Two Cynthias Vie for One Seat in West Tisbury Assessors Race

By IAN FEIN

They share the same first name and a passion for West Tisbury town
politics, but the similarities end there, and voters in West Tisbury
will be faced with a clear choice when they go to the polls in a special
election for town assessor next week.

Cynthia Mitchell and Cynthia Riggs face off for a one-year seat on
the town board of assessors in the election next Thursday. Only one race
is on the ballot; polls will be open at the town public safety building
from noon to 8 p.m.

Mrs. Mitchell is a former town selectman and treasurer who is part
of the West Tisbury political establishment and a longtime town hall
insider. Ms. Riggs is an innkeeper and author who is a frequent
government critic and watchdog.

Both candidates this week said that their interest in the
assessors' position stems from the Graham tax case against the
board, which raised sharp concerns about certain practices inside the
town assessors office.

Ms. Riggs suggested that her position as an outsider could prove
valuable.

"I think we need a dissident. Disagreement is healthy in
government," said Ms. Riggs, 74, who runs the Cleaveland House, an
18th-century bed and breakfast on Edgartown-West Tisbury Road.
"And Cindy [Mitchell] is more of a part of the good-old-boy
network than some of the good old boys."

Mrs. Mitchell rebutted the claim, and said that her support among
town hall staff members could help bring about change.

"I never was a good old boy, even when I was," said Mrs.
Mitchell, 56, executive director of the nonprofit Island Health Inc.
"Cynthia [Riggs] and I both want to change things in the West
Tisbury assessors' office. But the question voters have to ask is,
‘Who can make it happen?'"

The only woman to ever serve as a West Tisbury selectman, Mrs.
Mitchell logged four terms on the board and 17 years as town treasurer,
but retreated from the political stage after she lost a close
selectmen's race in 2002. At the time Mrs. Mitchell was embroiled
in heated controversy over the Steamship Authority, and had aligned
herself with a group of selectmen who were advocating for the interests
of the city of New Bedford in a ferry service dispute.

Mrs. Mitchell has been out of the political spotlight since then,
and said she could count on one hand the number of times she visited
town hall in the three years following her departure. She said she
decided to reenter the ring this winter because she felt that the board
of assessors were doing a poor job of communicating with town voters.
Mrs. Mitchell said she has no interest in holding any town office other
than assessor.

"The one thing I noticed during the debate about the Graham
case was that the voice of the assessors was missing, and there was no
real information emanating from the board. And I found that
troubling," Mrs. Mitchell said. "I felt it was a natural
time for me to step in and help, because explaining things to voters was
a big part of what I did as a selectman."

Ms. Riggs, who has served on both the Martha's Vineyard
Commission and town historic commission, said that she too has
experience explaining technical information to the public - both
from her degree in geology and her time as a science writer for National
Geographic and the Smithsonian Institute. But she admits that she ran
for the elected assessor position primarily to oppose Mrs. Mitchell, who
got her foot in the door early when she was appointed interim assessor
two months ago.

"I feel strongly that in a democratic society every election
should be contested," said Ms. Riggs, who ran two unsuccessful
campaigns against selectman John Early in 1998 and 2004. "I think
the voters ought to have a choice."

The open seat on the board of assessors arose in early February,
when longtime member Raymond Houle resigned for health reasons. West
Tisbury selectmen originally planned to fill the position with a
one-year appointment, but they called the special election after their
intentions were determined to be inconsistent because they placed a
finance committee seat vacated the same week on the annual town election
ballot.

Selectmen appointed Mrs. Mitchell to an interim two-month term on
the board, against the advice of their town counsel Ronald H. Rappaport.
Mrs. Mitchell has been an assessor for the last 70 days, and the winner
of the special election next week will fill out the 11 months remaining
in the term vacated by Mr. Houle.

Ms. Riggs this week criticized the course of events that led to the
appointment, and reiterated that the position should have appeared on
the annual town election ballot.

"I feel very strongly that there was a serious slipup,"
Ms. Riggs said. "And the way Cindy was appointed, she was clearly
hand-picked to fill that position with the expectation that she will
have the advantage being an incumbent."

Mrs. Mitchell said she does not feel the appointment has given her
an advantage, and she did not agree that the position should have
appeared on the annual town election ballot.

In a heated three-way race for the other assessor seat that did
appear on the annual ballot, incumbent Michael Colaneri earned
reelection by a margin of only ten votes. Mrs. Mitchell this week said
the outcome expressed a vote of no-confidence in the current board.

"It showed that people were really mad at the
assessors," Mrs. Mitchell said. "It was a huge vote against
the status quo."

Mrs. Mitchell and Ms. Riggs are both advocating for some change in
the assessors' office, and they both agree that the department
needs to improve its communication and interaction with the public. To
that end, Mrs. Mitchell in the last two months has identified the
department's legal budget as a separate line item in the budget
and helped organize a public forum with town taxpayers.

But the two candidates, both of whom have met with resident William
W. Graham to discuss his concerns, differ in their perspectives about
the still-pending case.

Ms. Riggs said the town owes Mr. Graham a debt of gratitude for
questioning and exposing the workings of the assessors'
department. She said the assessors operated with little or no public
attention for almost three decades, and as a result developed a number
of questionable practices. From her reading of the transcripts from the
Graham hearing, Ms. Riggs said the assessors' methods for valuing
wetlands and determining different neighborhoods need to be changed. She
said that she believed Mr. Graham has a very strong case.

"The testimony is essentially a window on the operation of the
assessors' office and the people in it," Ms. Riggs said.
"I think most of us who have read the testimony or parts of it
have some pretty serious concerns. I see some serious problems with the
assessors' office."

Mrs. Mitchell said she has read the closing briefs from the Graham
case, but not the transcripts. And as a sitting assessor, she says she
is unable to comment on the merits of the case. She did say she is not
convinced that any of the assessors' valuation methods need to be
changed, but she said some of the topics warrant consideration.

"The decision in the case is going to lead us naturally in one
direction or another. But no matter what the decision is, some of these
things need to be looked at," Mrs. Mitchell said. "Concerns
have been raised; we have to take a look at them. We'd be crazy
not to, and so we will."