PUTNEY — I recently thought of an ad campaign to pitch to the state: “Come move to beautiful Vermont - where your vote on local issues doesn't count!”
In June, the state began a campaign to get young “e-workers” who can perform their jobs via the internet to move to Vermont by offering a $10,000 incentive!
Unfortunately, one key attraction about living in Vermont is being undermined. I believe that what will really attract young people to Vermont (besides the obvious natural beauty) - the ideals that Vermont has always held dear - are now becoming more desired by many young people.
There is in the larger culture a recognition of the importance of strong, local communities. This is especially true as it relates to the local-food movement, which Vermont has led nationally.
But many young people (in this age of Trump) also desire a voice in their governance - and, of course, in how their children are educated.
Strong local governance has been a hallmark of the Vermont way of life and is one of the reasons many of us have found the state a desirable place to live and work.
But Vermont is really shooting itself in the foot by thinking that imposing mergers on school districts that have voted overwhelmingly against them is somehow in its best interest!
While election issues, voter suppression, and gerrymandering are all issues of national concern, we seem to have a unique voting issue at play here in Vermont: having voting that does not count for anything!
As you are all well aware, last November, a vote on the merger proposal for Act 46 took place in Putney, Guilford, Brattleboro, and Dummerston. The proposal was defeated not in one town (which is all that would have been needed for the merger not to be approved) but in all four towns!
And it was not defeated narrowly, but by what would be called a landslide in any election. Very close to 70 percent of voters in Putney and Brattleboro voted it down; more than 60 percent in Guilford, and more than 80 percent in Dummerston!
What did the study committee that put together the merger proposal do with the outcome of this landslide vote?
The committee ignored it. They sent the merger proposal - the same one that had been roundly rejected by their constituents - to the state for approval!
What disturbs me is not simply the gall that took, but actually the paucity of thought and the shortsightedness of that action.
One has to wonder at what level of defeat of the proposal would have prompted committee members to act in accord with the wishes of their voters. If each town had hit the over-80-percent mark as Dummerston had, would that have been enough? Or would each town voting at 95 percent to defeat the proposal have made the will of the electorate count for something?
Who knows?
What we do know is that we should be concerned - all of us, but elected officials in particular - when members of a small, unelected body decide that they know better than their constituents what is good for them!
How about we have elections for local offices, but if, say, the Selectboard does not like the outcome and believe that they really know much better than the voters who should have won, would they work to install a “much better candidate”?
It should not need to be said, but obviously this issue of election results actually mattering is really of critical importance for our democracy. At this point, it supersedes my concern about the merger.
And I think that people on both sides of the merger issue need to be alarmed. For who knows: it could have gone the other way: maybe a small group of anti-merger people could have been in charge of the recommendation to the state and the vote went pro merger - but, hey, “We know better.” I am sure you will agree: this is a dangerous road to go down!
Act 46 as it was written - and amended by Act 49 - clearly had provisions for what is called an Alternate Governance Structure. An AGS has been well thought out and proposed for the district. We have several key legislators who are in favor of this alternative, including our state representative, Mike Mrowicki, who has studied this issue extensively and feels it is the smarter way to meet the requirements of Act 46.
And we are in no way unique in our state in rejecting merger proposals: more than 90 other school districts chose not to merge as well.