April 2009 Election Results

I want to thank my Campaign Committee for running an excellent campaign, and the 43 generous donors. We lost by 109 votes to Mike Kopko and 52 votes to Tim Soverino. I was particularly happy to work with T.J. Grant. Hopefully he will inspire the younger generation to become involved in Town Government

Even though I was not returned to the BOS, I plan to work even harder for the future of Nantucket.

Selectman (1 seat):
Michael Kopko 943 ballots
Tim Soverino 886 ballots
Whiting Willauer 834 ballots
TJ Grant 289 ballots Blanks: 78 ballots
Write-ins: 3 ballots


TOTAL BALLOTS CAST:
7519 Registered Voters
3033 Ballots cast
40 % Percentage voting

5 Days Before 2009 Election

Monday, April 6th, 2009 - 1st night of Annual Town Meeting:
The appropriation for the new Police Station was adopted. The voters will decide whether to spend the money on Tue, April 14th. The Police and Fire Union contracts were approved. Master Plan approved. The prohibition of smoking marihuana in public places was approved. Separate Board of Health approved. Prohibition of Cell Phone use will driving was favorably supported by sense of meeting, but still permitted. Ocean Management Planning Process approved. Meeting adjourned at 10:30 PM until Tuesday, April 7th.

Tuesday, April 7th, 2009:
Atended SHAB meeting. The scallopers landed approximatley 9,000 bushels this year. Next year looks better. 182 commercial licenses have been sold for next year, an increase of 25. Nantucket has submitted a stimulus grant for $2.2 million for eel grass restoration, Consue Springs restoration, two large storm water drainage systems, and shellfish management plan. On April 1st 10 scallopers and marine department personnel moved 100 bushels of seed scallop from up harbor to the 1st point area.

2nd night of 2009 Annual Town Meeting
Long term lease for affordable housing lease options at 2 Fairgrounds Road was tabled. Many real estate conveyances, acquisitions, and dispositions were approved. The proposed Human Services Center project was approved to contain housing. The Annual Town Meeting was adjourned at 10:07 PM.

Wednesday April 8th, 2009:
Was interviewed by Plum TV at on site at Madaket Marine. I described how the boat yard operated in the 1950s and 1960s. Times were different then. There were no fiberglas boats. Everyone went scalloping in the winter and participated in the theater on weekends as there wasn't any TV. We charged the customers $3.00 per hour, the boat yard was full, and everyone eventually paid their bills.

BOS Achievements and Failures

I&M Question #2 for April 9th:

Name one achievement and one failure of the current Board of Selectmen. Is the board headed in the right direction?

One major BOS achievement was the land swap to move Myles Reis operations from Miacomet Pond to land near the airport. This enabled the Town to protect Miacomet pond from further pollution, and facilitated moving the bulk fuel tanks from the downtown onto the same property near the airport.

The present BOS has failed to prioritize the Town services and to determine which are essential. The Chairman of the BOS was recently quoted saying the services of Adult Community Day Care (ACDC) are not essential to the community. While they may not be essential to all community members, they are essential to an important segment. The BOS first cut ACDC from the budget, and then reinstated it for one year.

This year the BOS increased nineteen user fees, far more than any other year on record. Those approved or under consideration, include; residential parking fees, 14 liquor license fees, mooring waiting list fees, seasonal vacation rental tax, rental car fees, and beach parking fees. User fees should not be used to balance the Town budget. This hurts the residents.

We need an efficient budget process and real planning to grow our economy. We must encourage all aspects of our community to thrive. We have to take care of our business owners, Town employees, teachers, tradesmen, fishermen and year-round residents. Our people are our community.

Why Open Town Meeting

I&M Question #1 for April 9th:

Is the Town Meeting government system still serving Nantucket well? Should it be changed?

At our Town Meeting, citizens come together to legislate Town policy and budgets. While some feel we should have a Representative Town Meeting with elected members, Nantucket has always had an Open Town Meeting, inviting all registered voters the opportunity to participate. Changing that would require an amendment to our Town Charter. A city form of government is run by an elected mayor, with one city councilor elected to represent each district of the Town. There would be no Annual Town Meeting.

Nantucket is known to have more Home Rule Petitions than any other Town, where we amend state laws to suit our local needs. That's because we have unique issues being an island with just one Town and County.

While I agree it is good to re-evaluate our circumstances periodically, I believe the Open Town Meeting form of government has served us well, and I would like to see it continue. With this form of government, every citizen has the same opportunity to bring an issue to the voters at Annual Town Meeting. Nantucket is a true democracy.

BOS Present Operation

Nantucket Independent Question #3 for April 8th

No town board is perfect in its makeup of individuals who view issues from their unique perspectives. What is your greatest criticism of the operation of the current board of selectmen, and how do you believe keeping you on the board or adding you as a member will improve the selectmen's function?

The current board has great diversity but is missing someone with the experience of leading multi-million dollar organizations. We need a pro-active board, not reactive. We need to plan for Nantucket's future, not just muddle through and figure out how to get by. Right now, our Town is faced with a financial crisis that could have been avoided with better planning.

I am an 11th generation Nantucketer. I grew up here working summer jobs while getting a great education. I ran a boat yard business on the Island for 10 years. As a veteran of foreign wars, I served my country well. I excelled working for the U.S. government in intelligence, and later in private business. I have skills that are sorely lacking on the BOS, including; budgeting, planning, contract negotiation, forecasting, management, and setting and achieving goals.

I have attended nearly every Board of Selectman meeting since early 2005. As Board Chairman, I had a great working relationship with the Town Manager and all the other Board Members. I continue to serve on eight town committees and organizations. I am up to speed and can hit the ground running. I have several new ideas to bring forward that will help the Nantucket economy to grow and prosper.

We must reduce the cost of living for year-round Nantucketers, and make sure teachers and Town employees can keep their jobs.

I&M Endorsements

I&M Editorial - Thursday, April 9th

Four people for one slot, yet this is the hardest race of all to call. We applaud T.J. Grant for stepping forward to serve, and advise him to seek appointment to one of the town boards in June to get some experience in town government before running another time.

Then we have three people with experience in this seat to consider, and not a clear choice among them.

The incumbent Michael Kopko has matured a great deal since he took office three years ago, and has done a good job as chairman this past year. However, we can’t forget his votes that have hurt island tradesmen and an apparent anti-business stance that was evident in liquor license applications as well. We also do not like his view that the planning director should report to the town administrator, and indirectly, to the Selectmen. We do not feel that is appropriate and is such a clear grab for power and control that it bothers us quite a bit.

Nantucket’s current economic decline demands a board that will work in the best interests of merchants and tradesmen alike and we don’t see that in candidate Kopko.

Whitey Willauer and Tim Soverino have both served as selectmen and both lost their last bids for this office. What has changed for each since then?

Willauer has always had Nantucket’s best interests at heart, and works diligently for the good of Nantucket. His legendary spreadsheet of projects to be addressed shows that he is no slouch when focusing on what needs to be done. We just wonder if he can narrow those choices down so something actually does get accomplished. Willauer is also a genuinely nice guy who treats his colleagues with respect, and that’s something in his favor.

Tim Soverino can’t get away from the fact that he was one of two Selectmen who negotiated the contract with Waste Options that has been viewed by many as largely not in the town’s best interest. Soverino says he’d like to get back on board to iron those details out. We’re not sure how that would work. Meanwhile, we like Tim’s connection to the island workforce and municipal employees, his institutional knowledge of Nantucket, his background in government and finance and the Board of Selectmen. He knows the fiscal bind the town is in and may very well be the person who can talk with union heads and get needed concessions from them on future contracts. The Tim Soverino we have seen this go-around is a different, humbler person who would work well with the current board, as would Whitey Willauer.

10 Days to Go

Things are heating up. The Selectman election is 10 days away on Tuesday, April 14th. It's hard to tell the outcome.

Here's what I did the past four days:

Wed April 1st: Attended the BOS meeting. Discussions included: establishing Taxi Advisory Committee; Committee Appointment Schedule; establishing Ad Hoc Fiscal Committee; tracking Construction and Demolition (C&D) material.

Thu April 2nd: At 2:00 pm, chaired the Bulk Fuel Committee. We are moving ahead with disestablishing the fuel tanks downtown and building new tanks near the airport.

At 5:00 pm: Energy committee: review feasibility of 4WD Hybrid vehicles for the Police; solar energy for the school/swimming pool; and obtaining a grant for a feasibility study of Wind Turbines at the dump.

At 6:00 - 8:00 pm: Attended public forum for the Selectman candidates to answer questions by the five Town Unions.

Fri, April 3rd: At 10 am, interviewed by the I&M editors in preparation for their endoursements.

At 12:00 noon, participated with the four selectmen candidates in a debate on TV-17 with Jason Graziadei of I&M as moderator. This one hour show will be shown many times in the next 10 days.

At 2:00 pm, met with 30 or so residents of Sherburne Commons to discuss the future of that organization and the possibility of merging with Our Island Home, and Adult Community Day Care Center (ACDC) on the Sherburne Campus.

Sat, April 4th: The campaign team stood at the dump from 8:00 am until noon. Whitey left to attend James K. Glidden's funeral at St Paul's. He died April 1st at 92. At the funeral, we sang, How Great Thou Art, The Old Rugged Cross, and In the Garden. Richard Glidden gave an outstanding eulogy. Committal was at Prospect Hill. A reception was held at the Miacomet Golf Club with much of old Nantucket in attendance.

Andrew Vorce

I&M Question #2 for April 2nd: Do you feel that Planning Director Andrew Vorce should report to the town manager, or is the existing system, in which he is responsible to the Nantucket Planning & Economic Development Commission, working?

Planning Director Andrew Vorce is doing a great job. He has hired an excellent staff and is working well with the Town Manager and the Selectmen. He has produced the Master Plan. He is working with the State on the Oceans Management Plan. Real planning is being done and would not be better under the Board of Selectmen.

Having two parallel operations creates checks and balances. Why are we splitting the Health Department from the BOS? Why do we have separate Airport, Water Company, Solid Waste enterprise accounts? The answer is that they work better that way and so does the Planning Board.

Having a separate Planning Department encourages independent thinking. There have been many initiatives derived from the Planning Department that may have been stifled under the BOS. With them working independently, they can develop ideas and present them to the voters at Town Meeting for consideration. This department functions well as is. If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it!

Labor Cost Managment

I&M Question #1 for April 4th: Given the fact that town salary and benefit increases have outpaced the growth in municipal revenue, what changes, if any, would you propose to restructure the town's agreements with its labor unions?

We need to look at municipal revenue more carefully. In the past, we have relied on new growth to keep up with the salary and benefit increases. Most of the new growth has come from our vacation home housing boom. The Land Fill Operation was sized to accommodate the peak operations during the summer. The same is true of the Waste Water Treatment, the Police Station, the Water Towers, and Storm Water Treatment.

The BOS has increased 19 different permits and user fees this year. This hurts year-rounders struggling to make a living. If we look more carefully at the economic impact of an override, we find that 87% is paid by non-resident taxpayers and only 13% by resident tax payers. This means that for every dollar that the resident taxpayer pays the non-resident tax payer pays $6.70. Vacation homes caused the problem, and are rightly charged higher taxes.

Strategic planning is my greatest strength. Land based Wind energy can save the town $3M per year in a few years. Moving the bulk fuel to the airport will save $0.40/gallon or $4 Million per year. Doubling the scallop industry will bring $60,000 per day into the economy. Combining Our Island Home, ACDC, and Sherburne Commons into a public-private partnership will save $3 Million per year.

We need to grow our economy while protecting the jobs of teachers and Town employees, and reducing the cost of living for year-round residents.

$1.9 Million Shortfall at Land Fill

I&M Question #2 for March 26th

Do you believe the selectmen made the right decisions to cover a $1.9 million shortfall at the landfill through existing tax revenue rather than a new sticker-fee system or an operating override?

The Land Fill issue has been botched from the start in negotiating the 25 year contract. The contract was poorly conceived and lacked transparency. We are paying the penalties for past bad management. The situation was further impacted by the change in State regulations. That being said, we have to decide where we should go from here.

The Land Fill is its own enterprise fund similar to the Airport and the Water companies. Its revenue and expenses should be isolated from the Town’s general funds. By including the $1.9 million Land Fill shortfall in the general funds, we are making the Town departments and the School pay for the problem. The new sticker fee being considered by the BOS is regressive as it puts more of a load on the residents. It would cost each one of the 10,000 households on Nantucket $200 per year to pay for the $1.9M Land Fill shortfall. The best answer is a Land Fill operating override costing about $55 per year for a house appraised at $1M.

A Land Fill override reduces costs to residents and follows good accounting practices by matching revenue and expenses. When the BOS Vice Chairman and the Town Manager recommended this approach, Chairman Kopko ignored their recommendations. He chose to close the budgetary gap by increased fees, dipping into prudent reserves, and cutting critical items from the Town and School budgets.

Poorly Conceived Budget

I&M Question #1 For March 26th

Would you defend or criticize how the current selectmen have handled this year's budget deficit and their choices to date?

As the only candidate to attend all Board of Selectman meetings and most of the Budget Workshops, I have the following observations. The Selectmen continually tasked staff to make reductions, without making recommendations. They relied on the finance committee to make some of the more critical decisions. There was no prioritizing of what are necessary services. They moved the dollars around without any analysis. They did not consider the benefits of an override. Good budgeting and good planning is the result of looking at all possibilities and making smart decisions. Neither of these has been accomplished

All Town Departments were asked to make the same cuts without considering which departments needed to be increased or decreased in hard times. For instance, Health and Human Services was cut by 10% while its requirements and the community needs are increasing. They cut and then reinstated the Adult Community Day Care (ACDC) when its requirements were going up. They did not collect their fair share from the Airport. Finally, they dipped into Free Cash to bail out a poorly conceived budget.

Madaket Memories

Whitey launching a cabin cruiser at Harbor Sales Service, Madaket.  

During the summers of 1947 and 1948, I worked for Yerxa's Boat Yard at Straight Wharf and Madaket. I was employed as a yard hand and sailing instructor. In 1951, I was recruited by CIA and was trained at Fort Benning in Georgia. I was sent to the Far East and participated in the Korea War and the early days of the Viet Nam war with the French. In 1953, I return to college and then went to graduate school in aeronautical engineering. 

Back on Nantucket in 1956, Captain Sterling Yerxa approached me to purchase his boat business. I put a group together and bought Yerxa's Boat Yard. The new business was called Harbor Sales and Service (HSS). We built the main boat building for $4,000 which was $1 dollar per square foot. This location is now called Madaket Marine. Ben Perkins, Captain Yerxa's son-in-law, was the boat yard manager. We operated HSS from 1956-1966. We had such Nantucket luminaries as Sid Killen, Chairman of the BOS, Ernie Whelden, Ellison (Pod) Pease, Gibby Nickerson, Shirley Yerxa Perkins, and B.J. Yerxa Sharp working at HSS. 

The photo above shows the old way of hauling and launching boats using wooden rollers and the HSS marine railway. In the picture, I am adjusting the rollers for launching Reindeer II, E. Rayne Herzog's cabin cruiser. The HSS yard was always full, and was a unique social gathering place.

Using Free Cash to Cover Up Poor Planning

Inquirer and Mirror Question #3

Are you in favor of using some of the town's $5 million in free cash to balance this year's budget and prevent potential layoffs of town and school employees?

No. This goes against the Town’s approved Free Cash Policy. The approved uses are a) to fund the Stabilization Fund required by the State; b) to fund capital projects; c) to fund extraordinary deficits; d) to provide for critical cash flow and emergencies.

The primary sources of Free Cash are unexpected revenue or expenitures less than budget. Free Cash has to be certified by the State before we can use it.

We need the Free Cash when the unexpected occurs, not to bail out poor planning. We need to better manage the Town’s finances to make sure the year-round residents aren’t forced to leave the Island. First trim all the fat and then examine the benefits of an override. An override is paid 87% from non-residents and only13% by the year-round residents. For every one dollar the residents pay in an override, the non-residents pay $6.70 dollars. Without an override, the town leaders will over-burden our year-round residents with user fees for the necessities of life. These fees proposed by our current Selectmen would cost each year-round resident much more than an override. My goal is to reduce the cost of living for our year-round residents.

Current Fiscal Problems

Nantucket Independent Question #2:

Nantucket, like many other towns in the state, is facing escalating operational, personnel and other costs. How do you believe we arrived at our current fiscal problems and what ideas do you have to achieve a reduced budget without severe job cuts or substantial curtailment of services residents have come to expect in more prosperous years?

Upward pressure on the infrastructure caused by neglect and the rapid build out of the Island has brought many needs to the forefront. This was not unexpected, just unmanaged. The Land Fill is a perfect example. With a poorly negotiated long-term contract by our former Selectmen, we are still paying for that lack of leadership. I have managed worldwide worldwide organizations and have the experience and leadership to bring Nantucket back on track.

We need to be proactive and get serious about planning. We can drastically reduce operational costs by creating municipal renewable wind and solar energy. My research has uncovered potential savings of $30-million dollars per year for the Town in the very near future. I hope to make this a reality if re-elected, so the Island becomes energy independent.

We need to better manage the Town’s finances to make sure the year-round residents aren’t forced to leave the Island. First trim all the fat and then examine the benefits of an override. An override is paid 87% from non-residents and only13% by the year-round residents. For every one dollar the residents pay in an override, the non-residents pay $6.70 dollars. Without an override, the town leaders will over-burden our year-round residents with user fees for the necessities of life. These fees proposed by our current Selectmen would cost each year-round resident much more than an override. My goal is to reduce the cost of living for our year-round residents.

Cape Wind Receives Notice of Presumed Hazard From FAA

The BOS Chairman Chose to Place His Political Agenda Above Public Safety

The Chairman of the Board of Selectman has chosen to not place a critical an FAA Notice of Presumed Hazard on the BOS agenda. On February 13th, the FAA issued their notice. Since then, there have been numerous requests for the Town to respond to this public safety issue. Since the Chairman is in favor of Cape Winds 130 Turbines in Nantucket Sound, the requests have been ignored.

The response from the town is due this Friday, March 20. The FAA notice was published February 13th. The BOS elected to not act because it was not on the agenda. The Chairman controls the agenda.


The following is a draft letter that the Selectmen refused to consider within the required deadline:

Dear Sirs,

In contrast to the Cape Wind Energy Project FEIS produced by Mineral's Management Services, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) recently issued a Notice of Presumed Hazard for the Cape Wind project, stating that each of the 130 structures exceeds obstruction standards and would have an adverse effect upon navigable airspace or air navigation facilities. This FAA report has heightened our concerns about the Cape Wind project. Many other issues may be mitigated, but our primary concern is of course the safety of Nantucket residents and visitors.

Radar is critical to the safety of Nantucketers, perhaps more so than anywhere else in New England, as the island is located thirty miles at sea and is dependent on air transportation for the delivery of people and the necessities of life, which travel across Nantucket Sound. As one of the most easterly airports in the United States, radar on Nantucket is also relied upon for Homeland Security.

Nantucket Island has one of the busiest airports in New England with as many as 604,322 passengers arriving and departing on commercial flights annually and as many as 170,367 planes taking off and landing at Nantucket Memorial Airport in a single year. Our economy relies heavily on tourism brought by air travel. Our year-round residents are dependent on airplane and ferry transportation as their lifelines to reach the mainland for travel, services and goods. Nantucket Memorial Airport received 2,823,227 pounds of air-freight to the Island in 2008.

As part of Homeland Security, the Coast Guard Auxiliary Nantucket Flotilla flies missions up and down the New England Coast twice per week. More than 100 missions per year depart from Nantucket and use Cape Approach radar for flight following, and other radar systems as they monitor their route.

As the Town of Nantucket is proceeding through the process of developing municipal land-based wind energy on the Island, we know well the implications of radar interference. After seeing the results of aviation studies for a sight we chose at Nantucket's Wastewater Treatment Facility, we mitigated that problem by choosing a different location for wind turbines, due to radar interference.

Thank you for taking our concerns into consideration prior to issuing a record of decision on the proposed Cape Wind project.

Signature
Town of Nantucket


The following is the FAA Notice:

** NOTICE OF PRESUMED HAZARD **
The Federal Aviation Administration has conducted an aeronautical study under the provisions of 49 U.S.C., Section 44718 and if applicable Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations, part 77, concerning:

Structure: Wind Turbine 4A-HSS
Location: Cotuit, MA
Latitude: 41-30-55.77N NAD 83
Longitude: 70-23-48.35W
Heights: 440 feet above ground level (AGL)
440 feet above mean sea level (AMSL)

Initial findings of this study indicate that the structure as described exceeds obstruction standards and/or would have an adverse physical or electromagnetic interference effect upon navigable airspace or air navigation facilities. Pending resolution of the issues described below, the structure is presumed to be a hazard to air navigation.

See Attachment for Additional information.
Further study has been initiated by the FAA.

NOTE: PENDING RESOLUTION OF THE ISSUE(S) DESCRIBED ABOVE, THE STRUCTURE IS PRESUMED TO BE A HAZARD TO AIR NAVIGATION. THIS LETTER DOES NOT AUTHORIZE CONSTRUCTION OF THE STRUCTURE EVEN AT A REDUCED HEIGHT. ANY RESOLUTION OF THE ISSUE(S) DESCRIBED ABOVE MUST BE COMMUNICATED TO THE FAA SO THAT A FAVORABLE DETERMINATION CAN SUBSEQUENTLY BE ISSUED.

IF MORE THAN 60 DAYS FROM THE DATE OF THIS LETTER HAS ELAPSED WITHOUT ATTEMPTED RESOLUTION, IT WILL BE NECESSARY FOR YOU TO REACTIVATE THE STUDY BY FILING A NEW FAA FORM 7460-1, NOTICE OF PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION OR ALTERATION.

If we can be of further assistance, please contact our office at (816) 329-2525. On any future correspondence concerning this matter, please refer to Aeronautical Study Number 2009-WTE-332-OE.

Signature Control No: 107807735-108228745 ( NPH -WT )
Donna O'Neill
Specialist
Attachment(s)
Additional Information

4 Weeks to Go

I attended the Nantucket Sailors meeting in Annapolis over the March 7th and 8th weekend. About 100 sailors from Nantucket attended. We heard Dave Perry explain the new sailboat racing rules and discribe his experiences as a coach at the China Olympics . On Sunday, I visited the Chesapeake Bay Foundation. They have a very similar situation as Nantucket with their oyster beds and water quality. Interestingly enough their Headquarters is certified Leeds Platinum.

On Monday, I attended the Ms. Mantucket competition at the Fairgrounds restaurant. This has become a great Nantucket tradition sponsored by the Rotary for the High School Scholarship program. Next stop was the US Coast Guard Reserve meeting at Station Brant Point. This time of year, our Nantucket Flotilla flies missions up and down the New England Coast and is preparing to teach boating safety courses to our youth

On Tuesday, I attended the SHAB meeting where we discussing moving seed scallops from Fourth Bend to the area between First Point and Abrahms Point. The plan is to move 100 bushels on April 1st.

On Wednesday, I attended the Downtown Revitalization Committee where a Nantucket Business Survey of all businesses and organizations is being developed in order to identify goals for the downtown area.

The next stop was the BOS meeting where the Annual Town Meeting Articles were reviewed. The Board of Slectmen voted in favor of a seasonal rental tax which the Finace Committee voted against. The problem with this tax is that 60% goes to the State. This tax is highly regressive for the Nantucket economy.

On Thursday, I attended a presentation by Patty Roggeveen on the Dreamland renovation. This was an excellent presentation that was very well attended. The Dreamland will be disassemble piece by piece and the land will be grass this summer. Next fall a new steel structure will be built and the old pieces will be put back in their original places.

On Friday, I chaired a meeting of Nantucket Behavorial Health Service. NBHS serves the mental health issues on the Island. In the afternoon, I participated in the first organizational meeting of the Nantucket Shellfish Plan (NSP). Dr. Jake Kritzer of the Environmental Defense Fund was our guest and we started to develop the goals and objectives of the NSP.

On Saturday and Sunday, my campaign committee was out at the land fill. We were joined by School Committee Candidate, Melssa Bonvini Murphy, her husband Devon and daughter. As it turns out Devon is newly employed by Grey Lady Marine to manage their outside operations. Devon has great experience.

To cap off the week I attended Mike Kopko's kick-off party at the Chicken Box. It was a fun event and gave me a chance to have very productie conversations.

Nantucket Economic Future

Nantucket needs to capitalize on our resources to insure a bright economic future. Our scallop industry needs to be expanded by the proposed Marine Collaborative. With careful fisheries management, it is feasible to increase and maintain our scallop industry at 20 thousand bushels per year. This would bring an additional $3 million dollars per year into our economy.

We should develop wind power. We have one of the highest average wind velocities in the country and one of the highest electricity costs. If we build three 1.5 MW turbines at the Land Fill, we could save the Town $3-million per year. If we move our Bulk Fuel storage from downtown to the airport, we would save $0.40 per gallon or $4-million per year. The three initiatives would add $10-million to our economy in 2 to 3 years.

Within 5 to 10 years, we could save $27.8-million by generating the entire Island’s electrical power with land based wind turbines, heating our homes and driving vehicles using inexpensive electricity. Our fuel consumption could be reduced by 75%. At $3/gallon, we would save $22.5-million per year in fuel costs. The total amount of savings from lower fuel and electricity costs would be $50-million. Then we could export electrical power to the mainland. In the early 1800s, Nantucket was one of the richest Towns in America, exporting power to the world as whale oil. We have an opportunity to be energy independent.

Whitey's Resume

Whiting (Whitey) R. Willauer


Whitey was born in Boston on May 24, 1931. He first came to Nantucket when he was under a month old, and has come to the Island every summer until he retired here in 2000. He spent the winters in Dedham MA until his family moved to Washington DC just before World War II. In Washington, he attended John Eaton Public School until he transfered to St. Albans School.

Whitey left St Albans school at the end of the 9th grade when his parents moved to China. He was enrolled at Milton Academy in Milton MA and graduated with the Class of 1949. He was accepted into Princeton University as an aeronautical engineer.
During sophomore year at Princeton University, CIA recruited Whitey. He received training at Fort Benning GA in what are now Special Forces. After training, he worked for Northeast Airlines at Logan Airport to build cover. Next he traveled to the Far East and worked for Civil Air Transport. General Chennault of Flying Tiger fame headed the airline. During the day, they carried passengers. At night, they operated behind enemy lines during the Korean War and early Vietnam War.
Whitey returned to Princeton and received his B.S. in 1955 and M.S. in 1958 in Aeronautical Engineering. During this period, he was also involved in the Guatemalan revolution, flight testing C-46 aircraft in Florida, and running the Madaket Boat Yard from 1956 to 1966.
The next stop was back to Washington, D.C. and a think tank named Analytic Services (RAND subsidiary) doing strategic planning for the U.S. Air Force. At night, he studied astronomy at Georgetown University. Whitey received his Ph.D. in 1964 and became an assistant professor. He consulted to Booz-Allen, National Geographic, and the University of Texas. He was married, had two wonderful boys, and was subsequently divorced.
When Georgetown’s Astronomy Department closed, Whitey joined TRW in McLean, Virginia. He managed projects for the Vietnam War, US Navy’s Antisubmarine Warfare program, planning for the Chief of Naval Operations, the US Navy’s Amphibious Ship Building program, Scotland Yard’s fingerprint system, British Royal Mail’s delivery system, FAA’s traffic-control system, Counter Terrorist Tracking System, U.S. Air Force’s anti-ICBM program, and Centers for Disease Control communications systems.
Whitey became involved in the United States Skiing and Snowboard Association (USSA). He served as President of USSA from 1982 to 1987. From 1987 to 1994, he was the US Skiing representative on the US Olympic Committee and was also actively involved in the International Ski Federation (FIS). He was Assistant Chief Alpine Steward at the1980 Lake Placid Winter Olympics; Chef de Mission at the 1990 Las Lenãs, Argentina Winter Pan American Games; Assistant Chef de Mission at the 1992 Albertville, France Winter Olympics; and Chef de Mission at the 1994 Lillehammer, Norway Winter Paralympics. He received the USSA Julius Blegen Award in 1987 and the USSA Bud & Mary Little Award in 1998.
Whitey has saltwater in his veins. Both of his grandfather’s grandfathers were whaling captains. Captain Daniel Russell was master of the Essex until its last and fateful trip. Captain George W Gardner was master of the Globe. The Russell family moved off-island to Concord MA in the recession of 1870. Whitey’s maternal Russell grandparents became summer visitors before World War I. His grandfather Benjamin Franklin Winslow Russell designed the Academy Hill School. His uncle Gardner Russell was the District Court Judge for Nantucket.
Since moving permanently to Nantucket in 2000, he has served in the following positions:
· Chairman of the Nantucket Board of Selectmen (BOS)
· President of Nantucket Behavioral Health Services (NBHS).
· President of the Nantucket Shellfish Association (NSA).
· Chairman of the Bulk Fuel Committee.
· Treasurer of the Alliance for Substance Abuse Prevention ASAP).
· Secretary of US Coast Guard Auxiliary Flotilla 11-7 at Station Brant Point
· BOS Liaison to the Nantucket Energy Committee (NEC).
· BOS Liaison to the Harbor Plan Implementation Committee (HPIC).
· BOS Liaison to the Harbor and Shellfish Advisory Board (SHAB)


Please Vote for Whitey on April 14th

I love Nantucket!
I'm dedicated to solving our financial problems, reduce the cost of living for year-round residents, and preserving our native scallop fishery and other natural resources.

Why Vote for Whitey?

Independent Question #1 - March 11th Issue:

Whether you are new to the government arena, an incumbent or have served in prior years, why do you believe voters should choose you over the other contenders for a seat on the selectmen? What abilities and attributes make you most qualified for this highest town governing board?

As chairman of the Board of Selectman, I remained focused on goals and worked closely with the Town Manager. I continue to attend all BOS meetings and stay involved in Town committees. I can hit the ground running upon re-election.

My goal is to lower the year-round cost of living, while improving quality of life. As Bulk Fuel Committee chairman, our plan is to move the fuel tanks from downtown. This will lower the fuel costs and revitalize downtown. As Shellfish Association president and SHAB liaison, I work hard to preserve the scallop fishery. As Energy Committee Liaison, our vision is energy independence by developing affordable wind and solar energy. This can save $30-million in electricity.

I care deeply about the human side of our community. As president of Nantucket Behavioral Health Services and secretary for Alliance for Substance Abuse Prevention, we're addressing teen alcohol and substance abuse. I'm also concerned about the care of our senior citizens due to poor budgeting and mismanagement. Essential services are suffering which affects all of us.

My management and leadership abilities were relied upon to accomplish vital tasks for many worldwide organizations. Nantucket can rely on me to do the same. I treat people with respect, listen to their concerns, and dedicate my time to helping where needed.

As the great great grandson of Captain Daniel Russell, of the whale ship Essex, I'm an 11th generation Nantucketer with a longer bloodline than any other candidate. I've seen Nantucket struggle through difficult times and recover. I have the decisive planning skills to get us back on track. I'm asking for your vote.


Please Vote for Whitey on April 14th

I love Nantucket! I'm dedicated to solving our financial problems, reducing the cost of living for year-round residents, and preserving our native scallop fishery and other natural resources.

Parking Garage

I&M Question 2:

Do you support the concept of a parking garage on the former Nantucket Electric Company property in downtown Nantucket?

To clarify, this is not a parking garage issue; it is not a proposal for the Town to buy this land. It is a planning issue, where the various land owners in the Wilkes Square (Candle Street) area will be able to redevelop their properties in a coordinated effort with the Town, to best suit the needs of the community.

I wrote the Request for Qualifications (RFQ) in support for the Downtown Revitalization Committee to hire a designer to prepare plans for the Wilkes Square redevelopment site. The site includes: the National Grid, former Nantucket Electric Company property; Greenhound, former Island Liquors Site; Winthrop property, including fuel tanks, Grand Union and most of the parking lot; and Nantucket Island Resorts property including part of parking lot.
I interviewed all the above land owners and Harbor Fuel. The fuel tanks need to be replaced due to their age. They are used by Harbor Fuel, who is willing to move their operations to the airport. The owners of the properties were unanimous in their desire to work with the Town. The RFQ seeks to balance economics and community preservation. The designer is to prepare several plans so that the Town can choose whether to include: a grocery store; year-round housing; open civic space; cultural center; stores, restaurants; hotels; a parking garage; or no parking garage. The RFQ will require a consensus between the Town, the owners of the property, and a developer. The BOS unanimously approved the RFQ on February 4th.

Police Station

I&M Question #1 :

How will you vote on the proposal for a debt exclusion override to fund a new police station on Fairgrounds Road? Why?

Having toured the present Police Station, I find it to be clearly inadequate. I have reviewed the proposed plans for Fairgrounds Road and found they meet the requirements of modern law enforcement without being overdesigned. Our Island has changed as recent serious events testify. We require and need a modern Police Station.

The estimated project cost is $15.5M. We already have $3.3M of this cost in hand. Because of the downturn in the economy, construction costs are down. Similar projects are coming in at 20% below estimates. We have completed the design and construction documents. Our permitting is on track, and we have pre-qualified several contractors. We are ready to go. We need to act now before we loose the $3.3M and before the stimulus bill “shovel ready” projects push up costs.

I am in favor of a debt exclusion override for the New Police Station.

BOS Election Prediction

Whitey’s thoughts on this year’s BOS competition.

Elections are always difficult to predict. Here are some of the facts that helped me decide to run:

- The last time that Tim Soverino ran, Whitey beat him by 638 votes (1547 to 909).

- Of the 4 races that Soverino competed in, his highest total was 1402 votes and his average was 1212. Whitey’ lowest race was 1486 votes.

- In the past 14 years, Whitey received the 3rd highest number of votes behind Brian Chadwick and Matt Fee.

- Kopko received 1183 votes in a single seat race. Of all the 24 winners in the past 14 years Kopko was the 21st from the highest winner (or the 4th lowest).

Using these numbers:

• Soverino would beat Kopko in a two person race;
• Whitey would beat Soverino in a two person race;
• Whitey would beat Kopko in a two person race.

This year we have a 4 person race with T.J. Grant participating. T.J. is a recent graduate of NHS. He works at the Boys and Girls Club and was a mediator at the NHS. T.J. is a nice young man and I have enjoyed meeting and talking to him. It is very important to encourage younger people to participate in Town politics.

It is difficult to extrapolate these data to a 4 way race.

Please vote for Whitey on April 14th.

Whitey is dedicated to solving problems, reducing the cost of living for year-round residents, and preserving our native scallop fishery and other natural resources.

Wilkes Square Redevelopment

REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS (RFQ)
PROPOSED WILKES SQUARE (CANDLE STREET)
REDEVELOPMENT SITE

by Whitey Willauer

I. General Scope of Work
The Town of Nantucket invites responders to submit qualifications for the preparation of preliminary plans and specifications, schedule development, and cost estimating, for the Wilkes Square (Candle Street) Redevelopment Site (see map) including the National Grid, Greenhound, Winthrop, and Nantucket Island Resort properties as identified in Article 90 of the Nantucket 2008 Annual Town Meeting.

The Board of Selectmen has charged the Downtown Revitalization Committee with identifying goals for the Nantucket downtown area which balance economic strength with community preservation, and encourage greater venues for social activity while recognizing the importance of planning.

The designer should consider the following guidelines:
· Attracting a wide range of individuals through a multifunctional environment, including: housing, work, shopping, culture, entertainment, government, and tourist attractions.
· Balancing the human, social and economic needs with the infrastructure requirements of parking, public transportation, bike racks, road access, traffic flow, sidewalks and shore front walkways.
· Attracting commercial business to locate downtown by providing guidance on financing, zoning, and preliminary site design
· Protecting the unique qualities, historical significance and feel of the Town.
· Incorporating attractive space for civic gatherings.
· Recognizing the value of keeping the Town Government in downtown.

It is anticipated that the Preliminary Design will be completed by no later than June 2009.

Applications will be received until TBD at the offices of the Board of Selectmen, 16 Broad Street Nantucket MA. Four (4) copies of the application must be submitted in a sealed envelope marked Application for Designer Services for Proposed Wilkes Square (Candle Street) Redevelopment Site. All written applications will be evaluated and a short list of finalists will be developed. The finalists will be interviewed and a final selection made after the completion of the interview process.

The successful firm to this RFQ will be required to furnish the necessary personnel, materials, services, equipment, facilities (except as otherwise specified herein) to perform evaluations and additional efforts as specified in the detailed Scope of Services issued hereunder for design and engineering services for the Town to include: the programming, site master planning, landscape architecture, and environmental analysis subject to the independent review process provided for by M.G.L. Chapter 7, sec. 38H(i) (the “Designer Selection Statute”).

Questions concerning this RFQ must be submitted in writing to: Diane O’Neil, Board of Selectmen, 16 Broad Street, Nantucket, MA 02554, email: doneil@nantucket-ma.gov before TBD. Questions may be delivered, mailed, emailed, or faxed. Written responses will be mailed, emailed, or faxed to all responders on record as having requested the RFQ. The selection process is governed by M.G.L. Chapter 7, sec. 38D, et seq.

The minimum qualifications and comparative evaluation criteria are set forth below. Each applicant must have experience in the design of buildings in New England and have knowledge of M.G.L. Chapter 91 issues.

The Town will evaluate all applications submitted, eliminate any applications that do not meet the Minimum Criteria, develop a ‘short list’ and schedule interviews with those applicants at which time a price proposal will be requested. The contract will be awarded in accordance with the Designer Selection Statute.
Responders must be willing to enter into the Town of Nantucket’s standard form of contract that will include the scope of services of this RFQ.

II. Scope of Services
The Designer will perform the following services in connection with the Project:
1. Provide not less than three (3) site plans, and landscape architecture for the Wilkes Square (Candle Street) Redevelopment Site. In addition to the 3 site plans, the responders are encouraged to provide one or more alternative plans.
2. Coordinate with the stake holders including Harbor Fuel, National Grid, Greenhound, Winthrop, and Nantucket Island Resort in order to develop one or more plans that satisfy a combination of the operational, commercial, economic, and cultural needs of the Nantucket Community and the primary stake holders. The plans must address the larger goals and guidelines of the Downtown Revitalization Committee (DRC) as described in Section I.

3. Develop trade-off analysis as to the pros and cons of each plan. It is the expressed position of the DRC that the area be a: year-round venue; be committed to water-front access for residents; provide open space for civic use; include residential and commercial venues (possible vertical zoning); encourage Municipal use; and be part of Nantucket’s downtown parking solution.

4. Make presentations of the Wilkes Square (Candle Street) Redevelopment Plan to the Board of Selectmen, Planning Board and DRC and other boards and attend such other local meetings as may be necessary or appropriate (a minimum of five (5) meetings).

5. At least two (2) site plan recommendations of the proposed: one plan should not have a parking garage on the site; one must include one or more parking garage(s) on site; how many vehicles would be accommodated by the garage(s); where would the garage(s) be located on the site; and what other uses could be accommodated by the garage(s). The designer should reference the empirical data as to the nature of Nantucket’s parking issue, and the usefulness of various solutions to the island’s specific challenges.

6. Make recommendations: how to locate a grocery store on the site; what would be the size and scope of the grocery store; what would be the parking impacts; where would the grocery store be located on the site.
7. Make recommendations: how to incorporate year-round housing units on the site; how many units and what size would be incorporated; what would be the parking impacts; where would the units be located on the site. Units might include mix of low income and upper income; upper floor only; employee housing; rental or purchased properties.

8. Make recommendations: how to provide open civic space on the property; where the civic spaces should be located, what should be the footprint of the spaces; what would be the parking impacts; and what would be the uses on the civic spaces. Uses might include: farmers market; county fair; Figawi Weekend; Opera House Cup; Flower Show; Art Show; flea market; band concerts; 4th of July Party.

9. Make recommendations: whether and how to incorporate cultural activity structures such as museums, theaters, art galleries on the site; how many cultural structures would be accommodated; what would the uses of the cultural structures; what would be the parking impacts; where would the cultural structures be located on the site. Attention also should be given to the effects of vertical zoning on the area, and to the viability of year-round cultural activities.

10. Make recommendations: whether and how to incorporate retail outlets on the site; how many retail spaces would be accommodated; what would be the parking impacts; where would the retail spaces be located on the site. Attention also should be given to the effects of vertical zoning on the area, and the viability of year-round retail offerings.

11. Make recommendations: whether and how to incorporate restaurants on the site; how many restaurants would be accommodated; what would be the parking impacts; where would the restaurants be located on the property. Attention also should be given to the effects of vertical zoning on the area, and the viability of year-round restaurants.

12. Make recommendations: whether and how to incorporate one or more hotels on the site; how many hotel(s) would be accommodated; where would the hotel(s) be located on the property; how many rooms and amenities would the hotel(s) accommodate. Attention also should be given to hotel parking, employee housing, and the viability of year-round hotel operation.

13. Provide timeline for the redevelopment and an estimate of construction costs. The project timeline should take in to considerations the existing licenses and leases for the various properties. Such licenses and leases include: Town license with Harbor Fuel for fuel tanks expires September 5, 2009; grocery store / parking lot lease with Winthrop expires in 2010, and Winthrop lease with Harbor Fuel expires in 2018.

14. Develop an overall business plan(s) for the site and make recommendations as to how the project might be financed. Trade-offs might include: private vs. public financing; public-private partnership; single owner vs. multiple-owners;

15. Provide such other designer services as may be necessary to bring the Project to completion

16. All plans shall conform to the current Massachusetts State Building Code, the Americans with Disabilities Act and Massachusetts Architectural Access Board regulations and all local ordinances and regulations governing the Project

III. Minimum Qualifications of Designer
The Designer must meet the following minimum qualifications:
1. Demonstrate a minimum of five years experience in the design of buildings in Massachusetts
2. Possess knowledge of and experience in legal requirements of Massachusetts building projects. Be able to take into consideration the various economic and business needs and requirements of the stakeholders.
3. Possess all necessary current licenses and registrations to qualify under Massachusetts law to perform the function of the designer of the Project
4. Provide evidence of insurance for general liability ($2 million combined single limit), automobile ($2 million combined single limit), worker’s compensation (statutory) and professional services liability ($2 million minimum)
The applicant shall not be debarred under M.G.L. ch. 149, sec. 44C or disqualified under M.G.L. ch. 7, sec. 38D
5. The Tax Compliance Certification and Certificate of Non-Collusion must be included with the response. These forms must be signed by the authorized individuals.
IV. Requirements for Application
Responding Designers are to address each of the following requirements in a clearly labeled section of their response and in the same order.
1. Name and address of applicant
2. Brief resume of principals and of the staff to be assigned to the Project
3. Samples of projects which would best illustrate qualifications for the Project. References must include: drawings, photographs, illustrations, and pertinent documentation.

4. Names of engineers and other consultants that may be used for the Project

5. Statement of the scope and type of services proposed for Project

6. Work plan and schedule which reflects timetable for completion of Project

7. Statement of any legal or administrative proceedings pending or concluded adversely to the applicant within the past five (5) years which relate to the applicant’s performance of this type of work
8. Appropriate certificates of insurance
9. Evidence of financial stability
In addition, each applicant must submit a written application which includes responses to the items required in the standard “DSB 2005 Application Form”. In addition, the following are specifically required:

V. Evaluation Process
The Town will evaluate all applications submitted. Any application which fails to meet any of the minimum qualifications will be rejected as non-responsive. In addition to the minimum qualifications, the Town will consider the following comparative criteria. These matters should be addressed in the written application and will be explored further in any interview with the applicant.
Experience with similar projects
Recent Relevant Experience: with projects comparable to the
proposed project. Designer to describe relevant site master
planning and permitting in similar types of project designs
Ability to manage project design schedule
Proposed Schedule: Provide an outline and proposed project
schedule
Record of projects being completed as designed, on time and within budget and the degree of satisfaction of the owner
Proposers past schedule performance history: demonstrated past
performance with a discussion of rationale behind the history that
communicates the firm’s understanding of project reality, project
history of budget and final actual costs with dates.
Depth and breadth of experience and qualifications for personnel to be assigned to the Project

Key Personnel: Professional background, caliber and
staff availability for project; quantify staff and discipline;
describe the % of time to be committed to the project by
the key members of the project team.
Outside Consultants: Qualifications and experience of firms regularly
engaged by the architect; describe the % of time to be committed to
the project by the leadership of the project team.
Team Organization: Chart and describe team organization, listing key
individuals.
Ability to work with town committees, officers and contractors Experience in Green building design projects
Innovative Energy Methods: Demonstrate any of the firm’s
experience in using energy efficient power plants or recycled
content materials in construction of municipal projects. List any
LEEDS certified projects or related efforts involving “green”
building design. Information should include project name, contact
and phone numbers and reference to securing any gy grants on
behalf of clients.

VI. General Provisions
1. The Town of Nantucket reserves the right to reject any and all applications and to waive any informality whenever such rejection or waiver is in the best interests of the Town of Nantucket.
2. The Town of Nantucket will not be responsible for any expenses incurred in the preparation or submission of applications by the applicants. Each application should provide a concise explanation of the applicant’s capacity to satisfy the requirements of this RFQ. Emphasis should be placed on clarity of content.
3. The application, and any subsequent contract for services, shall be governed by applicable Massachusetts law.
4. Upon submission, all applications, plans and specifications will become the property of the Town of Nantucket and will be subject to disclosure in accordance with the Massachusetts Public Records Law.
5. The selected Designer will be required to comply with all applicable federal state and local laws, ordinances and regulations.
6. The Town of Nantucket is and Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Employer. The Town encourages applications from qualified MBE/DBE/WBE firms.

Who's in Charge?

Who is in Charge?
February 28th, 2009

Who is in Charge?

The Town has a serious problem on our hands. The scallop industry was effectively shut down by the new state so-called regulations. These so-called regulations first surfaced without any forewarning at the Harbor and Shellfish Advisory Board (SHAB) meeting on Tuesday, October 21st. SHAB held their regular meeting on October 28th including the Marine Department and many of the scallopers. On November 4th, SHAB held a special meeting with the BOS, the Marine Department, and the State Department of Marine Fisheries.

The so-called regulations were based on an interpretation by the Chief Shellfish Biologist of the State and should not have the standing of a regulation. The Marine Department has considered the interpretation as a regulation. Effectively the Town invited the State to manage the Nantucket fishery.

The scallop season opened on Monday, November 3rd. The harbor has a very large biomass of scallops. This includes both the classic adults and late spawn adults (a.k.a nubs), and an excellent crop of seed for next year. The new state so-called regulations will cause a productive season to be turned into the worst season on record. On the opening day, most of the fleet came back empty handed because of the new so-called regulations.

The magnitude of the problem is as follows. There is a shortfall of approximately 350 bushels per day. If each bushel yields 8 pounds of scallop meat and the wholesale price is $11 per pound, the fishermen lost $31,000 per day. This $31,000 has a trickle down effect on the Nantucket economy estimated to be 7 to 10 times. The overall Nantucket economy is loosing between $200 thousand to $300 thousand per day. On top of this, many scallopers spent their last dollars in getting their boats and equipment ready, and they don’t have money in the bank.

I have several questions as follows. Why were the so-called state regulations imposed on the fishery at the very last moment? Do these so-called state regulations have any legal standing? Why hasn’t the BOS stepped in and become pro-active, determined the legal ramifications, and sent a supporting letter to the State? What is the BOS going to do about this situation in the future?

As of Monday, November 10th, the Town has lost 6 days of fishing or $1.2 million to $1.8 million to the local economy. Where is our Town leadership?


Whitey Willauer, President
Nantucket Shellfish Assoc

Scallop Research

February 24, 2009

Harbor and Shellfish Advisory Board
Town of Nantucket Annex
Washington Street
Nantucket, MA 02554

Dear Sirs,

The Nantucket Shellfish Association (NSA) recommends that additional research be directed towards the proposal that scallops may be harvested without harming the Nantucket scallop fishery if such scallops are at least one inch thick. It is anticipated that the additional research will be accomplished by the Town shellfish biologist and the Maria Mitchell Association (MMA).

This NSA recommendation is in response to the Paul Diodati, Director of the Division of Marine Fisheries (DMF), memorandum dated January 9, 2009 which stated that the DMF encourages further research into the appropriateness of the proposed “one inch rule” and suggested two “field seasons” (years) of further study.

The proposed MMA research is consistent with the NSA objectives and the NSA desire to support the research financially. While it is agreed that the NSA would prefer to give a larger amount, the NSA approved a donation of $5,000 to the Nantucket Maria Mitchell Association to be paid $2,500 currently and the remaining $2,500 by October 31, 2009.

On January 27, 2009, the Nantucket Shellfish Association voted unanimously to support and encourage additional research with respect to the proposal that scallops may be harvested without harming the fishery if such scallops are at least one inch thick.

Sincerely,

Whiting (Whitey) Willauer, President
Nantucket Shellfish Association

Nantucket Wind Turbines

NANTUCKET WIND TURBINES
WHITE PAPER

by Whitey Willauer

ABSTRACT

Nantucket has one of the highest average wind velocities in the US and also one of the highest electric rates. This makes the Island an ideal location to install land based wind turbines. With the new net metering regulations, the Town could off-set $3 million in municipal electricity expenses by locating wind turbines at the dump. After that, we could offset all the power requirements for the Island with approximately 20 to 30 1.5 megawatt turbines. This would enable the Island to become energy independent by having all electric heating and transportation.

WHITE PAPER TEXT


ENERGY COMMITTEE
The Nantucket Energy Committee (NEC) is an advisory committee appointed by the Nantucket Board of Selectmen. The NEC reports to the BOS on energy related issues affecting Nantucket energy users; recommends policy or code amendments; evaluates and explores potential energy production for Nantucket; and serves as a resource for information on renewable and sustainable energy including wind, tidal, solar, wave power, and energy conservation measures.

The following white paper introduces a concept to install 4-6 turbines with a size range of 660 KW to 1.5 MW in the landfill/Massasoit area, as well as a plan to install 2-3 smaller (250 KW- 660 KW) at the Waste Water Treatment Facility (WWTF).
BACKGROUND
The U.S. is now the world leader in wind electricity generation. While Germany still has more generating capacity installed (about 23,000 megawatts), the U.S. is producing more electricity from wind because of its much stronger winds.
Total U.S. installed wind power capacity now stands at 19,549 megawatts (MW). The industry installed 1,194 MW in the 2nd Qtr of 2008, down from 1,532 MW during 1st Qtr of 2008. This brings the year’s new capacity to 2,726 MW, more than was installed in any year except 2007.

Nantucket’s energy costs in winter are some of the highest in the United States. Massachusetts with an average cost of 17.85 ¢/kWh has the third highest electricity rates behind New York (19.42 ¢/kWh) and Connecticut (20.24¢/kWh).

Nantucket has two principal sources of energy. Electric power transmitted from the mainland via two under water cables and petroleum products shipped from the mainland. At present, electric power is delivered to Nantucket via two 35 and 41 MW cables. The electric power cost to the consumers includes delivery services (summer rate 7.74 ¢/kWh or winter rate 6.61¢/kWh ) and supply services (11.79 ¢/kWh). Nantucket imports approximately 10 million gallons of fuel per year. The retail cost per gallon is approximately $0.50 to $0.70 per gallon higher than the mainland.

Nantucket has some of the highest prevailing winds in the United States. The average wind speed (AWS) varies from approximately 13 MPH to 19 MPH. The wind velocity varies with land based location and time of year. The off-shore wind speeds are higher and averages of nearly 20 MPH are observed.

At the request of the NEC, The UMass Amherst surveyed 10 Nantucket land based sites for wind turbines. Considerations included distance from the airport, distance from housing, and average wind speed / directions. The results of the UMass survey were reported on June 16, 2008.

DATA ACQUISITION
1. (May 9, 2008) At the request of the NEC, the Massachusetts Technology Collaborative (MTC) provided a grant which enabled the UMass Renewable Research Laboratory (RERL) to visit ten potential sites on Nantucket Island in order to evaluate their suitability for medium and utility-scale wind turbines.

2. (June 26, 2008) Members of the NEC made a site visit to Hull, MA to discuss their wind turbines. We met with Richard Miller, Operations Manager of Hull Municipal Light Plant.

3. (July 7, 2008) Members of the NEC met with William M. Moore (Atlantic Renewable Energy Corp) developer of wind farms and wind turbine consultant.

4. (August 7, 2008) The NEC invited the following individuals to their monthly meeting for a discussion on wind energy: Chris Amory an engineer working in Shanghai, China for a company that manufactures wind turbine blades; Dave Fredericks is National Grid’s acting Vice President New England South; and William Moore a wind farm consultant.

5. (From October 27 to December 17, 2008) Four Students from Worchester Polytechnic Institute (WPI) Department of Management working on certain aspects of the Nantucket Wind Energy Project. The WPI Students:
(1) Explored the laws, regulations, and permits required to develop wind power on Nantucket.
(2) Analyzed financial and ownership arrangements
(3) Investigated concerns regarding wind power for Nantucket

6. (January 21, 2009) Edward Bodmer, financial modeling expert, presented a workshop on financing municipal wind projects @ MTC in Westborough, MA.

ISSUES & RESEARCH QUESTIONS

Optimum Build Out Plan

What is the optimum build out plan for wind generation on Nantucket? Should we ramp up slowly, allow technology to mature, await changes in regulations, and learn as we progress.

Bill Moore: There is a shortage of wind turbines world wide. Nantucket will probably select turbines less than 1MW capacity. The smaller turbines operate better in our high winds, lead towards redundancy, and are more easily serviced.
Bill Moore: The transmission cables may dictate the size of the turbines
RERL: Wind Turbine Siting Considerations
Predicted Wind Resource – the economics of wind power at a given site depends on many factors; one of the most important is wind speed. Understanding wind speed and turbulence is critical to estimating the energy that can be produced at a given site. Winds on the Island may be too high to accommodate full-scale turbines, which typically experience more stress than medium scale turbines at high wind speeds.
Because of the high wind velocities, it is assumed that Nantucket will use medium-scale turbines. The medium-scaled wind turbine has a hub height of 50 meters (164 feet). The average wind speed (AWS) at the DPW site is 8.1 m/sec or 18.1 mph. A 660 KW turbine at 100% capacity delivers 8766 x 660/1000 = 5,785 MWHrs per year. A 660 KW turbine at the land fill would deliver 2,180 MWHrs or 38% capacity. At $117.90 per MWHr, the output is worth $257,022.

Germany is the world leader in terms of installed wind power, with 20,621 MW installed, yet it has only a fraction of the wind energy potential that North Dakota alone has. Large wind systems require average wind speeds of 6 meters/second (13 mph).

Wind resource potential is divided into: “moderate” means wind speeds of 6.4-7 m/s at a 50-meter height, “good” means 7-7.5 m/s, and “excellent” means 7.5 m/s and higher. Nantucket sites are better than “excellent”.

Wind Turbine Component Transportation & Access – Transporting turbine components and the necessary installation equipment (cranes, flat bed trucks) could add to the cost of wind turbine installation on Nantucket. In addition, there would be some logistical challenges transporting wind turbine components from the harbor to the sites because of the trucks’ large turning radii needed to move from the dock to the turbine sites. An alternate method of transportation is using heavy lift helicopters.
Distance to transmission/distribution lines for power distribution – The power generated by any installed wind turbine must be transmitted to adequately sized lines. Proximity to utility distribution or transmission lines is an important cost consideration. All of the proposed sites are within 250 meters of either transmission or distribution lines.

Noise – MA State regulations do not allow a rise of 10 dB or greater above background at the property boundary. Modern turbines easily meet these criteria. From a distance of several hundred feet, utility scale turbines can be compared to the sound level of a refrigerator. Any eventual wind turbine should be sited so that it would be minimally audible at the nearest residences. Wind turbines should be sited at least three blade tip height from residences. Distances from mixed use areas may be shorter

Environmental issues and permitting – The majority of Nantucket Island is home to diverse wildlife and, as a result, the entire Island has been designated as a Priority Habitat of Rare Species. RERL recommends investigating all applicable environmental designations as soon as a particular site is chosen for a wind project.
Proximity to airport – Most sites that are not within about 3 to 5 miles of a public or military airport are not considered a hazard to air traffic. The FAA requires that any structure over 200 feet to be lighted. The WWTF site lies within close proximity to the Nantucket Municipal Airport and so airspace restrictions need to be investigated.
Initial Siting Plan
The initial siting plan is based on the recommendations of the RERL June 16, 2008 Report. The plan is to install 4 to 6 turbines at the DPW Landfill Site including: Massasoit A (located south west of the Landfill); Massasoit B (located west of Landfill); and Massasoit C (FAA 100 acre site). The Massasoit turbines would be in the 1.5 MW class. There would be 2 to 3 smaller turbines at the WWTF with a size range of 250 kw to 660 kw smaller due to the proximity of Nantucket Memorial Airport.
Financing Plan

The wind turbines can be publicly or privately financed. The NEC plans to explore a variety of funding sources. Some of these are described below. It might be highly desirable to seek private donations during the initial stages.

Richard Miller (Director of Hull Municipal Light Plant): Recommends publicly financed turbines.

Bill Moore (Atlantic Renewable Energy Corp): Recommends publicly financed turbines, but cautions that the large turbine suppliers prefer to own the turbines and have a lock on the supply of turbines.

The Renewable Energy Trust (RET) is funded through a monthly charge on electric bills. The Renewable Energy Charge is $0.50 per MWH per month or about $6 a year on average. Nantucket’s total charges for 2007 were $71,213.

MTC brings together leaders from industry, academia, and government to advance technology-based solutions that lead to economic growth and a cleaner environment in Mass. MTC energizes emerging markets in the high-tech sector by filling gaps in the marketplace, connecting key stakeholders, conducting critical economic analysis, and providing access to intellectual and financial capital. For additional information about MTC, visit http://www.masstech.org/.

MTC, as administrator of the RET Fund, is seeking applications for the Large Onsite Renewables Initiative (LORI) Feasibility Study and Design & Construction Grants. Nantucket is eligible for LORI funding, and we can certainly go that route. However, subject to application approval, a project in Nantucket (of size >500 kW) would be eligible for CWC funding, which does not require a cost-share. Given this, it probably makes more sense for Nantucket to pursue the CWC path.

The Production Tax Credit (PTC) is an income tax credit of 1.9 ¢/kWh that is allowed for the production of electricity from qualified wind energy facilities and other sources of renewable energy. The tax credit was created under the Energy Policy Act of 1992. The credit applies to electricity produced by a qualified wind facility placed in service between January 1, 1993, and December 31, 2008, and is adjusted annually for inflation. It applies for the first 10 years of production. The tax credit is useful only for utility-scale wind turbines, not smaller turbines used to power individual homes or businesses.

Cost estimates from feasibility 2008 studies of MA Community Wind projects ranged from $2,800/kW to $3,290/kW.

Laws and Regulations

What local, state, and federal laws and regulations need to be considered when developing this project, and how do they affect the development of a business model? Are there changes to state law and regulations for which Nantucket should advocate?

The MA Green Communities Act
of 2008 allows energy produced at customer-sited generation facilities of up to 2 MW to be sold to the grid as if it were offsetting the energy used at the customers meter.

Previous MA law only allowed facilities up to 60kW to benefit from net metering while for larger facilites only that portion of the production that coincided with load could be credited to the retail site.

Each municipality can net meter up to 10 MW of generation capacity providing that no individual unit exceeds 2 MW.

The net metering credit for generation used to offset load at a customer’s meter is credited at a rate equal to the “default service” kilowatt-hour charge.
Bill Moore: Thinks that there are federal laws that trump the Massachusetts Laws that could be invoked.
Richard Miller (Hull): Recommends using the surplus power sales to reduce the cost to the Nantucket user through an agreement.
Bill Moore: Feels that Richard Miller’s recommendation is not feasible

Business Model

What business model best suits the interests of Nantucket Island? The WPI Study recommended the following:

· Put municipal Light Department issue on hold
· Consider joint venture opportunities
· Best projected % return on investment
- Landfill: 660 kW turbine(s)
- SWWTF: 250 kW turbine (s)

Separate profit and loss account (enterprise fund)
Rent land from the Town @ approx $40K per acre adjusted by market forces
Profits used to reduce the cost of electricity to the consumers, support the operations of the Town, or both?
What is the microeconomics for particular wind turbine site?

What is the macroeconomics for the Island as a whole?

Public Utility Company Option

Should the Island become its own public electric utility? Not recommended by WPI Project.

1. What would be the relationship with National Grid?
2. Who would maintain the distribution system?
3. How would the existing electric company recover its delivery service costs?

Future Land Based Sites

Should the town consider using conservation land for wind turbines?
This is a very sensitive subject. Much of Nantucket’s conservation land has very stringent restrictions, and yet from a philosophical point of view wind farms have a significant conservation objective.
The amount of Town owned land available for wind farms is limited. Ideally the conservation land is an untapped resource for windfarms. It will be important to determine what can and can not be accomplished to determine the build out plan.
This would entail talking to the various conservation groups on the Island and discussing the pros and cons of using their land. On one hand there would be a strong negative push back, and yet on the other hand the windmill argument is compelling. This might be a very instructive project for a student to take on.
As of October 2007, Nantucket contains approximately 30,000 acres of which 16,626 or approximately 55 % is in open space as follows.

1. Nantucket Conservation Foundation has 8,858 acres;
2. Nantucket Islands Land Bank has 2,529 acres;
3. Trustees of Reservations has 987 acres;
4. Massachusetts Audubon Society has 947 acres;
5. Nantucket Land Council has 422 acres;
6. Boy Scouts, Sconset Trust, Madaket Conservation Land Trust have a combined 242 acres.
7. Federal, State or Local Government-owned properties have 2,641 acres.

Off-Shore Sites

Should the town consider using off-shore sites for wind turbines?
The advantage of off-shore wind farms sites is that the sites are available. The down side is that they are approximately 50% more costly than land based. In addition, there are all sorts of maintenance, environmental, and navigational risks.
More likely off-shore will require outside funding and governmental support. This would reduce the cost benefits to the Island.
Nantucket has an area south of Tuckernuck Island which is in fairly shallow water. The transmission cable could be brought ashore on Nantucket. However, Dave Fredericks believes that the electric power should be transmitted directly to the mainland via underwater cables. Underwater cables cost about $1.2 million per mile to install.
As production increases more cables can be laid to the mainland and Nantucket could become a significant exporter of electric power. Nantucket will have to rely on the cables as a defacto storage mechanism. Our highest elevation is less than 100 feet so that gravity storage is not an option.

Dependency on Petroleum Products

How rapidly can electric heating and electric cars come on line so as to reduce the dependency of petroleum products?

This is an ultimate goal which will be driven by the competitive market forces. As the cost of electricity is reduced through windfarms, electricity becomes more attractive. Nantucket is an ideal location for electric vehicles since the travel distances are short and the speed limits are low.

Nantucket Power Consumption
At present Nantucket has two undersea electric cables bringing power from the mainland. The first cable is rated at 35 MW and the second cable at 42 MW. The National Grid maintains a back up capability of 10 MW

In 2007 Nantucket used 143,688,965 kWh of electricity in CY 2007. Assuming that the supply cost was $0.11 per kWh, the total supply cost would be $15.80 million. Assuming that the transmission cost was $0.066 per kWh, the total transmission cost would be $9.48 million. Nantucket imports approximately 10 million gallons of fuel per year. Assuming that the cost per gallon is $4.50 per gallon, the total fuel cost would be $45 million.

Nantucket electric usage varies from a low of 9,680,462 kWh in May to 16,653,095 kWh in September. A 1.5 MW turbine produces 1,500 kWh x 30 days x 24 hrs x 40% efficiency = 432,000 kWh per month. It would take twenty two (22) 1.5 MW turbines to supply 100% of the Islands electricity in May and thirty nine (39) 1.5 MW turbines in September.

The estimated development cost of land based wind turbines is $2.5 million per MW. The estimated cost of water based wind turbines is 50% higher of $3.75 million per MW. A 1.5 MW turbine produces 1.5 MW x 365 days x 24 hrs x 40% efficiency (on Nantucket) = 5,256 MWh per year. At $110 per mWh, this equals $578 K in gross profit. This gross is 15.4% on a $3.75 million investment before debt service, O&M costs, land usage fees and depreciation.

As the cost of electricity becomes competitive, the attractiveness of electric automobiles and electric heating increases. The Cape has been able to keep its electric consumption constant by offsetting increased growth through conservation techniques.

The total cost of importing electricity and fuel oil would be approximately $70.14 million. Interestingly this amount is about the same magnitude of the Town Budget of approximately $100 Million. Much of these costs can be offset by conservation techniques, solar, and wind turbine generation.

Pros and Cons of Wind Turbines

Do costs of developing renewable energy outweigh benefits? The pros and cons of wind turbines need to be clearly developed in order to get the voters to accept land based wind turbines? The WPI Study used a sampling technique to rank the wind turbine concerns. The conclusion was that the three most difficult concerns to over come were human factors (aesthetics, public outreach), financial, and avian.

The WPI Study recommended:
· Working with MTC for Wind 101 presentation
· Select 660 kW turbines or lower transportation costs
· If 1.5 MW Turbines are selected, look into Carson Helicopters S-61 or Sikorsky Sky Crane
· Conduct a study of impacts at each site on avian life
· Form a bird sub-committee to determine when the turbines should be shut off to prevent bird kills.
· Conduct a study at the Landfill for rare plan species.

Examples of benefits
a. The amount of fuel replaced by windfarms will determine the future bulk fuel storage facility requirements
b. Wind farms will greatly reduce the tanker truck traffic on the Island.
c. Reduction in the cost of electricity
d. Reduce the cost of transportation and heating
e. Bring new revenue sources into the Nantucket economy
f. Nantucket average wind speed (AWS) between 16 and 19 mph
g. Bluewater’s offer in Delaware of stable-priced electricity — an inflation-adjusted 10 cents per kilowatt hour for the next 25 years

Certain Problems (numbers indicate relative importance of concern by WPI)
a. Human Factors (aesthetics) - 18
b. Financial -17
c. Avian (Migratory Birds) -16
d. DPW Land Use -15
e. Radar Interference - 14
f. Maintenance – (20 year life cycle) -12
g. Electrical Interference and Lightning -12
h. Transportation - 11
i. Decreased Property Values -11
j. Flora - 9
k. Land Management -7
l. Small Scale Turbine Purchases -6
m. Turtles / Vibrations -6
n. Bats -5
o. Salt Spray - Sand blasting -4
p. Air Traffic Interference - 4
q. Winter Issues ( Icing / Electrical) -2
r. Oil Leakage from Turbine - 1
s. Marine Life - 0
t. Flashing from sun reflections -0
u. Intermittence and power variability - 0

Action Items
Accomplished actions
1. (9/17/08) Obtained approval of the Nantucket Energy Committee Mission Statement from BOS.

2. (9/17/08) Obtained approval from BOS to seek grants which would provide further analysis of the two selected sites (landfill/Massasoit and Waste Water Treatment Facility), funding for feasibility studies, environmental permitting, public information forums, technical services and start-up costs.

3. (11/5/08) Kitt Johnson, Edgartown BOS appointee, presented findings on underwater turbines in Muskeget Channel.

4. (11/6/08) Edie Ray, Shorebird Biologist for Nantucket Conservation Foundation, Ken Blackshaw, author of Birding on Nantucket, and Vern Laux, Ornithologist at the Linda Loring Foundation spoke to the NEC on bird migration and other bird concerns on Nantucket

5. (11/21/08) Visited Esther’s Island site visit to study vertical turbine, solar arrays, and energy efficient house.

6. (12/17/08) Four WPI students completed a 7 week study on Island sponsored by the NEC entitled “Wind Generation on Nantucket” and presented a briefing on the results to BOS.

7. (1/7/09) BOS approved grant application for Feasibility Analysis for Wind Turbines with MTC.

Future Actions
1. Attend MA Wind Working Group (MWWG) workshop on Wed, Jan 21 @ MTC in Westborough for presentation by Ed Bodmer, an expert in financial modeling for renewable energy projects. The workshop will address public, private and hybrid approaches to ownership, management, financing, and risk.

2. Investigate and begin environmental permitting process. Investigate electrical interconnections to the grid.

3. Invitations to future meetings will be extended to local representatives from Marine and Wildlife groups, Marine Mammal Stranding, Maria Mitchell Association, Harbor Plan Implementation Committee, The Harbor Master, Board of Health, Non-Voting Tax Payers, School students, and others.

4. Begin public outreach with community based forum for informational purposes

This stage also includes a “Wind 101″ instructional public forum offered by MTC to answer questions from the community.

5. Execute MYC’s “free Standard Financial Offer Service portion of the CWC grant.

Technical services as well as a grant of up to $150K to support project development are provided. A standing offer to purchase Renewable Energy Certificates generated by the project is also available.

6. Apply to the MTC for a feasibility study by the CWC (Community Wind Collaborative ) toward the installation of a ARE442 (or similar) turbine at the Nantucket High School.

7. Investigate the costs and logistics of transporting and installing turbine components on Nantucket.

8. Obtain financing
8.
9. Select a wind turbine developer

10. Select a wind turbine vender
10.
11. Obtain servicing contract

Bulk Fuel

BULK FUEL
WHITE PAPER

By Whitey Willauer

This white paper presents the essential details to the BOS in order that their decision may be made in a timely and informed manner.

The BOS was briefed on Wednesday, September 17. 2008 as to the status of the Bulk Fuel Project (see Action Item Section 9). The Bulk Fuel White Paper was presented to the BOS as background information.

1. TOWN LICENSE
· Town license for fuel tanks at 8 New Whale Street expires on September 5, 2009 for 975,000 gallons. There are 11 tanks ranging in size from 10K (1), 50K (1), 56K (5), 78K (1), 170K(1), and 211K(2) gallons, and ranging in age from 1947 (1), 1948 (1), 1949 (4), 1953 (1), 1958 (1), 1959 (1), and 1963 (2).
· License requires that Winthrop to provide an equivalent facility. License requires public hearings so termination is not pro forma.
· The Winthrop lease with Harbor Fuel expires in 2018. In 2018, Harbor Fuel is free to change locations. Winthrop has very favorable storage and flow rates. If Harbor Fuel built their own storage facility it would probably include a minimum of 10 days of gasoline and 10 days of fuel oil.
· There are 20K to 25K gallons of reserve fuel for the Electric Company. The electric company would use about 5K gallons per day to supply the entire Island. 6 standby turbines are down to 4 as a consequence of the second cable to the mainland. The fuel is stored on the airport property.
· Grocery store/parking lot lease with Winthrop expires in 2010.
· Fuel license with Harbor Fuel expires September 5, 2009
· Harbor Fuel is the sole user of the fuel tanks at 8 Whale Street. Sun Island and other distributors bring fuel in by tanker trucks.

2. USE OF TOWN LAND
· Bulk fuel facility will require 5 acres according to Ascent Study. This study was assuming a much larger facility than the present thinking.
· The airport leases land for $0.90 per square foot per year. An acre at this price would yield 43,560 x $0.90 = $39,285 or $40K per acre per year.
· Need access for entry and exit

3. USE OF DOWN TOWN LAND
· Assuming that it is in the best interests of the Town to move Bulk Fuel facility from the present location, the Planning Department needs to develop an overall plan that best serves the needs of the Community and the Stake Holders.

· The most logical approach is to include the Bulk Fuel property, Grand Union Store and Parking, Greenhound Property, National Grid property, and the concerns of Nantucket Island Resorts into the overall plan.

· The state has some valuable tools to assist cities and towns with economic development and permitting as part of the Chapter 43D program. The 2008 ATM Article 90 authorized the Planning Director to prepare a Chapter 43D application for the area surrounding the down town Fuel Tanks.
§ Greenhound Property (10-12 Washington)
§ National Grid Property (10 New Whale, 1 & 5 Salem)
§ Nantucket Island Resorts Parking Lot (15 Candle)
§ Winthrop/Grand Union (7 & 9 Salem, 4 New Whale)
§ Winthrop/Parking Lot (2 New Whale, Straight Wharf)
§ Winthrop/Bulk Fuel (9 Salem, 8 New Whale)

· Article 90 does not include:
§ Dreamland Theater (17 S Water, 18 Easy)
§ National Grid transformer Building (2 Commercial)
§ National Grid (12 New Whale)

· The Massachusetts Association of Regional Planning Agencies (MARPA’s) has developed a Best Practices Model for Streamlined Permitting. The Best Practices model makes permitting more predictable, equitable, cost effective, and efficient while reinforcing local jurisdiction, encouraging community-supported projects, preserving local resources, and maintaining the standard of review. The maximum grant award for a Chapter 43D Program was lowered from $100,000 to $60,000 on September 17, 2008.

· The ATM 2007 Article 10 authorized the expenditure of $250,000 in costs associated with further study of proposed bulk fuel facility. Such expenditure is to be made by the Town Administrator with the approval of the BOS. At present there is $240,336 still in the account.

· The question has been posed whether the Article 10 funds can be used for studying the plan for relocation of the Bulk Fuel facility.

· The Town is embarking on a Downtown Revitalization Study which should provide valuable input into Bulk Fuel Tanks relocation plan.

4. GOVERNANACE
· Three scenarios:
A. TON buys fuel and owns facility
B. TON owns facility and receives flowage and storage fees
C. Sole source supplier (monopoly). Harbor Fuel is the sole user and is willing to own and operate the new bulk fuel facility.
· Most likely governance would be an enterprise fund. However, the facility must be competitive, and be able fund support staff.
· Most likely the 15 South Pasture land should be a single enterprise fund. The rental would yield 15acres x $40K = $600K to the town less operating expenses.

5. TRANSPORTATION AND STORAGE
· 10 million gallons of consumption per year would require 1,000 tank trucks per year or about 3 trucks per day year around.
· There are 7 types of fuel delivered to Nantucket: heating oil, 2 types of diesel; 2 grades of gasoline; ethanol; and kerosene.
· A proposed new freight boat would be able to accommodate 12 semis. It would be designed for roll-on roll-off. It would be slower 14 to 15 knots to save fuel. The round trip cost for a fuel truck is $1,050 or $0.10 per gallon. Regular semis are charged $525 and the return trip is not charged. This is a boon for solid waste transportation.
· If the fuel is brought in by tanker trucks, there is more wear on the cobbles on Main Street. At present the fuel is brought in by barge and then shipped by trucks around town. These trucks are smaller but there are more trips and more chance for spillage.
· The Steamship Authority could best accommodate the additional tanker trucks on weekends, afternoons, and in winter. The delivery schedule, consumption requirements, and emergency situations drive the storage size. The Steamship Authority is considering building a larger freight boat
· Delivery from an alternate port needs to be studied such as New Bedford.
· In 1988 the fire chief was opposed to additional trucks coming through town. This risk would be offset by the risks of leaving the tank far where it is. TSA disaster study needs to be reviewed.
· At a recent meeting (5/12/08) with the Fire Chief the following points were made: not to renew differs from revoke; bottom loading is not required by DEP; multiple tanker trucks may need an escort to expedite travel; corners increase risk; new traffic plan may be called for; age of tanks is concern; license expires September 5, 2009;

· Storage Options:
1. The barge that lands in Town holds up to 800K gallons of fuel. The average delivery is between 400K and 600K gallons of fuel. Barge delivery was the only delivery method prior to building freight boats. Barge delivery does not permit premixing the ethanol.
2. Single point delivery off shore would require 5M gallons of storage with three deliveries per year
3. Tanker truck delivery would require a much small facility. Tanker truck delivery allows pre-mixing of ethanol.

6. FINANCES
· Preliminary financing of $250,000 is available. This can be used to develop a top level design at the South Pasture location. This money can be spent at any future time as it was authorized by 2007 ATM.
· Federal pre-disaster mitigation study funds may be available for relocation of Fuel Tanks
· Top level design and feasibility analysis for bulk fuel facility.
1. Account for Harbor Fuel, Sun Island, Marina, other retailers, Nat’l Grid, and Hospital
2. Five acres is needed for large facility much less for smaller facility
3. 2 to 3 weeks capacity if the minimum facility requirements
· An important consideration is that the bulk fuel facility be competitive

7. TIME LINE
· License renewal is critical.
1. The Town’s Fuel license with Harbor Fuel expires September 5, 2009
2. Grocery store/parking lot lease with Winthrop expires in 2010
3. The Winthrop lease with Harbor Fuel expires in 2018
· Briefing BOS

8. OTHER ISSUES
· Wannacomet well head issue does not seem to be a problem
· Moving Bulk Fuel Facility would require new diesel and gasoline tanks at Marina. These would be 8K to 10K gallon tanks. These would require extra space on the marina property.
· No passengers are permitted on hazardous boat
· The existing fuel tanks are located very close to the electric company main distribution center. A major fire or explosion would knock out the Towns electric power from the two cables.
· Cost of fuel on Nantucket
· Legal opinions
· Coordination with Downtown Revitalization Committee
· Coordination with ReMain Nantucket
· Coordination with Harbor Fuel and other retailers
· Coordination with Winthrop
· Coordination with possible developers.
· Avoidance of lengthy litigation

9. ACTION ITEMS

Accomplished Actions
The BOS on September 17, 2008 unanimously approved the following:

The policy of the BOS is to support the relocation of the fuel tank farm from its present waterfront location to a site outside of the downtown area because of environmental and safety concerns.

Future actions
1. Town Counsel recommended (9/17/08) informing the licensee Harbor Fuel that the BOS has given the go ahead on relocation of the fuel storage tanks.

2. Make presentation to NP&EDC at special meeting as soon as possible.

3. Include the Bulk Fuel property, Grand Union Store and Parking, Greenhound Property, National Grid property, and the concerns of Nantucket Island Resorts into an overall Bulk Fuel relocation plan.
4. Consider dedication of up to 5 acres of the Industrial Property to Bulk Fuel facilit