It is a picturesque island where Bill Murray, Reese Witherspoon and the Obamas often escape to to escape the stresses of everyday life.
But the clear blue waters of Martha’s Vineyard hide a dark civil war.
A century ago, two wealthy families with oceanfront mansions built the beach overlooking Oyster Pond, claiming land rights to large parts of the shoreline.
But the ravages of time have literally changed the landscape: erosion, storms and rising sea levels have gradually turned the private beach into public space.
Richard Friedman, a resident at the center of the conflict and a well-known Boston real estate magnate, is now working to make the beaches accessible to the general public.
Wealthy homeowners on Martha’s Vineyard (pictured) are engaged in a civil war over a private beach
Wealthy Martha’s Vineyard residents battle over private beach
Friedman’s fight began in the 1980s, when he bought a piece of land in Edgartown, believing it gave him rights to a beach between Oyster Pond and the Atlantic Ocean.
His neighbors disagreed, claiming the land was theirs. The Massachusetts elite then took their civil war to court, where it was fought out for decades.
But 2016 marked a turning point in the dispute. While still locked in a legal stalemate with his neighbors, Friedman’s perspective shifted with the sand.
He ruled that since the private beaches had now been moved north and were between two bodies of water considered “public” under Massachusetts law — Oyster Pond and Jobs Neck Pond — no private entity should have any claim to them.
Friedman took his argument to lawmakers, pushing for legislation that defines a beach barrier that is located on public property as public land.
The heated conflict reached a fever pitch in recent weeks following the approval of a bill that seeks to clarify access rights and redefine what is considered public land.
“I believe the biggest victory of this bill is that it is a victory for the public,” Friedman told the Boston Globe.
Richard Friedman, a resident at the center of the dispute and a famous Boston real estate magnate, is working to open the beaches to the general public
Pictured: Several waterfront homes at sunset along the coast in Woods Hole Cape Cod MA
Pictured: Waterfront in Oak Bluffs, Martha’s Vineyard, Massachusetts
Jeff Flynn, one of the executives who opposed Friedman’s bill, said that “any suggestion” that it is about expanding access to the general public is “simply not credible.”
“There is no public interest in this legislation,” he told the Globe.
‘Instead, they are just nice-sounding but confusing words that, if you read them carefully, attempt to turn a pig’s ear into a silk purse.’
Jim McManus, who also represents the wealthy neighbors, said the bill would “destroy the property rights of thousands of people in Massachusetts” and expose taxpayers to land expropriation lawsuits.
Friedman responded, saying the bill merely clarifies that the public would be allowed access to a beach that “poses as a private beach.”
“To me, this is not a personal vendetta or an ego trip, it is simply great government policy that benefits citizens across the Commonwealth,” he told the Globe.
“Because of global warming, sea level rise, etc., there is a need to address and clarify this issue,” he said. “I am proud to have played a role in these efforts, along with others.”
If the bill reaches the Senate, it must be approved by Governor Maura Healey.
Friedman’s team estimates that if the law passes, 28 similar beaches in Massachusetts would no longer be public, but private property.