For more than 50 years, the Martha’s Vineyard Commission (MVC) has been the Island’s first line of defense against overdevelopment. Created by the Legislature in 1974, the MVC was given broad authority to ensure that growth on Martha’s Vineyard occurs responsibly, balancing economic development with the protection of the Island’s unique environmental, cultural and community resources.

Today, that authority is under direct attack.

A Chapter 40B developer is arguing that the MVC is merely a “local board” and therefore should have no meaningful role in reviewing large housing developments that include a few affordable units. If successful, that argument would not simply alter a permitting process, it would fundamentally undermine the legislature’s vision for Martha’s Vineyard and weaken one of the Commonwealth’s most successful regional planning institutions.

The stakes extend far beyond a single project. They involve the future of the Island itself.

Martha’s Vineyard is not just another community. It is a place of extraordinary natural, historical, ecological and cultural significance. Its great ponds, coastal ecosystems, sand plains and rare species are resources of statewide importance. Recognizing that unchecked development threatened those resources, the legislature created the MVC and charged it with reviewing projects that have regional impacts.

For decades, that system worked. Development continued, but it occurred in a way that preserved the Vineyard’s rural character, protected sensitive environmental resources and respected the Island’s limited infrastructure.

Today, however, the pressures facing the Vineyard are greater than ever. Nitrogen pollution threatens the great ponds. Summer traffic strains roads and ferries. Workforce housing remains in short supply. Homes once occupied by year-round residents are increasingly converted into seasonal residences, investment properties and short-term rentals.

The Island is approaching a crossroads.

In response, the MVC has done exactly what the legislature intended it to do: carefully scrutinize large developments and ensure that their benefits outweigh their impacts. Most projects have been approved with conditions. A very small number have been denied when their impacts were simply too great.

Not surprisingly, some developers have pushed back.

Most recently, the developers of the Green Villa and Edgartown Gardens projects argued that the MVC should be treated as a local board under Chapter 40B and therefore be stripped of its authority to review major housing developments that include predominantly market rate units with a limited number of affordable units. Unfortunately, the State Housing Appeals Committee (HAC) accepted that argument in the Edgartown Gardens case, prompting ongoing litigation by both the MVC and the Town of Edgartown.

This is not a technical dispute over permitting authority. It is an existential challenge to the MVC itself.

If the MVC is reduced to local-board status, its ability to protect water quality, preserve open space, manage traffic impacts and encourage workforce housing will be dramatically diminished. Towns operating under the constraints of 40B cannot impose conditions on 40B projects to protect these key Island interests in the way the MVC does. Developers will have every incentive to bypass the regional review process that has protected the Vineyard for half a century.

Nor is this a debate about whether affordable housing should be built. The MVC has consistently supported affordable housing development and has helped create hundreds of income-restricted units while securing millions of dollars for affordable housing initiatives across the Island. The Commission has approved nearly every Chapter 40B project that has come before it. The issue is not whether housing should be built; it is whether large developments should be required to account for their impacts on the broader community.

If the HAC decision stands, developers will increasingly submit projects that ignore traffic, water quality, open space and infrastructure concerns because they will know the MVC no longer has the authority to protect the Island from the regional impacts of their projects. That is precisely the outcome the legislature sought to avoid when it created the MVC in 1974.

Martha’s Vineyard is different. Its environmental resources are fragile. Its infrastructure is limited. Its character is irreplaceable. The legislature recognized those realities more than 50 years ago and created a regional commission with the authority necessary to protect them.

In light of the recent HAC decision, the question now is simple: will the Commonwealth honor that vision or will it allow decades of thoughtful regional planning to be swept aside?

The future character of Martha’s Vineyard may depend on the answer.

Importantly, the MVC is not fighting this battle alone. The Island is fortunate to have Sen. Julian Cyr and Rep. Thomas Moakley as strong advocates in the legislature who recognize that protecting the Vineyard’s natural resources, infrastructure and quality of life is not inconsistent with creating housing opportunities for Islanders. Rather, it is essential to ensuring that the Island remains a viable place for year-round residents to live and work. Island residents who care about the future of Martha’s Vineyard, the protection of its unique character, and the creation of responsible affordable housing should take a moment to thank Senator Cyr and Representative Moakley for their commitment to these issues.

Peter Wharton is the chair of the Martha’s Vineyard Commission.