Welcome back to iBrattleboro.com Tuesday, May 22 2012 @ 12:30 PM GMT+4  
Home |  Submit Story |  Calendar |  Site Stats |  Directory |  Advertising |  Contact |  Help |  Policies |  Local Links |  Polls | 
What's New
STORIES
9 New Stories

COMMENTS last 2 days
  • Celebrate Prevent... [+5]
  • 5 Favorite Intros [+4]
  • Whetstone Station... [+2]
  • After Lord of the...
  • Shumlin Signs No ... [+5]
  • Brattleboro's Str...

  • LOCAL LINKS last 2 weeks
    No recent new links


    iBrattleboro Market and More
    Brattleboro Demographic and Housing Data
    iBrattleboro BMedia

    iBrattleboro Job Market
    Brattleboro Community Brain Trust
    BrattleBarter
    iBrattleboro Assignment Desk
    Brattleboro Maps
    iBrattleboro RSS Feed
    BrattleRide

    Recent Stories
    Monday 21-May
  • Brattleboro Union Station Steering Committee Meeting (0)
  • Just Pies (0)

  • Sunday 20-May
  • Mother of all Fundraisers: Shirley Squires Passes $200,000 Milestone (0)

  • Saturday 19-May
  • US Armed Forces Day Pride in the Mass-Murder of Millions in Illegal Undeclared Wars (2)
  • Brattleboro Concert Choir - Wrong Time for Sunday Concert in Reformer (0)
  • 5 Favorite Intros (12)
  • A German Organ Extravaganza & Holiday BBQ on May 27 (0)

  • Friday 18-May
  • Shumlin Signs No Opt Fee for "Smart" Meters (9)
  • 5:45 Live HD: 5/18/12 (0)
  • iBrattleboro Moving To A New Server (4)
  • Summary of S.99 - Supporting Mobile Home Parks (1)
  • Bull Full Moon- Festival of Goodwill (0)
  • Brattleboro Finance Committee Meeting (0)
  • Brattleboro Traffic Safety Committee Meeting and Agenda (0)
  • Why Some Politicians Are More Dangerous Than Others (1)

  • Sections
    Home
    Activism (1,467)
    Arts (851)
    Books (381)
    Business (559)
    Creative (439)
    Education (621)
    Entertainment (1,099)
    Food (444)
    Features (175)
    Health (689)
    History (217)
    Kids (261)
    Home & Garden (308)
    Media (626)
    Music (1,046)
    Nature (383)
    Obituaries (100)
    Opinion (1,611)
    Pets (259)
    Police (171)
    Politics (1,888)
    Recreation (377)
    Rumors (173)
    Sci-Tech (230)
    Spiritual (284)
    Town News (2,788)
    Town Plan (447)
    Questions & Answers (1,535)
    Other (1,032)
    iBrattleboro (156)

    Who's Online
    cgrotke
    Guest Visitors: 129

    User Functions
    :

    :


    Lost your password?


    Brattleboro Coup D'etat    
    Saturday, January 30 2010 @ 02:12 PM GMT+4
    Contributed by: tomaidh

    OpinionA couple years ago. A coup d’etat was engineered in Brattleboro.

    Like mushrooms after rain, lawn signs erupted all over town supporting a “slate” of candidates for the selectboard, which was successfully elected and which considerably changed the direction of the board.

    The new board, which is still in place, has been consistent in ignoring the wishes of the people and in promoting their own agenda.

    This is illustrated by three quotations from the Letters section of today’s Reformer:

    This perspective helps me understand the unfortunate and shortsighted action of our Selectboard regarding management of the Whetstone Brook and threats to public and private interests along its course. (Douglas C. Cox)

    The Selectboard should be asking the Heifer organizers what more can be done to help. I feel the Heifer organizers embody the spirit that is Brattleboro more than the Selectboard. (Joe and Cyndi Miskell)

    Last night I attended the selectboard meeting and witnessed the Selectboard vote to reject the petition to take over Vermont Yankee by eminent domain…Would they consider it town business if all the residents of Brattleboro had to evacuate as a result of a serious accident at Vermont Yankee? (Bill Dyon)

    I attended last week’s session, and I witnessed a discussion about the Chestnut Hill reservoir. The DPW director presented his analysis of the options, and made what I felt was a well thought out proposal to retain it as an asset for the town. Several residents then spoke, and all suggested that some form of town ownership and control was desireable.

    Then the “Selectchair” spoke and stated that he disagreed and that the town should sell it. After a short discussion, a vote was held and his “slate-mates” upheld his opinion. (The Town Meeting Reps will have a chance to further discuss this in the spring.)

    My perception was that this seemed autocratic, almost rehearsed, and that this is a characteristic of the present board.

    We have a chance to rectify this on Town Meeting Day. Petitions are in, and we have some good looking candidates.

    For the three-year Selectboard seat, Spoon Agave and incumbent Dora Bouboulis will face off.

    For the one-year Selectboard seat, challengers Daryl Pillsbury and Leah Stuart will try to unseat current board members John
    Allen and Jesse Corum.

    I wish we didn’t have to choose between Spoon and Dora, as they’re both intelligent, thoughtful candidates.

    I don’t know Leah very well. I do know she’s a student at SIT’s Graduate Institute and plays the recorder.

    Daryl is a proven legislator, and he has demonstrated that he knows how to get the job done. We need him now.

    Town Meeting is coming. Turn out and vote. Bring representative government back to Brattleboro.

     

    What's Related

    Story Options
  • Printable Story Format

  • Brattleboro Coup D'etat | 39 comments | Create New Account
    The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they may say.
    Coup D'etat?
    Authored by: SK-B on Saturday, January 30 2010 @ 08:36 PM GMT+4
    What made the last Selectboard election a coup D'etat?
    Coup D'etat?
    Authored by: tomaidh on Saturday, January 30 2010 @ 09:33 PM GMT+4
    Like mushrooms after rain, lawn signs erupted all over town supporting a “slate” of candidates for the selectboard, which was successfully elected and which considerably changed the direction of the board.
    Coup D'etat?
    Authored by: SK-B on Sunday, January 31 2010 @ 02:30 AM GMT+4
    "A coup d'état or coup for short, is the sudden unconstitutional deposition of a government, usually by a small group of the existing state establishment—typically the military—to replace the deposed government with another, either civil or military."
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coup_d%27%C3%A9tat

    My mistake: I had not realized that lawn signs are unconstitutional.
    Coup D'etat?
    Authored by: tomaidh on Sunday, January 31 2010 @ 02:50 AM GMT+4
    Picky, Picky, Picky.
    Coup D'etat?
    Authored by: Christian Avard on Sunday, January 31 2010 @ 02:04 PM GMT+4
    Actually, SK-B is giving a very accurate definition of coup d'etat. I think
    it's irresponsible to be using the term so loosely. Progressives in the
    Brattleboro area have a tendency to shoot these kinds of words from the
    hip and quite frankly, it makes us look bad. I've seen several Brattleboro
    activists do the same, if memory serves.
    Coup D'etat?
    Authored by: tomaidh on Sunday, January 31 2010 @ 07:27 PM GMT+4
    Of course, we didn't have a literal coup d'etat. I think I'd have noticed the guys in the tan uniforms with bandoliers. I certainly think it's appropriate to use the term in a figurative sense.
    Chris, you're a journalist. Don't try and tell me you've never used hyperbole to make a point.
    Coup D'etat?
    Authored by: Christian Avard on Sunday, January 31 2010 @ 07:40 PM GMT+4
    Taking yourself off the hook are we? I suppose by your rationale the
    current selectboard is in on the 9-11 conspiracy too. I don't use hyperbole
    in my work, thank you very much.
    Coup D'etat?
    Authored by: pjmelton on Sunday, January 31 2010 @ 08:30 PM GMT+4
    I think you're all Nazis! A pox on both your houses! Or...maybe I should just re-read this: http://www.orwell.ru/library/essays/politics/english/e_polit

    ---
    "Economic laws are not made by nature. They are made by human beings." -- FDR

    "Heil, pjmelton!"
    Authored by: Christian Avard on Tuesday, February 02 2010 @ 06:12 PM GMT+4
    Thanks for the read. Good point. But to call us/them/whoever Nazis? Um,
    I don't think we exterminated six million Jews. Just a little semantic
    tussle on our part is more like it. I fear the characterization may also
    have proven Orwell's point ;) Am I wrong?
    "Heil, pjmelton!"
    Authored by: pjmelton on Tuesday, February 02 2010 @ 06:17 PM GMT+4
    The Nazi thing was just a lead-in to the Orwell piece about using language carefully - such as the word "coup," which means something very specific. If we start throwing that word around, without irony, in situations where it does not fit, we stop being able to recognize a real coup when it happens. It's a kind of crying wolf. So I was just trying to agree with you. Sorry if that wasn't clear....

    ---
    "Economic laws are not made by nature. They are made by human beings." -- FDR
    Duh, thanks.
    Authored by: Christian Avard on Tuesday, February 02 2010 @ 06:28 PM GMT+4
    Reading on iBratt and talking in person are two totally different things.
    Takes a while to figure out how the person conveys online. Thanks!
    Not a Coup, But What Is It?
    Authored by: paulgardner on Sunday, January 31 2010 @ 03:19 PM GMT+4
    Technically Corum, O'Connor and Allen did not get their positions on the board by coup d'etat. But it is certainly worth asking how such a progressive town ended up with such conservative leadership.
    Did we allow ourselves to be stampeded into the vote because things were too tempestuous during Audrey Garfield's year on the board? Never mind that all of those crazy things were beyond the control of the board and in several instances had their genesis before that board took office.
    I'm still puzzled at how we came to have so much going on at one particular time. Remember? There was the suicide on Clark St. tied in with a neighbor filming the goings on on the street; the tasering incident on Putney Rd.; nudity and mayhem in the Harmony lot; and there was the vote to arrest Bush/Cheney should they ever come here (I must be forgetting something - seems like there was more).
    Things have certainly calmed down since, not - I would argue - due to any positive action on the part of the s.b. Hopefully next month we'll put a in place a board that better represents us.
    To Paul: my two cents
    Authored by: Christian Avard on Sunday, January 31 2010 @ 03:55 PM GMT+4
    Speaking for myself.

    I know one prominent member in the Brattleboro business community
    and I asked him what he thought about the 2008 selectboard election.
    He knew a lot of people were going to come out to vote and try and
    unseat Spoon and Audrey. They were unhappy with the
    micromanaging and there were others who believe the selectboard
    should be about running the town's business. By that I mean the
    business that keeps the town functioning. After covering dozens and
    dozens of selectboard meetings myself, I can understand why this
    should be the number one priority for ANY town.

    On top of that, the selectboard spent too many hours working on so
    many issues. I remember someone mentioning (maybe it was Dick
    DeGray) on the number of hours the selectboard was working on week
    after week. That was when Bob Fagelson penned that letter to the
    editor saying the only reason they're spending that much time is
    because the majority on the board "were marginally employed." Well,
    I think Fagelson is right and that aspect really set some people off in
    the town. So you gotta factor in that in people's decision making why
    the selectboard changed faces. I certainly don't think the current SB is
    spending that much time on issues like they used to in 2007.

    And your right Paul. There are several issues that were beyond the
    selectboard's control, yet people (on both sides of the political
    spectrum) didn't want to accept that. The two issues that come to
    mind were the suicide and the nudity issue, just like you said.

    The other thing I want to weigh in on is there was something eerily
    suspicious that happened to Dora Bouboulis' candidacy that year that
    suddenly made her drop out of the election. I don't know what
    happened. But then again, I do remember she was really excited on
    her re-election bid that year. Why did she make a sudden 180-degree
    change? Dora still never really explained why that happened. She just
    submitted a press release to the Reformer and that was that. It
    certainly smelled like a case of the progressives "eating their young."
    So I think we need to factor in their circular firing squad that resulted
    in a change with the selectboard.

    There's more, much more that could explain what happened. But
    those are the things that stood out for me why things changed that
    year.
    correction
    Authored by: cgrotke on Sunday, January 31 2010 @ 04:25 PM GMT+4
    "unseat Spoon and Audrey"

    Spoon wasn't on the board that year.

    Thanks Chris, now let me clarify
    Authored by: Christian Avard on Sunday, January 31 2010 @ 04:41 PM GMT+4
    I realized after I posted that, that I wasn't totally accurate.

    Steve Steidle stepped down, Dora rescinded her candidacy, and Audrey
    ran for the three-year spot. That left three spots on the SB. Spoon, Ian
    Keihle, Kiah Coble, Martha, Jesse, and John Allen. We all know what
    happened afterward.

    Thanks Chris, now let me clarify
    Authored by: ScottMcCarty on Monday, February 01 2010 @ 12:58 AM GMT+4
    Christian is right about what people were feeling. I know that the reason I supported John, Jesse and Martha was because I knew them for years and also because I felt that they would not micro-manage and just let the Department Heads do their jobs.

    In terms of the business community -- they also felt micro-managed from what I heard from folks on Main Street. The nudity issue in Harmony Lot and all the national exposure we got because of it was also a big concern for a lot of voters to oust the progressives and elect a more centrist board.

    Martha, John and Jesse also made a real and legitimate case for change and new leadership. The climate was very anti-incumbent at the time as it is now and people were just tired of the "drama" (not my words) and wanted a different voice on the Board.

    However, I think the best explanation was Lise's. She wrote a great editorial about the election. I read it after I read this opinion piece.

    http://www.ibrattleboro.com/article.php?story=20080304234341916&query=Audrey%2BGarfield

    These are just my observations. Nothing more.

    ---
    www.scottmccarty.org

    Good quote and good catch!
    Authored by: Christian Avard on Monday, February 01 2010 @ 01:31 AM GMT+4
    Scott, you said the thing I wanted to say but didn't. "Just let the Department Heads do their jobs." No offense to the 2007-2008 board, but that particular observation proved to me they had no experience in working with and managing groups of people who knew Brattleboro better than they did.

    I totally forgot about Lise's oped. That was good. I also liked Maus' comment below that brought it all into context.

    It would be great if the local lefties would engage in some honest analysis of their failure and come back stronger next year or the year after with some cohesion, vision, and a plan."

    I'm not in Brattleboro anymore, but I'd like to see left-leaning individuals with experience in town government/business develop a unique/progressive vision that's also grounded in reality. It needs to have both feet on the ground and it should acknowledge/support the things that don't fit into their plan that still makes Brattleboro a good town (for instance the ski jump. If it weren't for Dora, the ski jump would be out of luck for money). I still think the selectboard should be about town business. Not symbolic resolutions jailing Bush and such. There are better outlets for that out there, but not in town government.

    Good quote and good catch!
    Authored by: paulgardner on Monday, February 01 2010 @ 12:02 PM GMT+4
    Thanks, Scott for the link to Lise's story. I had forgotten about the "smile issue".

    Funny I don't see any mention of Rich Garrant - wasn't he on those boards?

    While I think there is some merit to the "circular firing squad" charge, to me it mischaracterizes what goes on with the left.
    It is true that we progressives are unafraid to stand up and confront each other. I also think we are more comfortable with self criticism than the right. I do occasionally see it on the right, but too often self criticism is treated as disloyalty.
    It's important to be critical of both sides. But don't be dismissive. I think with few adjustments Audrey's board could have been very good.
    Good quote and good catch!
    Authored by: SpudHill on Tuesday, February 02 2010 @ 12:22 AM GMT+4
    First of all the "Audrey Doesn't Smile Enough" claim was not only silly but really sexist, and the moment anyone who embraced that as a legitimate claim shows me the article/op ed where a male selectboard member has been criticized for not smiling enough I'll take back that charge but until then it stands.

    As for the micromanaging is anyone forgetting that the town finances were pretty much all over the place and it appeared that money was just being moved around willy nilly without any real serious accounting being done. It seems to me that you can charge micromanaging when your house is in order perhaps but as I remember it, there were funds being moved here and there and I believe some funds missing or in wrong accounts.

    As for Scott's statement that he voted for these 3 because he knew them for a long time, I have lots of friends I've known for a long time but that doesn't mean I think they're fit for office and in some cases quite the opposite. Does this mean that Scott thinks some of the dismissive behavior after people have put hours and hours of committee work into studies is appropriate.....I guess Jesse was smiling when he suggesting closing down the museum and women's center so heh then it's okay.
    Respectfully disagree
    Authored by: Christian Avard on Tuesday, February 02 2010 @ 02:24 AM GMT+4

    Lise? Sexist? That's a stretch. Tongue in cheek? Yes. Sexist, no.

    You're right that the 2007-2008 selectboard had a lot of problems
    relating to finances. There was a lot of cleaning up to do. They
    inherited a mess and they did the best they could. However, it was
    the town departments that I've heard a lot of micromanaging that in
    my mind was not necessary. Let them do their work. They knew more
    about their jobs than the selectboard did.

    I think Maus's comments below tells the past situation best. This
    current board, to me, I think is concerning. Especially after the last
    selectboard meeting. It could use some new members.

    Respectfully disagree
    Authored by: SpudHill on Tuesday, February 02 2010 @ 10:11 AM GMT+4
    I didn't say that Lise was sexist, I said that the comment and complaints that Audrey was not "smiling enough" were sexist. This is a common tactic with women (or others) in positions where people are uncomfortable...to go after personality traits that would be acceptable in others. She's not smiling so she's a witch (or the word that rhymes), she's smiling so she's not serious.

    This complaint was being thrown about quite a bit and don't give me the argument that it wasn't sexist because Martha is now on the board. I'm talking about the use of personal statements like this directed towards women when they are not directed at men.

    The fact that these personal statements were being made instead of comments directed to her performance (or rather I guess along with comments towards her performance). I'll withdraw the charge that whatever people's thoughts about whether they're fair to women or not, this "she's not smiling enough" comment is a time old charge that I see s sexist, I've never seen a comment "he's not smiling enough", when a man has a serious demeanor he's taken as a serious thinker. And of course this was a lose/lose for Audrey because if she'd smiled and laughed I suspect she would have been charged with not taking the job seriously enough.

    As for Lise not being capable of making a unintended sexist comment because she's a woman or, not knowing if she would label herself this way, but even a feminist, is absurd. But I took Lise's comment about this as more reportage of what was being said anyway.
    Respectfully disagree
    Authored by: SpudHill on Tuesday, February 02 2010 @ 10:19 AM GMT+4
    Well actually now that I've looked over Lise's statement I don't see this as "reportage". In fact I would disagree with Lise's claim that Audrey's "inability to smile" was what cost her the election. As I said I suspect if she'd been smiling a lot then it would have been her "inability to take the job seriously enough, she smiled too much." And I stand by my statement that this is a sexist charge and even the best of feminists is able to occasional make a sexist comment....sexism is so inbedded into our culture and the way even women even see themselves. And my comment wasn't direct personally at Lise but at all of us who repeated that statement during that time.

    But my thought is that there was a very directed attempt to get Audrey off the board by many who had been comfortable with the status quo, hence the micro-managing charges because people were uncomfortable with anyone looking into or suggesting changes in how they'd been doing things when, in my opinion, how "we've always done things" had created a mess. Well, in regards to those who voted for the current board because they were unhappy with Audrey's approach, remember that old adage "be careful what you wish for....."
    Respectfully disagree
    Authored by: SpudHill on Tuesday, February 02 2010 @ 11:28 AM GMT+4
    "That was when Bob Fagelson penned that letter to the
    editor saying the only reason they're spending that much time is
    because the majority on the board "were marginally employed." Well,
    I think Fagelson is right and that aspect really set some people off in
    the town."

    I remember seeing this letter and finding it a distasteful comment. The fact is that this town may have become so large that the current method of governing may not be the most effective. While Fagelson's comment might have had some base in truth, perhaps the fact remains that the job of governing the town does require a lot of time and attention...more so than possible for the "average" working citizen. So if the town stays with the current method you get either "average" working citizens who spend less time than necessary or those who for whatever reason have enough time to direct to what's necessary. I'm wondering if having a mayor wouldn't at this point be a more effective way of governing the town.
    Respectfully disagree
    Authored by: Christian Avard on Tuesday, February 02 2010 @ 12:03 PM GMT+4
    I'll seriously take your sexism claim into consideration. I appreciate
    that.

    However, here's where I part ways with you.

    *** But my thought is that there was a very directed attempt to get
    Audrey off the board by many who had been comfortable with the
    status quo, ***

    Can you confirm that the majority of voters that came out that day
    were comfortable with the status quo? Was that really the driving
    issue for all of those who voted for Allen, O'Connor, and Corum?

    *** the micro-managing charges because people were uncomfortable
    with anyone looking into or suggesting changes in how they'd been
    doing things***

    Honestly, I would to. Especially since, to my knowledge, Garfield,
    Garant, and Bouboulis had little or limited experience dealing with
    town agencies or running a business. I'm not talking about finances.
    I'm talking about knowing all the things that are pertinent to town
    planning, town services like public works, listers related issues, etc.
    Garant and Bouboulis had activist backgrounds. Garfield seems to
    have had an activist/non-profit blend of a background. I don't think
    those backgrounds are compatible with running, managing, and
    offering advice to town business or town agencies. They have nothing
    to do with activism and/or child advocacy. To be micromanaged by
    people not experienced in their respected fields, to me, would be
    unnerving. I'm sure town officials could deal with being micromanaged
    by the selectboard. If those selectboard members knew or had the
    necessary knowledge and experience in those particular fields.

    *** How "we've always done things" had created a mess. ***

    I agree and in cases like that, voters should change the make-up of
    the selectboard. With people who have the pertinent experience,
    confidence, and familiarity to the job at hand.
    Respectfully disagree
    Authored by: SpudHill on Tuesday, February 02 2010 @ 12:20 PM GMT+4
    My impression, and it was just that, an impression, was that the town had been running a certain way for many years and the departments had their own systems and ways of doing things that were comfortable but comfort doesn't necessarily mean effective or efficient.

    When Audrey came into the office it seems there had developed a very "loose" way of running things, money shifted without accountability, corners cut, etc. Nothing nefarious necessarily but the sort of looseness that can develop over the years and there had as I recall been some cases of money going missing and (do I remember this correctly) some cases of people being let go quietly that suggested some serious problems with accountability.

    From personal experience it is very likely in this sort of situation that attempts to understand how the systems were functioning and operating would be met with resistance. It is not uncommon for especially long-term employees who have their ways of doing things to balk at making changes or even be threatened by questions about how they do things. BUT this does not mean that the questions shouldn't have been asked and the "way of doing things" shouldn't have been looked into. It is in all our benefit for the town to operate as efficiently and effectively as possible.

    I always suspected that this is where the micro-managing charges came into play and I wonder if you or anyone for that matter could give an exact example of what the "micro-managing" entailed. One concrete example please.

    If, as I always suspected, it was just an honest attempt to look into the efficiency of how things were being run, then it was an unfair charge by people who were reluctant, threatened by and resistant to change. This does not mean they were not doing their jobs or up to no good, as I said, this is a very common reaction. But these days with the economy the way it is it is important that the town run effectively and I really don't care how long someone has worked for whatever department they work for all of us and if the Select Board asks questions or wants some accountability, annoying as it may be, it is not for them to say no and cries of micro-managing are not to be taken seriously.

    I've seen this response so many times I can predict it and bending to it does not help the town or it's citizens.
    Respectfully disagree
    Authored by: SpudHill on Tuesday, February 02 2010 @ 12:29 PM GMT+4
    As for my "status quo" comment by that I mean that everyone was just used to things being run a certain way and yes, I do think a lot of citizens found it unsettling to have things handled differently by Audrey...but in fact she may have been on the right track if the position required getting the "house in order" a bit more. There had obviously been problems.

    Often you get a group of people who are often business owners etc. who citizens are just comfortable with and they run things year after year much like re-elected senators. But that doesn't always mean they are running the town in everyone's best interests, it's just that they are seen on a sub-conscious level as the town "leaders" and so people keep voting for them. Just as Scott said, he's known them for years so he voted for them.

    Audrey upset the apple cart and she took the job very seriously, apparently too seriously in some people's minds but sometimes it's good to go with that sort of change to shake people up a bit then the "status quo" of reelecting the same people over and over again. On a sub-conscious level and not necessarily out of any bad intention people can develop a sense of "ownership" and entitlement when reelected over and over like this.....does that ring a bell these days to anyone?

    I think Audrey took her job very seriously and attempted against some pretty strong resistance to do her best for the town and she has never earned and gotten enough credit for the hard work she did.
    Clarification
    Authored by: Christian Avard on Tuesday, February 02 2010 @ 05:57 PM GMT+4
    Just to clarify Spud, you make it sound like I'm targeting Audrey in
    particular. I'm not. I have questions about how the THREE progressive
    board members handled a lot of things. Personally, I would be
    concerned if any newly elected selectboard members didn't have the
    experience of knowing, working, following town departments and the
    work they do.

    The selectboard is about running the town business and keeping the
    necessary departments going that make the town function. You need
    people who know how to handle town departments, personalities, and
    a minutia of tedious work that means a lot to keep the town going.
    That's a lot of hard work and I would want someone in there who has
    experience in that kind of work and has been effective at it. It's not
    about activism or getting back at those who screwed up the town.

    There really did seem to be a bit of "getting back" at people. Maybe
    that particular selectboard was trying to implement accountability.
    Fine. But was it done tactfully and professionally? I think the verdict is
    still out there.

    Plus, if what happened to Dora Bouboulis really happened, then that's
    just plain pettiness. Something definitely went wrong there and we
    may never know. But it's certainly suspicious to me. Remember Crazy
    Irish Chick's cartoon?

    Like Maus, I believed they failed. It's unfortunate and believe me,
    some people really got hurt by their actions. That's why Brattleboro
    has the board they have now. Now we know it's not any different than
    the last selectboard was. Now they need to mix it up a bit and get
    some new members in there.

    I'll leave it there.



    Quick Response
    Authored by: ScottMcCarty on Tuesday, February 02 2010 @ 04:26 PM GMT+4
    I want to respond to your statement that just because I knew them, I voted for them. I should have expounded on the statement by saying I felt that because I knew them, I had a fairly good understanding of what kind of leaders they would be. I felt that they would let the Department Heads do their jobs, not micro-manage and address town business and less on social and national issues. I grew up with several of these folks kids, I trusted them and felt that they would do a genuinely good job.

    And, by the way, I WAS VERY OFFENDED by Jesse's comments about the Women's Center and the Museum as it was tied to the conversation about our town Reservoir. I thought it was a false analogy and that he should not have said it.

    Do I agree with everything they have done? Of course not. But they were elected because they made a better case to voters about what direction the town should take. As Lise said in her editorial, style is very important and it counts in Brattleboro.

    Garrison Keillor said this: "Take small views of life and don't bother to solve the past...for it will solve itself."

    I think that quote is applicable to this discussion.

    I'm urging people to maybe not harp on the 2008 Town Election and look towards the 2010 Election, as it is going to impact us.

    ---
    www.scottmccarty.org
    Quick Response
    Authored by: SpudHill on Tuesday, February 02 2010 @ 04:59 PM GMT+4
    GEORGE SANTAYANA:
    "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it," (1905)
    "Reason in Common Sense", volume 1 of "The Life of Reason"

    I figured you also meant that you found them somehow better suited for the job but just exactly why?

    I don't remember much being said one way or the other about what direction the town should be headed in
    Can you give me one example
    and
    Can you give me one concrete example of what was meant by those oft repeated claims of micro-managing. Just one example of something that Audrey did that fit within that defnition.
    I'm really serious about this, I head this complaint so often by the opposition campaigners and yet I have never heard one example of what was meant by that.
    Quick Response
    Authored by: SpudHill on Tuesday, February 02 2010 @ 05:01 PM GMT+4
    Also as far as voting based on "style" I think that's a very dangerous slippery slope kind of basis on which to vote. How are y'all feeling about the "style" of this particular board now?
    Quick Response
    Authored by: ScottMcCarty on Tuesday, February 02 2010 @ 05:43 PM GMT+4
    I actually have never met Audrey so this is in no way directed at her personally. I wanted to point that out conversations that I had with a wide array of folks across the community.

    From my conversations with local businesses and folks in town government -- they FELT micro-managed. They never really went into details specifcally but if they felt they were micro-managed, then in some cases I believed them. They felt like Selectboard members had gone from "appropriate oversight" to just plain "meddling in direction of departments or local boards."

    Another issue that people i talked to had with the '07-'08 Board was the ski jump, was the town manager and police chief issue and the nudity issue and the prominence that it brought to our town. I remember getting phone calls about it from friends outside VT. How those issues were handled were what made many people question the direction of the town.

    I highly doubt Audrey's ability to smile had anything really to do with things rather the way things were handled. I've seen her smile before and I always thought she took her job seriously and did it well. People just didn't like the way things were being run and felt that the Board should focus on town business, like Christian said, rather then social issues (VY, nudity, the town manager). I can say that I know of more than one Progressive who was really taken aback by the way the ski jump and nudity issue were handled.

    Style, for many voters, was the most important to the people I spoke to and people simply wanted a change. We cannot fault people for voting the way they did when during the same year -- Democratic turnout for the Presidential primary was very high and we also voted to arrest President Bush and the Vice President. There really was no reason for the progressive candidates to lose in that kind of political atmosphere but they did.

    I think I've said all I really have to say about this issue on here. Let's look forward to the elections coming up next month and talk about those candidates instead of an election that was 2 years ago.

    A great discussion.

    ---
    www.scottmccarty.org
    Quick Response
    Authored by: SpudHill on Tuesday, February 02 2010 @ 05:55 PM GMT+4
    Well it's small town politics isn't it. My only comment is I still have yet to hear a concrete example of "meddling"....and this could mean anything from a real complaint with basis in fact to town business owners being used to no oversight...i.e. one person's "meddling" could be another's "appropriate oversight." It just seems it was an unsubstantiated charge for which no concrete examples have ever been given and until I see some sort of "real" explanation of what this meant I must dismiss it.

    I agree the nudity issue got very messy and just should have been dealt with but it wasn't the SB that put all that junk on the internet, seems to me that if that had anything to do with the vote then this twn let a bunch of mixed-up teenagers determine their vote albeit a quicker more precise passing of a ban would have solved it.

    Yes, let's move on but as I said before it seems to me that voting on approved "style" hasn't exactly improved things at this point. Although I do think this board has made some good faith efforts to keep taxes down and that is greatly appreciated. But seems to me they've got a little room to improve on that style thing themselves.
    Stingy with the compliments
    Authored by: tiny on Wednesday, February 03 2010 @ 04:32 PM GMT+4
    Good faith efforts? As I said, this board has had less drama, and
    been able to keep things okay in town while other towns are suffering
    the last year. If you are going to complain,fine, but at least give
    credit where credit is due.

    And yes there was meddling, but you are not going to find
    documented evidence of this. One example I can think of is the
    Economic Development Meeting Garfield sponsered and didn't include
    BDCC or the Chamber. Okay you might say that is not meddling but
    it is an example of not playing well with others.

    A case can be made that one of the
    selectboard members quit because he couldn't meddle enough with the
    sewer treatment plant, though i
    guessthat is open to opinion. Out of those 3 progs, Dora dropped from
    the scene but is back, Garrant quit because he wanted out, and
    Garfield has vaporize from the scene. That says something to some.
    I agree, get some new blood. NEW BLOOD, not old retreads.
    Memory Lane
    Authored by: tiny on Monday, February 01 2010 @ 03:03 PM GMT+4
    Lise's editorial was a pleasant trip down memory lane. But to say
    Chairperson Garfield lost the election because she lacked style and
    presented a stiff, unsmiling face is over simplifying the issue. It was
    Ms. Garfield's actions and deeds that spoke about her.

    Paul points out that she inherited lots of problems. This is true. This
    will be the Board that dealt with replacing the Town manager and
    Police Chief, the two most important municipal jobs. It is these "local
    issues" that is primary work of any Selectboard, not dealing with
    nudity issues, Peta protests, arresting Bush-Cheney and other high
    political drama. "Audrey plus two" started out with such promise. I
    don't think it was her lack of telegenic smile that failed Ms. Garfield.
    It was a number of issues, happenings, circumstances, fate. How
    would have every thought Dora would be so fatigued, she would leave
    , albeit for only a short period of time (glad your back!) Or that Rich
    Garrant would quit in the middle of his term?
    Memory Lane
    Authored by: tiny on Monday, February 01 2010 @ 03:19 PM GMT+4
    (I hit the submit button when I should have hit preview. Please note
    "who" replaces "how" in the second to last sentence.)

    Other than the recent reservoir and the PAYT issues, this Selectboard
    has been pretty quiet. But I think it is better to have drama over
    these issues than arresting Bush. For such turbulent fiscal times,
    Brattleboro has done quite well compared to other towns and with
    little fanfare. I think this is something many citizens voted
    for in the last election and the Selectboard has delivered. And I am
    pleased that those who are running again are doing so and have not
    burnt out or quit in frustration. Good luck to all of those who are
    running.
    A coupless coup
    Authored by: Maus Anon E on Monday, February 01 2010 @ 02:58 AM GMT+4
    Exactly, the progs' loss was their own fault, it had nothing to do with any real or hyperbolic coup. It was the voters' reaction to a group that had overstepped their bounds time and time again.

    This year, it's the righties that have become too full of themselves. The current group seems to be serving themselves instead of voters - in fact they've gone so far as to say that they'll impose their will on the voters, rather than respect the will of Town Meeting. Imagine the arrogance.

    ---
    We Rock!
    "We all remember what happened"
    Authored by: kitty on Tuesday, February 02 2010 @ 07:37 PM GMT+4
    I really don't remember the "progs" acting as any sort of unified group in 2008, though I know there was talk of "Audrey plus two." I'm not even sure that the O'Connor-Allen-Corum slate "made a case" that townspeople decided to embrace, overthrowing some "Audrey ticket." As I recall, for the Allen-Corum win anyway, it was just split-vote math. Spoon got 1300 votes, Ian got 1400, Kiah almost 900, and even Dora, who was no longer running, got 244 votes. That's over 3800 votes, and seems like a lot of support for what might be termed "progs" (actually more a loose group who were not-Corum-not-Allen). Jesse & John's combined winning votes were just a bit under 3800. (Also Martha beat Audrey by 170 votes, almost the number that went to the 3rd candidate John Archambault.) Whatever, perhaps it's silly to try parsing numbers this way. It only matters who wins, right? But I just don't see the alleged "sweep" as much of a large-margin-mandate or message from Brattleboro's voters.

    Anyway, onward to 2010.

    (Got numbers from http://www.ibrattleboro.com/article.php?story=20080304200226365)
    "We all remember what happened"
    Authored by: SpudHill on Tuesday, February 02 2010 @ 08:52 PM GMT+4
    Actually Kitty, this is very useful information and very informative. I never knew that the vote spread between Martha and Audrey was only 170 votes. Seems like this was a close election overall and not some sweeping statement about the progs on the previous board. Thanks for the info.
    But a loss is a loss, no matter how you look at it
    Authored by: Christian Avard on Tuesday, February 02 2010 @ 09:32 PM GMT+4
    Sure the numbers are small But I still think the fact remains that
    Audrey plus two lost that election due to petty politics, personal
    agendas, micromanagement, and just plain bad government. I know
    that's a popular reason for several voters in tipping the balance toward
    Corum, Allen, and O'Connor. Break down the numbers and split hairs
    all you want, but the results remain the same. Garfield and other like-
    minded individuals lost.

    Hopefully that's all behind us and some more effective progressive-
    liberal leaning candidates (with experience in town government) step
    forward. Good to know that Daryl Pillsbury is.
    Weather Link
    Look outside, then look here.

    Brattleboro Weather Forecast and Links


    Local Ads


    Brattleboro Events
    In the next 2 weeks

    Tuesday 22-May
  • Pink Pint Night
  • "Where (we) Live" Work-in-Progress Showings by VPL Lab Artist So Percussion

  • Wednesday 23-May
  • An Evening of Poetry

  • Thursday 24-May
  • WSWMD Policy/Personnel Committee
  • Southern Vermont Scrabble Club
  • WSWMD Planning/Operations Comm.
  • Karaoke Thursday @ The Beacon Bar

  • Friday 25-May
  • "Where (we) Live" Work-in-Progress Showings by VPL Lab Artist So Percussion
  • Turkuaz $ Medicine Warriors @ The Beacon Bar

  • Saturday 26-May
  • Dummerston Rummage Sale
  • Biomass District Energy System Tour
  • Gotterdammerung Opera
  • Community Supper & Contra Dance at Pierce's Hall in E. Putney
  • Talkin' Smack @ The Beacon Bar

  • Sunday 27-May
  • Organ Barn Recital & BBQ

  • Thursday 31-May
  • Southern Vermont Scrabble Club
  • Karaoke Thursday @ The Beacon Bar

  • Friday 01-Jun
  • Gallery Walk
  • The Future Collective: Silent Art Auction Opening
  • Strolling Of The Heifers Parade & Weekend 2012
  • DJ Mega @ The Beacon Bar

  • Saturday 02-Jun
  • Free Detoxing the Mind Workshop
  • Strolling Of The Heifers Parade & Weekend 2012
  • Ghost Dinner Band @ The Beacon Bar

  • Sunday 03-Jun
  • Tour de Heifer

  • Tuesday 05-Jun
  • CDBG - Disaster Recovery
  • Free Adult Career Develpment Workshop

  • Brattleboro Weekly Poll
    Right now, my view is that Brattleboro is
    improving by leaps and bounds
    getting better slowly
    staying about the same as always
    slowly going downhill
    rapidly falling apart
    other
    Results
    30 votes | 0 comments