The Massachusetts House took a step to advance a bill Thursday that would allow the Vineyard to create a housing bank, though the bill still seems unlikely to pass in the current legislative session.
State House lawmakers gave an initial approval to the bill that would allow the Island to apply a 2 percent transfer tax on real estate transactions over $1 million; State House News reported Thursday evening that one more favorable House vote would send the bill to the Senate.
There was some confusion from state lawmakers Thursday evening that the chamber gave the initial approval on such a hot-button issue, but the movement signifies to some that there is hope for the bill advancing fully next session.
The bill, sponsored by Island Rep. Dylan Fernandes, would create a Vineyard housing bank to fund the acquisition of year-round affordable and community housing. Proponents have argued that this bill would take advantage of luxury sales in order to help alleviate the Island’s affordable housing crisis. The bill’s $1 million-per-sale threshold is also below the median price of a house sold on-Island.
Local housing officials say that while the housing bank may not pass this session, Thursday’s move is still a good sign. Laura Silber, Island housing planner at the Martha’s Vineyard Commission, told The Times that the step signals good things to come.
“The House was under no obligation to move anything forward in informal session, so It is a positive sign that they are keeping the transfer alive for the Island towns,” Silber said. “We fully intend to continue to work for passage of a transfer fee for both Nantucket and Martha’s Vineyard, as it would provide the necessary revenue for utilizing the new tools provided to the Islands in the Seasonal Communities designation.”
While legislation to help Nantucket create a transfer fee did not advance on Thursday, Nantucket filed a home-rule petition, and would likely not have to refile that petition for the next session.
The housing bank has enjoyed official support on the Vineyard, with the Martha’s Vineyard Commission in 2021 unanimously approving a letter to the state legislature supporting a transfer fee.
Better would be investing in high speed commuter boats for workers. Wait until the job market crashes and now the Island has to support 10,000 unemployed workers living here. The best thing is summer only residents paying taxes and not using our schools and facilities. You will see.
We have seen it.
That is not what we want.
We do not want an Island where the people who work here can not afford to live here.
Would the Island be be better off if Mark was a commuter?
Mark, if there are 10,000 people unemployed in a small geographical area, I promise they will move to wherever there is work.
Mr Acker, points to some realities which should be part of the descusion moving forward, the building boom (for huge homes) hopfully has a half life.We don’t want to react but plan ten, twenty years out.
The island has ‘always’ had huge homes.
Mark, we’re spending enough on ferry transport to build a bridge.
Say NO to the real estate transfer tax.
Mary, ‘we’ do not want a bridge.
Chappaquiddick does not want a bridge.
Naushon does not awant
Cuttyhunk does not want a bridge.
Nantucket does not want a bridge.
Bridges bring more people.
Manhattan wants more bridges.
Albert, if an oil baron wanted a bridge,
there would be a bridge. I’m not an
oil baron so I can’t buy a bridge.
https://pigeonkey.net/a-short-history-of-the-old-seven-mile-bridge/
Comments are closed.