Planning Commission And Rayport Fail To Reach Compromise On Proposed Reforms

A pair of meetings between a subcommittee of the Nantucket Planning and Economic Development Commission (NP&EDC) and citizen reformers including Hillary Hedges Rayport on Monday failed to result in any significant movement toward a compromise on proposed reforms to the structure of the commission.

With no deal in place, the NP&EDC voted to support the Finance Committee’s motion not to adopt Rayport’s proposed reform article at the Special Town Meeting next month.

“There's nothing to do other than to continue on the path that we had, which is to advocate against the citizen's warrant article,” NP&EDC member and Select Board Chair Brooke Mohr said. “The purpose was for us to come together. That's not happening.”

Rayport, who already sponsored one article to reform the NP&EDC that passed by just one vote at the 2023 Annual Town Meeting and is now pending as a bill before the Massachusetts legislature, intends to bring her new article, which treads much of the same ground, to a vote at Special Town Meeting. Rayport hopes the citizen petition will prove to be a rebuke of the entrenched planning regime. The NP&EDC has drafted its own proposed reform but it won’t be ready to come before voters until next Spring—and some critics, including Rayport, think it is too little, too late.

“It just doesn't seem that you're receptive to what Town Meeting has already said,” Rayport said. “If we reach no agreement it's because what you're willing to agree to does not achieve the goals of the reforms.”

Despite protracted negotiations, Rayport and the NP&EDC remain at odds on several key points, with both sides accusing the other of being unwilling to compromise.

“I just don't know why we're here at this point. I thought there could be a middle ground, but there's not a middle ground,” said Rayport, who was joined in the discussions with the NP&EDC by former Select Board member Rick Atherton and former Nantucket Historical Commission (NHC) member Georgia Raysman.

“I think some of the language is inflammatory and it's not helpful. We have offered a lot of compromises. What is the compromise that is being offered to us?" NP&EDC member Abby De Molina asked. “I haven't really heard a lot of compromise on the other side. There have been a lot of accusations and statements made but I haven't seen much appetite for compromise at all.”

Rayport’s proposed reforms include: slashing the Planning Board’s representation on the NP&EDC from five members to one member; increasing the at-large members from three to five; having all at-large members elected by the public; and implementing specific seats on the NP&EDC designated for the Nantucket Historical Commission and the Land Bank. During negotiations, Rayport and her team proposed a compromise of four at-large members, two elected and two appointed by the Select Board. They also seemed willing to accept more than one Planning Board member on the NP&EDC.

The NP&EDC’s draft reform would reduce the representation of the Planning Board from five members to three, add a representative from the Land Bank, and tentatively seems poised to give joint authority to appoint the Commission’s at-large members to the Select Board and the NP&EDC rather than the NP&EDC alone—all changes that would move the NP&EDC closer to Rayport’s vision. During negotiations, NP&EDC member John Kitchener suggested giving the Select Board sole authority to appoint at-large members as a form of compromise, a proposal other NP&EDC members appeared willing to consider.

“I think when you say, ‘well, you guys haven't really given anything,’ that's not true, and if you want to keep saying it, go ahead, but that's not true,” Kitchener said.

Much of the debate has centered around Rayport’s proposal to add a representative from the NHC to the NP&EDC, a proposal the majority of the NP&EDC opposes. At a recent meeting, the NHC voted 4-0, with De Molina abstaining, to support having the right to appoint a member of the NP&EDC.

Members of the NP&EDC, including chair Barry Rector, have pointed to the town’s paid preservation staff, including Preservation Planner Holly Backus, as offering sufficient representation, and when pressed, have turned to the Certified Local Government Commission (CLG) as an alternate possible appointing authority.

Rayport has rejected the possibility of using the CLG, which is a composite of the NHC and the Historic District Commission, on the grounds that it is little more than a placeholder designation used by the state.

In an email, Massachusetts Historical Commission Local Government Programs Coordinator Jennifer Doherty explained that “the designation of ‘CLG Commission’ is really just a name in the context of the program – it is not necessarily a separate or new commission, nor is the name of the local commission changed.

“It’s nice that the town is highlighting the designation, but really the ‘CLG Commission’ is just your two existing commissions [the NHC and the Historic District Commission], with the duties divided amongst them,” Doherty said.

Proponents of using the CLG to appoint a preservation advocate to the NP&EDC believe its larger membership would allow for a greater diversity of opinions and possible representatives when selecting an appointee.

Rayport made clear that no matter what happened during her negotiations with the NP&EDC, her article was going to be called at Town Meeting. Ideally, she said, it would be amended to reflect a compromise, but her unwillingness to accept the negative recommendation from the Finance Committee in the spirit of accommodation and to facilitate continued discussion made it difficult for some members of the NP&EDC to see what they were negotiating for at all. No matter what happened, it would remain possible for the article to be called, any amendments to be defeated, and Rayport’s initial language to be passed without compromise—though it would still need state approval to go into effect.

The NP&EDC voted at its full meeting Monday evening to back the Finance Committee after negotiations with the subcommittee collapsed that morning. The subcommittee was comprised of Rector, De Molina, and Kitchener. During the subcommittee meeting, Rayport drew attention to the fact that Rector, who voted against negotiating, chose another of the three NP&EDC members who voted against the negotiations to join him, with Kitchener the lone representative of the six who voted in favor of them.