NP&EDC Again Unable To Reach Compromise With Rayport On Reform

Negotiations between the Nantucket Planning and Economic Development Commission (NP&EDC) and citizen petitioner Hillary Hedges Rayport over a pair of competing articles seeking to reform the Commission collapsed Thursday, setting the stage for a Town Meeting showdown between the two proposals.

While compromise seemed possible on a number of the points where the two articles diverge, fundamental disagreements about whether the commission should have elected members and a belief from both sides that the other was unwilling to engage in good faith dialogue ultimately sank the talks early in the second of two scheduled negotiating sessions.

“The commissioners were very honest and forthright about areas of concern and areas of willing[ness] to compromise, and the petitioner group did not give anything back,” Select Board and NP&EDC member Brooke Mohr said. “It was not a dialogue. It was a one-way conversation.”

Rayport, who now serves on the NP&EDC by virtue of her election to the Planning Board, has long sparred with the NP&EDC over proposed reforms, and the debate has often been sharply personal. The negotiations scheduled as a result of an NP&EDC vote last month proved no different, and despite signs of progress toward a consensus article, the two camps remained unable to reach an agreement.

“We came here with some concessions we could make and we have been nothing but attacked,” Rayport said. “This is not a consensus-building discussion. This is: let's villify these people, let's insult them.”

At the first of the two meetings, a facilitator walked the NP&EDC through the differences between the two articles, and a number of compromise proposals were floated. Rayport said she needed time to speak with her fellow petitioners before committing to anything, and the meeting was adjourned.

Before the second meeting, Rayport submitted a revised proposal, which she called an attempt at consensus, but the majority of the NP&EDC criticized, with Planning Board chair and NP&EDC member Dave Iverson saying it “widened the gap, not shortened it.”

Whether Rayport’s revised article widened the gap or not is difficult to say. It offered several compromised, but proposed significant changes not contemplated in either her earlier article or the NP&EDC article, such as making the Select Board’s representative on the NP&EDC non-voting and upping the Planning Board’s representation to four members. It also did not offer a compromise on the two most contentious issues: elected members and the inclusion of term limits.

The facilitator was not present for the second meeting, despite the NP&EDC’s earlier vote calling for a third party to manage the dispute. There was little attempt at negotiation, despite the efforts of Planning Board and NP&EDC member John Kitchener, who has emerged as the strongest champion of dialogue on the commission.

The NP&EDC quickly moved to advance its own article to the warrant without compromises, and the motion passed 8-3, with Rayport, Kitchener, and Land Bank Commission chair Kristina Jelleme in the minority.

“The petitioners came back with something that is so far away from what we need,” Planning Board and NP&EDC member Joe Topham said. “It's really kind of sad.”

Versions of Rayport’s proposal have passed at Town Meeting twice, but state approval is needed for them to go into effect. Under pressure from members of the NP&EDC, the state has taken no action.

Now, the NP&EDC’s own reform article is ready for Town Meeting. With Rayport’s proposal still on the warrant, commissioners will have to convince voters to break with their past votes and support their alternative proposal.

That led the NP&EDC to attempt to find common ground with Rayport, after Kitchener suggested that the two articles were relatively similar. But two scheduled mediation sessions ended with tempers high and no agreement in sight.

“We are being vilified and ripped apart,” Rayport said. “We, by the way, moved again and again and again…you have never, ever countered with anything different.”

While both sides have accused the other of an unwillingness to give ground, both have proven able to compromise on many of their disagreements over the last three years. Still, the remaining gap has been impossible to bridge.

Much of the debate during the negotiations centered on whether the NP&EDC should have directly elected at-large members. The NP&EDC’s article does not include any elected members, while Rayport’s includes two.

Opponents of elected members say that the cost of elections, in terms of both money and time, make elected seats more exclusive and decrease diversity. They contend that elections are better reserved for powerful boards with regulatory authority, like the Select Board.

“That is the one hill I will die on,” Mohr said. “I don't think the commissioners should be elected.”

Proponents counter that elections allow anyone to run, increasing turnover, accessibility and accountability.

“We've had a chance to have a diverse board all along, and the appointing body hasn't appointed a diverse board,” Select Board vice chair Matt Fee said. “I think, if we want to get this to one article for this Town Meeting, I think we should leave it at two [elected] and two [appointed at large members].”

The disagreement about which option would maximize accessibility was central to the debate for both commissioners and members of the public.

“I feel like the public is being blocked through what is currently done,” island resident Campbell Sutton, speaking in favor of elected members, said.

Not everyone agreed.

“I can speak from experience that running a campaign is extremely expensive on Nantucket,” former Select Board member and current town of Nantucket housing director Kristie Ferrentella said “If you're trying to get more inclusivity and diversity on our boards and committees this would absolutely be going backward.”

The NP&EDC also voted through a late change to their proposed reform that mandates members be Nantucket residents. Notably, Rayport was at the center of a high-profile legal challenge to her residency when she first emerged on Nantucket’s political scene.

A full comparison of the two articles, first published here, is available below.