A Responsible Path Forward For Sconset Bluff

To the editor: As Nantucket residents consider how they will vote on Article 73, it is critical that this discussion be guided by facts, not fear.

The proposed geotube expansion is one of the most thoroughly reviewed coastal resilience projects in Nantucket’s history. Over a 15-month public hearing process, the Nantucket Conservation Commission evaluated extensive scientific data, expert testimony, and regulatory standards under both the Wetlands Protection Act and local bylaws. The result was an approved Order of Conditions with 72 specific requirements; a level of scrutiny and oversight that is virtually unprecedented.

A central claim made by opponents is that the existing geotubes are causing erosion of nearby beaches. That claim is not supported by the record. Data reviewed by the Commission including analysis from the Massachusetts Office of Coastal Zone Management which shows that the entire eastern shoreline of Nantucket has been eroding for decades, in some cases dating back to the 1800s, and well before the geotubes were installed in 2014.

Even the opposition’s own coastal expert acknowledged the limits of that argument, noting that shoreline change in Sconset is influenced by many factors and that isolating any single cause is “like finding a needle in a haystack.” In fact, the expert concluded that the geotubes are not responsible for all observed erosion and are functioning within a system that is already naturally eroding.

What is not in dispute is this: erosion at Sconset Bluff is real, ongoing, and accelerating. The Sankaty Head Lighthouse was moved more than 400 feet inland in 2007, years before the current system was installed because of that erosion. In recent years, storms have caused significant losses along the bluff, threatening not only private homes, but Baxter Road, critical utilities, and public access to one of Nantucket’s most iconic landmarks.

The Conservation Commission carefully evaluated all feasible alternatives, including retreat, and determined that no other option would effectively protect the bluff under current conditions. The approved project complies with state and local standards and is specifically designed to minimize impacts to adjacent beaches while protecting existing infrastructure.

Article 73 is not just about erosion control but also about planning for the future. The proposed license agreement establishes a privately funded solution, with strong financial safeguards and accountability measures that protect taxpayers. It also acknowledges long-term realities by incorporating a pathway for future retreat if and when it becomes necessary.

The choice before voters is not between preservation and protection, but rather a managed, carefully regulated approach and the very real risks of inaction. Nantucket has always faced the challenge of living with the ocean. Article 73 reflects a thoughtful, science-based response to that challenge and one that protects the community today while planning responsibly for tomorrow.

We urge voters to support this balanced approach and vote YES on Article 73.

Meridith Moldenhauer/Sconset Beach Preservation Fund