The scheduling of the Plymouth Town election should have been the perfect way to fill the lull in the presidential election caused by the protracted death match between Hillary and Obama. While we wait for a Democratic nominee to emerge victorious from this endless slog, we could shift our focus closer to home for the May 10th Town election. But based on current measurment of the lawn-sign quotient, the Plymouth election is mired in second place, just behind the annual running of the herring. Not that there is a lack of hot ballot topics.
For example, a casual observer might have thought that the approval or rejection of the proposed new Town Charter might have stimulated some interest as it would, if accepted, change the entire organization of Town government including the providing of Town services (you know, like police and fire protection, the public schools and public works) not to mention the levying of property taxes to pay for it all. Admittedly, the proposed charter was not well-received when presented due to its over-the-top complexity designed to mollify anyone who ever proposed a change to Town government. But someone should be out there touting this thing. What if it passes in a light voter turnout?
On a more cultural note, the ballot also contains a question regarding the establishment of a movie studio in South Plymouth. The proponents of this project seem to be among the best organized as their distinctive black signs proclaim “Vote Yes on 3, Plymouth Rock Studios.” While the studio presumably would bring some economic benefit to the Town, it is not clear how a film-making culture would mix with life here in Olde Plimoth, at least not before the Wampanoag’s open their big glitzy casino on Route 44(soon to be renamed Rte 66). Look at the picture above and try to envision palm trees lining Plymouth Beach as the studio shoots a re-make of Bay Watch.
BTW, In spite of the similarity of the names, the proposed studio is not in any way affiliated with this blog.
At any rate, the point is somewhat moot as the referendum is non-binding which means no one has to act on its successful passage. Presumably, however, the results might provide guidance to Town officials as they weigh the approval of the project.
Finally, the mother of all non-binding referenda is contained in the “question” concerning the War in Iraq. Essentially, a vote for the question is a vote to recommend to our Washington Legislators that they cut off all funding for the war except for paying the fare to bring the troops home. As we have discussed before HERE, this is one of the dumbest ideas to ever come down Rte 3, eclipsed only by the Selectmens' decision to allow it on the ballot by a unanimous vote, without the necessity of collecting signatures. And for those who might write the whole thing off as harmless, consider the lift that an affirmative vote might provide to our enemies in Iraq on reading that the good folk in historic Plymouth think that we should cut off funding for our troops. If this isn’t giving comfort to the enemy, I don’t know what is. Lets leave this issue where it belongs in the presidential election. Although now with Hilary putting Iran in her gun sights, it might not be quite as simple.
The ballot will also contain some folks running for office including self-proclaimed produce king, Dicky Quintal and Jean, “sign monitor” Loewenberg, both of whom are running for re-election to the Board of Selectmen. Let’s just hope that voters remember the stellar performance of the selectmen, not only in putting the Iraq War question on the ballot but also their deft handling of the trash disposal fiasco.
There are still a few weeks before May 10th for the voters to catch up with the issues. Moreover, the herring seem to be just about through with their run.
No comments:
Post a Comment