A Radical Idea For Our Island Home

To the editor: I have a proposal for a new Our Island Home (OIH) that may seem radical to some and impossible to others. From my point of view, the entire process seems backward. Rather than go to the architect with an essentially open-ended budget, which is no budget, why not set a figure in advance and then ask for proposals from architects who can design a facility that satisfies the budget?

In addition, find out from voters in advance what amount they are willing to pay for a new building for OIH. Would it be $65 million for instance? 

The tax implications of the new amount would have to be worked out so that voters would know how much their taxes will be increased for a given period of time.

I believe that this work could be done in advance of the fall Town Meeting.

There could be a challenge identifying builders who could construct a facility for a much lower price, but, again, with creative thinking and all the new tools available for design and building, it cannot be an impossible task.

I am heartened by the creative thinking I am already reading about in the Current. By all means, find out from the Land Bank how much they would pay for the land now occupied by OIH. The town cannot be bound by the promise to reserve that land for the new senior center.

Nantucket has a generational divide. In trying to accommodate the needs of its senior
population, it is stressing the financial means of its younger families—those families who will be the future of Nantucket. If the senior population is to have its skilled nursing home, then sacrifices have to be made.

This means that a new site could be identified for the senior center. With a lower figure for OIH, and the money from the Land Bank, the total cost of the project could be substantially reduced.

I am sure that the town can come up with a thousand reasons for why the budgeting process I propose will not work or is not consistent with all the rules and regulations governing the construction of public buildings. But surely the town understands at this point, with all the costly challenges that the island is facing, that it has to rethink the design and building process.

The island is clearly at an inflection point. As I look at the prices of the residential homes and what seems a growing gap between asking price and assessed value, I see an island that cannot continue on this path. But it will take a community to decide how it wants to proceed; it will take the entire Nantucket community to clear a sustainable path to the future. Let that process start with the design and building of the new OIH.

Maureen Searle