The select board has the authority and the responsibility to spend money, to apply for grants, to pursue planning for the future needs of the town. Where does the notion that these responsibilities end with a no vote come from?
For the past 10 years, the town has been undertaking the legitimate task of looking at the future needs of Waitsfield Village and Irasville in terms of water and wastewater. This work was undertaken without any special authorizing vote from the citizens. It was undertaken because board members recognized that there would be a need and set the process in motion.
The suggestion that a no vote means no more work in this area is irresponsible. Can towns never spend money on planning for the future and for necessary infrastructure projects? Towns regularly spend money in advance of voters approving funding. Waitsfield spent $1.2 million dollars planning and engineering these projects before the voters ever spoke.
That is legitimate and appropriate work for duly elected officials to undertake. It is the job of leaders to lead; we elected them to do so and presumably trust them to do so.
When they bring us projects or Town Plans or zoning amendments or subdivision regulations that we don't like, we vote our consciences. But that does not mean that our leaders should quit doing their jobs. It means they have to go back to the drawing board, find out why we voted no and proceed accordingly.
{loadnavigation}
