Real estate agents and zoning officials on Martha’s Vineyard have their eyes on a court case unfolding on their sister Island that could disrupt the short-term rental market, a long tradition and economic engine of the region.
While the case hasn’t been resolved, a Massachusetts Land Court ruling raises the question if some short-term rentals would be allowed with existing zoning on the Vineyard.
On Thursday, March 14, Massachusetts Land Court Judge Michael Vhay ruled in a Nantucket case that a short-term rental cannot be a primary dwelling’s principal use in Nantucket’s residential neighborhoods. In other words, if a home is primarily used as a short-term rental, that could be considered a commercial enterprise, which isn’t allowed in a residential area.
Nantucket resident Catherine Ward filed the original lawsuit, suing her neighbors the Grapes and the town’s zoning board of appeals for allowing a short-term rental operation she saw as an illegal commercial venture. Ward contends that light pollution and excessive noise coming from the rental has made her consider moving off Nantucket.
According to court documents, Vhay determined that Nantucket’s zoning bylaws did not explicitly permit short-term rentals, therefore it was not permissible.
However, the court found that short-term rentals were allowed as an accessory use under Nantucket zoning. An accessory use would be considered incidental, or a secondary use of a property.
In his recent decision, Vhay remanded the case to Nantucket’s zoning board of appeals for reconsideration. The board initially sided with the Nantucket building commissioner, who wrote that short-term rentals did not violate zoning.
The Nantucket zoning board of appeals now has 45 days to determine whether the Grapes’ short-term rental operation would be allowed as an accessory use of the property. If not, the board would need to figure out “appropriate remedies,” according to Vhay’s conclusions.
The decision was met with mixed reactions on Nantucket, according to the Nantucket Current. Nantucket officials are worried about the potential impact to the traditional short-term rental market, while housing advocates felt validated about their concerns that the rentals hurt the year-round housing market.
Although it is uncertain whether the town will appeal the decision, the Nantucket zoning board of appeals met on Monday, March 25, to discuss the court decision in executive session. When reached for more information, The Times was told further details regarding the executive session were not available yet.
How exactly the Vineyard will be impacted is not yet fully clear. But the Nantucket decision has some watching closely.
“I know it’s a concern, but we’ll just have to wait and see what happens,” Anchor Realty owner and real estate agent Lisa Lucier said.
Lucier notes that short-term rentals are a “vital part of the economy” on the Vineyard. Many visitors who use short-term rentals stay longer than a day or two, and they tend to spend lots of money on the Island, Lucier said.
She also said the elimination of short-term rentals would have a “real impact” on Martha’s Vineyard, pointing out that there aren’t enough hotel rooms to meet the summer demand on the Island.
Lucier said there still seemed to be “hoops to jump through” on the Nantucket side, and she hopes the issues will stay across the ocean.
Feiner Real Estate owner and broker Jim Feiner said Vineyarders are “going to look hard at this.” He pointed out that Nantucket’s zoning bylaws did not mention short-term rentals in its text, while“clearly stating that any use that is not explicitly listed in the zoning code is prohibited.”
Municipalities on the Island are also paying close attention to the case because it may prompt changes to local zoning.
“It’s fair to say we’re just watching with real interest with what’ll come out of Nantucket,” attorney Ron Rappaport told The Times. Rappaport serves as town counsel to five Vineyard towns. “I think we’re going to get some pretty clear guidance from that case.”
He said the case was a “muddle right now,” and how the Nantucket zoning board of appeals moves forward would likely set the stage for the Vineyard, considering the zoning bylaws of both Islands are pretty similar.
Rappaport explains that short-term rentals have been allowed on the Vineyard under the assumption they were permissible by the 2021 Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court case Styller vs. Zoning Board of Appeals of Lynnfield. The case upheld a land court decision not allowing short-term rentals in Lynnfield’s residential zones.
“The court held that short-term rentals are not customary in Lynnfield — it’s not a resort community, it’s not customary, and therefore commercial, and therefore not allowed,” Rappaport said.
West Tisbury is particularly concerned with the lawsuit, because voters will be debating a short-term rental bylaw at town meeting on April 9.
The article was intended to codify West Tisbury’s short-term rental market process. However, it being proposed as a general bylaw, and as it is written in the warrant now, may lead to issues. According to Vhay’s decision, if a municipality regulates activities through zoning bylaws, then its general bylaws cannot contradict them. West Tisbury’s zoning bylaws currently don’t mention short-term rentals.
West Tisbury town officials decided it would be best to explain the short-term rental issue to voters at the town meeting and let the townspeople be a part of determining next steps.
Some housing advocates say that the court case on Nantucket could ultimately be beneficial for year-round residents.
Oak Bluffs select board member Gail Barmakian said she welcomed the court decision. “[Short-term rentals have] had a great effect on the availability of housing on the Island,” Barmakian told The Times, adding she thinks short-term rentals take away some houses from the year-round rental market and increase home values.
However, Barmakian feels the Nantucket case will need to be analyzed more before any decisions are made.
Tisbury planning board chair Ben Robinson said he thinks the Nantucket case will propel Vineyard towns to get a firmer grasp on their zoning bylaws regarding short-term rentals. Otherwise, it may result in lawsuits filed by residents against the towns and abutters, as in the Nantucket case, although Robinson said he was unsure whether people would actually follow through. “It’s definitely advancing the short-term rental conversation,” he said.
Other factors Robinson said might be taken into account were the amount of revenue the towns received from short-term rental taxes, and the supply of places for visitors to stay.
AirBNB and other short term rental programs have incentivized individuals to purchase MV houses without ever even stepping foot on island. Short term rental houses are viewed as commercial assets and contribute to the housing shortage. “Accessory use” means first and foremost that the home owner must be a MA resident, and must use the house as the primary residency. This isn’t what is happening. Ban short term rentals and only people who want to LIVE here will own the houses. People who want to live here, care about the land and community. I’d take summer/seasonal and year round home owners over airbnb people any day of the week.
The majority of the Island’s homes are owned by people who do not live here.
Do you consider people short term people to be trashy?
Why would I consider them trashy? I’ve come to know a lot of really cool short term island visitors. I am trying to make the point, as the courts will, that commercial rentals in residential neighborhoods by non-resident individuals is against zoning laws, and therefore illegal. Once this ruling is upheld in court, I believe we will see these houses sold and repurchased by people wanting to spend time here, not by people only interested in making money off short term rentals. How many of these homes exist? Unknown. I personally know many individuals who own multiple houses on island for the sole purpose of short term rental income. I’m hopeful these houses are sold to families who wish to become members of the community. What they do with their house is their will. But I’m against individuals owning houses ONLY to rent them as short term rental income, in residential neighborhoods. The tax base wont change. It’s already maxed by the number of homes on island. The infrastructure won’t change, because it’s already setup to handle the max number of residents on island. The only change, is the individuals running commercial rental businesses out of residential neighborhoods will end.
Dukes County has the fourth least population density in the state.
Suffolk 65 times more.
We the people will decide what infrastructure we want.
The Vineyard and and Manhattan are about the same size.
Dan, who are these airbnb people that you speak of? The people who support the local economy with their hard earned dollars vacationing here in the summer? Are the people of MV so privileged that they only want those who own property on the island to segregate from those who can’t afford a house on MV? I have made lifetime friendships of those who could only rent one or two weeks out of the year. Great ideas Bob, ban the one thing that props up the tourist economy on MV. Sounds like typical progressive thinking to me. What next ask for open boarders but please don’t send them here because they can’t buy a house.
What are your facts? How many homes have been bought by owners who only do vacation rentals? Why would an investor buy property on the Vineyard when there is such a short season? A smart investor would purchase somewhere with a much longer rental season. The numbers don’t make any sense unless of course it’s someone who buys a Summer house and rents a few weeks to help pay the taxes. You also seem to want to increase the year round population. Are you ready to foot the bill for more schools, larger roads, more police/fire, etc.?
No Mr. Axel the mindset of the liberal island resident is to complain about everything as the solutions stair them right in the face. They chant we demand affordable housing while in the same breath say no new development. We demand higher wages while screaming about the cost of a hamburger. We demand open borders but don’t send them here since we don’t have the resources. Send them to the Cape. All though I don’t understand the liberals vacuous way of thinking I do admire their total commitment to it.
Mr. Kelly, the mindset of the conservative island resident is to complain about everything as the solutions stair them right in the face.
All though I don’t understand the conservative vacuous way of thinking 2020 election results) I do admire their total commitment to it.
The court’s ruling seems so logical as to be irrefutable. As to its practical affect, may be it will prevent corporations and wealthy individuals from snapping up housing to use purely for rentals, thus making more housing available to people who live and work here. I doubt it will make much of a dent in the tourist trade and will not prevent Islanders and regular summer residents from earning a few bucks (or a lot of bucks) by renting out their homes for a few weeks each summer when they are elsewhere.
Paul, thank you for your considered response. Much appreciated.
I for one applaud the possibility of this law going into effect on Martha’s Vineyard. How many houses are bought up by people who buy them specifically to be rented out? They might never live in the house and probably own another house on the Island that they actually live in. If they actually live here at all. This has depleted the market of “affordable” houses that should be lived in by people who would actually make them their homes. They would also establish real neighborhoods, not ones where people don’t know their neighbors because there are always different people, week after week. I really believe that if this changes then we wouldn’t need more houses to be built because this might open up a new market for Island people who call this fragile island home.
Gayle, maybe the government should buy those houses and put the migrants in them. Sounds like a new liberal housing plan. After all we are paying for migrants to live in exclusive NYC hotels.
And we can do away with those icky visitors who can’t afford a second home on MV but would still like to visits MV to see how the hypothetical snobs frolic in the sun and tan at The ECBC play tennis at the ECTC and set sail from the ECYC. I’m not picking on East Chop it’s just where we own our home. And some of my lifelong friends are those awful people who have been renting for years on island.
Carl, you bring up a very good point about people. People from anywhere can become lifelong friends. Sincerely. (On a side note, I love the word sincerely, it has a cool etymology). Which is why I’m sometimes flabbergasted when people talk about immigrants or migrants as if they are animals or aliens.
I don’t think anyone should besmirch those coming to this country through our legal process. On the other hand I don’t have much empathy for those entering our country illegally taking advantage of our generosity. We are not capable of taking in and caring for every person that decides to come here. We are 39 TRILLION in debt.
Please describe the legal process.
For a Mexican kid who can pick ten bushels of tomatoes and hour.
A Dominican kid with a 95 mile an hour fast ball?
An Indian kid with a PhD in Computer Science.
A Hong Konger with ten million in clean assets?
Are we capable of taking all of them?
We are 35 TRILLION in debt.
The last administration made a tax cut.
The last administration increased spending.
Americans owe more on residential real estate than National Debt.
The number of concern is our nation’s net worth.
Most everyone owes something.
What is you best guess of America’s net worth?
Mine is in the area $300,000 per person.
We are the richest nation on earth, of any size.
Oddly enough we go further into debt when we cut taxes and not spending, that is irresponsible leadership.
You mean illegal aliens?
Yes Gayle we know how fragile the island is. So fragile that the good people of MV couldn’t figure out how to deal with 50 migrants. What do you think will happen to the local economy if you ban short term rentals? I happen to know many people who own homes on MV who are forced to rent them so they can pay their taxes so they can keep the property in their family. Maybe lower taxes which will give more people the ability to afford higher rents or a mortgage payment. Not in taxachusetts, too many people on the dole. The answer to the housing crisis is to build more houses. But the good people of MV don’t want to change the look and feel of the island. The good people of MV wants everyone else to make changes to their neighborhoods to deal with our sudden overpopulation. The hypocrisy is palpable.
The good people of MV did figure out how to deal with 50 migrants.
They did not load them onto a private jet bound for Florida.
Carl, what is it that draws you to this pit of Liberalism? The pretty windmills? Masochism?
Carl, how many people are on the dole in Massachusetts? How does that compare to the rest of the United States?
Well, let’s start with The top 10 percent of earners paid 74 percent of all income taxes and the top 25 percent paid 89 percent. that’s a lot of people on the dole.
As for the rest of the country CT, MA and NJ send the most money to the federal govt and get the least back. Kentucky, New Mexico and West Virginia send the least to the federal government and get the most back. MA and NJ tax and spend liberals don’t even get the full benefits of what we pay in taxes. And the liberal answer is send more people here for more free stuff.
I disagree that we don’t benefit from our taxes. The school systems alone in the states you mention should convince you.
Carolyn, you pointed out to me that I often over generalize and I have been doing it too much lately. You are correct we do benefit from our taxes and our schools demonstrate that. The waste and entitlement spending clouds my judgement. And as Keller pointed out to me it’s not just liberals who are wasteful with our money.
“How many houses are bought up by people who buy them specifically to be rented out?” Good question and if you don’t know the answer the rest of your argument is moot.
This is good news for the island and hopefully we can stop the commercialization of these rental properties in residential districts. we all have neighbors who have no intention of living or retiring here and run their rental property as a cash cow to the detriment of the neighborhood. They put in swimming pools, hot tubs, and create mini resorts next-door to families who are just trying to live and work here.
Anyone who rents their property for any reason have commercialized their property.
How do swimming pools, hot tubs, and mini resorts negatively impact families who are just trying to live and work here?
Installing swimming pools, hot tubs, and mini resorts pays well for families who are just trying to live and work here.
Swimming pools, hot tubs, and mini resorts increase the value of the homes owned by families who are just trying to live and work here. They also increase the value of your home.
Bob, I agree with you. Short-term rentals should be in a commercial setting for many reasons. Safety is one reason. Safety requirements for the short-term living space (let’s use hotel requirements) and the safety and peace of a residential neighborhood. We can choose (let’s make a purposeful choice) to zone some neighborhoods (homes) for short-term rentals.
Finally!
When I sought after endless meetings with the Oak Bluffs ZBA to build a small cottage next to my own house it was finally approved with the understanding that I might well move some of my family into it. Instead I have used it to rent below-market housing to a very few people (who tend to stay for a long while) year-round. In my neighborhood there are quite a few unused cottages that are used only in the summer for Air B&Bs. Most of them were built specifically with that in mind. IMHO they add nothing aesthetically or otherwise to the neighborhood. Folks who stay there know nothing of our town or Island and are just thrilled to have a place to sleep on Martha’s Vineyard from which they can walk to the beach. I expect we can count on the neighbors to decide if the place next to them is being rented out on a weekly basis or is being lived in by a year-round person. Or who else will police/supervise the situation? I live in the so-called “Arts District” of Oak Bluffs and the last thing we need here is more weekly housing. But when the rare house appears on the market it is mostly sold, I have found, to people who want to live here year-round and integrate themselves quickly into the community, which is welcome.
Sarah, even if you rent your cottage out for less than others charge, you’re still profiting. You’ve still commercialized your property to a degree. I see no reason to judge or restrict others for doing the same. Perhaps they need the money more than you do and that accounts for the difference in rates/approach.
It’s a tourist destination. I don’t expect the families staying nearby to be familiar with the towns, and if they’re just looking for a spot to sleep, that often amounts to a quieter experience for all. I’ve lived in many places and have never seen so many informal rules/preferences about who can and cannot join in as I do here. Snobbery is, hands down, my least favorite feature of the Vineyard, and it pops up constantly on these pages.
If short-term vacationers stopped coming, some of the same folks who turned their noses up at accomodating them would see their own businesses suffer. Then the complaints would roll in about that. We can’t have it both ways.
Katie, well said. I’m sure so many would agree that you articulate things so much better than I do. Thanks for your spot on comment.
Thanks, Carl. I agree with you and Sara that it’s important to acknowledge how much the island benefits from off-island money, taxes and tourism alike.
It’s disheartening to see how often some groups are made to feel less welcome. Right now, it’s short-term vacationers. A few years ago, it was seasonal residents. New Yorkers have often been a target for no reason, and recently it seems Floridians are up for ridicule. Some locals don’t like wash-ashores, and…
At this rate, if we kick everyone off who’s being looked down upon, only the puppies will remain. (I was gonna say skunks, then remembered we don’t like them either.)
Katie, yes, we can have it both ways. We can rezone.
It’s not that simple, Mary. As others mentioned, it’s important to gather the facts before assessing potential consequences. There’s risk in supporting a change without having any numbers, even if they’re ballpark figures.
I second (third?) the most pressing question. How many of these houses are truly owned by people who have never lived here? While I don’t doubt it happens, I’d prefer specifics to understand the scale of the problem. To weigh the pros and cons. How many bookings does each property average? Approximately how many guests per booking? If we had that info, we could better estimate how much money they’ve been adding to the local pot—and what stands to be lost in the absence of their business.
It surprises me that some assume it’ll be negligible. On what basis? I don’t make a dime from the Vineyard economy but am concerned for those who do. Again, short-term visitors provide a huge boost. Some spend hundreds a day on food alone. That’s a lot to make from a single group, and it’s only one example of their purchases.
Any dip in tourism could hurt the very same islanders we’re trying to assist. I know of multiple teachers who have summer jobs in the retail or hospitality industries. Some make generous tips that are earmarked for future expenses—and there’s the rub. Solving the housing crisis is about more than controlling what’s on the market. It’s also a matter of having the funds to snatch up a house or room when listed.
I don’t want to curtail anyone’s income, let alone that of essential workers. Not even a little. That would be counterproductive.
Lately, we’ve seen businesses secure housing for their employees. It’s a great development, and the ability for others to follow suit depends on their own financial health. Even a modest decrease in profits can be serious in a locale with plenty of overhead and a fleeting peak. If an employer has a lean year because zoning messes with the status quo, will they still be able to offer this option? We don’t know.
It’s prudent to look at such factors. Every decision made in a closed circuit like MV could impact the next person.
I agree that peaceful neighborhoods are a consideration. This is true regardless of who’s next door, be it a seasonal resident, local, or tourist. When it comes to the featured Nantucket case, I don’t blame the complainant for seeking resolution, assuming there’s proof of ongoing disruption. At the same time, weekly rentals are not the awful, newfangled trend some make them out to be. They’re a tradition that was in operation long before Airbnb existed, and largely without incident.
Islanders who rent to other year-rounders for a low price are helpful to the community. Unfortunately, some folks need to charge the higher rates just to remain here for a portion of the year. Is that portion enough? As with the Housing Bank, the devil will be in the legal details. West Tisbury’s proposed bylaw is reasonable and should not cause these owners–those who rent out their homes often to stay afloat–an issue.
We will see what happens elsewhere. It’s vague at the moment, and so I remain cautious of the bandwagon. I would hate to see anyone who’s struggling have to sell because MV failed to consider all angles and circumstances.
Sara, I apologize for misspelling your name. Didn’t notice until after my comment posted.
Just reading these few comments about restricting access to people willing to pay thousands of dollars to rent for a week or two so they can have a family vacation clarifies to me why MV packed up those migrants so fast and shipped them off. If you don’t want the people who actually support the local economy why would want those who are a drain on it? Do you people actually listen to yourselves?
Mr. Kelly, did you actually read the comments? We did not, as you put it, pack “up those migrants so fast and ship them off.” That’s a very tired, erroneous description of what the Island did with the migrants that Mr. DeSantis actually gathered up in Texas, not Florida, and surreptitiously sent to the Vineyard. We don’t have housing for the people who are already here. Nor jobs. This is a finite space. We’ve no doubt that people who can afford to buy houses here are an addition to our local economy if they are working folks who live here year-round. The folks who don’t — well, they have grand houses on which they pay large tax bills which are mostly empty 10 months of the year, but contribute vastly to our economy and for which we’re mostly grateful. It enables us to have very good schools and first-rate town governments, as well as a very good hospital, built entirely with private funds. The DeSantis migrants were a whole other story: most of them thought they were treated well by the Island folks coming together in splendid ways and helping them to go on with their migration. We sent them to the Cape which has appropriate facilities to handle this many people who need housing, food, help in becoming citizens or at least getting jobs which we don’t have here. I’m told a few of them resettled here with the assistance of a year-round entrepreneur.
Yes Sarah, that’s my point, welcome to the party. MV is not alone with THEIR finite resources. Do you think other jurisdictions have unlimited resources? Have you seen the housing crisis in other places in the US? It’s unaffordable all over thanks to the recent printing of money driving up the cost of everything including mortgage rates. Sara I do appreciate you being grateful for those who are paying taxes that allow for so much of what makes MV so incredible but I don’t think most people do. Today the wealthy are vilified as not paying their fair share. I do see that you acknowledge that “we sent them to the Cape” but can you also acknowledge that no place is willing to take on this added burden. MV absolutely could have fed, housed educated 50 people but the community chose not to. They thought the migrants would be better off somewhere else. Well most people think the same way when a group of people arrive with nothing but are looking for what you have. But what have has taken years to accomplish and was not given to us.
Printing money allows more people to buy housing.
“community chose not to.” Who in the community made that choice?
Did your parents provide you with housing and education, lucky you.
Where would be now if they hadn’t ?
Don’t lie. MV did not pack MV did not pack up those migrants.
Back up your claim with names.
Just exactly who on the Island packed up the Migrants?
Third generation born here Islanders?
Recent washashores?
Albert, your hypocrisy is front and center again. Memory seems to be failing, too.
Those migrants were presented with a bus to a military camp, and voluntold to get on it. You don’t have to go there but you can’t stay here, the church is closed.
Don’t even try to tell it different. I was there.
Facts
Your “you people” remark clarifies to me that you 1) don’t live here and 2) have no idea wtf you’re talking about. How do you conflate short term rentals with the migrants who were trafficked here? Dumb. Oh yeah, and they weren’t “shipped off”, they WANTED to go to the mainland where accommodations and legal support were available. Incidentally, some of them came back here, where they were welcomed with open arms, and are now an integral part of our community. Educate yourself before posting something so demonstrably untrue.
Carla, the “you people” that I was referring to was the liberal hypocrite. My residence is in NJ but I own property on East Chop. However, I have been spending around 6 months a year on MV. The island is filled with housing hypocrisy and the migrants are just one example of the liberal hypocrisy. Liberals want affordable housing but won’t let public housing be built here. Liberals want open borders but don’t want you house them in their neighborhoods. Read some of the comments above how the Cape has better resources. You just tell yourselves that to feel better. You want other people to pay for your virtue signaling.
Carl, did you have any contact with the migrants?
Were you on Island when they were here?
Have you spoken to anyone who did have contact?
The shrill of the migrant dog whistle.
It’s not always a matter of greed. There are locals who rent out their homes this way to make ends meet. At a time when so many are struggling financially, I would be hesitant to place restrictions on them.
As long as the property is safe for renters (smoke detectors in working order, everything up to code, not overcrowded), I don’t have a problem with owners doing as they wish. They’re paying the mortgage and related costs.
Oh, thank you for not “having a problem” with what I do with my own property that was purchased off the back of two 30 year careers, and now must be rented a few weeks a year to make ends meet, so we can continue to live here. Much appreciated.
John, I meant that it’s none of my business if you’d like to rent your house out.
Has anyone thought about what the concept of “private property”
means ? I find it interesting that some “conservatives” here seem
to be in favor of the government controlling what we can or cannot
do with our private property that we worked hard to acquire.
I wonder why, while they rant about how the liberals want to turn
America into a socialist or communist country are advocating for
one of the fundamental principles of freedom to be trampled on by local
aristocrats. Of course, I have also noticed that they point their
fingers at “progressive” policies that they think are turning the U.S
into a communist state. But then,they turn a blind eye to the suffering
of the people of Ukraine at the hands of a ruthless communist dictator.
And they support a person running for the highest office in the land
who has declared he will be a dictator, imprison his enemies , and
claims to be above the law.
Millions of people have died for the cause of keeping communism
at bay around the world, but now, somehow, the “conservative”
movement is encouraging the Russian government and military to
” do whatever the hell they want.” in Europe.
And don’t forget to get your trump bible as soon as you can
to support your favorite crook – It is described on its website
as “the only Bible endorsed by President Trump.”
And it’s only 60 bucks.
That’s some kind of potent Kool aid you guys are drinking.
Kool-Aid makes the pages sticky.
Extreme politics is just that: Extreme. Extreme left is Communism (an example is Putin). Extreme right is Fascism (an example is Hitler). I personally don’t want to live under either extreme.
Hitler and Fascism were also extreme left, and also not the same thing. An example of extreme right would be an absolute hereditary monarchy, think the Tudors, the Plantagenets, the Habsburgs.
The difference between Nazism and Fascism was where absolute loyalty was expected to be given. Nazism gives it to their idea of a master race, Fascism gives it to the State.
What sets those apart from Communism was who owned the means of production; the State in communism, privately in the other two but with such governmental micromanagement it didn’t much matter.
All three were overt attempts to turn the ideas of socialism into a functioning government, and all three backfired horribly.
The truth is that left-right measures are really as useless as tits on a bull. It takes more than one axis of measurement to describe governance.
Kevin, thank you for your comment. Well said and succinct. I am more interested I am more interested in what the relies will be to it. It could be very entertaining.
Enough is enough, the Island must pull together and make the decisions about what people can do with what they own.
Enough of this unregulated chaos.
Comments are closed.