Dear Editor,

Contrary to claims made by some residents, decisions made by the majority vote of the Board of Trustees do not represent a circumvention of democratic process. Indeed, it is the role of elected officials to make such decisions, and it is the role of residents to either accept or challenge them through the mechanisms outlined by law. These might include regular elections, referendum petitions, or in rare cases, substantiated legal challenges.

The signatories on the referendum petition to reconsider Ordinance 859 granting special review use (SRU) for a private childcare center at 750 W. 5th Street for TEENS, Inc. did just that: they exercised their legal right to challenge a democratic decision by the Board of Trustees. As is the Board’s legal right, they declined to reconsider, and chose instead to send the question to a special election. These procedures are outlined clearly in law and represent democratic processes at work. The signatories of the petition should be commended for their passion and engagement in local governance. It would be incorrect, however, to suggest that their actions are any more legitimate than those taken by elected decision-makers.

Furthermore, it is an ethical misstep to cast aspersions on members of our community based on erroneous understandings of how local government works. To suggest that this ordinance was passed hastily or that the Board abridged democratic process would ignore the fact that this issue has been, and continues to be, rigorously debated in the public eye with multiple opportunities for all to express their viewpoints.

Societies cannot be effectively governed on the whims of desire or preference. Instead, effective governance must operate by working together to identify our community’s needs, propose potential solutions to those needs, and decide whether and how to implement those solutions. No solution, regardless of how elegant or well-intentioned, will satisfy all stakeholders, and may even impact some negatively. Granted, the proposal by a community nonprofit to operate a much-needed childcare facility on publicly-owned land is unlikely to result in catastrophe for anyone. It might result in some discomfort, but elected officials have weighed that against the potential benefits and voted accordingly. That a petition to reconsider their decision was signed by the required percentage of Town voters is not a failure of democracy, but its triumph.

The question now is whether to allow TEENS, Inc. to operate a childcare facility on this Town-owned lot for $1/year. Recent attempts to reframe the special election as a defense of democracy are misinformed at best, and only deflect from the real benefits this proposal will provide. I implore the petitioners and their allies to consider that this is a real opportunity to meaningfully contribute to the betterment of our world. It is rare that such a relatively small sacrifice could produce such a significant impact for so many. Rather than watch Town assets continue to languish in disuse, let’s take advantage of this moment and put them to work for the community. Vote yes.

Eric Coombs Esmail

Nederland