East Hampton council continues public hearing on historic Town Lodging House after residents push to preserve farm

The East Hampton City Council opened a public hearing on April 22 to consider a resolution declaring 75 Oliver Street, the historic Town Lodging House and surrounding farm, surplus and available for disposition under existing deed restrictions.

Council President Connie Denham and procurement officer Michael Owens presented the proposal and the RFP framework staff would use if the council authorizes disposition. Owens told the council the vote would only set the legal step required under Massachusetts General Law to declare the property surplus and to establish the conditions and timeline for a request-for-proposals process; the city would not yet be selecting a buyer.

Residents who live adjacent to the property and long-time stewards of the hayfields urged the council to slow down. Bill Chuin, who identified himself as a longtime farm tenant, described four decades of family stewardship and said the land supports a "symbiotic relationship" with livestock and local agriculture that should be preserved. Ellie Chickwin, who said she grew up on the farm, provided historical material and pointed to language in the deed and agricultural-preservation restrictions emphasizing that the land was given "to the inhabitants of the town of East Hampton," a phrase she said carries community obligations.

Several speakers pressed the council over notice and process. "I request that the public hearing regarding the town lodging be delayed; it is my understanding that abutters have not been provided written legal notice about today's hearing," resident Kathy Wisinski said during public comment. Planning Director Alice Emanuel replied that, under state law, the disposal process is not a zoning hearing and abutter notice is not required, while the city had nonetheless chosen to hold the public hearing to maximize transparency.

City staff stressed the property's legal constraints. Emanuel and Mayor's procurement staff said the farmland is subject to an agricultural preservation restriction covering most acres, the house and immediate parcel are subject to a historic-preservation restriction, and there is a third affordable-housing restriction that further limits reuse options. Chair Kwisinski and staff described a recommended minimum 10% payment-in-lieu-of-taxes (PILOT) provision if a nonprofit obtains the property, and a local-governance observer seat to preserve local oversight.

After two hours of testimony and detailed questions by councilors about alternatives (including CPA funding, severance clauses, rights of first refusal and potential timelines), the council voted to continue the public hearing to May 6 at 6:15 p.m. The continuance gives staff time to clarify RFP language and gives residents an opportunity to prepare proposals or testimony for the next meeting.

What happens next: If the council authorizes the RFP at a later date, staff said a selection process overseen by the property committee would review submissions and make recommendations to the full council. No sale or conveyance can occur without those subsequent steps and any mayoral approval required under city charter.