The Lighthouse Keeper

The Special Town Meeting came and went on Monday night. It was notable for its lack of notability. The byplays and undercurrents were far more interesting, in most instances, than the outcomes.

During the call of the articles, when Article 22, which petitions the legislature to allow Nantucket to establish a housing bank, was not called, it became clear that it was going to be an evening not of controversy but of acquiescence. That is pretty much how it played out.

As with most affordable housing ventures, the housing bank goal is noble. However, in this instance, the initiative would create a potential honey pot of money to be doled out to supplicant developers. Beyond the very broad definition of what constitutes community housing, the proposed legislation is very short on guidance as to how the money is to be applied and there are no provisions for enforcement or oversight. The potential for waste, cronyism and/or corruption is more than should be tolerated. Yet, apparently nobody was willing to say that they didn't like apple pie, and the article passed without comment or question.

The suspense of the evening was whether a quorum would be present. Of the necessary 399 people, only about 300 were there at the appointed hour of 7 p.m. The moderator explained that the town by-laws require a quorum of five percent (and in some cases three percent) of the registered voters for certain financial matters, and that those matters on the agenda - primarily the additional appropriation for Surfside wastewater plant up- grade - requiring a quorum would be dealt with as soon as a quorum was present.

The interval until a quorum developed, one hour and seven minutes after the start of the meeting, was drawnout, to say the least, in the hope that the quorum would develop. During that time, several thoughts came to mind.

In the context of previous ruminations on whether town meeting really is representative and democratic, the quorum issue and the moderator's explanation underscored the weakness of the process. Because there are always enough diehards who attend, it wouldn't really happen, but, in theory, a literal handful of unelected people could make zoning decisions and impose all sorts of additional silly rules and regulations on the town - not to mention a new tax on property transfers. Is that democracy?

By a very inexact count and lots of guesswork, it is estimated that ninety percent of the people in attendance at the special town meeting were over 50 - a clear indication that the other half of the voting population trusts us. (It should be remembered that the attendees are of the demographic that, with the exception of the makers of all sorts of correctives, preventatives and promises, advertisers don't want and, who, by conventional wisdom, should be in bed at the appointed hour of town meeting) Is this democracy? If things don't get better, the voting age should be raised to 50 and the meeting time changed to 4:30.

The interval before a quorum developed also afforded time for reflection on a political theory. Simply stated, if an individual's ox is gored it provokes a reaction, while if the collective ox is gored - particularly in pursuit of what are presented as noble goals - acute numbness results in the body politic. The events of this special town meeting bore out the theory.

On some of the proposed zoning changes, the sewer issues and the discussion about what to do with Miller's Way, it was the individuals whose backyards were being invaded who led the charge for or against change, as suited their purposes. They were as successful as often as not. On the other hand, the issues which have a significant impact on the entire community - the housing bank and the wastewater plant upgrade, passed without any question or challenge.

When the quorum developed, the call on the sewer plant appropriation article was withdrawn. This issue has been on the table long enough that the community knows that it needs to happen and even the proponents of no- or slow-growth concur and have channeled their energies elsewhere. However, it is remarkable that no one called the article if just for the purpose of expressing outrage that the entire process has taken so long, resulting in cost appreciation of 73 percent since the need for the upgrade was first acknowledged around the turn of the century and 25 percent in the last eighteen months. Some of this was beyond anyone's control, but if the project hadn't had to go through the town meeting process, but rather an alternative legislative mechanism, how much could the timing have been shortened and how much money "saved"?

There were some good things which came out of special town meeting. There was a sense that the Planning Department, with the backing of the Planning Board, is doing a fine job in laying the framework for zoning rationalization as part of its master plan process. The articles which were presented to the special town meeting were as logical and simple as zoning articles can be. The concept of creating commercial zones is recognition of the fact that, with the much higher value currently afforded to residential uses than to commercial uses, the commercial use spaces are being badly squeezed under the present rules. This all bodes well for the master plan.

The meeting continued to keep its finger in the dyke holding back sewer district expansion. This is good as the Sewer Advisory Committee puts together standards for allowing admission to the sewer districts, but time is running out. The dyke was put in place at least two years ago, with promises that such standards would be forthcoming. Because citizen's warrant articles for April's town meeting must be submitted by November 16, there will be more petitions for entrance to the sewer districts on the table for that meeting. Unless the Committee does it its work and the Board of Selectman adopts some rational rules prior to the April meeting, it may well be that the meeting gets tired of waiting for the rules. Then the dyke could be breached.

Finally, those in attendance got a bit of a civics lesson. During the Miller's Way discussion, Selectman Kopko took pains to say that if the article allowing the transfer of that property from the town to a not-for-profit housing group passed, the selectmen would decide the terms and conditions of the transfer, regardless of the advisory language in the article from the Finance Committee. Whether intended as they came out, Kopko's statements sounded arrogant and overbearing. Tim Madden, Nantucket's liaison to the state legislature and a former selectman, stood up and reminded Kopko and the entire board of selectman that the four hundred people assembled in town meeting were expressing their will by approving the advisory language as part of the FinCom's motion and that the board would be well advised to give that serious consideration in determining the terms of any property transfer. The motion, with the advisory language included, passed by more than the required two-thirds vote. Well done Mr. Madden! Caveat emptor, Mr. Kopko!

Did the STM happen? Yes. Did it creak and grown? Indeed it did. Did it work? Kinda. Best of all, we got much more than our money's worth from the moderator. She got paid, on a pro-rated basis, about $40.00 for her efforts and she held out for the quorum so we wouldn't have to go through the exercise all over again. Good job, Madame Moderator!

Correction: Last week, the date of the special election to fill the seat vacated by Michael Glowacki was incorrectly stated in this column. The election will be held on Tuesday, November 21, 2006.

+ + +

The "Lighthouse Keeper" reflects the views of the author and does not necessarily represent the editorial position of The Nantucket Independent. Please send any comments to drake@nantucketindependent.com.