Voices

Why would we want to terminate existing supervisory union for the unknown?

DUMMERSTON — I, for one, am unable to support the Act 46 Study Committee's proposal that is being put to the voters on Nov. 7.

I recognize that many people have worked hard to develop a plan that they hope is supported in the voting booth. The plan, as most of you know, is for a full merger of the school districts in the four towns in the current supervisory union. The proposal would (1) merge the districts in the three small towns, Putney, Dummerston, and Guilford, with the much-larger Brattleboro, and (2) take away the autonomy in the three towns to make “local decisions for local schools.”

Note that even the combined voting power of the three smaller entities would be less than that of Brattleboro alone. Why would any of us in the three towns vote for that, considering there are alternatives that achieve similar goals for all schools without asking three towns to make all the sacrifices? It would seem to portend the future of the relationship. Think of the Materials Recovery Facility as a fresh example that should concern our towns.

My hope is that, if the proposed merger fails, we consider what we should have been considering along, in parallel with the merger proposal, namely, the State Act 46–approved alternative governing structure, which is a supervisory union with member districts, i.e., an “enhanced supervisory union.”

Why would we want to terminate the existing supervisory union, which seems to have broad support, by residents of all towns, with a from-the-ground-up merger, possibly full of advantages but definitely full of drawbacks for the small towns and full of unknowns for everyone?

In light of the work done by the Act 46 Study Committee, and the acknowledged merit of many aspects of the proposal, I hope it could be used as an important point of reference for a broadly supported discussion to keep our supervisory union and to work within its current structure to improve it.

This could result in another proposal in 2017. I would rather see both proposals on the ballot so that voters could have a real choice. At the moment, we have a choice between the Study Committee's proposal and an alternative about which neither voters, nor anyone else, knows anything. What kind of choice is that?

I do not know if Act 46 provides this as an option, or if the act could be modified to include it, but it would seem to be fairer than any options voters have been given to date.

Subscribe to the newsletter for weekly updates