Under scrutiny by at least two Island towns over rising expenses and a skyrocketing legal budget, the Martha’s Vineyard Commission is defending its role.
Under scrutiny by at least two Island towns over rising expenses and a skyrocketing legal budget, the Martha’s Vineyard Commission has begun defending its role as a regional planning agency to some town officials as town meeting season nears.
Due to an unprecedented number of lawsuits from appeals on developments of regional impact decisions, the commission’s legal budget has ballooned this year. Total projected legal spending for fiscal year 2024 is pegged at $445,000, compared with $195,000 the prior year.
Overall, the commission budget totals $2.4 million, an 18 per cent increase over fiscal year 2023. Town assessments, which pay for the bulk of the budget, are slated to increase 24 per cent.
The sharp spending increases came under pointed questioning by select board members and finance committee members in Edgartown at a meeting last month.
In response, MVC executive director Adam Turner wrote a letter on Feb. 22 to the two boards, both acknowledging the concerns and seeking to underscore the importance of the commission.
“The commission understands that its fiscal position impacts the town’s budget,” Mr. Turner wrote in part.
“While we understand your members’ concerns, I feel it is important to demonstrate the value of the commission’s work to Edgartown and the Island as a whole,” he also wrote, outlining the many planning projects under way.
Among other things, Mr. Turner said, the commission has completed an open space plan and a storm tide pathways mapping project, and is working on an update to the town’s harbor plan and a study of the Edgartown-West Tisbury Road — planning that enables the town to seek grants and move forward on its own projects. The letter also outlined a score of Islandwide planning initiatives in areas including climate change, water quality and housing.
Rumbles of discontent over the MVC have continued in Oak Bluffs, where this week the select board debated whether to put a nonbinding resolution on the annual town meeting warrant this spring, asking voters if they want the town to withdraw from the commission.
Mr. Turner attended the meeting.
But after discussion, the board voted to not put the nonbinding resolution on the warrant.
Select board member Ryan Ruley had asked that the question go before the board for discussion, but at their meeting Tuesday several board members felt that the idea, or at least the timing of it, wasn’t prudent.
“I don’t agree with a lot of their decisions,” said board member Gail Barmakian, speaking of the commission. “That doesn’t mean you do away with it.”
Mr. Ruley told Mr. Turner that he floated the question because of the jumps in budget, which he feared could eventually start eating into town services if left unchecked.
By statute, the six Island towns must pay their commission budget assessments.
The only way to stop paying would be to engage in the lengthy process of pulling out of the commission.
For that, a town would have to petition the state legislature to make changes to the state that authorizes the commission, get a change in the law, and then vote again on the issue at a future town meeting or election.
This process took place in the 1980s, when Oak Bluffs and Edgartown withdrew from the commission for a time, and later returned.
An article to start the withdrawal process remains on the draft Oak Bluffs warrant. When commission chair Joan Malkin, who also attended the meeting Tuesday, asked if the town planned to take that off the warrant as well, select board member Brian Packish indicated it would likely be withdrawn, given the decision about the nonbinding resolution.
The select board plans to meet to finalize the warrant this month.
Edgartown has placed no articles on its warrant to withdraw from the commission. And despite the concerns, the finance committee did eventually vote to recommend the commission’s budget to town meeting. Speaking to the Gazette by phone this week, Edgartown select board member Arthur Smadbeck agreed there had been anxiety from town officials, but he said it’s their job to scrutinize the budget.
Mr. Smadbeck said that even with the ongoing legal budget debate, trying to pull out seemed to be a permanent solution to a hopefully temporary problem.
“It was a big uptick for this particular year in the legal budget,” he said. “Do I see that continuing? No.”

Comments
Since being established in
M. Toms EDGSince being established in 1974, the VGC has certainly lost its way as to why it was established and what is the focus of its work. The stated mission of the MVC is twofold: (1.) To assist our region's 7 towns (Aquinnah, Chilmark, Edgartown, Gosnold, Oak Bluffs, Tisbury, & West Tisbury) with planning expertise; and (2.) Protect and enhance the islands' environment, economy, character, and social fabric. In recent years, the Commission has focused an overwhelming amount of its effort solely on the housing development on the island, and its members have taken a more dictatorial posture of “the answer is NO, but convince us“ on any project. It no longer is “assisting”, but rather is now a detriment as evidenced by the soaring legal cost and challenges of almost any decision it makes. Each town has its own building code bylaws and oversight by the Zoning Board and that’s where decisions of housing development should lie. The Commission should focus all of us efforts on the overarching issues of the environment implications to its regional coverage and provide guidance and insight to the Towns, not self-serving policies.
What good is the MVC? Is it
Fred J. Hancock Oak BluffsWhat good is the MVC? Is it doing the job it was created for?
To give you a hint about my thoughts and feelings, I am beginning my 14th year as a commissioner. I began as an appointed member from the Town of Oak Bluffs, and later became an elected member. During this time, I was also the MVC Chair for 3 years.
In my opinion, one of our biggest failings is not informing the public about all of the planning work that the MVC does for the towns. Our twelve person staff has only one person who is solely assigned to DRI’s (developments of regional impact). While the other members provide occasional support to the DRI coordinator, they are principally involved in planning projects for the towns. The simple answer is that passions are stirred by the higher profile development projects, which are regularly covered by both newspapers, and not by planning initiatives which generally have a longer gestation period and often are not as eye-catching as development projects.
There are also many planning issues that transcend town lines but are vitally important to the island. Water quality, housing, energy, and climate action are four that I think most people can agree on, and we have staff members dedicated to those issues. There is also a staff cartographer who makes maps for the towns and other island entities. Other staff members are assisting towns with planning projects, including master plans and transportation improvement initiatives. As the regional planning body, we compile and maintain a statistical profile of the Island which town and other constituencies regularly rely on for various state-sponsored programs and grant applications.
We all know that the island is not the same place as it was 10, 20, 30 (you pick the number) years ago. How could it be? It is not a museum exhibit stuck in a time. But when I drive around the Cape, I think that the Commission has had some measure of success in trying to preserve this island. With each decision, we weigh the probable impacts of the proposed development on the island as a whole. Would you want a regulatory body whose only concern was “is the applicant was likely to sue”? One of the changes in this modern world that has come to the island is the growing number of people who have deep pockets, are willing to take legal action to get their way, and who may not share the best interests of our community. That is not something that we can control. but we can’t just give in. While litigation can be costly, it is our responsibility as laid out in the MVC’s charter to stand up for the Island despite the deep pockets who are willing to take legal action to get their way.
I would like to leave you with the language from the last section of the enabling legislation. Section 1, Goals
“The purpose of the commission created by this act shall be to further protect the health, safety and general welfare of island residents and visitors by preserving and conserving for the enjoyment of present and future generations the unique natural, historical, ecological, scientific, and cultural values of Martha’s Vineyard which contribute to public enjoyment, inspiration and scientific study, by protecting these values from development and uses which would impair them, and by promoting the enhancement of sound local economies.”
This is direction that MVC Commissioners take to heart in every decision, and has been over the nearly 50 years of the Commission’s existence.
I think this is a really
Molly OBI think this is a really wonderful response.
I am afraid that I must
Frank Brunelle TisburyI am afraid that I must strenuously disagree with Mr. Fred Hancok and anything he has to say. About 10 years ago I was seated at the head table with the then Director, Mark London. We had pre-arranged that I would speak to the issue of Shared Use Paths and was serving on the Committee at the time. Previously I had served on another committee.
When I rose to speak, at the MVC invitation to speak, Mr. Hancock interrupted me mid sentence and insisted I answer a question. I said, okay, what is your question?
He then said “I want to know if you are in favor of the Shared Use Paths or opposed?
I said, I am opposed to it, of course. That is the reason that I am here.
Mr. Hancock then said “Not another word. Go sit down in a corner somewhere. You can stay for the meeting”. Trip Barnes was there and I was shocked as he and every member of the MVC was in favor of this outburst from Mr. Hancock. And so it happened.
The SUP project was developed and depended on funding that the MVC was mining. It had planned for taking over our roads with this method of cycling and had at one point plans for an incredible sum of money’s worth of paths. But I objected on the basis that it was unsafe. In fact, every advisory from the Commonwealth and Mass DOT advised against any SUP on any two lane road in Massachusetts, and emphatically. I was blocked from speaking to this.
In addition, the new Director Adam Turner vehemently opposed any possible DRI of the project. The then DRI Director disagreed and word from staff that I spoke with told me that Adam had been harassing the DRI Director and this resulted in the best qualified person leaving the MVC.
Now, there is one SUP created. It is an utter disgrace. It was approved by the Oak Bluffs Select Board. There never was a DRI hearing. All of the eminent domain taken should be reversed due this and owners compensated for the falsehoods used to create this path.
Sadly, the MVC is not what the writers from the MVC claim.
Frank, I think your voice and
Kelly OBFrank, I think your voice and writings in strong opposition to the SUP have been in just about every forum imaginable on this Island. For many years. You may think you were blocked. Others think a decision was made.
covid hurt the MVC along with
trip barnes vineyard havencovid hurt the MVC along with other people places and things.The MVC turned to ZOOM when open meetings were shut off and have NOT GONE BACK TO LIVE MEETINGS.A live meeting puts the applicant infront ofthe commissioners 100% more effective...nobody can give a poor performance oor get up and take a break At a live meeting alot of interesting things happen before and after ...THERE IS A COMPARISON= TV SHOW OR LIVE THEATRE..probably eliminate some lawsuits
In 2022, almost fifty years
Nelson Sigelman Vineyard HavenIn 2022, almost fifty years after the Martha's Vineyard was created, I had the opportunity to interview four of the original members of the commission still alive: Everett Poole of Chilmark (who died in February of that year), Gregory Coogan and Steve Amaral of Oak Bluffs, and Doug Cabral of Vineyard Haven. The story published in June 2022, "Saving Martha's Vineyard," is available at mvmagazine.com. I think the comments of those original commissioners are of interest.
Here is my summary. All
paul adler WTHere is my summary. All checklist and mandatory MVC referrals are eliminated. But any town can refer any project to the MVC, including a cross town referral. However, with any cross town referral the town making the referral is solely responsible for any legal bills generated. With this method no town can ever complain about any legal bills, as they referred the project to the MVC.
The best offensive is a good
Ken Rusczyk OBThe best offensive is a good defense. Time to review as the MVC calls it :"the benefits and detriments" of the MVC.
If only these strong armed,
Amy EdgartownIf only these strong armed, deep pocketed, new land/home owners would stop suing the MVC. Perhaps then the MVC could focus on carrying out their mission, in part to: (2.) Protect and enhance the islands' environment, economy, character, and social fabric. The amount of high end property's of late that have been approved for building/ remodeling etc is disturbing, as these are frequently simply rented seasonally. There seems to be far fewer seasonal residents actually living here anymore. The impact of a 'summer family' living in their second home vs a large party renting each week is vast and detrimental to the island. We desperately need the MVC to help protect this island and to set reasonable limits on the construction growth.
Add new comment