Land Bank Position

Editors, Vineyard Gazette:

The following letter was sent to the Edgartown selectmen from the Martha’s Vineyard Land Bank.

I am writing regarding the mini-park on Main street. You had asked the land bank to consider contributing to its acquisition.

The land bank commission has now discussed this matter several times in the past few weeks and has determined that it does not support land bank involvement here. The central reason is financial. Allow me please to explain.

Approximately 15 years ago the land bank realized that it needed to develop a policy for evaluating the multiple and manifold requests it was receiving from the six towns for conservation funds. Its goal was to find an objective way to prioritize land which would treat all the towns fairly . . . and also avoid commitments that would drain the land bank treasury.

A list of higher and lower-priority types was composed and sent to each town for public hearing. Favorably received at these hearings, the list was then adopted and has guided the land bank ever since.

The mini-park falls into the lower-priority category. Here are some of the property types which are in this category:

• Any property located in either a business commercial-industrial zoning district or a zoning district whose minimum lot size is 0.4 acres or smaller.

• Any property fully or substantially subdivided to the maximum permitted by town code such that price is reflective of retail rather than wholesale value.

The higher priorities, by contrast, are those that you would recognize from having observed the land bank over the years: beaches; roadside farms and fields; larger properties where there is adequate room for uses such as drinking water protection, hunting, etc.

The land bank certainly is glad when towns create parks in the village centers. But the land bank also knows that it would be jeopardizing its treasury if it were to find a way to add these parks to its mission.

Generally speaking, downtown properties are more expensive than out-of-town properties; the former are usually subdivided to the full extent permitted under the town zoning bylaws, meaning that they sell for retail prices, whereas the land bank instead always seeks, whenever possible, to purchase properties before they are subdivided and perhaps even before their titles have been perfected, viz., at wholesale prices. Public money goes further when it is spent this way.

In addition, there are many conceivable acquisition prospects in a town’s downtown. This would pose a financial issue to a land bank serving only one town but it would create a significant financial liability for a land bank serving six towns, at least four or five of which have distinct town centers. I should mention that, during the commission’s discussion of the mini-park, commissioners were able to identify several properties in these other town centers whose purchase by the land bank, were the land bank to participate in the acquisition of the Edgartown mini-park, would immediately become expected. Expanding the land bank’s existing priority list in this manner would mean less money available for those beaches, farms, aquifer recharge areas, hunting areas and other properties that so many Islanders have come to rely on the land bank to set aside.

One final note about finances. The land bank has been careful over the years to peg its prices to the real estate market so that future sellers do not have grounds for seeking extravagant prices. In the case of conservation restrictions, the land bank is currently paying $43,000 per acre for a standard restriction. Any payment made by the land bank in excess of this price will disadvantage the land bank in its future negotiations for restrictions.

(I should add that, in addition to these policy considerations, there is also a legal consideration. The land bank law calls for the land bank to “retain any real property interest acquired” by it “predominantly in its natural, scenic or open condition.” This is a meaningful limitation on future use of properties — a limitation which meshes with out-of-town goals but is potentially troublesome at in-town locations. In addition, the mini-park does not naturally fit into any of the following categories, which are the types of land that the land bank is legally allowed to conserve:

(a) land to protect existing and future well fields, aquifers and recharge areas; (b) agricultural lands; (c) forest land; (d) fresh and salt water marshes and other wetlands; (e) ocean and pond frontage, beaches, dunes and adjoining backlands, to protect their natural and scenic resources; (f) land to protect scenic vistas; (g) land for nature or wildlife preserves; (h) easements for trails and for publicly owned lands; and (i) land for passive recreational use.)

The land bank has tried hard over the years to be as business-like as possible in conducting its affairs. Involving itself in a downtown property such as the mini-park would be a major fiscal shift — one that would be difficult to reverse and one which would could upend the land bank’s efforts to carry out its mission in an orderly manner in all six towns.

James Lengyel, Executive Director

Edgartown

Edgartown Responds

Editors, Vineyard Gazette:

The following letter was sent from the Edgartown selectmen to the Martha’s Vineyard Land Bank Commission.

The board of selectmen had intended to come before you today to discuss the possibility of your participation in the purchase of the so-called mini-park on Main street in Edgartown. We called to be placed on the agenda, and a couple of days later we were presented with a letter from James Lengyel stating that you had already discussed the matter and, further, that you had made the decision not to participate. We find it quite disconcerting that you made this decision prior to letting us state our case.

We will take this opportunity to present our case in writing so we know we have done due diligence on behalf of the citizens of Edgartown.

Many years ago a movie theatre occupied the property now known as the mini-park on Main street in Edgartown. The theatre burned down and the owners of the property erected a fence. It stayed that way for many years. Ralph Grant, an Edgartown conservation commission member, put together a proposal to lease the property. After a period of time a lease was drawn up and the town brought the property up to the condition you find it in now.

When the town entered into the first lease in 1979 the rent was taxes only. From 1990 to 2004 the rent went from $1,000 plus taxes to $10,000 plus taxes. The rent for 2011 is $18,071 plus taxes. In addition to the rent the town spends anywhere from $3,500 to $5,000 per year in maintenance. As you can see the town has spent a considerable amount of money trying to protect what we consider to be a very important part of the community. We would like to protect the property forever by purchasing it.

We are aware of many other properties you have purchased to protect, within our town. Many of these properties are on Chappaquiddick and while that is very beneficial for those residents and visitors, we feel the purchase of the mini-park would serve a larger Island population. Many nonprofits from all over the Island use the mini-park for fundraising efforts on a year-round basis. Many tourists and locals alike enjoy sitting, reading, or just watching the passersby.

We find it a little ironic that in Mr. Lengyel’s letter he refers to the types of land the land bank is legally allowed to conserve. Under category (i) it describes land for passive recreationial use. Many years ago the park department was looking for land for an additional baseball field. One of the commissioners spoke with Mr. Lengyel about the land at the Triangle on the way to Katama. Mr. Lengyel said the land bank could not allow that as it was not passive recreation. What is sitting on a bench reading, sipping coffee, and watching the passersby if not passive recreation?

We do not feel there is another piece of land like this on the Island, on busy Main street surrounded by buildings, where there just happens to be 7,000 square feet of grass and trees.

The town of Edgartown has $1.5 million to put toward this purchase. We were just seeking some help from the land bank. Not all the money, not half the money, not even one third. We were just looking for whatever you felt you could contribute. We now know that number is zero.

We ask that you reconsider your decision.

Margaret E. Serpa, Chairman

Edgartown

The letter was also signed by selectmen Arthur Smadbeck and Michael Donaroma.