Village Trustees Hold Off On Proposal That's Got Dog Owners Biting Mad

It may be the dog days of summer before the village board decides how to proceed with a proposed law regarding dogs' freedom on the beach. 

The East Hampton Village Board held a hearing on Friday on the proposed requirement that dogs be kept on a leash of no more than 6 feet within 500 feet of the road ends. 

The board made the proposal after it said it received complaints about dog poop on the beach and unruly dogs disturbing picnickers and such. However, dog owners were the only ones to speak up at the hearing, and their hackles were certainly raised.

Jarvis Slade, a resident of East Hampton for 60 years, said if residents of New York City could live amongst the 2 million dogs there in harmony then so can East Hampton Village. 

"I would like to see less rules and regulations. The idea of 500 feet — maybe I could learn to understand that, but my dog wouldn't," he said. "If we end up with trustees that feel we need more and more regulations," he said perhaps, "we should let them retire gracefully and let people who respect the wonderful bucolic ways in East Hampton" and elect "people who want more freedom here."

Several speakers told the board that the proposal would preclude them from even going down to the beach with their dogs anymore because they have trouble walking such distances. 

"It's very difficult for me to walk 200 feet, let alone 500 feet," said Randy Slifka, who has had several surgeries and had a service dog. He also said he believes this to be a constitutional issue and may impact property values negatively. 

Rick Nersesian rebuffed the idea that there were a large number of people who ever complained about dog activity on the beach. "Personally, I wish there was more dogs on the beach than people," he said. 

Mayor Paul F. Rickenbach Jr. said he could not provide a specific number of complaints that were lodged with the village. When another speaker, Kevin Reynolds, pressed him, he said it was over 20. 

Steven Gaines, a Wainscott resident who ran for town board in 2011, said if passed, the proposal would reflect badly on the village. "This is going to become an Associated Press wire story and we're going to look like fools," he said. 

"We have a problem with people who won't pick up after their dogs, and suddenly we're making a leash law?," he said. "We don’t have enough people to enforce it. Who is going to be undercover? One of the gentleman in the back said, 'What are you going to have someone dressed as a dog?'" Tom Quigley, whose wife is East Hampton Town Deputy Supervisor Theresa Quigley, often walks his dogs on the village beach, and he thanked the board for provided garbage cans and plenty of bags. "Punish those who don't pick up, but don't punish everybody," he said.

Dan Rattiner, the founder and editor of Dan's Papers, said he mostly sees trash from beach-goers when he takes his dog to the beach. While he said he understood the board's desire to accommodate both sides of the argument, "I see absolutely no reason why there should be any kind of restrictions out of season."

The point was echoed by several speakers at the hearing on Friday. 

Ambiguous language in the proposal made it seem as if the amendment was intended year-round, when board said it only wanted to restrict dogs to be leashed within 500 feet from the second Sunday in May to Sept. 30, the period of time when dogs aren't allowed on the beach between 9 a.m. and 6 p.m. 

"I think that's fair criticism," Linda Riley, the village attorney, said. "It could be interpreted either way. It would be easy enough to make more specific," she told the board. 

Riley said she would reword the proposal and distribute to the board. A new hearing does not need to be held, she said, because the amendment would become less restrictive. 

While the hearing was closed, the board took no action on the proposal when it came up for a vote. 

After the meeting, Rickenbach explained the board will revisit the issue after Riley cleans up the ambiguous language. He said it is doubtful that any new law will be in effect by the Fourth of July.

"I think we would like to go back and absorb all the comments that we had taken today," he said.