Dear Editor:

I have lived in many places with a variety of local governments. I have lived in cities where a city councilor I probably didn’t know represented me. I have lived in rural areas where the county government administered the whole county. I have lived in towns where a representative voted for an entire section of town. It wasn’t until I moved to Alna that I got to experience a town meeting and see it as the pure form of democracy it is. I have been to town meetings that were fun and cooperative. I have been to meetings that were contentious. I have changed my opinion on an issue following discussion, and been disappointed when a vote turned out differently than I had hoped. But always I left feeling a sense of community and belonging. A referendum town meeting may be democratic, but it does not provide a sense of community or benefit from the interchange of ideas that
happens when an issue is presented. Letters to the editor, including this one, do not take the place of discussion.

We have had big issues over the years — deorganizing the town and discontinuing contracting with Wiscasset for schools were two. Always we have spent time researching the implications and then bringing information to town meeting for discussion and a vote. This process is being sidestepped by Article 4 in the upcoming election. I fear that by doing so, we take away what makes a town meeting such a unique, important, and community building activity.

I do not know if we need to change the way we govern our town. But I do know that a slower, more inclusive approach to looking at the issue will better serve the many different people who reside in Alna.

Barbara Baston

Alna