How much public input is enough when it comes to a construction project?
That question has been asked by a small group of Brattleboro residents scrutinizing current plans to install mast arm traffic lights on Main Street as part of the state's long-awaited reconstruction of Route 5 between Brattleboro and Putney.
Multiple public meetings took place between 1996 and 2009 as part of that construction planning process. The town Traffic Safety and Control Committee had several meetings on the subject. The Selectboard voted unanimously to approve the Vermont Agency of Transportation's plans in October 2009.
But the opposition, led by Selectboard Vice-Chair Dora Bouboulis and resident Steven K-Brooks, felt this wasn't enough, especially when the details about what the new traffic lights would look like came out not long before the Route 5 project was slated to begin.
For all the demands for greater public input made by Bouboulis and K-Brooks, it doesn't appear that most Brattleboro residents share their enthusiasm.
Though the AOT and the Selectboard followed the letter of the open meetings law in scheduling and warning these meetings, a project duration of 13 years might well warrant some additional hearings that go beyond the letter of the law.
But in this case, would it really have mattered?
For true public participation, residents should have an opportunity to weigh in on matters early on, but all the public hearings in the world are useless if the public doesn't attend.
Brattleboro citizens have a history of not showing up and participating in public affairs. The annual information meetings for the town and school budgets are sparsely attended. Turnout is usually low for the municipal elections each March.
And, for all the controversy over pay-as-you-throw trash disposal, fewer than 1 in 4 registered voters weighed in on the matter in the June 29 special election.
Most of the time motorists notice the traffic lights on Main Street only when they have stopped working. The 50-year-old lights are so old that town officials say they can't get parts for them.
Yet, old as they are, the current lights are mounted on aluminum posts, hardly in keeping with the historic character of the downtown area that the mast-arm-lights opponents say will be destroyed.
If you want to get a look at what is proposed for Main Street, take a ride to Greenfield, Mass., where black mast-arm traffic lights are being installed on Main and Federal streets. The color makes the mast arms blend in better and make the lights easier for motorists to see.
Aside from the width of its Main Street, downtown Greenfield isn't substantially different from Brattleboro. If complaints about the design or about the lack of public input came about in that process, they certainly were not as strident.
“Dressing up” Brattleboro's proposed traffic lights would cost about $35,000, and there are many other ways that the town could better spend the money.
To the AOT's credit, its representatives patiently and carefully responded to all the concerns about the traffic lights, and about a proposal to narrow the sidewalks, at the July 6 Selectboard meeting. They didn't have to, but in doing so, they showed the sort of courtesy that their critics had claimed was lacking.
The town can always do more to include the public in the deliberation process, but the public has to do its part by showing up.
That is the lesson to be learned from the great traffic light kerfuffle.