The poor voter turnout (185 of 1307 registered voters) and the margin of defeat are indicative of several things. First, the low turnout shows that while a handful of people (14 percent) care a lot about subdivision regulations, a whole lot of people don't care. Secondly, the margin of defeat shows that the small handful who voted believed the inflammatory rhetoric spouted against the regulations.
So now what? The task before the town, if it wants to get its regulations up to speed, involves creating an atmosphere of true education and communication so that voters: one, understand why subdivision regulations are important to the future of a town; and, two, know enough to sift through anti-government rhetoric when it is proffered.
And that won't be easy. The town's select board, development review board and planning commission made Herculean efforts to inform the public about the vote and the regulations. There were informed and accurate opinion pieces which ran in local media; there was a live call-in show on MRVTV. And those efforts were not enough.
For whatever reason, more people chose to believe that their town officials were trying to pull something over on them, than chose to believe that their town officials were trying to do the right thing for the town. That's a perception problem and not one that can be solved easily.
Perception problems aside, however, Waitsfield has subdivision regulations that are almost two decades old, were designed for the suburbs of down country and have a proven track record of not working.
Moreover, those regs are harsher and allow regulatory bodies broad latitude in making important decisions about peoples' land and how the town develops.
But they are the law of the land now, until a revised version works its arduous way back through the planning commission and the select board and perhaps the voters. Be careful what you wish for.
{loadnavigation}
