Well, in the thriving metropolis of BTV we don’t get to sit face to face and discuss the issues and vote (I do miss Putney sometimes!) – so we are broken into wards and vote in private. Being in the NNE there are plenty of the repeal IRV lawn signs out, along with many signs for the two republicans from Ward 4 and Ward 7. Having dealt with both on the 4/7 NPA I can say that I’m not thrilled and hope Russ Ellis (whom I cannot vote for) maintains his seat, and maybe the dem in my ward will pull out a longshot victory. While I’d be a fan of a progressive / liberal dem in a NNE race – chance of success would be slim, so I’m crossing fingers that either of the two dems can pull out a victory.
The ‘I’m Pissed at Kiss’ (IRV repeal) vote of course is a hot topic. I’ve been pretty pessimistic about its chances to survive. If it goes down I imagine a petition drive to get a 50% +1 measure on the ballot. But – if I understand correctly – even if BTV voters repeal – it still has to go the the leg. for a charter change. IRV is not perfect, but to me its way better than allowing someone with 40% of the ‘simple’ vote to run the city. Politics isn’t simple. And reading a ballot isn’t that difficult. If folks can’t figure out how it works – how do they parse a debate, understand nuance between two candidates, balance their checkbook – or even make a choice when going to the eye doctor (Do you like this one, or this one? Is this clearer, or this one…), etc…. I know most folks vote based on if there is an R or a D after the name – but we need to grow up, be more inclusive to the I’s and the P’s and the L’s and the whomevers – and figure out how to tear down this two party bash and crash system of politics. I hope some good comes of this…
And we have the BTV airport bond issue for more parking with solar roof, and a school budget issue…
are the charter changes that include giving the Mayor a vote on the City Council. It is concerning primarily because the person who now occupies the Mayor’s office has been known to behave in a manner that some might characterize as bullying. Of course I would never go so far as to say that myself; but I have had certain experiences that make me leery of awarding additional power to this or any other mayor.
Also being considered is whether or not to change the City Treasurer from an elected to an appointed position.
As I have for years, I attended last nights meeting in the great city of Vergennes. There may have been 40 people in attendance and it included very few of those whose names will be included on the today’s ballot. The mayor read the name of each candidate aloud, which primarily served to highlight that most of the candidates were not in attendance. Of the 18 +/- requests that the city has for funds from various non-profit agencies only four representatives of the agencies stood and made a pitch for the voters support and took questions.
The highlight of the evening came at the very end. As the Mayor asked if there was any “new business” that anyone would like to discuss, a woman rose and asked for permission to speak about school consolidation. Much to the apparent consternation of the Mayor and number of the Alderman, the time was granted. The woman spoke for about 4-5 minutes to the need for a consolidation of our elementary schools. Having listed a number of plausible reasons for consolidation, she rambled on a bit too long and finished with this:
“Think of it this way. As we consolidate all of our elementary schools together we will have an amazing amount of buying power. Picture it like this. We’ll all be able to pool our resources and shop at COSTCO instead of buying from the local stores”.
At this point the crowd erupted into laughter. Of the 40 or so people in attendance at this meeting, I’d guess that half of them own one of them there local stores she’s advocating we stop shopping at. I can tell you right now that school consolidation is going down today.
Although I love Vergennes and am proud to call it home, I feel rather rooked when it comes time for town meeting day. Our system of governance doesn’t allow for the types of exchanges that most other towns have, and as such, few people care or participate.
last night.
high point was the presentation of an actual chair to longtime selectboard chair bill ford, retiring after 23 years in the job.
also an excellent legislative report from our rep., willem jewett. i gotta say, i’m awfully glad it’s not my job to figure out how to make the state budget balance.
a great pleasure to live in a well-run town.
As a Selectboard member in Essex, I attended last night’s Essex Town Meeting. In Vermont’s second largest municipality, with roughly 15,600 registered voters, our meeting drew a whopping 250 voters, about 1.6% of our electorate. The only major item we voted on was our budget of nearly $10 million. We don’t do Australian ballot for the budget.
I believe that our present arrangement is undoubtedly undemocratic and arguably unconstitutional. Yet, town meeting here has its defenders, who argue the tradition is important. Some traditions are indeed important, but barring democracy’s door to 15,000 potential voters is a tradition that deserves to die.
I have begun agitating for a new arrangement. When I ran for Selectboard last year, I felt that Australian ballot was an appropriate mechanism to decide our budget; it may be appropriate, but perhaps not the best. I am interested in learning from folks who have experience with the representative town meeting, a format used in Brattleboro and in several towns in Massachusetts. If you have any reflections or thoughts on your experience, please put in your two cents. (Williston reportedly is considering this arrangement.)
In an era of the egregious filibuster practice in the U.S. Senate, my former employer, in a judicial environment that equates powerful, wealthy corporations with John or Jane Q. Public, I keep on hoping that the term “citizen” can recapture its original meaning and significance. Thanks.
With a floor vote during Other Business, Dummerston overwhelmingly voted to request the Selectboard convey to Governor Douglas the message that he should direct the Dept of Health, Dept of Environmental Conservation, and Dept of Agriculture to immediately begin enforcement actions against Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee’s radioactive leaks into the Connecticut River and Vermont groundwater.
Readsboro voted to support the acquisition of 660+ acres on Route 100 and Howe Pond Road from private willing sellers by the USA to become part of the Green Mountain National Forest to conserve water, wildlife habitat, trails, and public access. I expected this to fail. It won overwhelmingly by a voice vote. Southwestern Vermont will be an even greater place for the outdoors, wildlife, windmills, etc.
The voters in Montpelier performed true to form and passed every single ballot item. Most budget items passed by healthy margins, close to 2-1. At a minimum this demonstrates that Montpelier voters did not see tough financial times as a good reason to defund city government and its activities.
Mary Hooper, who had faced her first strong challenge as mayor following the Scott Construction overpayment flap, was reelected by more than 2-1, 1377-613.
Councilor Nancy Sherman, running for reelection against two challengers, won handily, 399- 275 for Jack Lindley and 78 for Richard Sheir. Ultimately, “I’m pissed about Scott Construction” turned out not to be a winning campaign theme for either Mayor or Council.
The advisory ballot item on decriminalization won big, 1530-585, or almost 3-1.
This was a real town meeting with a very strong turnout and a good mix of opinions. All done in a civil fashion.
Shap Smith is our representative. He spoke and took some questions. I made the point that we should institute an income tax surcharge before we cut essential services.
He said that the votes weren’t there to allow for an income tax surcharge to pass and overcome a certain Douglas veto.
In my mind, how can you call yourself a Democrat if you would cut essential services to the needy rather than add a bit to the income tax?
Seems like we need to get rid of some so-called dems.
A petition to remove a pergola from Wilmington center was defeated 397 – 248. This was a big, big story in southern Vermont.
Well, in the thriving metropolis of BTV we don’t get to sit face to face and discuss the issues and vote (I do miss Putney sometimes!) – so we are broken into wards and vote in private. Being in the NNE there are plenty of the repeal IRV lawn signs out, along with many signs for the two republicans from Ward 4 and Ward 7. Having dealt with both on the 4/7 NPA I can say that I’m not thrilled and hope Russ Ellis (whom I cannot vote for) maintains his seat, and maybe the dem in my ward will pull out a longshot victory. While I’d be a fan of a progressive / liberal dem in a NNE race – chance of success would be slim, so I’m crossing fingers that either of the two dems can pull out a victory.
The ‘I’m Pissed at Kiss’ (IRV repeal) vote of course is a hot topic. I’ve been pretty pessimistic about its chances to survive. If it goes down I imagine a petition drive to get a 50% +1 measure on the ballot. But – if I understand correctly – even if BTV voters repeal – it still has to go the the leg. for a charter change. IRV is not perfect, but to me its way better than allowing someone with 40% of the ‘simple’ vote to run the city. Politics isn’t simple. And reading a ballot isn’t that difficult. If folks can’t figure out how it works – how do they parse a debate, understand nuance between two candidates, balance their checkbook – or even make a choice when going to the eye doctor (Do you like this one, or this one? Is this clearer, or this one…), etc…. I know most folks vote based on if there is an R or a D after the name – but we need to grow up, be more inclusive to the I’s and the P’s and the L’s and the whomevers – and figure out how to tear down this two party bash and crash system of politics. I hope some good comes of this…
And we have the BTV airport bond issue for more parking with solar roof, and a school budget issue…
are the charter changes that include giving the Mayor a vote on the City Council. It is concerning primarily because the person who now occupies the Mayor’s office has been known to behave in a manner that some might characterize as bullying. Of course I would never go so far as to say that myself; but I have had certain experiences that make me leery of awarding additional power to this or any other mayor.
Also being considered is whether or not to change the City Treasurer from an elected to an appointed position.
As I have for years, I attended last nights meeting in the great city of Vergennes. There may have been 40 people in attendance and it included very few of those whose names will be included on the today’s ballot. The mayor read the name of each candidate aloud, which primarily served to highlight that most of the candidates were not in attendance. Of the 18 +/- requests that the city has for funds from various non-profit agencies only four representatives of the agencies stood and made a pitch for the voters support and took questions.
The highlight of the evening came at the very end. As the Mayor asked if there was any “new business” that anyone would like to discuss, a woman rose and asked for permission to speak about school consolidation. Much to the apparent consternation of the Mayor and number of the Alderman, the time was granted. The woman spoke for about 4-5 minutes to the need for a consolidation of our elementary schools. Having listed a number of plausible reasons for consolidation, she rambled on a bit too long and finished with this:
At this point the crowd erupted into laughter. Of the 40 or so people in attendance at this meeting, I’d guess that half of them own one of them there local stores she’s advocating we stop shopping at. I can tell you right now that school consolidation is going down today.
Although I love Vergennes and am proud to call it home, I feel rather rooked when it comes time for town meeting day. Our system of governance doesn’t allow for the types of exchanges that most other towns have, and as such, few people care or participate.
last night.
high point was the presentation of an actual chair to longtime selectboard chair bill ford, retiring after 23 years in the job.
also an excellent legislative report from our rep., willem jewett. i gotta say, i’m awfully glad it’s not my job to figure out how to make the state budget balance.
a great pleasure to live in a well-run town.
As a Selectboard member in Essex, I attended last night’s Essex Town Meeting. In Vermont’s second largest municipality, with roughly 15,600 registered voters, our meeting drew a whopping 250 voters, about 1.6% of our electorate. The only major item we voted on was our budget of nearly $10 million. We don’t do Australian ballot for the budget.
I believe that our present arrangement is undoubtedly undemocratic and arguably unconstitutional. Yet, town meeting here has its defenders, who argue the tradition is important. Some traditions are indeed important, but barring democracy’s door to 15,000 potential voters is a tradition that deserves to die.
I have begun agitating for a new arrangement. When I ran for Selectboard last year, I felt that Australian ballot was an appropriate mechanism to decide our budget; it may be appropriate, but perhaps not the best. I am interested in learning from folks who have experience with the representative town meeting, a format used in Brattleboro and in several towns in Massachusetts. If you have any reflections or thoughts on your experience, please put in your two cents. (Williston reportedly is considering this arrangement.)
In an era of the egregious filibuster practice in the U.S. Senate, my former employer, in a judicial environment that equates powerful, wealthy corporations with John or Jane Q. Public, I keep on hoping that the term “citizen” can recapture its original meaning and significance. Thanks.
With a floor vote during Other Business, Dummerston overwhelmingly voted to request the Selectboard convey to Governor Douglas the message that he should direct the Dept of Health, Dept of Environmental Conservation, and Dept of Agriculture to immediately begin enforcement actions against Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee’s radioactive leaks into the Connecticut River and Vermont groundwater.
Readsboro voted to support the acquisition of 660+ acres on Route 100 and Howe Pond Road from private willing sellers by the USA to become part of the Green Mountain National Forest to conserve water, wildlife habitat, trails, and public access. I expected this to fail. It won overwhelmingly by a voice vote. Southwestern Vermont will be an even greater place for the outdoors, wildlife, windmills, etc.
The voters in Montpelier performed true to form and passed every single ballot item. Most budget items passed by healthy margins, close to 2-1. At a minimum this demonstrates that Montpelier voters did not see tough financial times as a good reason to defund city government and its activities.
Mary Hooper, who had faced her first strong challenge as mayor following the Scott Construction overpayment flap, was reelected by more than 2-1, 1377-613.
Councilor Nancy Sherman, running for reelection against two challengers, won handily, 399- 275 for Jack Lindley and 78 for Richard Sheir. Ultimately, “I’m pissed about Scott Construction” turned out not to be a winning campaign theme for either Mayor or Council.
The advisory ballot item on decriminalization won big, 1530-585, or almost 3-1.
This was a real town meeting with a very strong turnout and a good mix of opinions. All done in a civil fashion.
Shap Smith is our representative. He spoke and took some questions. I made the point that we should institute an income tax surcharge before we cut essential services.
He said that the votes weren’t there to allow for an income tax surcharge to pass and overcome a certain Douglas veto.
In my mind, how can you call yourself a Democrat if you would cut essential services to the needy rather than add a bit to the income tax?
Seems like we need to get rid of some so-called dems.
A petition to remove a pergola from Wilmington center was defeated 397 – 248. This was a big, big story in southern Vermont.
Click here to learn more about the story.
Wind farm approved overwhelmingly. 342-114.