Another Breakdown of the “Compromise” STR Article

To the editor: Like Jim Sulzer, I served on the Short-Term Rental (STR) subcommittee representing Nantucket Neighborhoods First (NNF). Our mission was to try to hammer out a compromise article taken from the three STR articles on the Warrant for Special Town Meeting (STM) on September 17, to send to the Select Board. It was well-intentioned but a somewhat ham-handed endeavor, with miscommunications and misunderstandings of the intent of the group, particularly in the final draft that was presented to the Select Board. That document contained new language the work group had never seen, much less discussed, the impacts of which were stunningly not what the work group intended.

Thankfully, the Planning Board heard, understood, and accepted suggestions from members of the work group and others at its meeting on July 15. Revisions were made to the final article which reversed language that would permit “operator” run investor-owned STRs and “operator” run “hosted stays,” among other things totally at odds with Nantucket tradition. The Planning Board vote on these revisions was unanimous.

Then, the Finance Committee struggled with the article. Some members suggested it was too complicated, and some, for what appeared to be purely personal reasons, said they couldn’t vote to support it. Only one member liked the article and did not find it confusing. No surprise, then, that the original FinCom vote on July 22 was 4-3 not to support the Planning Board’s revisions. Then, in an unprecedented reversal at the end of its final meeting on July 25, the FinCom reconsidered its original vote and, in what seemed like a hasty and pre-ordained discussion, voted to reverse themselves and vote 4-2 to support the Planning Board’s revisions. What happened? Why? Who knows…

Unfortunately, in his July 31 letter to the Current, Jim failed to mention Article 1’s enormous “Elephant in the room.” The article requires a “Y” (Yes) for the newly defined “Nantucket Vacation Rentals” in the Zoning Use Chart for all but one of Nantucket’s zoning districts (dominated by the airport), or as Nat Lowell commented, “97% of the island.”

For NNF, putting a “Y” in the Zoning Use Chart cannot be compromised away. This one short sentence would bring sweeping changes to Nantucket. It would permit STRs in all residential districts and wipe away 50 years of zoning protection for our neighborhoods. It would accomplish what Article 59 attempted, but which was resoundingly defeated this year at ATM. Its insinuation into Article 1 for Special Town Meeting is another stealthy attempt, embedded in another part of the Article that Jim overlooked, to try to get voters to overlook it as well. That unmentioned, but quality of life changing element, is the real stab at the heart and soul of Nantucket’s future.

At STM, all the rest of the regulations will be attacked and haggled over by self-serving property owners and special interests of the real estate industrial complex who feed on the “transaction economy” of property sales and Short-Term Rentals. They will be like buzzards devouring prey. Consequently, the proposed regulations that you will read in Article 1 in the Warrant are largely “aspirational,” vulnerable at STM to diluting amendments, workarounds, and creative loopholes. On top of that, for a town that can’t even get a registry in place after several years of trying, why would anyone trust it to enforce regulations when it has shown no appetite or aptitude to do that in the past?

That is how NNF sees the quality of life on Nantucket, as we have known it, being “broken down” at STM. Please be very wary with your vote. If whatever Article 1 looks like when it comes up for a final vote contains a “Y” in the Zoning Use Chart for “Nantucket Vacation Rental” and the regulations are shredded into meaninglessness, we are better off to defeat it soundly and send a fifth message to the establishment that it is unacceptable and a waste of our time to try to trick the voters, once again. They should have learned by now that we are smarter than that.

Charity Benz