To the Editor:
To have the end result of a nine-month general manager search, conducted by an internationally respected transportation search firm, advance only one external candidate out of 131 applicants contacted is nothing short of alarming. Ninety-two of these applicants were targeted by the search firm. It should shake every Islander, every commuter, every business owner, and every traveler who depends on the Steamship Authority. This is not just a disappointing outcome, it’s a wake-up call to us all.
In the private sector, customers express their trust through their wallets. In municipal government, citizens vote at the ballot box. But for quasi-public entities in Massachusetts, there is no clear way for the public to show support or outrage. When an organization wields monopolistic control over an essential public lifeline, this absence of accountability is unacceptable.
The Steamship Authority’s Enabling Act places total control of our Island’s only transportation link to the mainland in the hands of a five-person board, appointed by various governmental bodies, yet accountable to none of the people who rely on it every single day. When that system fails, the public has no vote, no voice, and no choice, except to raise its collective voice through the press, the media, and public outcry.
Time and again, this board has shown little to no oversight of a general manager who operates with unchecked power over both financial and operational decisions. A review of meeting minutes shows no meaningful debate, no probing questions, and no evidence of critical evaluation about the use of public funds. When the Woods Hole ticket office was approved (a decision with significant financial impact), representatives deflected responsibility onto the previous general manager, though it was this current board that cast the deciding vote.
Instead of releasing a well-regarded search firm after the general manager search committee advanced only one external candidate, the board should have stopped and asked why. The search committee elected to interview only six candidates, a mix of internal and external candidates. Per the search firm, of the 131 applicants, “one or two or a small group” of applicants dropped out due to public scrutiny. Why was only one external candidate advanced to final interviews? Why weren’t community voices invited into the process? Why wasn’t dissatisfaction — clearly visible in the press and public meetings — acknowledged and addressed? A transparent, inclusive process could have restored trust and encouraged more candidates to step forward.
Amy Cody, Margaret Hannemann, Alysha Norbury, Nat Trumbull, and Beth O’Connor
Steamship Authority Citizens’ Action Group and Southeast Massachusetts Regional Transportation Citizens Task Force
