Nantucket Town Meeting on May 20 voted a nonbinding sense question expressing opposition to converting to a town council–town manager form of government, with the result 251 yes, 477 no on the measure as read. The moderator explained a “yes” vote would indicate interest in conversion while a “no” vote would signal a preference to retain open town meeting.

The question was placed on the warrant by the Town Council Study Committee, created after a 2023 article that authorized a committee to explore charter options. Jeff Carlson, vice chair of that study committee, told the meeting the committee has held 38 public meetings and multiple information sessions and was “ready to deliver” a draft charter for review, but framed the ballot question as a way to test current interest among town meeting members.

The session limited discussion because the question was nonbinding. Supporters said a change could increase access and make legislative functions more inclusive; opponents raised concerns about losing direct voter control and the speed and power municipal councils can exercise. Beau Barber, a former town employee, described the separation of powers and urged using budget authority to hold executives accountable under the current system. Several speakers, including Marshall Keys and John Fones, urged a “no” vote, arguing the open town meeting is a long-standing local democratic practice.

Carlson said the study committee’s work was commissioned by prior town meeting direction and that a nonbinding vote was intended to guide whether the committee should proceed with delivering a draft charter for public review. He told the meeting the committee’s draft is intended to preserve citizen access while redesigning legislative processes.

The moderator emphasized the question was nonbinding and described it as guidance for future deliberations, not a policy change. Because the result expresses the sense of this legislative body only, any formal change to government structure would still require future steps, including a binding vote or charter change process consistent with state law.

The discussion was short by design; committee members said they will continue outreach and may bring a future, binding proposal if public support and political processes warrant it.