To the Editor:
In Oak Bluffs, as in the other Island towns, there is an article on the annual town meeting warrant asking the citizens to approve the creation of a Housing Bank. The purpose of the Housing Bank is to raise funds to tackle the intractable problem of affordable housing on Martha’s Vineyard. That sure seems like a good idea.
But is this Housing Bank a good idea for Oak Bluffs and the Island, right now, at this time?
I don’t think so.
The Housing Bank, in theory, is modeled after the successful Martha’s Vineyard Land Bank (more on that later). However, there is one major, glaring difference between the way the Land Bank is funded and the way the proposed Housing Bank will be funded. The Land Bank gets its money from a 2 percent tax on the sale of real estate on Martha’s Vineyard. No municipal funds are diverted from Island town budgets to fund the Land Bank.
However, unlike the Land Bank, the proposed Housing Bank will be funded directly by municipal revenue. That wasn’t the correct way to fund the Land Bank in 1986, and it isn’t the right way to fund the proposed Housing Bank today.
Additionally, Oak Bluffs and the rest of the Island towns already use municipal tax dollars to fund affordable housing via the Community Preservation Act. The Oak Bluffs Community Preservation Committee annually funds affordable housing projects, and in any given year could devote up to 80 percent of its funds for affordable housing. This is a significant amount of town dollars under town control flowing to affordable housing.
Further, the source of the funds for the proposed Housing Bank is 50 percent of the room occupancy tax. The room occupancy tax rate is set by the individual towns. Wealthy towns, not needing the revenue, could keep their room occupancy tax rate low, giving a competitive edge to the vacation rental businesses in their towns. Less wealthy towns, such as Oak Bluffs, might set their rates higher because they need the revenue. Unintended consequence: The taxpayers of the less wealthy towns fund the Housing Bank, while tourist dollars flow to businesses in the wealthier towns.
This is a bad design!
Back to the Land Bank. Since its inception in 1986, the Land Bank has conserved over 3,300 acres. That is 5.9 percent of the total acreage of the Island. This is a significant reduction in the supply of land on the Island. But the Land Bank is not the whole story.
The Manuel F. Correllus State Forest conserves 5,100 acres. The Sheriff’s Meadow Foundation conserves 2,900 acres. The Nature Conservancy protects almost 1,000 acres. The Trustees of Reservations conserves 1,573 acres. The list goes on. In fact, according to the Martha’s Vineyard Commission, 34 percent of the Island (18,900 acres) is either in public open space or protected by conservation restrictions.
That’s a lot of land. The economic effect of that much land being removed from the market is enormous.
That is not to say that conserving land on Martha’s Vineyard is bad. It’s not bad, it’s good. But conserving this much land creates a problem: Land and housing on Martha’s Vineyard is not affordable for the poor, the workers, the lower middle class, and the middle class. And all this conservation of land is creating, in effect, a park system for the wealthy. The Land Bank, as a public entity, should serve the interests of all Islanders, not just the wealthy.
That is why a new housing bank should not be modeled on the Land Bank. It should be merged with the Land Bank. Since 1986, the Land Bank has raised $230 million. That’s a lot of money. Imagine if only a quarter of that ($56 million) had been devoted to affordable housing.
The circumstances of 1986 have changed; overbuilding and development are no longer the critical threats they were then — 34 percent of the Island is conserved, and local zoning laws are stronger. The biggest threat to the Island is the lack of affordable housing. It’s time to reform the Land Bank and create a new Martha’s Vineyard Land and Housing Bank.
I urge you to vote against the proposed housing bank at the Oak Bluffs annual town meeting and to actively work to reform the Land Bank.
Brian Hughes
Oak Bluffs
“The Oak Bluffs Community Preservation Committee annually funds affordable housing projects, and in any given year could devote up to 80 percent of its funds for affordable housing. This is a significant amount of town dollars under town control flowing to affordable housing.”
Glad someone is pointing this out. Housing, not the envirnoment, gets the lion’s share of Communitiy Preservation Funds in a number of the Island’s towns.
Howver, the solution to the housing issue is not to dilute the mission of the Land Bank. That I will never sign on to. The sad fact is that there is no solution to the housing issue. Destroying the Land Bank to not solve another problem would be stupid. Land Bank lands are not “a park system for the wealthy.” That is simply untrue. Where does the letter writer get this idea? The Land Bank creates a series of “parks” that everyone can use, and it is primarily funded BY the wealthy.
Comments are closed.