To the editor:
I recently read Margo Steiner’s letter to the editor, “Think of the Less-Blessed,” about the public way on Cove Lane. I appreciate her thoughtful comments, but there’s an important point missing from the discussion.
Public ways aren’t just historic features; they are part of Marblehead’s foundation. These spaces have been supported by public funding, giving access to all. They remain part of our shared community, not private property.
Margo wrote: “Public town ways are means to let us less blessed folks have access to the benefits and splendors of our town that the Sheas enjoy every single day.” This is true, but it leaves out a critical distinction: there are two kinds of public ways in Marblehead.
The first are passageways that connect one street to another. In a town without a grid system, these cut-throughs are vital for residents trying to move easily around Marblehead whether they are walking to work, shopping, exercising or visiting friends.
The second type, like the Cove Lane public way, provides access to a public space. In the case of Cove Lane’s public way, it opens out into a public bench and beach, which is the only access point to this town land. If that access is eliminated, can the beach still be considered truly public, or would it effectively revert to private ownership? Marblehead must ask these questions before allowing town land to be cut off and turned private for the enrichment of a single homeowner.
These areas are maintained by the town and funded by taxpayers. If private property owners succeed in acquiring public walkways for free, Marblehead loses in multiple ways. We lose access to public spaces, and we lose the financial value of the land itself, while tax dollars are still allocated to maintain these nonpublic spaces.
This raises deeper concerns about town land that is currently listed as public space. Which areas are no longer accessible to the public? Which of those areas are still being maintained by tax dollars? And, if those areas are now privatized, are the homeowners paying adjusted property tax for the increased value of their property? Marblehead residents should not be subsidizing these costs.
Our town is already struggling financially. Our roads, schools, public buildings and even trash collection all show the strain. At a time when state funds have been cut, we cannot afford to “gift” shared public spaces to private homeowners without compensation or accountability. And the expense of upkeep for those spaces shouldn’t be borne by the very people who lose the land. However, more to the point, it’s wrong for any person to take town property, enrich themselves, and create a legal situation in which the town is forced to use limited taxpayer funds to fight a lawsuit to protect the ownership of its own land.
This issue deserves serious discussion by the town and residents. Property owners cannot have it both ways: claiming public land for private use while expecting us to bear the cost.
Erin Underwood
Hawkes Street
