The Dukes County Commission has rejected a recommendation by the Department of Revenue (DOR) that it be abolished.

In 2010, at the request of the county commission, the Department of Revenue concluded a review of the financial management and the functions of the county. The primary recommendation of the DOR report was to disband the county altogether and replace it with a “council of governments,” an approach that more directly involves town leaders and emphasizes intermunicipal agreements, modeled after Franklin and Hampshire counties which disbanded in 1997. On Wednesday a Dukes County steering committee issued its response to the revenue department report, saying that the county had investigated the idea before.

“Frankly [the county] had done a pretty exhaustive study on the idea of a council of governments and rejected the idea for Dukes County for a number of reasons,” said county commissioner Melinda Loberg.

For one, the county’s report says, both Vineyard state representatives had warned the county that the legislative process required to disband the county and replace it with a council of governments would be “enormously time consuming.”

The county committee also cited the experience of Franklin and Hampshire counties themselves.

“They all stated that if faced with the decision again, they would not abolish the county,” the county’s report says. About Franklin County, the report says: “The principle disadvantages of abolishing the county were the negative impact on the region of having to transfer all their real property to the state . . . and the loss of their ability to issue bonds. The towns in the region also lost the stability of knowing they were all in this together because each town now has the ability to opt out of the council.”

The 2010 Department of Revenue report was at times unsparing in its appraisal of the county, citing a “lack of universal confidence” in it, and “disagreement on the role of county government on the Island.”

“While operating in this environment, we do not believe the county government is at all well positioned to fulfill a meaningful role in the regionalization of municipal services,” the revenue department report reads. “Based on our conversations with officials, these circumstances have prompted a new wave of questions regarding the county’s ongoing purpose and value.”

The report also notes that since the sheriff’s department and airport have splintered off from the county, the county manager “only has direct administrative oversight over several programs, including the health care access program, integrated pest management program, veterans agent and animal shelter.”

Since the report was issued, the animal shelter has become a separate, private, nonprofit organization.

But on Wednesday Mrs. Loberg said that the county’s resources were under-utilized and underappreciated.

“One thing of note is how well-equipped our treasurer’s office and its services are to help out regional government in a cost-effective way that are fairly unknown by the public,” she said.

The county’s response to the DOR report also highlights the work of the Dukes County Health Council, which Mrs. Loberg also discussed on Wednesday.

“The Dukes County Health Council was created by the county commission and in their capacity they have generated more than $3 million of grants for the Island that has been managed financially by the county in a way that enables lots of different organizations to provide services and benefits to Islanders in a very cost-effective way,” she said.

The county’s report also says that the DOR’s recommendation for an Islandwide strategic planning committee to establish a set of common goals and objectives for Island towns could be handled by the current body of all-Island selectmen.