I just received an email from the selectboard about town meeting.
“Town Meeting Representatives: — As you may know, the March 3 ballot contains three proposed Charter amendments. Attached for your information is the “Proposed Brattleboro Charter Amendment Information Sheet” that was prepared and endorsed by the Selectboard.”
Well, it was not “Information”, it was “Propaganda”. It was telling us to vote the way the Selectboard wanted us to.
I guess they have a right to do that, but we have an equal right to ignore it.
For the record, here are the 3 proposed amendments:
(1)
A
change to the town charter that would allow 16- and 17-year-old residents to vote on town matters. That single proposed charter revision is included in the first article.
(2) The second article includes a group of proposed changes to the charter which only give voters a single “yes” or “no” vote on five changes to the town’s governing document.
(a) set a six-year term limit for Town Meeting Representatives,
(b) move the election of town officials to the first Tuesday in November,
(c) force employers to provide for up to two hours of paid leave to vote,
(d) re-establish the Town Grand Juror and
(e) allow voters to call for a special town meeting at any point in the year.
(3) The final article gives voters authority:
(a) To ask for special referendum on any expenditure exceeding $2 million,
(b) To reduce the number of signatures needed to adopt a new ordinance, and
(c) To call for a special town meeting at any time in the year.
(again, an up or down, take it or leave it choice).
I’m not gonna tell anybody how to vote, but I will air my views on some of these changes.
allowing 16- and 17-year-old residents to vote on town matters
Generally a good idea. These are HS Juniors and Seniors who are probably better versed on the issues than
the average Brattleburgher burdened with providing the necessities of life. I would think the HS would include more Civics in the curriculum as a result.
TOWN MEETING TERM LIMITS
I think this is ridiculous. Right now there are 25 open Town Meeting slots, so anyone interested in joining already can.
The only justification I’ve heard for this is: “The WRONG PEOPLE are on it”.
ii) Who are the “wrong” people?
iii) What makes them “wrong”?
iv) Who would the “right” people be?
v) What would prevent the “wrong” people from being replaced by new “wrong” people?
There are ways to improve Town Meeting, like having the Reps actually represent specific neighborhoods. But this isn’t one of them.
VOTING ON THE FIRST TUESDAY IN NOVEMBER
This is a technical error. Election Day in the United States is the day set by law for the general elections of public officials. It occurs on the Tuesday right after the first Monday in November (this does not necessarily mean the “first Tuesday” in a month because the first day of a month can be a Tuesday).
Elections are expensive. To have our voters weigh in on town issues the same day they determine national and state affairs would save the town beaucoup bucks.
PAID TIME OFF FOR ELECTIONS
Again, a technical error. The ballot proposal to require employers to give paid time off is not tied to Brattleboro Town Meetings. The idea is a good one, but it needs to be massaged.
TOWN GRAND JUROR
The role of the town grand juror under Vermont law is to recommend prosecution of offenses to authorized
officials. The purpose of this article is to enforce the above Paid Time Off article. Foolishness!
PROPOSED REFERENDUM, ORDINANCE AND INITIATIVE CHARTER CHANGES
I think I go along with the Selectboard’s recommendations here:
The proposal to change the Charter’s current referendum system seeks to shift decision making away from
the Town Meeting model, which encourages collective discussion and consideration of issues, to a ballot system that only allows up or down votes on questions. Town Meeting makes many important decisions, and setting separate rules for voter review of budget items over $2 million is confusing and arbitrary. The proposal to remove the words “representative” and “general” from the Charter’s ordinance and initiative sections do not fit with the structure of the Charter, and also would cause confusion. While it is claimed that the amendments would restore free speech, recent Charter changes actually lowered the number of signatures needed on a petition, and there is nothing to show that the Charter as it stands discourages ballot items.
We still have the freedom to hold a referendum on anything. The necessary number of signatures is small, and
easy to gather.
STRUCTURE OF CHARTER AMENDMENT PROPOSALS
The proposed Charter amendments are grouped together on the March 3 ballot, and can only be voted up or down in groups. Take it or leave it. Not a good idea. When in doubt, voters will always choose NO.
