What Kind Of Example Is The NP&EDC Setting?

To the editor: Last week I filed an Open Meeting Law complaint against the Nantucket Planning & Economic Development Commission, Nantucket’s regional planning agency responsible for comprehensive planning. Open meeting law says boards and commissions must allow the public to observe their decision-making. The point is: regardless of whether you like the sausage, you get to know how it’s being made. It’s foundational to our democracy.

No one can know how the AG will rule. In the meantime, and regardless of the outcome, I am calling on the Select Board and the public to ask whether the current arrangement – in which the NP&EDC employs a director and lends this person to the Town to oversee the Planning and Land Use Department – is working out well for Nantucket. For many reasons, this weak governance structure tops the list of things on Nantucket that must change.

Long-range planning requires focus, clear goals, and accountability. The current arrangement offers Nantucket not one among these three things. You don’t have to take it from me: consider Nantucket’s new Master Plan, now published in draft form and open for public comment. The introduction recommends five “critical steps Nantucket’s leadership needs to consider” to start on our ambitious vision for the future. It says “During the almost three years required to complete this Master Plan, no comprehensive assessment or “report card” on the status of Nantucket planning could be obtained. It does not exist.” The Draft Master Plan recommends “departmental goal setting and performance evaluations” to “improve the effectiveness of island-wide planning” (p. 10).

What is the point of a Planning Director if not to direct planning? Even when I served as a member of the NP&EDC, I could never get clear and consistent answers to questions about the Director’s performance goals or oversight. Abby De Molina, Chair of the NP&EDC, told me the Town Manager is responsible for managing performance and, according to staff, is moving away from performance reviews (!!!). Town Manager Libby Gibson wrote that “Ms. Snell is considered to be under the jurisdiction of the NPEDC for performance review and employment contract matters.”

The NP&EDC held one meeting to discuss their director’s employment contract – one day before the current contract expired. The job description in the new contract dates from 2012. Ms. Snell’s last performance review was in 2024. While she periodically provides long lists of what she works on, this is not the same as having employment goals or a performance evaluation. Questions also arose about the arrangement with the Town. The NP&EDC promised to “put a pin in” these items for a future meeting after signing the three-year contract worth over $610,000 of taxpayers’ money, letting go the leverage they might hold.

The contract discussion was in executive session, but when the Commission returned to open session for the vote, the most priceless quote was from Ms. De Molina: “So next steps I will sign those documents. They will go into the system or whatever. Hopefully you guys will get your money. If you don’t, don’t blame us.”

What Ms. De Molina may be referring to is whether the NP&EDC can even legally direct payments from the Town to Ms. Snell. Nantucket’s Communication Director addressed this when she told the Current “It is not clear whether or not the NP&EDC has the legal authority to independently enter into employment agreements with employees whose salaries and benefits are paid by the Town.” Shouldn’t this matter get some attention from the Select Board? Perhaps more importantly – even though Ms. Snell’s contract is with the NP&EDC, the Town is on the hook for anything that goes wrong with the employee or the planning department.

Related to that point - one topic the NP&EDC is allowed to discuss in executive session, but chose not to, is whether Ms. Snell’s arrest in West Falmouth last April violated her contract or raised questions about her ability to perform in her critical dual roles as Director of the NP&EDC and Director of the Town’s Planning and Land Use Department. The Commission has a responsibility to act with both compassion and sound judgment. What example does this set?

No number of Open Meeting Law complaints or AG adjudications will create an accountable government – only a caring, responsible, and engaged electorate will succeed at this task. It’s time for the Town of Nantucket to take control of its Planning Director’s employment contract and for professional managers to exercise the same goal-setting and performance review processes applied to other Town departments.

Hillary Hedges Rayport