Chris Perry Column: Christmas Came Early

The unofficial starting bell to Monday’s opening day of Town Meeting rang at 3:14 p.m. when Andy Reis secured the first handheld clicker and raced to an aisle seat like he was jockeying to be first in line on opening day at the Hospital Thrift Store. Roughly two and a half hours later, once all the pomp and circumstance was completed, the voters went to work.

It had a business-like feel to it. Sarah Alger, who celebrated her 30th year as Moderator, took the gavel and the helm and navigated the ship of voters like an experienced boat captain. Besides an occasional bump due to issues with the clickers or to respectfully ask the predictable hordes of voters to be quiet as they departed after signature votes, Alger deftly moved things along.

Surprisingly, voters only called 17 of the 83 articles on the warrant, prompting Leslie Snell, director of Planning & Land Use Services, to later thank the Nantucket voters for “not calling a lot of Planning Board articles…”

When the dust finally settled after two days of what often turned into a philosophical battle between emotions and fiscal control, Christmas came early for many on Nantucket as voters authorized roughly $225 million in spending on day one alone. That prompted Finance Committee chair Jill Vieth to say to me after Town Meeting wrapped up: ”This year’s Annual Town Meeting reflected an extraordinary level of capital spending addressing some real community needs, but the cumulative financial impact can’t be ignored as it will increase pressure on taxpayers and future budgets for years to come…”

As anticipated, there were three featured bouts: articles 11, 12, and 73.

Our Island Home (11): The emotional case put forth by many who rose to speak in support of Article 11 was compelling. Interestingly enough, very little push back was mounted from a financial perspective as Article 11 passed not once, but twice, ultimately by a 959 to 321 margin once “uncertainties in the gym” related to the hand clickers were rectified.

From the get-go, the final results never seemed to be in doubt. However, two things stood out to me.

The first was the disappointing mass exodus of most of Nantucket’s senior citizens who came out to vote for Article 11 but abandoned Nantucket’s youth prior to the vote on Article 12.

During the debate on Article 11, several emotional statements were made by senior citizens in an attempt to secure support for Our Island Home, including one by a former Selectman reminding the voters about “the community’s responsibility to support our seniors and our youth…”

However, immediately after the vote on Article 11, roughly 250 people headed for the exits even though Article 12 had been introduced. With the vast majority being senior citizens, this migration took place right in front of the predominantly younger voting crowd who had just been asked to answer your call to support Article 11.

In the end, Article 12 passed comfortably, but if you’re going to talk the talk and ask for the community’s support, then walk the walk when Nantucket’s youth asks for yours.

The second lasting impression was a statement from Select Board chair Dawn Hill: “This will be the maximum cost to see this project through…”

The cost Hill was referring to was the $128.8 million price tag for the Our Island Home appropriation, which was recently bumped up from $126 million. That’s a bold prediction that pushes all of Hill’s political capital onto the table and one that could come back to haunt her like her signature on the Good Neighbor Agreement in 2020.

Time will tell, but assuming the article passes at the ballot, when was the last time any project of this size and scope ever came in under budget?

School athletic facilities improvements (Article 12): It did not take long for the shenanigans to start with a proposed amendment to Article 12 that was nothing more than an effort to scuttle the turf field portion of the facilities improvement plan, potentially delaying the entire project. Town Counsel John Giorgio quickly rose to advise against it, and with that, some sanity returned to the debate.

However, it is this type of back-door maneuvering that has been the calling card of a vocal minority who have been opposed to the turf field project since the day the School Committee endorsed the plan. Whether it was inappropriate e-mails, moratoriums, open-meeting-law issues, or unrealistic testing requirements, I believe this rogue behavior drove a number of fence-sitting voters to support the turf field upgrades.

With Nantucket’s student-athletes playing a critical role, coupled with a dedicated core group of proponents who smartly cultivated support from across the entire community, what you got was Article 12 comfortably passing 719 to 281, which only added momentum to the overall improvement plan as it works its way to the ballot box on May 19th.

Baxter Road erosion control (73): The final bout of the 2026 Town Meeting was a spirited debate over whether to grant a license for the Sconset Beach Preservation Fund and the town to expand the erosion-control geotubes. Island heavyweights chimed in, including two former Selectmen, Rick Atherton and Bruce Miller, who sparred from the same mic minutes apart.

Frankly, I was greatly entertained by the lively debate and appreciated the comments made about stewardship of the beach, sacrificial sand, and various opinions on the entangled parties.

And for a moment, I thought I might be swayed.

In the end, the vote was 182 to 163 to defeat the article. While I wavered, my position didn’t change, and I remain as skeptical now as I was over two years ago when I penned a Current column (Erosion: It’s What’s For Dinner). Ultimately, Mother Nature wins the battle against geotubes, so tossing good money after bad is literally washing out to sea.

Four community members who are often seen but not heard caught my attention and should be nominated for a prestigious Toastmaster’s Award for pubic speaking:

Jody Kasper: Despite Article 14 failing, Nantucket’s police chief spoke well in answering questions and outlining several interesting facts, such as 53 percent of those who recently graduate from the CSO program become new hires, and approximately 1,900 parking tickets were issued last year. However, that was not enough to save the LORAN barracks upgrades.

Beth Hallett: Not only did the superintendent of the Nantucket Public Schools speak convincingly to the audience, but she also successfully handled the pressure associated with introducing Article 12, understanding the polarizing nature of the topic. Moreover, Hallett also rose to speak smartly on Article 13 and faculty housing.

Joe Topham: Topham rose to speak in spurts and usually as a member of the Planning Board. And when he did, it was with confidence, great presence, and local knowledge. It might take some convincing, but Topham appears to be perfectly suited for a position on the Select Board.

Vince Murphy: Famous for an earlier quote in the turf field debate (“It’s not science, it’s science fiction.”) Murphy has been an outspoken supporter of the turf field upgrades as well as a knowledgeable and passionate advocate for Article 73 and erosion control. Murphy batted one for two at Town Meeting, but his comments alone almost changed my mind in support of Article 73.

Town Meeting wouldn’t be the same without a few funny quips and one-liners, none better than Moderator Alger’s tongue-in-cheek comment to the Wall Street Journal , correcting any potential misconceptions regarding Joe Topham’s role on C.R.A.C.

Richard Ray was good, saying he felt any tax increase associated with Our Island Home was like “paying rent in advance…”

Nat Lowell acknowledged that “Nobody can cut a hedge better than Marty McGowen…”

Matt Fee, when speaking on Article 15 and the high costs associated with the Somerset Road Sewer Extension, said, “Lunch isn’t free,” and he’s right. A Shelia’s Favorite, coupled with a Matt Fee Tea, is pushing $25 at Something Natural, and that’s before a chocolate chip cookie and tip.

Arthur Reade, when discussing Article 45, “Mr. DeCosta is absolutely right as he is on just about everything…”

And finally, I am not a big fan of the seasonal proliferation of lawn signs, especially those that remain years after the fight. But whoever came up with the lawn sign campaign against Article 73, most notably posted mid-island and around the rotary, deserves a Clio Award.

Colorful, bright, humorous, well-thought-out, and just enough subtle visual truth to make you pause and think.

Coming from someone who thinks the life span of a lawn sign should be days, not months, leave these up for a while. It gives me a chuckle every time I go through the rotary and am forced to face the traffic of Old South Road.