Naomi Higgins, in front of an auditorium full of Vineyard residents on Thursday, criticized high-ranking state officials in an emotional reproach for their clearing of a homeless encampment in the Manuel F. Correllus State Forest earlier this summer. She said that photos of her deceased children were taken, her wedding dress from two weeks earlier was taken, her great-grandmother’s wedding ring was taken — seemingly collected in a dumpster and taken off Island by a hired hand.
Higgins is the first person directly impacted by the controversial clearing to speak publicly about an issue that has roiled Vineyard officials, many stating that the state failed to coordinate with local agencies beforehand. And she did it on a big stage: the head of the Massachusetts department of conservation, with other state officials in tow, planned Thursday’s listening session at the Martha’s Vineyard Regional High School as a way to gather feedback from the community following the public outcry.
Higgins reinforced what local officials have been reporting that about two dozen people living in the forest were displaced — seven, she said, were off-Island for substance abuse at the time. The state, according to emails obtained by The Times, believed there were only a handful of people in the forest.
“I am a college-educated woman,” Higgins told a transfixed audience. “I have licenses. I am smart. The people in the forest are electricians, mathematicians, nurses at hospitals and schools on this Island.”
Higgins held the floor for about ten minutes on Thursday.
“Don’t even try to pretend that it’s something you guys had announced beforehand,” she said. “Because you didn’t. We were there every day.”
Camping in the state forest is illegal, and state officials have said that they did post no-camping signs, which has been documented by The Times. The state also worried about possible forest fires from the camping, but Higgins on Thursday reinforced that they were cautious.
“Our fire pit had the earth and the water ready to put out a small fire,” Higgins said. “We cooked over a grate, one fire for the entire 24, sometimes even up to 30 people in one night that we would cook for.”
It wasn’t just those displaced that spoke on Thursday. Though Higgins gave the only firsthand account, representatives of the Island boards of health and state groups lamented the clearing’s obstruction of their public health efforts.
“I was horrified when the events that really triggered the attention of DCR to all of this occurred,” said Michael Hugo of the Massachusetts Association of Health Boards, referring to the clearing as a raid.
Hugo, shared services coordinator for the Public Health Excellence Shared Services Grant Program, said the clearing interrupted the delivery of 100 canisters of permethrin, a pesticide used against ticks, to homeless people in the forest. “We would have been able to have hands on and eyes on much of the homeless population, and may have come up with some homeless people that were unknown to Harbor Homes [homeless shelter],” he added. Harbor Homes manages the only shelter on the Island, which is only open in the winter.
In the future, Hugo asked the department to notify local boards of health two weeks before breaking up any homeless encampment. “There is a public health aspect to why these people are experiencing homelessness, and we take that very seriously,” he said.
Dr. Brian Morris, executive director of Harbor Homes, echoed Hugo’s statements, noting that the department did not notify his nonprofit beforehand.
“All we ask is that the next time DCR plans a clearing, please extend to us the courtesy of communication and maybe even collaboration so that we can leverage our resources to proactively assist those impacted. We would aim to minimize the disruption, loss of personal items, and trauma to those who are already suffering,” he said.
Coincidentally, Morris noted, Thursday’s session fell on World Homeless Day, held each year on October 10.
State officials did not directly address the clearing during the session, but The Times reached department commissioner Brian Arrigo afterwards. Arrigo shared his department’s work toward a more coordinated approach in the future.
“We are currently working with the [Massachusetts] Executive Offices of Health and Human Services, and Housing and Livable Communities for more coordination of sister agencies,” he said. “And [we are] making sure there is additional coordination on the Island, that everyone knows what our plans are, and how we are coordinating.”
Though the clearing was the backdrop to Thursday’s session, Vineyarders made themselves heard on many other aspects of forest management, from establishing a year-round presence of employees, improving the forest’s trails and shared use paths, and protecting Vineyarders from the threat of wildfire.
Several on Thursday pushed for the forest superintendent to live year-round again in a house on forest grounds, which was inhabited year-round Manuel F. Correllus, the forest’s namesake and first superintendent.
Edgartown conservation agent Jane Varkonda said she lived there year-round with her husband and 26-year forest superintendent John Varkonda until the mid-1990s, when they moved out due to the home’s poor condition. The home has since been renovated and used sometimes by researchers. She and others wanted a superintendent to move in again. “It’s very important that you have boots on the ground, that you have a presence here,” Varkonda said. “We were here 24/7. John responded to all sorts of emergencies day or night.”
Responding to requests to house department employees on-Island, Arrigo shared a number of challenges, including state ethics regulations, concerns regarding collective bargaining agreements, and the high cost of a renting on-Island: “[R]ight now we think that given the amount that we pay our employees and the amount of the rent that would be charged, it would be a very difficult hurdle to overcome,” he said.
He did say, however, that the state legislature has been supportive of additional resources for his department.
He added that his department is exploring staff housing options with the Martha’s Vineyard Commission, and providing additional resources to support the work of forest superintendent Conor Laffey. “If we are able to have additional staff, we can think about and possibly move forward in terms of providing temporary housing to those employees on a rotational basis so that there is an active presence on the Island, [and] they’re able to use the housing that’s available. But it’s not a permanent situation. It would be a temporary situation,” Arrigo said.
Vineyarders also drew attention to the forest’s trails and shared-use paths, and many felt threatened by the presence of electric bikes.
Dick Cohn, the Dukes County associate commissioner for disabilities, said that he bikes and runs on the forest’s shared-use paths. He complimented the department’s work so far to widen the shared-use paths, but when it came to E-bikes he feared for his safety. “To me, it’s an accident waiting to happen, and I think I’m going to be the victim at some point … you don’t even hear the electric bikes coming on.”
Department officials told attendees that only pedal-assist E-bikes that fit into the state’s Class 1 category are allowed on shared-use paths. They also said that they have looked into posting speed limits, and have seen promising results testing signs in Boston that give visual feedback to riders on their speeds.
“If Class 1 is all that’s allowed, how about some enforcement?,” Vineyard Mark Rosenbaum asked. “If a couple of those things got confiscated, even for a week, it would send a message to people.”
Rosenbaum, a Vineyard Conservation Society board member, also spoke on his own behalf against trail closures in recent years. “You’ve cut a lot of people’s access,” he said. “People don’t just want to go on the pavement around the state forest. They’d like to go in the state forest.”
Acknowledging Vineyarder’s concerns about trails in disrepair, Arrigo highlighted the work of superintendent Laffey. “We as an agency, back in 2019, accomplished paving a portion of the trails. [For] the portion that hasn’t been paved, to the best of his ability, Conor has been doing patchwork to try to improve those trails. Unfortunately, we know that they’re not in condition that folks need to enjoy them.”
Multiple homeowners near the forest also shared their fears of wildfire.
Dave Celino, Chief Fire Warden of the department’s Bureau of Forest Fire and Forestry, noted that fires in the last 10 years have been fairly small, for which he credited local departments. He added that prescribed fires and managing things like leaf litter have also reduced fire risk. “How many folks here have seen smoke columns in the air for the last 10 years intermittently?,” he asked.
He added that the department has proactively burned 1,000 acres since 2012 and trained 85 firefighters over five years, including increasing training programs for assessing homeowners’ fire risk.
The state Department of Conservation and Recreation is accepting public comments on its website until October 17.
There’s a habitable house on the state forest property. We need an on site forest manager. But they wouldn’t have access to the house. Make this make sense to me.
We Need a Campground located in the state forest the proceeds of which can care for the State Forest it is done in other state parks why not ours ??
Paul– A state forest is not a state park. We have a number of parks here.
I think the homeless and even tourist should be able to camp in Ocean park and
Waban park, and Veterans park also. After all, veterans seen to have pretty high rates of
homelessness– veterans park could be for veterans only.
They could all pay a small fee and the proceeds can go to the care of those
parks. Why not ?
These same homeless people if they got injured in the forest, would be quick to file a suit, so I understand something must be done. I am tired of the less fortunate demanding housing. There are numerous places in 90% of the USA where nice housing is only $500 a month for a nice room. With a minimum wage job, those numbers work. The Island has no moral or legal obligation to house anyone, unless maybe if they are mentally ill or seriously handicapped, and even then there are State facilities for that situation off Island. If you can’t afford to live here, just 35 miles a way there is plenty of lower cost housing.
Jon, I understand that housing and homelessness are contentious issues, but there are a few points in your post that reflect common misconceptions. I’d like to offer some clarification based on the data and realities of the situation:
1.) Litigation by Homeless Individuals: The idea that homeless people would “quickly file a suit” if injured is more of a stereotype than a reality. In fact, most homeless individuals face significant barriers to accessing legal help. Their DAILY struggles are typically about finding shelter, food, and medical care, NOT pursuing lawsuits. National Coalition for the Homeless highlights how legal systems often work against the homeless rather than for them. Source: National Coalition for the Homeless on [legal rights and barriers for the homeless](https://nationalhomeless.org/advocacy/).
2.) Affordable Housing Availability: You mention that there are places in 90% of the USA where housing is only $500 a month for a nice room. Unfortunately, that’s not reflective of current housing markets. According to the National Low-Income Housing Coalition (NLIHC), $500/month rentals are rare, and most housing is significantly more expensive—even in rural areas. In 2023, the average rent for a one-bedroom apartment was around $1,200 nationally, so the availability of affordable housing is extremely limited.
Source: [National Low-Income Housing Coalition’s Out of Reach 2023 Report](https://nlihc.org/oor).
3.) Minimum Wage vs. Housing Costs: You also suggest that a minimum-wage job can cover housing expenses. The REALITY is that someone working a full-time minimum-wage job still wouldn’t make enough to afford even modest housing in most places. For example, a worker would need to put in 2-3 full-time jobs in some states to make ends meet for housing costs, according to the NLIHC.
4.) Obligation to House the Homeless: Communities, including the Island, actually do have legal and moral obligations to address homelessness. Under the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act, local governments must provide resources for the homeless, including those who aren’t mentally ill or disabled. The idea that the state has enough facilities for these individuals is also not accurate—many facilities are overburdened and underfunded.
5.) Moving to Affordable Housing Nearby: Finally, the suggestion that people can simply “move” to more affordable areas isn’t always feasible. Housing costs even 35 miles away—such as on Cape Cod—are still high, and transportation, employment opportunities, and available housing are often significant barriers. It’s an oversimplification of a complex problem.
I hope this helps shed some light on these issues. Housing insecurity is a multifaceted problem, and we must approach it with accurate information and empathy.
Jon– I am curious to know if you think that anyone who
gets injured in a state forest has cause to file a lawsuit.
If you were walking on a trail and tripped and sprained
you ankle, would you sue the state ? Or do you have
some sort of misguided opinion that only homeless people
who get injured while violating the law are entitled to
file lawsuits? Do you think no one has ever been injured
in the state forest ? Do you know of any lawsuits that have
been filed as a result of those injuries ?
That’s rich.. and when the people who have been here for generations are gone and the island is home to seasonal washasores remember the island has no legal or moral obligation to not be a complete tourist trap full of cheap garbage for 10x the price and rotting ecosystems. Can’t wait!
Or we can stop fighting and realize that we are all trying to enjoy life on the same rock because it’s a community full of people. We lost some of the last remaining island owned businesses this year. People are not coming back. The remaining young people are flocking away in droves. The reality on the ground is absolutely heartbreaking. We are begging for help because this is our HOME!! We grew up here.. my husband has family going backwards on island for over a dozen generations.. we will likely be leaving soon.. and closing another family business when we go. It is family legacy business vs family legacy have children.. it’s an impossible choice.
God forbid the island make smart decisions to help people like us stay and keep the backbone of what makes MV special alive..
But if it’s immigrants and money grubbers y’all want.. we can’t change reality.. the future of the island is really in people like your’s hands. We want to stay and make it special. We want to serve you all what we have been for decades.. but like you said.. the island doesn’t owe anyone anything.. we know.. we are leaving.
Amy– what could “the island” do to reverse this trend ?
Don’t do the crime if you can’t serve the time….Don’t do it….
John– for once I agree with you– all those responsible for this
deplorable crime of grand larceny should be prosecuted
and thrown in jail.
John, agreed. Trump belongs in prison.
A scofflaw is someone who flouts the law, especially when they know that law is difficult to effectively enforce. I have compassion for those caught up in the lack of year round housing. What I don’t understand is the chutzpah it takes to criticize officials who must enforce the NO CAMPING laws for the safety and good of the general public. Since when is a public state forest also a bathroom for humans? Ms. Higgins is quoted as determining that the illegal campfire for 22 people, including 2 children, was “small” and that they have a bucket of water and lots of mother earth to douse and bury flames should they become large and out of control into a genuine wildfire. I’m sure it’s great comfort to neighbors that this flock of professional, well-educated scofflaws are also adept at fire-fighting.
Jackie– I agree with you that camping in the state forest is
illegal and dangerous. It should not be tolerated and the
reasonable laws of which the no camping rule is,
should be enforced. The problem I have is not that
the officials enforced this law, it was how they did it. They had a complete
disregard for the rights of these people. It would be like getting
stopped for speeding, and the police just drag you out of your car,
confiscate everything in it — including your drivers license
and your groceries and then towing the car directly to the junkyard
and having it crushed. There is a difference between enforcing the
law and abusing the scofflaws.
“Camping in the state forest is illegal, and state officials have said that they did post no-camping signs, which has been documented by The Times”. Naomi and the others broke the law by choice. Intelligent, college educated, licensed professionals choose living in a state forest is a falsehood. One individual having a pity party claiming 30 people together all the time in that area. The DCR cleared the area, not one person present at that time of clearing to protest or claim responsibility for belongings. This is a second lie. Naomi’s statement is no evidence of any harm or loss to people. Times should not report this unsubstantiated nonsense without investigating and verifying her statement. GET THE PROOF. The state law prohibits living in the forest to protect residents homes nearby and citizens from crimes by trespassers. Why would “SMART” people conceal themselves in this manner? Reasons: drug addiction, drug dealers, criminals, mental illness, alien fugitives. Times should investigate to FIND THE TRUTH. MEDIA must take responsibility to avoid spreading falsehoods.
Roy– once again we agree– Falsehoods should not be tolerated. Only truthful statements should be publicized . Shame on the MV Times for posting a wild generalization about these people — I hope the editor interviewed every one of these people and concluded that they were all involved in or are “drug addiction, drug dealers, criminals, mental illness, alien fugitives.” It would be totally irresponsible for them to publish such unverifiable opinions of a person who probably thinks that FEMA gave all it’s money to “illegals”, is stealing aid destined for the people of N.C and Fl. Some might actually believe that Biben created these hurricanes with some secret technology to punish southern states for making it illegal to say “gay” Yes== it’s clearly up to the media to decide who is right and who is wrong and censor the opinions of those that the editor of a local paper disagrees with.
Maybe not this year, since we still have that pesky first amendment, but maybe next year we can “suspend” it so the media can promote the TRUTH and the government can shut down those who don’t.
Don, we agree yet again. Please add to your list the burning of firewood as a clean renewable source to heat your home.
Years ago in Boston I had a friend who regularly parked illegally in a certain area of the city because he knew the tow zone spaces were not policed. Eventually he had to go pick up his car from impound. There he discovered that somehow during the towing process someone had stolen his child’s valuable sports team’s equipment from his car. Boo-hoo, and not in a good way.
You see, according to folks who entitle themselves to put the public at risk by parking in TOW ZONE spaces meant for public service vehicles, like ambulances, or folks who entitle themselves and their fires to park in a NO CAMPING forest, certain scofflaws insist on being notified first when the laws they know they are breaking will be enforced, so they can at least keep their illegally plunked down belongings somewhere else while they continue to break the law. Only on Martha’s Vineyard do people think this.
My friend in Boston learned a hard lesson, without sympathy, too. While lacking a parking space is quite different from lacking a home, both scofflaws held their immediate needs and self-interests ahead of the general good. Both law breakers were endangering the public. According to the one scofflaw foolish enough to publicly condemn officials for placing the public good above her illegally parked wedding dress, she says not only is she smart, but that her fellow scofflaws are electricians, nurses, etc, who make more than minimum wage, btw. Eviction notices were not required in this circumstance of immediate threat of fire, and even Smokey the Bear agrees. Hard lessons learned for these folks.
It’s important that a community help out. Your suggestions for allowing more suitable camping grounds for island residents are good ones.
“The problem I have is not that the officials enforced this law, it was how they did it. They had a complete disregard for the rights of these people…There is a difference between enforcing the law and abusing the scofflaws.” ~Keller
We seem to be on a roll of unclear, incorrect, or misunderstood statements. Could you please explain how anyone’s rights were disregarded? What rights did you mean? How were the scofflaws “abused”? That’s a harsh word, so please be specific. It looks to me that the sad results were entirely brought on by the illegal campers, no one else.
Guys! (sorry, Gender-Autocrats):
It’s called commonwealth property (i.e., Massachusetts is a Commonwealth incorporated in 1780). Commonwealth property denotes its Ownership and only the Commonwealth has the right to possess and control this property. Therefore, the entire Commonwealth OWNS 100% of this space, our so-called ‘state’ forest. The County doesn’t own it – therefore WE on the island don’t own it. The entire Commonwealth of Massachusetts owns 100% of it.
In other words: get these squatters off of OUR COLLECTIVE property.
302 CMR: DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND RECREATION,12.08: Rules of Conduct on DCR Properties – Camping and Campsites Camping and Campsites: “(1) No person may camp on DCR property, except in a designated campsite, camping structure, or camping area.(2) DCR camping facilities shall be deemed to be a temporary recreational use. No designated campsite or camping structure shall be used as a residence or domicile.”
Need I say more? End of Discussion. Period.
Isabella, the problem is liberals change the definitions of words when they don’t fit their progressive agendas. So your posting the actual law means very little and most likely offends some.
Carl– I am one of the more outspoken liberals here, and
I in no way condoned the illegal camping going on in the State forest and
clearly said it was illegal and should not be tolerated.
I also have not seen a single comment on any of the stories
here on this topic by liberals or conservatives saying these people should be
allowed to camp there. What words have liberals changed the definition
of ? One person suggested the state provide some sort of legal way for
that to happen, and that idea was quickly shot down by both
conservatives and liberals.
By the way,
Since 1969, there have been 39 “upper level” officials convicted of crimes .
30 republicans
5 democrats
4 unaffiliated
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_American_federal_politicians_convicted_of_crimes#1989%E2%80%931993_(George_H._W._Bush_presidency)
This doesn’t include the 34 felony convictions of you know who.
But then again, I guess for a guy who thinks the people who
trashed the capital building, defecated on the speaker of the
house’s desk, and violently attacked police while attempting
to stop the official proceeding of the government’s
peaceful transition of power and had
every intention of hanging the sitting Vice president,
the actual laws mean very little to you
and your ilk. Sorry if you are offended that they
are being prosecuted.
Kind of ironic that conservatives condone all those
people violently breaking the laws I mention above
as well as others.. Kind of hypocritical to
criticize liberals while praising violent radical right wing
insurrectionists.
” I guess for a guy who thinks the people who
trashed the capital building, defecated on the speaker of the
house’s desk, and violently attacked police while attempting
to stop the official proceeding of the government’s
peaceful transition of power and had
every intention of hanging the sitting Vice president,
the actual laws mean very little to you
and your ilk.” ~Keller
Keller: Carl has never supported nor defended the rioters’ actions of Jan 6, so the “you and your ilk” personal attack of his character is wrong on every level. The slander is as much a falsehood you tell about a fellow commenter with whom you disagree, as is falsely claiming that I, Jackie, “hate ugly Palestinian girls”. You cannot say you care about truth when your tactics to debate here are based in telling so many falsehoods.
Jackie– Carl has expressed his opinion that liberals
are not law abiding citizens– he has not used those exact
words, but conservatives change the definitions of words
when they don’t fit their oppressive agendas.
But let me ask Carl directly—- Carl, what do you think about the
people who have been prosecuted for their actions on Jan 6 ?
Carl– Ok about the firewood– I have posted numerous studies
showing that heating with wood is carbon neutral, and has the added
benefit of reducing fossil fuel use. You have continued to blather
your opinion. You are entitled to that. But your opinion is
just conservative claptrap. You can keep talking about it, and I will point out
that your opinion is demonstrably incorrect, and we can let
the readers here decide which of us is an ignorant fool.
And just for fun– I know who will call me the fool and
who will call you the fool. Can you guess ?
Let me assure you those that will call me the fool will not
have anymore factual information about the subject
than you do. Which apparently in none.
Don, all the readers here have to do is Google if burning firewood is a clean way to heat your home. Then they can decide if your distorted twisting of words and of science is correct, or just a way that makes you feel better for polluting the environment.
Of course its offensive to put forth technicalities to liberals. They dont want it to be true even if it is and of course they will pull the moral card. It might be illegal they say but its morally right to protect the homeless on commonwealth property. Its useless Isabella to argue logically with some.
Carl Kelly: Who here is talking liberals or of any philosophy? I’m talking LAW. Period. Every man, woman and child. No one on the island seems to know the Law. I’m educating people… liberals, conservatives, dumbbells, anyone. If they can read, they’ll know people can’t live there … unless it’s a temporary designated camping area.
Isabella– I can read, and I have not seen a single comment here
that has disputed the law, and the illegality of camping in the forest.
But I can also read well enough to notice that there are a few people
here who are seemingly implying that “liberals” think it’s fine to break the
law by camping there. They apparently are just trying to fan the fires
of their hatred for liberals by accusing them of “thinking” the laws don’t
need to be followed by them ( liberals that is). We all agree– camping in the
state forest is illegal, dangerous, and should not be tolerated.
But if you read comments from a few people here, you would think that half the
people are ready to go out and set the forest on fire to support these scofflaws.
Ridiculous lies and innuendo. They should be ashamed, but they know no
shame.
Isabella, my point is good luck trying to educate anyone on this site. They don’t care. You are using logic trying to educate illogical people. I get it. The law is clear. Black and white. But clearly you can see with the comments that it’s not fair. But in all seriousness thanks for trying.
Never give up, Carl! I enjoy reading your points and your adherence to facts, and without the hysterics. Peole are aware of what’s going on here.
Comments are closed.