<p>Edgartown and Oak Bluffs voters defeated the controversial housing bank question Tuesday night, while in West Tisbury the question won approval. Tisbury voters take up the question tonight.</p>
Edgartown and Oak Bluffs voters defeated the controversial housing bank question Tuesday night, while in West Tisbury the housing bank won approval.
Doug Ruskin led the charge in West Tisbury to approve housing bank.
Doug Ruskin led the charge in West Tisbury to approve housing bank.
Debate was long and passionate on a night that saw meetings run late in every town.
“I think the biggest mistake would be to rush through this. There are too many comments. There are too many concerns,” selectman Michael Donaroma told a packed annual town meeting at the Old Whaling Church in Edgartown.
Tisbury voters will take up the housing bank question when they reconvene on Wednesday night for a second session.
The question is on every town meeting warrant by petition this year. The issue has been fiercely debated, with proponents arguing the time is right with funds potentially available due to the recent passage of the short-term rental tax.
Critics include elected town officials in the three down-Island towns, who have said the proposal is too rushed and would divert needed tax dollars.
In Edgartown on Tuesday night the debate played out on both sides and went on for two hours. Some 20 people stood to speak.
In the end Mr. Donaroma moved for indefinite postponement for the main housing bank article, with a condition that the town work with the housing bank proponents and hold public meetings before the next annual town meeting.
Voters agreed 208-64.
Oak Bluffs voters soundly defeated housing bank proposal.
Oak Bluffs voters soundly defeated housing bank proposal.
A second, companion article to fund the housing bank using monies from the short-term rental tax was also postponed.
In Oak Bluffs the housing bank question was defeated 197-71 after long and spirited debate.
Renee Balter, a member of the Oak Bluffs affordable housing committee, urged voters to approve the question.
“It’s so important to understand that housing is a regional crisis. It’s not something we have a lot of time to come up with an answer for,” she said. “These people have worked so long, so hard, so diligently to bring you an opportunity that we have, that we won’t have again for a long time.”
But planning board chairman Ewell Hopkins had a different view. “We believe these questions must be answered as locally as possible,” he said. “We have to get this real local, real quick. We have the components in Oak Bluffs to get it done. We don’t need an Islandwide bureaucracy to make the tough decisions that Oak Bluffs needs to make.”
In West Tisbury the debate was similarly long, but with a different outcome. Speaking in impassioned tones about the affordable housing crisis, Doug Ruskin urged voters to approve the housing bank despite any flaws in the way the proposal was written “What used to be a problem is now a huge problem,” he said. “It’s an Islandwide problem and we have to come together as an Island to solve this.”
But there were concerns.
“There are too many unanswered questions abut the housing bank,” said Chuck Hodgkinson. “It’s just not ready.”
West Tisbury swiftly approved plastic bottle ban, but later the meeting bogged down.
West Tisbury swiftly approved plastic bottle ban, but later the meeting bogged down.
In the end the question won approval by a wide margin — 184-58.
Large Turnouts
Annual town meetings in four Island towns saw large turnouts Tuesday.
Oak Bluffs finished its meeting in a single night, adjourning just before 10:30 p.m. A total of 345 voters attended, easily approving a $30.9 million annual town operating budget. But voters later balked at paying the town’s share of a feasibility study to repair or replace the regional high school amid objections to the school district funding formula.
In Tisbury 370 voters turned out. The meeting began with emotional tributes for selectman Tristan Israel, who is stepping down after more than two decades of service to the town. State Rep. Dylan Fernandes presented a formal resolution in Mr. Israel’s honor, and a standing ovation followed.
Edgartown moderator Sean Murphy presided over his first town meeting.
Edgartown moderator Sean Murphy presided over his first town meeting.
Voters approved a bylaw that will impose health and safety rules on short-term rental properties, and discussed at length the allocation of monies from the ferry embarkation fees and Community Preservation Act. A proposal to change the town clerk from an elected to appointed position was defeated.
The meeting recessed just after 10:30 p.m. and will reconvene Wednesday. The housing bank question remains to be voted on, along with a $400,000 spending request for a feasbility study for a new school.
In West Tisbury, for the first time in many years the annual town meeting will also run for a second night.
An overflow crowd of more than 300 voters swiftly approved an initiative to ban plastic bottles started by a group of school children. Voters also approved a first-time six per cent rooms tax after lengthy debate. But later the meeting bogged down later amid lengthy debate over the housing bank question. When the meeting adjourned just before 11 p.m., only 10 of the 62 articles on the warrant had been voted on.
Meanwhile, in Edgartown voters were in it for the long game — tackling a total of 95 articles on special and annual town meeting warrants in a single night.
A $900,000 proposal to replace a historic World War II-era hangar Katama Airfield won the necessary two-thirds approval, 157-56, after long debate that weighed historic preservation against practicality. The hangar replacement project is back for a second year still needs approval in the ballot box at the annual town election Thursday.
Voters began with a moment of silence for Ted Morgan and a poem by town poet laureate Steve Ewing remembering the late longtime selectman who died this week:
“Right up front/every year/the colonel’s in his full dress gear.”
The meeting adjourned just before 11:40 p.m.
Landry Harlan, Holly Pretsky, Noah Asimow and Steve Myrick contributed reporting.
Home page picture by Maria Thibodeau.
More pictures from annual town meetings.
Comments
Thank you for working late,
Name LocationThank you for working late, after working hard in the days leading up to the meetings, to provide us all with updates on these important issues. It is truly appreciated.
Based on the reporting
Richard Whittaker OssiningBased on the reporting contained in this article the Housing Bank was not defeated in Edgartown but “postponed indefinitely” under the condition of further discussion. The headline of this article is misleading and groups the decision in Edgartown with the decisions in Oak Bluffs and West Tisbury, which had counted votes.
One could argue that an indefinite postponement is a defeat but to write that in the headline is misleading.
The Massachusetts Secretary
editorThe Massachusetts Secretary of State defines indefinite postponement as a defeat. Here is a link to the state website with its helpful citizen guide to town meetings. Thanks for being a close reader. https://www.sec.state.ma.us/cis/cistwn/twnidx.htm
Thank you for the
Richard Whittaker OssiningThank you for the clarification. I wonder, then, how the tone of an indefinite postponement compares to the tone of other measures/motions that voters use to either approve or defeat an article? For those less familiar and less educated about Town Meeting procedures (myself included) it could seem that the town is actually in favor of this idea but doesn't believe there has been an appropriate amount of time for the voters in Edgartown to consider the issue, or it could simply be a procedural move by the selectman to table an idea for which they have a strong disapproval and no true intentions to consider.
On a separate note, it seems that the selectman in Oak Bluffs, Edgartown, and Tisbury have harnessed the uncertainty inherent to any social program that seeks to alleviate a shortcoming in the current social structure of a particular community in order to sow fear and dissension instead. I'm not exactly sure what the Selectman of these three towns have in mind when the use the term "money grab." From whom is the money being grabbed from?
The Housing Bank has done an excellent job presenting their case. Their website is clean, transparent, and relies upon figures derived from the MV Commission, the very body entrusted to preserve the Island and prevent it from adopting measures that would harm the Island as a whole. They seek to model their program after the Land Bank, the very body trusted with ensuring the literal bedrock of the Island is saved from hasty development that doesn't meet the needs or character of the Island.
The Selectman have not. In their 'wait and see' approach they haven't expressed any good will to the efforts of the Housing Bank. Instead, it seems they've taken the proposed unification as an affront to their own legitimacy and have done nothing to mitigate the spread of misinformation (E.g. the belief that any taxes other than the occupancy tax and the infusion of cash afforded to it by the recent short-term rental bill will be used to fund the Housing Bank).
It's a money grab to anyone
Mark EdgartownIt's a money grab to anyone that currently pays property taxes or uses island provided infrastructure. In order to meet current budget requirements over the last decade, each town has gone through overrides and tax increases to fund shortfalls. The new source of rental taxes should be used to reduce property tax burdens, not new entities that duplicate existing initiatives. Think about this next time your property taxes go up or when there are shortfalls in core infrastructure needs e.g., education, police, fire, etc.
This entity wouldn't
TisKid VHThis entity wouldn't duplicate anything because it would be a grantor. They wouldn't actually build any affordable housing themselves. It's all in the FAQ on their web site. It's about getting a steady stream of funds that affordable housing doesn't currently have, as opposed to the Land Bank.
Don’t conflate the issue, you
Mark EdgartownDon’t conflate the issue, you are proving my point. As a grantor of funds, the money is sourced somewhere, hence the money grab. The housing bank will sap funds that could be used to offset rising costs of core infrastructure on the island and commensurate increases in property taxes.
Great comeback EDITOR! I am
VH Villager Spring StreetGreat comeback EDITOR! I am happy to see our little paper does it’s research. My faith in the press has been restored.
Thank you.
I was saddened, to say the
Kevin OBI was saddened, to say the least, when the OB Town Administrator felt it was important to announce, just after his formal Powerpoint presentation promoting one view (only government can use the big screen) that Edgartown had "just" voted against the Housing Bank proposal. I has thrilled when at least one citizen clarified/corrected that statement. Such prejudice, to me, is electioneering of sorts - permitting candidates to campaign within 150' of the polling space.
The statement was fact, and
Name LocationThe statement by the town administrator was fact. The editor of this paper confirmed that the Edgartown vote was a defeat and provided an unbiased outside source to help readers decide for themselves. Sounds like the town administrator just knew the specifics of the Edgartown vote and could read through the jargon. Taxpayers should expect no less of their town admin and we’re reminded why they pay him well in this instance. The “clarification” was actually obfuscation, though I am sure it wasn’t done intentionally. As for the decision to announce it? How is it different from Tisbury going back to decide this question with full knowledge of the OB and EDG decisions? Should we sequester the hundreds of Tisbury voters until they make a decision, lest they be influenced by a neighbor’s opinion? Please don’t be sad that this failed. Just about every person in that room agrees affordable housing is a huge problem. They just didn’t want to attach the problem with a solution offered by and heavily funded by realtors and developers. Good smart liberals and conservatives banding together to avoid exploitation.
Did the town administrator
Dean Rosenthal EdgartownDid the town administrator note that West Tisbury voted the proposal up, or only that Edgartown voted it down? Essential detail to the people of Oak Bluffs, to my mind, as it speaks to intent.
FYI, the OB meeting ended at
skip OBFYI, the OB meeting ended at 10:30 and the WT at 'just before 11'; the OB Town Administrator may not have known about the WT vote
One thing that the media is
Jane EdgartownOne thing that the media is not reporting and it's crucial. NO WHERE in the proposed Housing Bank legislation is the word "Affordable" used. It's nothing at all to do with "Affordable" even though the backers of this slipshod legislation wanted voters to think this. ALL it says is "Year-Round". That can mean anything from a North Water Street year-round captain's home to a house in the exclusive Field Club development.
Further, if Edgartown had voted in favor, it was estimated that we would pay $1.5 million to the Housing Bank in return for 1/7 votes. Aquinas would pay $145,000 and also get 1/7 votes. If you were a stockholder in a company and owned 33% of the publicly traded company, would you settle for 1 vote and not 33?
As Town Counsel further pointed out, the legislation is a mess. Whoever hastily scotch-taped this together making no legal sense almost got away with it. Thank God, Edgartown voters are smarter.
Great point Jane, nothing but
Mark EdgartownGreat point Jane, nothing but mismanagement and bureaucracy would have come form the housing bank. A much better path forward is to use any rental tax revenue to support town budgets and reduce property tax burdens.
Thanks for clarifying that..
here we go again edgThanks for clarifying that.. sounds like the usual where Edgartown gets stuck with the tab for the other towns.
I agree that this legislation
Chris EdgartownI agree that this legislation was poorly written but to kick the can down the road one more year missed an opportunity to set aside these new funds for future affordable housing. The selectmen criticized the wording but only offered more of the same, hearings and committees. When they said that there was no way to figure the source of each of taxes the state sends them money from I found that frankly dishonest. Even the most rudimentary accounting could figure that. These selectmen need to go.
It was a spirited debate in
Dean Rosenthal EdgartownIt was a spirited debate in Edgartown of both sides that essentially turned south when the town counsel tore apart the wording of the legislation as "swiss cheese" and two of the three selectmen came out against approving it. But Mr. Donaroma promised to renew the debate over the course of the next year and floated the idea of putting it on the warrant again next year, especially after Mr. Rappaport indicated it could come up again, indefinitely. Mr. Donaroma also promised public hearings and committees. I feel this should have been part of the article because it paints a full picture, although space may have been a consideration, one or two sentences could be added for the print edition. Thank you for your coverage. It is up to Edgartown selectmen to make good on their promise to continue the process to make the possibility of a housing bank a reality by keeping their word and forming committees and holding public hearings – they specifically said they would do this when they made the motion to postpone indefinitely/defeat the article.
You agree that the
Name LocationYou agree that the legislation was poorly written. A lot of people who voted against this legislation have all the room in the world for supporting good grassroots legislation that is poorly written. Good people, not used to dealing with the technicalities and consequences of legal mandates, presenting an inspiring idea best they can. These voters have made that mistake with the best of intentions! Who can blame them. This wasn’t that scenario. Twelve grand paid by realtors and backing from big money developers? This was not a big hearted effort done by an underfunded best intentioned group of dreamers. It was a calculated, carefully written to maximize profit piece of law that exploited grave concerns of moral folk. I expected more of our well paid untaxed nonprofits, because this introduced a new level of cynicism in the liberal community, and will make it much harder for genuine attempts at solving real societal problems to succeed. Our nonprofit advocates, heart in the right place, got into bed with the wrong partner and set us all back.
I agree we have a year round
Huh! Vineyard HavenI agree we have a year round housing challenge. We also have serious infrastructure needs in all towns. A 20 year bond paid for by the projected island wide revenue from this tax covers the cost of the high school. Oak bluffs could get their renovation done to town hall. Tisbury could fix its school. Those towns could probably do both in that 20 year span and not have a significant hit to the taxpayers. Reiterating.....we do have a housing challenge. For those directly affected by it, the definition of the word crisis may apply. We also have a once in a lifetime chance to fix some of the other things that are broken without constant increases to taxes. As with all these votes, there are no perfect answers. Add a 1% fee to house sales, everyone knows up front what they are spending! Then use it in a very narrow definition of affordable housing in developments equally spread geographically across the entire island to spread the infrastructure costs in a balanced manner. Probably a great deal less opposition to this idea.
Lots of interesting use of
Huh! Vineyard HavenLots of interesting use of information last night at TTM but if you listen closely there were themes. Rush and pass this now and you can fix it later! That is actually funny. Why rush. The funding source won’t go away! I caught the statement about the real goal is rentals. Who will get to manage all these new Rentals? But most importantly, for towns like Tisbury you take away a revenue stream that will provide relief to the very people you say are so affected by the increase in taxes to come for Tisbury School, MVRHS and a Town Hall. You actually add pressure to the very people you want to help keep their homes. Unless you offer alternative housing for them but guess what. They would be dumb when getting out if they did not seek max value for their home likely going to a seasonal resident and further compounding the problem. Please know what you are buying with this.
I think a more novel solution
Elyssia West TisburyI think a more novel solution that would get at the heart of the issue, would to tax unoccupied houses at a higher rate.I wonder if this is legal....the precedent being Tisbury's dual rate structure.Anyone know if this would be feasible?
Are you serious? Why do you
here we go again edgAre you serious? Why do you think nobody in their right mind would buy a seasonal home in Tisbury, the most dysfunctional town on the island. The seasonal residents already subsidize the locals and do not use the schools, and most of the other municipal services for the majority of the year. So in the interest of 'fairness', perhaps seasonal residents might just get an 'ear' from the US supreme court with respect to taxation without representation. One can only have one domicile for federal elections, but since we ARE subsidizing the local tax base, perhaps we should have a say. IF not,,, count on one spouse of every summer resident to vote here for local selectman, county commissioners and town meeting expenditures... lets see how that works out?
Ditto
Mike WTDitto
All towns not just Taxbury
So, you want to raise the
WashAbhorred EdgartownSo, you want to raise the taxes on people that aren't using town resources as opposed to the people that have kids in the school (~$30,000/year per student)? The seasonal homes are a financial gift to the town. There's a reason that several of the towns on the Island have the lowest property tax rates on the Island. There's also a reason that there are so many charitable organizations are so well-funded on the Island. Think twice before trying to punish that group and chase them off the Island. Work together - not against each other.
Seriously?
mike WTSeriously?
The people that own 'unoccupied houses'(I am assuming you mean second homes) pay taxes without getting some of the benefits already.
Meaning they pay for services they do not receive.
Schools come to mind, which is a very large percentage of the taxes.
If these taxes were not collected the Island would be in a world of hurt.
It would eviscerate the school funding.
I am not saying this should be done, and as part of the community(at least I thought we were) pay taxes so the Island we love can prosper.
How would it fair to add another tax to the already high taxes that are paid.
How about taxing the residents that use the towns and Island services all year round at a higher rate because they use those services.
Something like a per diem tax, pay as you use.
Second home taxes would go down drastically.
Again, not saying this should be done.
Just using your illogic.
This is a ridiculous
Jason Jupiter FloridaThis is a ridiculous suggestion. At the heart of the issue here is why people believe that they are entitled to affordable housing so that they can live on
an island which is primarily a tourist resort and destination. I understand that housing is priced is very high and that supply is limited. That is part of living on a seasonal tourist destination. That said, outside of MV, many people spend hours a day commuting to a job in order to obtain affordable housing. Many people outside of MV also routinely work very long hours or hold multiple jobs to make ends meet. For example, in my case, when I lived in CT, I commuted 3 hours a day to NYC and routinely worked 70 hours per week. And I was not alone...there were many moms and dads who did exactly what I did. The so called hardships that on islanders face are not unique to them. High housing prices and very long and expensive commutes are part of how the rest of America gets by.
I also don't understand the suggestion why people whose homes are vacant much of the year would pay more taxes when by definition they tend to use fewer services other than they probably don't vote on MV and so they are easy to target.
Folks, let’s cut to the chase
Al Reis TisburyFolks, let’s cut to the chase. There’s an unspoken but real uneasiness among many islanders about affordable housing “remedies” and the suspicion that these approaches will misfire or make things worse. I saw the sentiment running heavily against this measure in these postings and predicted the larger towns would say no and some of the more sparsely “crunchy” towns would say yes. Sure enough....
so, you are arguing about
mike edgartownso, you are arguing about what to do with the vacation tax money? you all accept this absurd tax? this is acceptable to you? another tax? this government in Massachusetts corrupt, and it has come down to the local level. Shane on you.
Add new comment