LETTERS
SEND YOUR VIEWS AND LETTERS TO THE EDITOR: DON@NANTUCKETINDEPENDENT.COM
TAKE THE LONG VIEW

To the editor:

It has always seemed odd that I'm unable to vote in Nantucket, the place where five generations of my family have had their roots, the place I love more than any other in the world, and where we pay taxes. If I could vote, I would strongly support the referendum allowing beach nourishment on town land along the 'Sconset shoreline.

I am not a coastal engineer and so do not have the expertise to determine whether the plan will work or not. I do know that beach nourishment has been successful in many other places so I'd hope for the best here. I am not an environmental scientist, but I know that the project has to be approved by no less than 11 different agencies at the local, state and federal levels so I would rely on those experts to ensure there would be no harm done.

As an island resident I would see the project as a way of helping my neighbors in an effort to save their homes. I would be eager to see the beach built up and have more public access to it. I would welcome the opportunity to have the project funded privately and not by the taxpayers. I have seen how quickly the years go by. If this project isn't given a chance to succeed, surely the Town of Nantucket will have to shoulder the burden of lost roads and utilities, and it will be at taxpayers' expense. I probably won't be around when the village of 'Sconset is immediately threatened, but many of you reading this letter will be. I urge you to take the long view and support the beach nourishment project.

- Caroline S. Weymar STEWARDS OF THE OCEAN

To the editor:

I see SBPF has the propaganda machine in full swing prior to Town Meeting and elections. I received a mailing the other day "I want my kids to enjoy Sconset beach just as I did". I wonder what you would tell them … enjoy the beach children, it's too bad though, we destroyed one of the richest fishing grounds in New England to make it. The fishing grounds off Sankaty are truly one of Nantucket's most precious public places and we stand to lose that if SBPF goes through with their plans.

I have attended the majority of the CONCOM meetings pertaining to the Sconset beach nourishment project and it has become very clear to me that the information the proponents present is very selective. They have underplayed the amount and significance of rock and vegetation all along. This whole time we have been told the borrow site is all sand, that there might be some sea clams there that they would move [they have no feasible way of doing this] and not one word about mussel beds until Pete Kaizer shot a video of them, then at a meeting the following week there was a presentation about mussels in the borrow area… information they undoubtedly had already. It's hard to believe we are seeing the whole picture, not an edited version.

It will be near impossible to fish down there while the project is going on what with pipelines, massive dredge ships and support vessels all over the area. Time of year they will be doing this the water is thick with "krill" which will indiscriminately be sucked up while watering sand in dredge and be deposited on beach along with sand. Most importantly what will be left of the bottom when this enormous operation pulls away.

We should all be stewards of the ocean as well as the land and I believe the trade off here is too great. Please vote Yes on Article 67 and No on Question 5.

- Bob Rank,

fisherman IT'S NOT ABOUT THEIR BACKYARDS

To the editor:

The organized opposition to the beach nourishment program appears to be engaging in very ugly class warfare on Nantucket; it is divisive, they are wrong and I suspect this tactic will ultimately be to their detriment. The 'Sconset Beach Preservation Fund (SBPF) is clearly not about a bunch of white, wealthy summer residents wanting to save their Baxter Road homes. If it were just about saving their homes they would have bought some land and moved their homes years ago, saving themselves a lot of headaches, heartaches, time, energy and money. It's a much bigger issue than their backyards or ocean views. The SBPF is taking a long-term view of the erosion problem affecting Nantucket.

Erosion on Nantucket is a long-term issue and I'm afraid we no longer take a long-term view of many issues in this country. It's erroneous to think that erosion comes and goes and that 'Sconset may not even be threatened in the long run. It is a fact, however, that since 1957 the shorefront from Ocean Avenue to mid-Baxter Road, including Codfish Park, has receded roughly 300 feet. The un-vegetated bank north of mid-Baxter Road has receded roughly 175 feet during that same period. Nantucket is a sand pile in the middle of the ocean with a high-energy storm season and, absent some intervention, there is no reason to expect these trends to slow down or stop, either in 'Sconset, Nantucket's south shore or other eroding Nantucket shorefronts. Of those 300 feet in front of Codfish Park, 78 feet were lost in two years, between 1991 and 1992.

The Nantucket community was delighted with the saving and moving of Sankaty Head Light but we tend to ignore the fact that if there is no beach nourishment attempted then the lighthouse is only temporarily out of harm's way. In its new location, at the historic rate of erosion, it will be in exactly the same threatened position in a few decades.

As we approach our April 15th election and contemplate the non-binding public opinion advisory question of allowing the SBPF to nourish town- owned beaches, I hope we can put the divisiveness and class warfare aside and see that the SBPF is looking at a long-term solution that will positively impact Nantucket as a whole.

Let's face it, given the age of some members of the SBPF they probably won't be around to experience the fruits of their labor. Now that's long-term thinking!

- Kit Murphy LET'S BE FAIR

To the editor:

Independent columnist Grant Sanders has made some untrue accusations and misrepresentations against me on his chat site (YackOn) and in his column on April 2. There is little free exchange of ideas there, particularly if they are diametrically opposed to his views. There is little opportunity to correct the misinformation being spread on the eve of an election that has been used to cast a shadow across candidates and those that may want to speak at town meeting that have the courage of their convictions but do not espouse the same positions.

In my opinion, there is very little respect, fairness and decorum, and it drags down the act of running for office. To me, these tactics indicate arrogance hiding behind the right to free speech.

I hope that we as a community make up our minds after careful consideration of the issues and people running, and are not swayed by innuendo and negative comments. We should all expect better of ourselves, our community and our newspapers.

My record at town meeting speaks for itself. My dedication to this community is well known. I trust the voters to do the right thing and vote their conscience.

- Linda Williams WHERE ARE THE PARENTS?

To the editor:

Marijuana; sex; teenage pregnancy; alcohol; deadly driving accidents; parents supplying alcohol to teenagers; advisors for high school students; school budgets; and a drug and alcohol survey administered last year in the high school. These are just a few of the topics I got to discuss in a one hour private conversation with Superintendent Dr. Pellicone, administrative intern Nina Slade and Assistant Superintendent Dr. Carlos Colley on March 19. I was the one and only parent who attended the Superintendent's monthly parent coffee, located at the high school.

This was a rescheduled meeting from Tuesday, March 11. When I arrived I thought I had maybe the wrong time but then I saw Linda Peterson setting out platters of cookies, fruit, and coffee. But the LGI room was empty. Well, I sat there waiting. Soon Nina Slade appeared, then Dr. Pellicone and Dr. Carlos Colley. I then knew, I had the correct room and correct time, but I did not understand where the other parents were. I could not believe that not one other parent walked through those doors.

In the high school alone there are over 400 students, the total number in the entire island school system I do not know, but it did not matter because not one single child in the entire system had any parent representation at this meeting. The only population I give reprieve to is the population of parents who do not understand English and when they receive the telephone pace messages, maybe they have no desire to try to understand the often fast spoken English nonlive recording they hear on the telephone.

These administrators are making themselves available to parents on a monthly basis. Your tax money pays their salary. I do not understand why every meeting held on this island for educational matters is not standing room only. These people are the ones in charge of the people teaching your children. Don't you want to ask questions and hold them accountable? These meetings are often held on a rotating schedule for parents who cannot make the early day times due to working. All these meetings are listed in the Nantucket Public Schools 2007-2008 school year calendar given out in September. Ask your child's school administrators for a calendar. We are very fortunate to have these well done calendars funded by, I believe, the "Friends" parent group. These calendars provide a wealth of knowledge about our school system, from various phone numbers to school policies, etc. It also can be viewed online at www.npsk.org. They are free. There is no reason not to have one.

I have only been a parent within the Nantucket School System for the past two years. Prior to that my daughter attended the Nantucket New School for eight years. At first, when I would be alerted that parents were asked to attend various meetings regarding school matters, I would attend and not understand where all the other parents were. Then a veteran parent informed me that never will I see a full house for any meeting regarding the scholastic part of education here on island, but maybe for sports related issues. Please excuse my lack of proper wording. Maybe we need to revamp some communication skills. Maybe parents feel their voices go unheard. Are we all that busy? I do not know the answer.

I want to publicly thank Superintendent Dr. Pellicone, Nina Slade and Dr. Carlos Colley for taking the time out of their day to sit and talk with me. Also, Mr. Kelley, Mr. Lucchini, the "ladies" in the main office, Greg Toledo, Kathy Lepore and all the teachers at NHS who on a daily basis take the time to answer my questions and do their best teaching my child.

The next superintendent coffee is at 9:30 a.m. at NHS LGI on Monday, June 9.

- Sharon Ames