Randy Steere, Westford resident

To help dispel misconceptions regarding Article 10 that passed at the last town meeting, I would like to offer a clear description of my vision for a re-imagined town meeting.  The process would start as it does now with articles being drawn up and citizen petitions being put forward.  Once the agenda was finalized, one or more Town Meetings would be scheduled to facilitate discussion.  Each meeting would only cover specific articles.  No final vote would be taken except for amendments if still allowed.

By having multiple meetings, people could attend only those meetings that covered the articles they had the most interest in.  There would be more time for discussion rather than the current 2 minute limit.  People could attend in person or online, but only those physically present would be allowed to addess the audience.  

These meetings would be recorded and placed in an online community forum where they could be accessed by anyone at their leisure.  Additional questions, comments and answers could be added in this online forum basically opening up the discussion and vetting process to more citizens and vastly improving the dialogue within the community.  In short, this would be a 21st century town meeting that can easily handle the entire population of Westford and provide for better community involvement.

Amendments would only be entertained from those physically present (as is currently the case).  Therefore those with that level of interest would still have to be present.  I would be open to other ideas about amendments.  It is worth pointing out that state level ballot questions do not allow amendments at all.  There is also something to say for limiting amendments at the town level to require more dialog before the article is proposed!

At some point in this process, right after the final town meeting for instance, citizens would face a deadline to request  a mail-in ballot.  To make it easy to administer and familiar to all, this would be the only voting mechanism allowed.  The actual ballot would be mailed out once all wording was finalized.  This gives everyone the opportunity to vote through a well-known, secure process.

By not having either an in-person voting day or early voting, the process can be very simple, fair and consistent.  Every eligible person that requests it gets an opportunity to vote.  Everyone can perform their own due diligence and can get as involved as they want.

Returned ballots would have to be postmarked by a specific date to be counted.  Those ballots are tabulated quickly with our voting machines and the results announced.

This is just one vision for a re-imagined town meeting process!  Hopefully it demonstrates in more concrete terms how this might work.  Hopefully it is clear that such a process is not only very possible, but also offers many improvements over the current process.

One isn’t required to attend a meeting to vote.  One isn’t required to be present at a specific date and time to vote.  One isn’t required to sit through long discussions they aren’t interested in.  One can vote whether they are away at school, have inflexible work hours, have children at home, have mobility issues, get sick, or any number of other reasons that currently keep people from attending town meeting.  This will lead more people to be in the habit of always voting as they do other elections.  

Discussions can be much larger and spread out over time.  Those who like to attend a meeting in person can still do so.  However, I find writing out comments such as this letter typically results in a much more thoughtful argument than speaking emotionally off the top of one’s head at a meeting.  We don’t need to censor what people say with either a time limitation or limiting how many people can talk, both of which currently happen.  More people feel confident to write online without facing hundreds of people in a meeting.  Our society is very familiar with online discussion boards, listservs and other ways to share information.  The town can monitor this online discussion to answer questions and provide needed facts.  In short, it can take the town meeting into the 21st century, engaging a larger number of citizens in the process.  Rather than suppressing the vote as the current process does, this encourages voting.  It returns what used to be the most democratic process to that status once again.

Disclaimer: If you would like to submit a letter to the editor, contact managing editor Ben Domaingue at bdomaingue@westfordcat.org. Letters to the editor are reviewed and published at the discretion of the editor. Letters to the editor represent the opinion of the reader who submits it and do not necessarily represent the opinions of WestfordCAT or its employees. WestfordCAT retains the right to refuse any letter to the editor for publication as it deems necessary.

Letters should be 750 words or less. Letters should include the name, address, phone number, email of the individual submitting it. Only name and town will be published. Submissions do not necessarily have to be from Westford residents, however, those with Westford ties will have priority. Letters that contain direct personal attacks against an individual will not be published. Letters that contain libelous content will not be published. Readers may only submit one letter per 30-day period.