CAVENDISH, Vt. – At the 2024 Cavendish Town Meeting, voters discussed concerns on the budget, the approval of a proposed cannabis retail facility, and the merits and drawbacks of voting on all future Town Meeting articles and public questions by Australian ballot. All articles will be voted on by Australian ballot Tuesday, March 5.
Before discussions of articles began, State Rep. John Arrison (Democrat, Windsor-2) and State Senator Alison Clarkson (Democrat, Windsor) updated voters on issues they are working on in their respective chambers. Moderator Mike Ripley waived the requirement of all speakers being registered voters of the town so that they could speak.
Arrison reminded everyone that, with federal money from the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) coming to an end, the legislature is shifting back to a budget with “business as usual.” Arrison also spoke about court backlogs due to high rates of retail theft recently, noted the poor healthcare and facilities at Springfield’s Southern State Correctional Facility, and expressed his desire to move the 125 individuals who are incarcerated in Tennessee back to prisons in Vermont. “We have a moral obligation to take care of our detainees to the best of our ability,” he said.
Senator Clarkson, who is also the Senate Majority Leader, told the Town that “we went into this session thinking that flood recovery mitigation, climate change, and housing were really gonna be our top areas of focus, and indeed they are. But we quickly realized that we had an equally challenging perfect storm in our education funding system in school funding and in school construction.” Clarkson said several policy changes had created “unintended consequences” outside of the legislature, namely those enacted by Act 127, which was designed to change how the State Education Fund allocates money based on a district’s concentrations of high-needs students. Clarkson said that clarifying the ambiguity of the act’s wording and fixing the issues it had caused were key priorities in the Senate. She also said working on Act 250 (in relation to where towns can develop and areas they must protect) and debating open carry in polling places during a highly contentious presidential election are also some of her main focuses this legislative session.
The first two articles passed with no discussion, before arriving at the budget article. Wendy Reiger, who previously spoke at a Cavendish Selectboard meeting about her experiences with the Ludlow Ambulance Service, again expressed her concerns with Cavendish contracting an ambulance service that refuses to take residents to any other hospital but Springfield Hospital, even though she says they should consider that for her and many other residents, nearby Mount Ascutney Regional Hospital is the “closest appropriate” hospital. Reiger said that many other Cavendish residents had reached out to her in support after she spoke to the selectboard, so she would like to establish “some sort of committee forum or group of citizens” to discuss the issue and bring it to the attention of the legislature. Interested citizens can contact Reiger or leave their names at the Cavendish Town Office.
Several people asked the selectboard about budget lines related to road repair. Cavendish resident Ann Cooper asked the selectboard how many miles of road the extra resurfacing line in the budget would cover. Town manager Richard Chambers said that, depending on the road and the contractor, it would cover one-third to one-half mile of road. “We saw this as a starting point,” he explained, and the town would need additional funds to do any more than that. Another concerned citizen asked a similar question about the gravel line. Chambers said that the figure in the budget was based on the town crushing some of its own gravel and using the town road crew. “They work pretty hard,” Chambers said of the road crew. “They do work hard, but it’s a limited group,” returned the citizen. “If we start to slip, what is our backup plan?” Chambers confessed they had none, but said that some of the gravel would be put aside for mud season repairs. Martha Mott of Twenty Mile Stream Road asked the selectboard if the town had a timeline for previously-hinted paving of all town roads. Chambers said he was not sure when the town would get around to back roads repair, and that paving would be a gradual process when it began. Selectboard member George Timko added that when the town gets paving money, they usually alternate between Twenty Mile Stream and Tarbell Hill, and since Tarbell Hill was done most recently, Twenty Mile Stream should be next.
The next article discussed was whether the town should allow the operation of cannabis retailers in town, as requested by Daniel Singleton. Sandra Russo expressed concern at the lack of discussion opportunities the town had provided for this issue, citing Ludlow’s many active meetings when they had considered a similar decision. She asked the selectboard if Cavendish, as a no-zoning town, would have any choice over the number or location of retailers once voters had allowed their operation. Chambers said the town would be unable to make special ordinances for cannabis retailers, and that the number of licenses distributed in the town would be determined by the Division of Liquor Control. Russo also asked if there was a difference between the terms “retailer” and “dispensary,” given that the Town Meeting article had used the former. Sen. Clarkson responded that dispensaries are for medical cannabis, and that retailers sell recreational cannabis.
Next, the town discussed the Australian ballot issue. Mike Ripley, the moderator, noted that before Covid had made the use of Australian ballot necessary and the town had voted to continue the practice for the last several years, Town Meeting had been a much more lively event, as voters proposed and voted on amendments. Resident Stuart Lindberg echoed his remarks, saying he had always been taught the importance of traditional Town Meeting, and that the practice should be “flowing in people’s veins here…the best democracy is a local democracy.” Reiger expressed strong support for his sentiments. Peter LaBelle added that, “Once you give Town Meeting up, it’s hard to get it back…making everything by Australian ballot is the death knell for Town Meeting.”
Town clerk Diane McNamara pointed out that voting by Australian ballot is much more accessible than floor voting. Without Australian ballot, there is no absentee ballot, no early voting, and having Town Meeting on a weekday evening makes it difficult for people with school-age children and older folks who don’t like driving at night to attend. She noted that there were 38 people present at Town Meeting that night (not counting Zoom attendees, as they would not be able to participate in floor voting), but voter turnout with Australian ballot was 200–300 people.
Rep. Arrison agreed that moving Town Meeting to a weekend day would be a good compromise, allowing the town to keep the tradition of floor voting that he personally supported, and making it more accessible. Jen Leak, who is the selectboard’s recording secretary, emphasized the accessibility issue. “The most important thing in a democracy is having a voice,” she said, “and it matters less how you have that voice…holding onto Town Meeting just because you’ve always done it that way isn’t democratic.” Selectboard member Dave Norton expressed support for these sentiments.
Despite differences of opinion, there was general interest in moving future Town Meeting dates to a Saturday. This would have to be determined at a future Town Meeting, or at a special meeting.
As the meeting ended, Tim Calabrese reminded residents that the planning commision will be hosting a question and answer session for the new Draft Subdivision Regulations, which are available on the town website. This will be on April 24, at a location yet to be determined.
Voting results will be posted in next week’s edition of The Vermont Journal.