BRATTLEBORO

Weather

View 7-day forecast

Your support powers every story we tell. Please help us reach our year-end goal.

Donate Now

Your support powers every story we tell. We're committed to producing high-quality, fact-based news and information that gives you the facts in this community we call home. If our work has helped you stay informed, take action, or feel more connected to Windham County – please give now to help us reach our goal of raising $150,000 by December 31st.

BRATTLEBORO

Weather

View 7-day forecast

Your support powers every story we tell. Please help us reach our year-end goal.

Donate Now

Your support powers every story we tell. We're committed to producing high-quality, fact-based news and information that gives you the facts in this community we call home. If our work has helped you stay informed, take action, or feel more connected to Windham County – please give now to help us reach our goal of raising $150,000 by December 31st.

Voices

Australian ballot: a better way forward for Brattleboro’s democracy


The writer represents District 7 as a member of Brattleboro’s Representative Town Meeting.


BRATTLEBORO-As Brattleboro voters consider the future of our town governance, I support moving away from Representative Town Meeting (RTM) — not toward open Town Meeting, but instead toward conducting town business by Australian ballot, paired with strong public discussion and information sessions in advance of each vote.

Much of the support for RTM rests on two commonly cited strengths: the ability to amend articles on the floor and the opportunity for debate and discussion.

In theory, both are valuable. In practice, however, they occur far less often than many assume.

Over the past decade, RTM has almost always voted articles up or down as warned. When concerns arise, the outcome is typically rejection rather than thoughtful amendment.

It is also said that when RTM votes something down, representatives can give direction to the Selectboard about how they want it changed. But that kind of feedback does not require RTM. Residents already provide guidance through public comment at Selectboard meetings, public hearings, and written input — processes that would continue under Australian ballot voting.

Debate and discussion are essential, but they do not need to be tied to a single meeting where representatives are expected to listen, deliberate, and vote immediately. Holding discussions in advance of Australian ballot votes gives people time to reflect, review materials, and talk with neighbors before casting a ballot. That is a feature, not a flaw.

Another concern is that Australian ballot consolidates power in the Selectboard. But the Selectboard already controls the Town Meeting warning, and citizen petition articles exist under both systems.

Finally, RTM participation is difficult for many residents — those who travel for work, who work weekends, who provide care, or who face accessibility barriers. Australian ballot voting makes participation easier and more inclusive.

No matter where you stand, please vote now at the Town Clerk’s Office, on Tuesday, March 3 at the American Legion, or call the Town Clerk 802-251-8157 to get an absentee ballot. Our democracy is strongest when more voices are heard.

If this vision of local democracy appeals to you — a vision that preserves discussion, expands participation, and gives every voter an equal voice — I encourage you to vote yes to discontinue Representative Town Meeting, yes to conducting town business by Australian ballot, and no to open Town Meeting, which limits direct voting to those able to attend lengthy in-person meetings.

Lindsey Worden

Brattleboro


The writer represents District 7 as a member of Brattleboro’s Representative Town Meeting.

This letter to the editor was submitted to The Commons.

This piece, published in print in the Voices section or as a column in the news sections, represents the opinion of the writer. In the newspaper and on this website, we strive to ensure that opinions are based on fair expression of established fact. In the spirit of transparency and accountability, The Commons is reviewing and developing more precise policies about editing of opinions and our role and our responsibility and standards in fact-checking our own work and the contributions to the newspaper. In the meantime, we heartily encourage civil and productive responses at voices@commonsnews.org.

Subscribe to receive free email delivery of The Commons!