The town of Gosnold has written to the state indicating its willingness to allow wind turbines to be located in its waters, and its determination that it be able to negotiate its own terms for any development, free of interference from the Martha’s Vineyard Commission.

“If our needs are met, we are willing to have a commercial wind project sited in our town waters,” the Gosnold selectmen wrote in a letter to Ian Bowles, Massachusetts Secretary of Energy and Environmental Affairs, last week. “We understand that, even though we are the smallest community in the commonwealth, we have a responsibility to be part of the solution to reducing carbon emissions. We understand the connection between our small actions and much larger consequences.”

The letter, which is published on the Commentary Page in today’s Gazette, frames in sometimes eloquent language the conflicts and contradictions inherent in the intense discussion now swirling around the Vineyard about possible wind turbine development.

“We are at a crossroads. It is difficult to accept such a facility in our community. But not accepting this burden means not taking responsibility for our lifestyle, which includes the use of electricity. We recognize that now and into the future energy must be generated without greenhouse gas emissions. But there are risks in demonstrating new technologies, and are the risks worth it?” the selectmen wrote.

The public comment period ended Monday on the draft Oceans Plan, which provides for as many as 166 turbines, each about 360 feet tall, in two areas close to the Vineyard — one off Noman’s Land, and the other off Cuttyhunk, the outermost of the Elizabeth Islands and home to most of the 80-odd year-round residents who make up the populace of the town of Gosnold.

Gosnold’s position could be problematic for the Vineyard in a couple of ways. First, any turbine development in the town’s waters would be clearly visible from the Vineyard. Second, its assertion of independence calls into question the regulatory powers of the Martha’s Vineyard Commission, and in particular its recent decision to impose a one-year moratorium on offshore wind developments.

And the law on the matter is unclear. Under its enabling legislation, the MVC was given regulatory power over all lands and waters in the County of Dukes County — which includes the Vineyard and the Elizabeth Islands — with the exceptions of tribal lands in Aquinnah, state-owned land and the Elizabeth Islands.

The wording does not make it clear whether that includes just the Elizabeth Islands themselves or also the surrounding sea.

But Gosnold residents believe they have power over what happens not only on land, but also in waters up to three miles from the islands.

“My understanding is that the MVC doesn’t have any regulatory power in the town of Gosnold or in the town of Gosnold’s waters,” said Mac Davidson, the chairman of the Gosnold selectmen.

“We are members of the commission for non-regulatory purposes, for planning and advisory purposes. But we value our independence and we want to have an independent, distinct voice and we do not want our future determined by the Martha’s Vineyard Commission,” he said.

Ironically, his sentiments echo those of the Vineyard selectmen, who over recent weeks fought to ensure the Vineyard had the final say in wind power developments in Island waters, and that state bureaucrats could not override local wishes.

And while Secretary Bowles appeared to satisfy the concern by telling the Vineyard that it would, through the MVC, have final say in the approval of wind turbines in local waters, Gosnold has opened a second front.

If Gosnold selectmen turn out to be right in their interpretation of the limits of the MVC’s regulatory reach, the commission would be powerless to control large-scale commercial wind generation on the Cuttyhunk site nominated in the draft Ocean Plan.

Yet the impact of a Cuttyhunk development on Vineyard viewscapes would be as pronounced as that of a Noman’s Land development, and considerably greater than that of the other nearby proposed wind farm, Cape Wind, in Nantucket Sound.

The commission is expected to argue it does have power to regulate development in all waters in the county.

But Cuttyhunk is not offering carte blanche to the state and to developers. The selectmen’s letter lays out a long list of deeply felt concerns about the impact that a large wind turbine project would have on the way of life on tiny Gosnold.

“Offshore wind seems to many of our residents a very expensive experiment. Being mariners, and living on the water, they know firsthand how harsh and corrosive the marine environment is. They have pointed out to us that saltwater and electricity are not a good combination. We want to do our part to advance technology and be part of the climate change solution, but we do not want to be part of another failed experiment, and live for years with the consequences,” the selectmen wrote.

They make clear that their support is conditional on a number of demands being met.

Perhaps the most significant is that they want no development on Sow and Pigs Reef, which was the proposed location in the draft plan, because its relatively shallow water made the engineering of the turbines easier.

“Fishing for striped bass and bluefish in this area is a major part of the local economy,” the selectmen wrote. “Hired guides and boats, boarding houses and rentals, meals and services to visiting fishermen, our moorings and marina, boat fueling and repair, employ a significant portion of the population. To protect Sow and Pigs we ask that turbines be prohibited from the reef itself, and a quarter mile beyond. [The section of the plan titled] Fisheries Resources seems to show a low level of resources in and around Sow and Pigs Reef. Generations of Cuttyhunk fishermen would challenge that conclusion and recommend that the designation be amended.”

Before any development, the selectmen have called for a comprehensive environmental impact statement, including the effects of construction on the aquifer which provides the island’s fresh water and the effects of construction and operation on fishing.

The EIS should also consider potential changes to ocean currents, light and shadow impacts, such as “flicker” (of sunlight reflected on spinning turbine blades), the prospect of night lights on the turbine towers interfering with the view of the stars and air flow over the island.

They also seek assurances that the town have a say in the review and approval of any development, and that the developers would be required to put enough in escrow to cover the removal of the turbines after they ceased operation.

And they want money.

“We would like to see a minimum of 50 per cent of project revenue paid to the state by the Minerals Management Service (MMS) be distributed directly to the town,” the letter says.

Details of how compensation would work should be written into the plan.

What the residents of Gosnold definitely do not want, however, is the MVC interfering in their decision making.

“Although we are a part of the County of Dukes County,” the letter says, “our town is very different from the towns on the Vineyard.

“We were once a part of the town of Chilmark, but have minded our own business since the town was separately incorporated in 1864.

“While we don’t want to seem unneighborly, we would like to continue to manage our own affairs.

“For example, we do not have representation on the Martha’s Vineyard Commission, and do not want any commission making decisions for us,” they wrote.

But they conclude: “If a commercial wind project has to be somewhere in state waters, the town of Gosnold is willing to do its part.”

A spokeswoman for the state department of Energy and Environmental Affairs said on Monday at the close of the comment period 170 submissions had been received.

The final plan is due by Dec. 31.