Undaunted by the bleak economic picture, Oak Bluffs voters agreed on Tuesday night to increase the room occupancy tax and allocate $200,000 for the historic renovation of the brick bathhouse on the North Bluff.
But when it came to a much-discussed article by petition to reduce the number of selectmen from five to three, voters could not agree.
“We feel that too many cooks spoil a soup and there’s too many selectmen to run our town efficiently,” said Catherine Deese, one of many town residents who signed the petition to place the article on the warrant. “When we [voted to increase the board] did we have a town manager that was making the kind of money that Michael Dutton’s making now? We need to go back to where we have some functionality. It seems like everybody has too many ideas and nothing seems to get done.”
In 1993 a blue ribbon panel recommended the town increase its board to five members to accommodate the growing obligations of the board.
Now some would like to change the number back to three, but as voters learned at the special town meeting on Tuesday night at the Oak Bluffs School, nothing is simple.
Town counsel Ronald H. Rappaport informed petitioner William Alwardt that the state Attorney General and Secretary of State’s office would not recognize a change in the size of the board by a simple vote on the article by petition. Instead, he said such a change would require a special act of the legislature under a home rule amendment. Mr. Alwardt then moved to amend the article to petition the legislature for a home rule amendment, but by then voters had grown skeptical.
“I cannot even fathom we’re in any position to make this decision tonight. I follow town politics pretty closely. I don’t have a clue which way to vote on this,” said Joe Alosso.
“I feel like this is being ramrodded,” agreed Gail Edwards. “I want to know the pros and cons.” And the article was defeated.
The historic brick bathhouse on the waterfront, which withstood the 1938 hurricane but in recent years has fallen into disrepair, is now eligible for a facelift after voters agreed to spend $200,000 in Community Preservation Act money for renovation work.
“The current condition of the bathroom is deplorable,” said parks commissioner chairman Nancy Phillips. “It has dangerous rusted railings, bad plumbing and fixtures and dangerous, non-accessible steps.”
The total project, estimated at $490,000, is part of the larger $750,000 Seaview Heritage project that also calls for repairing drainage problems at Waban Park and adding portable showers, bathrooms and concessions near the Pay Beach. Ms. Phillips told voters the CPA money is needed in order to qualify for a $250,000 National Park Service grant to help fund the project. Voters previously approved $290,000 in CPA money for the bathhouse in 2009. At the time parks commissioners were depending on state highway funds to complete the project, but those funds were eventually cut.
Susan Thompson, a member of the historical commission, praised the integrity of the building.
“The beauty of form and function is combined in this building,” she said. “The building is a beautiful example of early 20th century public architecture which deserves to be renovated and preserved because of its artistic value.”
Not everyone agreed. While former highway superintendant Herbert Combra argued that the renovation was long overdue, he questioned the financing of the project.
“I think it’s going to look nice . . . but how much money is this finally going to cost us?” he asked. “You say the parks department is paying [$250,000]. That’s taxpayer money. These CPA funds, this is taxpayer money. It’s costing us three per cent on our taxes. I hope we get rid of the CPA money because it’s just been a slush fund for too many years,” he added.
“I urge people not to vote for this,” said Barbara Hoyle. “I feel like this article is much too complicated and confusing. I think we should just get the comfort station repaired as best we can to be functional and let some of the other things wait until later.”
But Priscilla Sylvia reminded voters of the town’s depression-era expenditures such as the bathhouse itself, the former school, the harbor bulkhead and property purchased from the Steamship Authority for use as a public beach.
“We were far-looking then and I don’t think we should stop now,” she said. “This needs to be done.”
Ocean Club owner Mark Wallace agreed.
“A nice way to look at this is that the federal government and the state just bought us a beautiful prom dress from the Steamship all the way to town,” he said. “I think we need the shoes and we should take care of it.”
The project is expected to be completed by next June.
Visitors will be greeted not only by the restored brick bathhouse when they step ashore next summer, but also by higher prices at town motels, hotels and inns. Voters agreed to raise the room occupancy tax from four to six per cent. Combined with state taxes, the increase amounts to an 11.7 per cent rooms tax. The finance committee did not recommend the article.
“We feel it places an unfair burden on Oak Bluffs hotels and motels,” said committee chairman Bill McGrath.
But Renee Balter, an innkeeper and town business leader, defended the tax increase.
“Provincetown and Nantucket have both raised their rooms tax . . . we need this tax. It’s not a tax that’s going to affect any of the businesses in town. Oak Bluffs ranks favorably to the other towns in our room rates. That’s what people book rooms on, they don’t book rooms because of the room tax,” she said.
Wesley Hotel owner Peter Martell also supported the article.
“I don’t think it’s going to affect us at all,” he said. “I’m not afraid of this one bit and the town could use the money.”
Voters also approved the transfer of $41,800 from the ambulance reserve fund to lease four public safety vehicles; $107,510.50 from the stabilization fund to pay for residential placement tuition; and approved raising a number of town clerk fees, including for birth, death and marriage certificates.
Comments
Comment policy »