A draft warrant article to create a Martha’s Vineyard housing bank is now being circulated in the six Island towns for possible inclusion at annual town meetings next spring.
The article has been drafted by the coalition that formed earlier this year to promote the housing bank. If it wins approval at town meetings, the housing bank would next go to the state legislature. Modeled somewhat loosely on the Martha’s Vineyard Land Bank, the housing bank as currently proposed would collect a buyer-paid two per cent transfer fee on real estate transactions that fall above a certain threshold. The money would be distributed in the form of grants for affordable housing projects on the Island. An elected Islandwide commission would control the funds.
The article is lengthy and its language is still subject to change, as each town begins to review the details. As currently written, the measure would require approval by four of the six Island towns to pass.
At a meeting last week the Chilmark selectmen agreed to put the article on their annual town meeting warrant, offering generally positive comments although there were some questions, including the about the role of the housing bank commission in buying and selling properties, how and if commissioners would be paid, and potential conflicts of interest.
“I think this structure, as it’s presented today, it’s really very good. This is a structure which has worked very well for the land bank, we’re all very familiar with it,” selectman Warren Doty told spokesmen for the coalition who attended the meeting. “I think you’ve done a good job of putting this together.”
Selectman Bill Rossi agreed.
“I think it’s very clear what you’re trying to do,” he said. “I’m hoping that it [passes] in the spring.”
Chilmark resident Wendy Wolf said the housing bank, while a good idea, does not solve the immediacy of the Island’s affordable housing crisis. As an added measure, she suggested a portion of the money collected from the short-term rental tax go to the Molly Flender Fund, the town’s affordable housing trust.
But Mr. Rossi said the Molly Flender Fund is not strapped for cash, with $700,000 added to it this year alone. He said the problem is a lack of proposals.
“We have a lot of money sitting, waiting for a project,” Mr. Rossi said. “Quite frankly, it’s a little frustrating.”
The select board is expecting a proposal soon from the planning board for Peaked Hill Pastures, a roughly 17 acre-parcel of town-owned land that has been designated for affordable housing. A series of community engagement sessions were held over the summer and this fall; a proposal is expected by some time in December.
“Once we receive that and review that, it’ll give us a better sense of where we’re going in terms of that particular site, and what could be a significant number of building opportunities there,” selectman James Malkin said. He added:
“Should we, at that point, need to factor in some additional funding, I think that would roll into the conversation that you brought up, Wendy.”
Meanwhile, in Edgartown on Monday, members of the select board took no vote on the draft article, saying they would wait until it is reviewed by town counsel Ronald Rappaport before making a decision.
“We won’t have much to say until we hear Ron’s opinion,” selectman Michael Donaroma said.
The board tentatively scheduled a followup discussion for Dec. 6.
On Wednesday, West Tisbury select board members Skipper Manter and Cynthia Mitchell followed suit, moving to postpone consideration of the article until after the Edgartown board has heard town counsel Ron Rappaport’s legal opinion.
“I would feel much more comfortable pushing this off another week so we have the benefit of his analysis,” Ms. Mitchell said, noting that Mr. Rappaport is also town counsel for West Tisbury.
One day earlier, the Aquinnah select board voted to put the draft article on the annual town meeting warrant in that town.
The Oak Bluffs select board takes up the draft article at a meeting on Dec. 14, while the Tisbury select board will review the draft article on Dec. 15.
Comments (11)
Comments
Comment policy »