A title dispute between the Sheriff’s Meadow Foundation and two Vineyard residents, both sides believing they own the same piece of property in Chilmark, moved into the Massachusetts Land Court this month after the foundation sued the two year-round residents who had begun to clear the land and build on it.
In August 2010 Nisa Counter and Benjamin Ramsey bought their lot near Blue Barque Road in Chilmark from a family member for $9,000. The approximately one-acre lot lies on or adjacent to the Freeman Hancock Woodlot, about 10 acres that was given to Sheriff’s Meadow in 1973 by the late C. Russell Walton. Mr. Walton had acquired the land from the late Priscilla Hancock, according to documents filed in the land court and a statement issued by Sheriff’s Meadow.
Sheriff’s Meadow Foundation executive director Adam Moore said yesterday that the foundation has been in discussion with Ms. Counter and Mr. Ramsey about the issue for the past 11 months. He said a title search conducted by Sheriff’s Meadow attorneys showed that the foundation owns the land Ms. Counter and Mr. Ramsey bought as a youth lot from Mr. Ramsey’s aunt, also a member of the Hancock family.
“We believe we own the whole thing and we have tried to demonstrate that through title work,” Mr. Moore said.
“We didn’t reach an agreement [with Mr. Ramsey and Ms. Counter] because we are confident in our title work. We believe we own it and we can’t make a deal to sell off part of it,” he added.
In a lengthy posting on Ms. Counter’s Facebook page over the weekend, Mr. Ramsey said he and his wife paid for their own title search with a different outcome. “Our title search found that our land was very clearly defined as a separate lot from the Freeman Hancock Woodlot . . . Nobody can argue with stakes and stones still marking corner bounds to two distinct properties . . .” he wrote in part.
But Mr. Moore said when Ms. Counter and Mr. Ramsey began to clear the land and build a wooden tent on it this summer, with a permit approved by the town in June, the foundation had no choice but to go to court.
On August 9 Sheriff’s Meadow filed a complaint against Ms. Counter and Mr. Ramsey in the Massachusetts Land Court; the foundation has also obtained a temporary restraining order to bar them from further building or clearing on the land. A hearing is scheduled to be held in land court in Boston on Thursday on a request for a permanent restraining order.
Meanwhile, the dispute grew emotional over the weekend with Ms. Counter and Mr. Ramsey posting social media messages saying Mr. Ramsey’s family was assessed for and had paid taxes on the land, which his late uncle, Herbert Hancock, had claimed and used. “Sheriff’s Meadow allowed my family to think that they owned it, and to pay taxes on it, until we actually tried to get a building permit and put up a modest house. Then and only then was it worth proving that they owned it,” they wrote.
The couple created a new Facebook page labeled “Youth lots vs. tax breaks,” arguing their situation evidenced a clash between “the two major issues here, affordable housing and conservation.”
They also wrote: “First, be careful who you donate your money to on this Island, there are plenty of other good causes. Second, before you support your neighbors, know if they are good neighbors or not.”
In a written statement issued yesterday, Mr. Moore said:
“In 1973, C. Russell Walton gave the Freeman Hancock Woodlot off Blue Barque Road in Chilmark to Sheriff’s Meadow Foundation in order to conserve the land.
“In August of 2010, Benjamin Ramsey and Nisa Counter received a deed from a third party to a portion of Freeman Hancock Woodlot, for which they paid $9,000.
“Through a series of letters, telephone conversations and meetings over the past 11 months, Sheriff’s Meadow has tried to demonstrate to Mr. Ramsey and Ms. Counter that Sheriff’s Meadow owns the land that they are claiming. Sheriff’s Meadow consulted with title experts, who performed an extensive review of the title, tracing it back to the early 1800s. The land was owned by members of the Hancock family from 1828 until 1962, when Priscilla Hancock sold it to C. Russell Walton, who later gave it to Sheriff’s Meadow.
“Mr. Ramsey and Ms. Counter do not accept that they have no ownership. They have subsequently constructed a wooden platform and built a structure with wooden sides and a wooden roof.
“In Massachusetts, there is a venue for resolving title disputes and determining ownership of land, and that venue is the Land Court. Sheriff’s Meadow has filed a lawsuit in the land court so that this dispute can be properly adjudicated.”
This article appears in August 16, 2011.
Attached comments are from a former Vineyard resident who aided in conserving hundreds of acres and aided in creating public interest projects on MV over a period of 13 years. email to follow.
Thanks for getting this information out to your reader base. Since I was not contacted for comment you can appreciate why I may want to add a few things.
Adam Moore’s comment makes it seem like they were the one’s who tried to clear this up and/or contact us. This is untrue, they took all winter to conduct a title search on the Freeman Hancock Woodlot, which they now claim to include our acreage as well. The deed they received from C. Russell Walton is for Parcel III, “the south part of the wood lot to the west of Quenames rd up to and including the orchard in the woods”. We asked for clarification of that very ambiguous verbage, and why they thought that this somehow disproves our ownership claim over a separate piece of land abutting their woodlot, and they could not. They could not reasonably explain it to our attorney either.
We then approached them to work out our differences of opinion, because unless we could come to an agreement that worked for both parties, we would all be going to land court – an expensive lengthy process for everyone. They however held the company line, of course, that they were right, we were wrong, and that nothing was unclear.
We have consulted with three attorneys over the course of the last two years who are all intimately aware of the professional title work that we had done and the title work that they have submitted. The one thing that they all agree on is that there is nothing clear about it.
It’s a shame that we have to deal with this in court, mostly for what it says about them as neighbors. With 2000 acres on this island they have many neighbors. That’s a lot of possible law suits if you can’t look your neighbor in the eye and be honest with him.
It is very disquieting to know that a not-for-profit, land conservation agency has acquired any of its properties without due diligence and clear title… at the time of the initial deed transfer to them at purchase/donation. Further, a law suit is never the only alternative to valid disputes. I hope the Land Court employs the wisdom of King Solomon. And please, Mr. Moore, clear up all other cloudy titles the SMF thinks it owns so that you can be a better neighbor to everyone, not just the wealthy NIMBY’s that the SMF is reputed to cater to. Affordable housing lots and land conservation should not be mutually exclusive… or the basis for a bullying animosity toward neighbors.
It seems to me that taking this to land court is a good thing. Let the experts decide. Both parties have titles, both parties want it ( for very different reasons). SMF would never and could never give away property that was set aside for conservation, so again it seems like taking this to land court would benefit everybody. The childish, name calling and just gross behavior I could really do without.
Island Gal, do you have any idea how much money is required to pursue a case through Land Court? SMF has resisted attempts at mediation and negotiation, and they had no objection to the Hancocks paying taxes on the property for many years.
Yes, I am aware that it requires a lot of money. Just as I am aware that SMF is paying for it. Just as I am also aware that the Chilmark by-laws state that “the tent site must be a canvas, or equivalent, material.”
I have tremendous respect for Sheriff’s Meadow.
Thank you Vineyard Gazette for writing this article to bring attention to a serious matter.
@Island Gal, SMF doesn’t pay for the litigation; “generous” donators do… Who are the predominant donators? What are their interests? It might be real nice to have a large estate being surrounded by conservation land that nobody can build on………. And what a coincidence that the summer resident neighbors of the land in question, who own large estates mostly surrounded by conservation land, did in fact call the SMF to complain…. Along with acting in a hostile manner towards Nisa and Ben.
About the permit, Nisa & Ben have a permit, they went to the town of Chilmark to obtain it prior to constructing their camp. Why don’t you ask Nisa & Ben to show it to you and you can read what their permit states that it allows.
@Joyce, I, personally, have had, in the past, tremendous respect for the SMF as well, and my family has also supported them financially, up until now. I might suggest you research who is currently in charge of SMF, what their backgrounds are, what techniques they use when a land dispute arrises, how they go about obtaining land, the clarity of all the land titles they do obtain, and what are the tax benefits to land donors. In addition, for exactly how long out of each year are these new people who are running the SMF actually living on MV, and during which months do they live here. I personally don’t have a lot of respect for highly affluent summer residents, with backgrounds in high money financial firms, who take over honorable conservation groups, and use bullying techniques heading straight to expensive litigation after large donators call them to complain about a young, hard working, long time islander, couple who would like to build a small home on a small plot of land they believe to be theirs. Land whose taxes have been paid for on a consistent basis, not by the SMF, but by the family of this young couple. Who I might add, has had this land in their family for hundreds of years. Still have “tremendous respect” for the current SMF?
seems to be quite a problem with clear land titles on this island lately. Ie: Mspca ,golf course etc. How is this happening?
Yes I do understand that the donors are paying for this matter to be examined and decided upon by the land courts. Why would they want this? Hmm, maybe because thats what they donate for- To keep the land in conservation! Again- my point is that this is the best way for this matter to be decided. As the matter is about land and nothing else. As for the “tent” permit, I was simply quoting the Chilmark by-laws word for word-the picture of the “tent” I’ve seen is not made out of canvas. It’s made out of wood.