Every so often, particularly during these trying times of the COVID-19 pandemic, I need to be reminded why Town Meeting still matters.
On Tuesday, Lyme voters did that.
The 125 or so residents who gathered in the Lyme School gymnasium made sure their voices were heard, literally. Four times in voice votes on hot-button issues, they went against the wishes of the town’s Selectboard.
Voters left their rubber stamps at home. Which is a sign of a healthy democracy.
Town Meeting is the ultimate citizen legislature. It’s the one day of the year that voters are truly in charge.
By Town Meeting, I mean communities that continue to stick with tradition. No mail-in ballots or dropping by the polls after work — towns that conduct most, if not all, business on the floor.
(That doesn’t mean arguments for going to all-day and mail-in voting are without merit. Not everyone can afford to take time off from work, leave young children at home or feels comfortable venturing outdoors in early March to attend Town Meeting.)
I think it’s safe to say that voter apathy is more responsible than anything else, COVID-19 worries included, for people staying away from Town Meeting in Lyme and other communities (Lyme uses Australian balloting for election of officers).
Roughly 10% of Lyme’s eligible voters attended Tuesday’s two-hour meeting.
Coming out for Town Meeting, however, has its own rewards. Along with an opportunity to speak their minds, residents can listen to neighbors and elected officials — often one and the same — explain their stances.
Town Meeting debates in most communities tend to be civil. When people with opposing viewpoints come face-to-face — even while wearing masks — it’s not like posting on Facebook or other social media. They can’t hide behind a computer or smartphone screen.
When Lyme residents took to the microphone Tuesday to disagree with the Selectboard’s position on the four warrant articles that drew the most attention Tuesday, they weren’t belligerent about it.
The Lyme Selectboard was asking voters to remove three town positions — tax collector, treasurer and overseer of public welfare — from the ballot, starting next year. Instead of leaving it up to voters to elect people to the part-time jobs, the three-member board wanted to the power to make the appointments.
The three jobs require a “certain skill set and technical knowledge,” Selectboard Chairman David Kahn told residents.
In essence, the board wanted the authority to hire and fire, which it doesn’t have with elected officials.
“We sincerely believe this will improve the town of Lyme,” Kahn said.
Town Meeting attendees were skeptical. If the decision on who holds the jobs went from voters to the Selectboard “another aspect of our small town would be lost,” Faith Catlin said.
Elections are a “method of performance review,” Allan Dooley added.
Without going into specifics, Kahn said, “When there’s a problem, it’s often invisible to the public; it isn’t invisible to the Selectboard.”
A resident pointed out that the Selectboard could essentially make its hires without any public involvement. Names of candidates could remain secret. The board could interview finalists behind closed doors. Residents might not know who got picked until the board had already made its decision. (State law requires only that the positions be held by town residents.)
Over the years, Lyme voters have done a “good job” of electing people to the positions that they “respect, admire and believe in,” resident Michael Whitman said. “We should continue the tradition.”
Barbara Woodard has twice been elected tax collector, but she didn’t run this year. The current board has given her “very little support and help,” she told residents.
After the meeting, Woodard told me that her decision not to run again wasn’t due to the board’s proposed change. It had more to do with turning 70 and wanting to spend more time with her grandchildren, she said.
In one of two contested elections on the ballot, Stephen Castellani and Marci O’Keefe were seeking the tax collector’s job that’s set to pay $11,680 in the upcoming budget year.
Resident Phil Kinsler told the audience that he liked having a choice instead of leaving it up to the board. “I don’t want all the power consolidated in the hands of three people,” he said.
In three separate voice votes, residents rejected the board’s recommendations.
Voters weren’t done, however, in letting the board know that they had a will of their own.
In a petitioned warrant article not supported by the board, residents wanted to offer more property tax relief to elderly people with household incomes of $50,000 or less a year.
The change could “help people stay in their houses,” said Rich Brown, one of the article’s architects.
Lee Larson pointed out that Lyme hadn’t changed the so-called “elderly exemption” that New Hampshire communities can offer since 2004. “We all know what’s happened to salaries and property values” in the last 18 years, he said.
Compared with other communities across the state, the tax relief that Lyme offers to qualified elderly residents is “fairly generous,” board chairwoman Judith Brotman told voters. (Last year, 19 Lyme households received property tax exemptions of varying amounts.)
Before the warrant article was proposed, the board was making plans this year to study the possibility of increasing exemptions for the elderly and other groups, including military veterans and people with disabilities.
But voters were unwilling to wait.
The meeting didn’t end without the board chalking up several big wins. Its proposed town operating budget of nearly $2.7 million sail through on another voice vote.
After the meeting, Brotman, who has lived in Lyme for 37 years, acknowledged the board took some hits on Tuesday.
“But that’s OK,” she said. “It was democracy.”
Jim Kenyon can be reached at jkenyon@vnews.com.