Since writing my letter (printed in the Jan. 23 Gazette) for presentation at the SSA meeting in Woods Hole on Jan. 19, I have had a long, cordial and constructive conversation with Marc Hanover about various Authority projects and plans. It seemed that we were far more in agreement than probably either of us would have guessed. Mr. Hanover was also kind enough to gently point out several errors, and I hasten to correct what I wrote.

The contract to construct the new Woods Hole Terminal has not yet been bid or signed — only the architectural design phase — and his hope is that the project will not move forward until a new Falmouth member is in place and up to speed. The Woods Hole terminal project has been estimated to be $62 million with an additional $6 million to move the offices. The contract for the new ferry Woods Hole has been signed and that project is proceeding. As I understand it, the new ferry will cost about $40 million.

A fact that Mr. Hanover reminded me of and which I had forgotten is that the SSA is limited to $100 million in bonding debt, and while I am unclear about how much currently exists, they did retire some last year. However, if the two capital projects (ferry and terminal) proceed, just those two projects alone could well exceed the bonding limit unless phased over time, as is the current plan.

This raises a fundamental issue — how can the SSA proceed with various projects efficiently without exceeding the bonding limit? The short answer is that it can’t, so the Woods Hole project would be phased over time to 2020. This is a much larger issue than the rate hikes because it has long term as well as short term implications for enormous fiscal impacts for the Islands and physical impacts for Falmouth. If bonding is extended close to the maximum (as it would be for some years), or even if it is only at 66 per cent, what happens if the SSA has a really bad year, or folds? Well, dear reader, keep in mind that the “participating communities” have to pay for any deficits or shortfalls. That means that any deficits will be assessed to the Islands. Could that happen? It has in the past. Will it in the future? We have no way of knowing but fiscal conservatism will serve us better than spending and bonding to the max.

I have no problem with the concept of bonding — it is a very useful tool that allows for communities and municipalities to cushion capital costs over time — nor do I have concerns about who is profiting from the bonding. Providing money to entities such as the SSA, or an Island town for an emergency services building, is a very good investment and if I knew how to purchase such bonds (and had the wherewithal) I would. I don’t even have any problems with the new and higher rates. Yes, they impact Island families (many of whom are fiscally challenged) but everything costs more over here. It is reputed that the cost of living on the Vineyard is between 37 and 56 per cent higher than on the mainland. It probably is even higher on Nantucket. Everyone has to suck it up and deal, just as one has to cope with the crowds and traffic in the summer months. What would help? Developing a broad-based, green year-round sustainable Island economy with benefits for employees would be of enormous assistance, but that is a discussion for another letter.

What I do have problems with is that the Woods Hole terminal project would take place over five years, with the attendant disruption of life in the village for the bulk of the year due to construction and the huge impacts of traffic and crowds in the summer. In short there will be chaos for 12 months a year instead of the usual summer season. In addition, there is the potential for fiscal disaster if the SSA is bonded close to the maximum. Such action will insure that they must keep rates high, and that they must encourage more folks to visit the Islands (which means more traffic through overburdened Falmouth and Hyannis) which are fairly bursting at the seams in summer with people and cars. If they suffer financial reverses then we own the deficit — this business plan leads inevitably to a damned-if-you-do and damned-if-you-don’t Hobson’s choice.

Mr. Hanover promised better and more transparent communication with the towns, and the other governmental entities on the Vineyard. I have volunteered to help set up a meeting in West Tisbury with a number of up-Island boards including selectmen, planning boards and members of the MVC. Such face-to-face communication can only be positive and some give and take on information that could profoundly affect us would be very useful. So thanks Mr. Hanover for calling, and I look forward to a useful and informative meeting at a date not too far in the future.

Virginia C. Jones
West Tisbury