Elizabeth McLoughlin is chair of the Brattleboro Selectboard. She is a candidate for re-election for a three-year seat.
BRATTLEBORO-The people of Brattleboro deserve clarity about why former Town Manager Peter Elwell has chosen to publicly attack my character. His recent statements accuse me of bullying and demeaning others, even as he claims to champion "civility," "respect for facts," and "thoughtful listening."
These accusations are false. They are designed to intimidate me and to discredit my work on the Selectboard. I reject them completely.
As a woman serving in elected office, I will not be pushed aside, talked down to, or silenced by anyone - especially not by a former official who now seeks to influence town politics from the sidelines.
This year's Selectboard election is not routine. It is a defining moment for Brattleboro. Voters must decide whether we remain a town with a modest, focused municipal government or whether we transform into an activist municipality with expanding departments, rising taxes, and untested programs.
We can continue supporting our police department - which has restored safety downtown and in our neighborhoods - or we can strip resources from law enforcement and redirect them to a brand-new municipal Community Safety Department with no proven track record.
The choice is stark, and the consequences are real.
* * *
When I joined the Selectboard seven years ago, Mr. Elwell told me plainly that Brattleboro was not an activist government. He emphasized that the town should support social service agencies only in modest, appropriate ways. He was clear that municipal government should stay focused on core services.
Today, he has reversed himself. He now champions defunding the police and expanding municipal social-service functions. His priorities have shifted dramatically.
I believe in responsible budgeting, public safety, and a government that stays within its proper scope.
The defund-the-police agenda has been pushed repeatedly in recent years. We have seen proposals to cut $300,000 from the police budget. We have seen a push to create a new town Department of Community Safety with a $350,000, three-year director position. We have seen demands for a municipally run homeless encampment and advocacy for a safe-injection site.
These proposals would fundamentally reshape Brattleboro's government and finances. They would increase taxes, expand bureaucracy, and weaken public safety.
I do not believe this is what the people of Brattleboro want, and I will not support it.
* * *
Our town has already been carrying a disproportionate burden. The state's Covid motel program placed 10% of Vermont's homeless population in Brattleboro - a town that makes up only 2% of the state. This strained our services, increased crime, and destabilized our downtown.
Meanwhile, under Mr. Elwell's leadership, the police department was allowed to shrink to just 13 officers - far below what a town our size requires. That combination created a crisis that Brattleboro was left to manage alone, without adequate resources and without acknowledgment from those who helped create the problem.
After several tragic incidents in 2023, including the killing of a shelter manager, the state of Vermont intervened. Working with Jim Baker, Town Manager John Potter, social service leaders, and first responders, the Selectboard - me included - helped built a collaborative framework now known as One Brattleboro.
This partnership has strengthened public health and safety and shown what real cooperation looks like - not slogans, not ideology, but actual results.
At the same time, downtown merchants and residents demanded action. They were right to do so.
The Selectboard responded by directing Chief Norma Hardy to create the Downtown Safety Action Plan and the Brattleboro Response Action Team (BRAT), which deploys unarmed officers to assist the public, support vulnerable individuals, and address illegal activity.
The Selectboard approved this plan, and it has delivered results. People feel safer. Businesses feel supported. The collaboration between police and social services is working. This is what effective governance looks like.
Yet defund advocates continue to ask when we can cut the police budget. They refuse to acknowledge the success of these efforts. They opposed the Acceptable Community Conduct Ordinance. They resisted the BRAT program. They continue pushing to shift police funds to new municipal social-service initiatives.
Their agenda is not fiscally responsible, and it puts both social workers and the public at risk. It is not grounded in the realities Brattleboro faces every day.
* * *
I want to help people, but I also have a responsibility as a Selectboard member to Brattleboro's stability, safety, and fiscal health.
I want a town where social services and law enforcement work together, not in opposition. I want a town where taxpayers are respected, not treated as an endless funding source for experimental programs. And I want a town where public safety is understood as the foundation of everything else - economic development, community life, and basic quality of life.
I will not be intimidated by political pressure or personal attacks. I will not be shamed into supporting policies that I know are harmful. I will not allow Brattleboro to be pushed into becoming a "little Burlington," with higher taxes, weakened public safety, and an activist municipal government that grows larger every year.
I will continue to make hard, reality-based decisions to ensure that Brattleboro remains safe, vibrant, and welcoming.
Yes, I want our town to have nice things. I want a clean, secure town where residents and businesses can thrive.
I am running for re-election to the Selectboard to defend that vision and to continue fighting for the community I love. Brattleboro deserves leadership grounded in facts, not ideology; in responsibility, not intimidation; in courage, not political gamesmanship.
If you share my vision, then vote for me on Tuesday, March 3.
This Voices Response 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 [email protected].