Town Attempts To Chart A Path Forward For Our Island Home With New Survey

The town has released a survey asking for feedback on what should be done about Our Island Home after an attempt to relocate the nursing home to Sherburne Commons failed at Town Meeting last spring. The survey presents three possible options: another attempt at relocating to Sherburne Commons, renovating or rebuilding the current facility, and doing nothing, which will likely result in the eventual closure of Our Island Home.

The proposed new facility and move to Sherburne Commons was able to garner a majority at the ballot box and on Town Meeting floor last Spring, but came a mere 38 votes shy of the two-thirds margin required to pass at Town Meeting.

The survey, which follows a directive from the Select Board to seek voter input, is open until October 31st, and could help the Select Board chart a path forward for Massachusetts’s only town-owned nursing home.

It does not mention a proposal floated at a May Select Board meeting to sell the land on which the current Our Island Home facility is located to the Land Bank, which would reduce the cost of a potential move to Sherburne Commons.

Online surveys are often unreliable, especially surveys like the town’s that rely on “convenience samples,” which allow anyone who wishes to reply to the survey to answer. The town’s survey also does not control for demographic variables such as race, age, or gender, meaning that results may not be representative of all Nantucket residents or voters

But the town may not intend to gather unbiased responses.

“The survey is not intended to be a neutral exercise in comparing all options from scratch, but rather a tool to inform residents about the work done to date and to gather feedback on the recommended path forward,” Nantucket communications manager Florencia Rullo wrote in an email to the Current. “The Town is seeking meaningful public input, but we are also clear about which option has been recommended based on years of committee work, engineering analysis, and Select Board direction.”

Relocation to Sherburne Commons is described in the survey as “the most advanced and ready-to-implement option” and “thoughtfully refined.” The survey lists a number of amenities, saying that the new facility was “designed with sustainability in mind” and will “provide high indoor air quality, thermal comfort, and acoustics.”

In contrast, renovating or rebuilding the existing facility is “not recommended” and will “require relocating all current residents, many in fragile health.” Instead of listing amenities, the survey lists challenges, including the “small lot,” “proximity to the ocean,” and “financial uncertainty.” Respondents who indicate support for renovation on the current lot are asked to provide a brief response explaining how they would handle the relocation of residents. Similarly, in the section on taking no action, the survey emphasizes the risks repeatedly and does not discuss any potential benefits, such as cost savings.

“The Sherburne Commons option is described in terms of amenities and sustainability because engineers developed those design details as part of the feasibility work,” Rullo explained. “By contrast, renovating the current site or taking no action presents significant challenges that have been consistently identified throughout this process, such as the need to relocate fragile residents, the small size of the lot, and financial risks. These were highlighted so that respondents understand the implications.”