Open Meeting Law Complaint Filed Against NP&EDC Over Planning Director's New Contract

Former Nantucket Planning and Economic Development Commission (NP&EDC) member Hillary Hedges Rayport has filed an open meeting law complaint alleging that the NP&EDC violated the state law during a recent executive session discussion on Planning Director Leslie Snell’s new contract.

Rayport’s complaint, which will be reviewed at the NP&EDC’s meeting Monday, alleges the Commission violated open-meeting law - which is intended to ensure that local government meetings are open and accessible to the public - by engaging in a “wide-ranging discussion” during executive session.

“The Commonwealth of Massachusetts construes executive session discussions about non-union employment contracts narrowly. Discussion of a more wide-ranging agenda that reaches beyond the employment contract renewal is not appropriate for executive session,” Rayport wrote. “[Chair Abby] De Molina led the NP&EDC and Ms. Snell in exactly such a wide-ranging discussion.”

Snell’s contract was renewed June 29th after a lengthy executive session meeting. In the open session that followed, De Molina summarized the executive session, and the NP&EDC voted to approve the new contract.

Rayport claimed that the summary implied the executive session discussion had covered topics including Snell’s performance review, job description, and a memorandum of understanding, all of which she says would be outside the appropriate scope of such a discussion. De Molina pushed back on Rayport’s accusations.

“In executive session, we discussed whether to include in the contract certain contract provisions related to compensation, performance and management goals, job description, and signatories; ONLY as those matters related directly to being included in the contract,” De Molina wrote in a statement to the Current. “We did not discuss the MOU. We determined that those issues should be addressed in open session.”

Rayport previously briefly served on the NP&EDC after being elected to the Planning Board. Under the NP&EDC’s current rules, all Planning Board members serve on the Commission. Rayport’s reelection campaign came up just short against charter boat captain Brian Borgeson this spring, and she has now returned to her previous role as a prominent community critic of Nantucket’s planning regime.

Town spokesperson Florencia Rullo told the Current that “the Town is aware of the complaint, and the Nantucket Planning and Economic Development Commission will review and respond as appropriate.”

Rayport called for the NP&EDC to revote Snell’s contract after an open public discussion and attend open meeting law training, and for De Molina and Snell to apologize. She also said that “the Commission should be required to elect as chair and vice chair someone who has not previously served as chair or vice chair of the Commission, in any prior year.”

The entire episode may feel familiar. In 2023, when Snell’s first contract was approved, Meghan Perry, another prominent critic of Nantucket’s planning leadership, filed a complaint alleging that the NP&EDC had violated open meeting law when it approved Snell’s contract in executive session and did not list her name on the posted agenda. The state sided with Perry, reprimanding the Commission and requiring them to revote Snell’s contract. Rayport referred to this episode in her complaint.

“I believe this violation was intentional,” she wrote. “The similar 2023 violation involved Ms. Snell and others currently on the Board, some of whom have been cited multiple times for OML violations. Ms. Snell has been employed by the Town of Nantucket since 2002 and participated in numerous personnel reviews and contract renewals for both her and the former Planning Director, which were held in open session. Finally, during my time serving on this Commission, I made repeated requests of Ms. De Molina to discuss Ms. Snell’s performance goals, performance review process, and responsibilities of the Commission vs. the Town relative to employment contracts in the Planning Department. Her avoidance and refusal, even as the contract renewal period approached, indicates her commitment to keeping these discussions out of public view.”

De Molina said that the “personal attack pieces” in the complaint were “inappropriate.”

“The key takeaways were that we wanted to be transparent and wanted to specifically discuss in open session at a later date the job description, performance evaluation and goals policy as a contract amendment,” De Molina said.

Rayport is no stranger to challenging the NP&EDC. Before she was elected to the Planning Board, Rayport had spent years fighting to reform the Commission. A compromise between her supporters and the NP&EDC was finally reached this year and was passed by Town Meeting in the spring, but has yet to obtain the state approval it needs to go into effect.

Rayport told the Current that her complaint was "not at all personal" and she had mentioned specific individuals, including De Molina, only to establish why she believed the violation to be intentional.

Snell’s contract had already drawn some fire. Documents obtained by the Current showed that town leadership had objected to a raise she received last year. This year, she did not receive a formal raise, but she did receive a bonus equivalent to roughly a 4 percent raise, the same increase that drew internal pushback last year.