The Planet Hank Live Show streamed live on January 16, 2025 and is available on YouTube
https://bit.ly/4hq2rXC
Starting around 33 minutes, there is a section which I would like to point out. Here is the text, courtesy of the YouTube generated transcript:
… to see the town go in a better direction to get on to our representative town meeting and become a rep so that you have a voice and we can consolidate what we’re doing down there it’s very easy RTM you do not have to stand up and speak you do not have to do anything all you do is you either sit up for Yes or stay sitting down for no [sic] you vote in that way and when you’re in there with a whole group of us you can kind of look like say you’re unsure you can look to the people in the real progress group and stand up with us or sit down and just do what all your group members do you know uh it’s very powerful and very important for us to mobilize in that way …
Years ago, when I attended Representative Town Meeting, I sat with a group of like minded members and we did have a pact of sorts to vote together. It applied to one particular type of vote: we all voted “No” on any motion to “call the question” or “cease debate.” Our concern was that all opinions are valuable and ought to be heard.
The Planet Hank quote also reminds me of a story from years ago in another city. I had filed an employment grievance against a supervisor, who, unbeknownst to me, was the sister of a city council member. Soon after, I was seated at a bar between a department head and a county official. The one said to the other: “tell him how he’s going to vote in the next election.” I replied: “Go ahead and tell me.” The other then retorted, “Don’t tell him, he can’t be trusted.”
I submit to you that the first anecdote above supports democratic institutions, while the last one does not.
Where does Planet Hank’s advice or direction fall on this continuum?
Finally, I hope that if you are running for Representative Town Meeting Member or any elected office, that you commit to study the issues, understand different points of view and vote with an informed conscience..
All good
Hank’s quote reminds me of the Town Meetings just prior to Representative Town Meeting being imposed… one of the “complaints” was that an organized group of people would come to the meeting with a single issue, such as a new grandstand for a ballfield, and get it approved. Never seemed that awful to me. The people who show up at meetings usually make the decisions. But that sort of randomness upsets traditionalists.
I think the real problem with Representative Town Meeting is the lack of “representation” of any meaningful sort. Without knowing how any member stands on an issue, the public is rightfully nervous. So many RTM members, by the questions they ask and the statements they make, clearly haven’t been following along and are just starting to think about the issue in front of them at that meeting. There is tremendous peer pressure to vote the right way, whatever that is, with the majority, so one won’t stand out in the crowd. I’ve heard audible groans from the body when an individual suggests something unusual, and “calling the question” has been used as a blunt object to shut down discussions.
In the end, “representatives” are primarily just individuals that were popular enough with just enough people in town to get enough votes to be allowed to vote at these town meetings. We vote for them because we like John and Jane Doe, not because either of them has told us how they plan to vote.
There is also the problem of new things arising from the floor. A rep could promise to do something but the situation might change in the room and there is no way for the rep to poll constituents on these changes.
So, should a group get elected with a goal of accomplishing an objective? Why not? And if said group announces their intention ahead of time, then that is almost a form of a political party of sorts, isn’t it? Brattleboro has politely avoided political parties for the most part – we like to ignore that and instead act as though we are all on the same team. But we aren’t. Maybe parties make that more clear?
I really don’t know. All of this democracy stuff seems on very shaky ground at the moment. Ask me tomorrow and I might change my mind. : )
I think I’d worry about small groups getting their way through shenanigans more than folks organizing around an issue. If the organization fails, the vote fails.
This is all fine
People are always going to coordinate their votes. My beefs with RTM are along the lines of cgrotke’s: it doesn’t feel very representative at all. When I do know who my reps are, I have no way to know how they voted.
Any town meeting is going to be susceptible to being hijacked by a motivated minority, but it strikes me that RTM makes that much easier since the number of voting members is much smaller. At the recent special RTM, I personally know people who tried to get nominated that night (regular blue-collar people, not with any faction) who were excluded by a coordinated effort of the anti-ordinance faction to get their people in. The community conduct ordinance got voted down by a margin of ~20 votes. It’s a lot easier to coordinate that many people than if we had a regular town meeting, and any faction would need ~10x as many members to have the same impact.
RTM membership
“In the end, “representatives” are primarily just individuals that were popular enough with just enough people in town to get enough votes to be allowed to vote at these town meetings. We vote for them because we like John and Jane Doe, not because either of them has told us how they plan to vote.”
Although that might have been true in the past, since I have been involved (7ish years) there are always more open seats than people running. So if anyone wanted to be on RTM they were pretty much guaranteed a spot. Even up to the night of the information meeting one could show up and be caucused in.
It’s only this last special RTM that made a lot of people want to come out. And I hope some do stay for the entire three year term and get to know the issues and budget and be involved members instead of just watching for a cue from some leader to stand and sit.
True
My point is that we don’t know anything about most candidates when voting for them.
But that is another potential problem. : ) If someone doesn’t want to bother to gather signatures or bother with election day, and there happens to be an open seat or two, a person can often walk into the caucus and get appointed as a representative. Bypasses the entire election process. It’s legit, but a bit strange.
And while I’m complaining (heh) – it is bizarre that – in Brattleboro – you have to get permission of someone in advance by getting them to agree to go register with the Town Clerk if you want to write that person’s name on a ballot and have it count. That is not a write-in – that is going and convincing someone to campaign. Write-ins by definition should be anyone the person wants to write down. And they should be counted and documented for historical purposes. Brattleboro used to do it not that long ago. Almost all the names were real people in town, not jokes. It never delayed counting to list the hundred or so extra names. Bring it back, democracy lovers.