To the Editor:

Regarding the upcoming warrant item pertaining to renovating the Town House,  this letter is not intended to be an agreement or disagreement with the renovation proposal.  It is intended to share my understanding of a recent letter by John Waterman, which expressed concern with way in which the decision was made to include the renovation proposal in the town warrant, and to exclude an alternative.

If I understood it, John's letter expressed the importance he puts on proper procedure.  I have not seen a response to John's letter that proposes that the Selectboard's decision to include one warrant item involving a major capital expense, and to exclude another, is consistent with our usual understanding of the Selectboard's proper role.

The fact that the Selectboard's  preferred course of action is in the warrant is not the same thing as the town being given the choice to vote on their preferred option.

I feel that an underlying question is, how important is it to the town to have clear procedures for governance, and to be willing to support them, even when it might seem exasperatingly slow, or result in outcomes that we'd rather not have?

Bob Sanderson

Marion