bone-headed moves in modern product positioning, as a mass boycott by traditional buyers ensued, and although InBev has not apologized for it, you can be confident that this is not a company eager to do further woke outreach. But that’s not stopping DeSantis, who earlier used a Florida state cudgel against the Walt Disney Co. for its political gestures. Like the tort lawyers, DeSantis is looking for at least a minor payoff, in the form of needed support for his foundering campaign for the 2024 GOP presidential nomination. Good luck. Some plaintiff lawyers have made successful Republican bids around the U.S., but not many. Most of the party rank and file, even today in these MAGA times, would rather keep politicians out of commerce and have professionals manage the pension accounts.
https://www.cnbc.com/2023/07/21/desantis-orders-probe-into-bud-light-dylan-mulvaney-deal.html
Making a Hash of Legal Cannabis
“Recreational” marijuana sales are legal now in nearly half the U.S. states, but the effort has gotten ahead of itself on the retail front–or at least, ahead of the regulation still imposed on it.
The rollout of shops for legitimized selling of weed, which memorably suffered in early-adopting California, is continuing to give New York fits. Attempts there, as elsewhere, to give license preference to individuals or groups thought to have been unjustly penalized during the years of prohibition have tied up the opening of such shops. Affected also are the state’s now-legal marijuana growers. (They are to sell their crops through the blessed stores.) Meantime, a profusion of illicit “convenience” storefronts since legalization, offering drug paraphernalia and often cannabis as well, has confounded the authorities even as Gov. Kathy Hochul and New York City Mayor Eric Adams promise Eliot Ness-like crackdowns on the proprietors and their landlords. Libertarians laugh and stoners smirk at the contrast in market readiness between the formal and informal sectors.
In Oregon, however, a different dynamic has evidently been undoing the experiment. That state made it relatively easy to open a weed store, out of the same intent to ease the barriers for victims of past social injustice to get a piece of the new action. The result was lots of legal shops, but too many of them to profitably share in the market. There are still hurdles to “safe” dope dealing, mind you, starting with the tax (up to 20% in parts of Oregon) that must be imposed on the consumer. No wonder the margins on transactions aren’t enough to cover assorted costs for some in the competitive field—particularly when the base “street” price is set by the skulking guy on the corner.
To be sure, the states have laden the weed industry with many of the constraints put on other vice sectors, such as forbidding sale near protected locations such as schools, even in tight urban areas. Localities add to the restrictions, such that on Long Island, for instance, only a handful of new licensees have found spots, even though the state aids them in site acquisition through its misnamed Dormitory Authority.
But it is the federal government that is really gumming up the works, by not joining in the legalization wave. This most powerfully pains the entrepreneurs by effectively keeping them from nationally-chartered banks and therefore card or phone transactions. When you are a cash-only business, it limits your market–and increases your security risks. (There’s an additional wrinkle: IRS expense deductions common to other businesses are not allowed.)
So, no wonder there’s renewed pressure to get the Biden administration to act on removal of marijuana as a Schedule 1 narcotic. Ben Kovler, a national player in the cannabis business, placed a full-page ad—depicted here–in last Sunday’s New York Times and Washington Post editions making this pitch. He framed the 1970 Controlled Substances Act, a key part of the old drug war, as a concerted attack by Richard Nixon on people of color and Vietnam peace protesters. (You can’t underestimate Nixon, but Kovler does overlook the Congress that enacted it, majority Democrat.)
Maybe a green light from Washington D.C. would finally turn Main St. marijuana into a viable enterprise. Demand exists for the product–that we know from decades of thriving “dealerships.” And there’s a whiff of weed on many Manhattan blocks these days, so the smokes (as well as the chews) are getting to market, for better or worse. If the industry really were allowed to function in a more normal way, we’d at least reach what economists call a market equilibrium. Would that suit the feds and the states? Or is the high here from market manipulation?
All Sports, All the Time?
As the U.S. grows and diversifies, we can expect a wider range of diversions, including sports. Now cricket has caught on, at least in parts of the country, as this New York Times article discusses. (https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/15/us/texas-cricket.html) Soccer, of course, has become established here after many decades of American absence from the “beautiful game.” And women’s leagues are now a bigger part of the picture. Not only is there spectating, in person and remotely, at these commercial events, but also endless chatter in the various sports media about them. (Plus, increasingly, legalized wagering on them.) The question becomes: Even accounting for a gradually larger potential audience, where does the time and attention span come from, to offer this support? At some point, there must be zero sum, and then some paid athletics must contract and fold. To date, there’ve been dips in attendance and a handful of failed franchises, but overall, just growth–including in the semi-pro “college” ranks. (Okay, ESPN and the regional sports networks seem to have maxed out.) If Americans have found more time for following athletes, they may be devoting less of it to family, friends, community and work. When does that account run dry?
Ken Fisher Got Another Call Right
As the bullish U.S. stock market of 2023–surprising to most of us–continues through mid-July, it’s appropriate to express kudos (so far!) to those who went against the grain and have made investors money. One is a prominent and controversial figure in financial circles, Ken Fisher. I knew Ken from his many years as a columnist at Forbes Magazine, where he was pushed out by a new guard at the end of 2016. He got further ostracized after some crude and sexist jokes in public a few years back, but has kept a following. And of course, the firm he founded and led for many years, Fisher Investments, remains a ubiquitous marketer in the money-management sector. Ken patterns his market commentaries on both economic data and political history, and has generally been bullish for the past generation. That, of course, has been the right call, as his was at the outset of 2023 in this video below (loaded at YouTube 1/20/23: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bv5wiOOtbdk). He has stayed “contrarian” since while many feared a Fed-borne recession. You can’t argue with the results to date.
An Excise Tax That Fortifies Long-Island Wine
Some milestone anniversaries on the East End of Long Island have been easy to overlook but not so its start as a wine region. Fifty years ago, as the “Hamptons” south fork of the island was consumed with some of its earliest development battles, the north fork saw the planting of its first commercial vineyard by Louisa and Alex Hargrave, at Cutchogue. The region’s now $115 million-plus winery industry is making much of its 50th celebration.
Carving what was ultimately an 84 acre estate out of what had been a potato field, the Hargraves were the forerunners of what would become the East End’s agricultural mainstay as they dug up the spuds that were fast relinquishing that role. Today wine grapes and bottlings are not only a product but also an attraction, mostly on the north fork. To be sure, that has brought tourism traffic and real-estate speculation to what had survived as a rustic retreat for years after the south fork came into the commercial crosshairs.
The south fork’s wine production is comparatively a teardrop, if a pricey one. Two main wineries, the Wolffer Estate (vineyards since 1988, a destination tasting room since 1997) and Channing Daughters (plantings from 1982, first retail vintage 2001), draw plaudits and visitors, capitalizing greatly on the booming market for rosé wines. But the area’s famous loam soil hasn’t always been right for viticulture. An early stab along the turnpike to Sag Harbor, Bridgehampton Winery, was a washout as a vineyard and was nearly transformed into a golf course before town officials instead opened a nature center. On the Montauk Highway in Water Mill, the flashy Le Reve winery flamed out by 1990, to be replaced by the Duck Walk sister brand of the north fork’s Pindar winemakers.
A few big names can still get in the Long Island vintner game though the escalation of real-estate prices narrows the window for further bootstrap stories. But there is one twist to that cork: In 1999, the year the pioneering Hargraves sold their winery, the Community Preservation Fund (CPF) was instituted in Long Island’s wine country. It employs a tax on luxury property sales to buy land or development rights to foreclose development. Agricultural use, including related facilities, can still be made of the acquired lands. There’s a legal tightrope for a vintner to navigate all the way to on-site retail operations, but the CPF—which has raised $2 billion already–lessens the chances that today’s grape rows will give way to mansions the way so many potato fields did.
The tax won’t subsidize ongoing operations; still, a onetime check can provide a cushion. As the primary sponsor of the CPF, state legislator Fred Thiele, emailed me, “Of course, once a farmer is compensated for the sale of his/her development rights, there is no limitation on the use of the proceeds in connection with their agricultural business.”
I have a hunch the East End will get to this crop’s 75th anniversary festivities.
Tim W. Ferguson 