Will This FS1 Town Meeting Be as Unfairly Organized as the Last One?

This Monday’s Special Town Meeting will vote on approving the new FS1 plan.

Town officials frequently describe Town Meeting as “the purest form of direct democracy” where every citizen acts as a member of the town’s governing body. Yet in practice, it often feels as though leadership views the process as an annoying hurdle to be managed, rather than a true forum for citizen debate. Last year’s Annual Town Meeting vote on the previous FS1 proposal was a particularly troubling example. The question facing residents now is: How much of that unfairness will be repeated this time?

Because Town Meeting is the official public forum where residents deliberate and decide on important town issues, procedural fairness is essential. Yet during the 2025 Annual Town Meeting, the presentation structure for Article 14 (Fire Station 1) blatantly violated the spirit of neutral deliberation. Municipal proponents were granted unlimited media privileges and clock-free presentation time, while resident opposition was strictly capped at three minutes per speaker of floor testimony.

Before the floor debate even opened, the Select Board aired a well-polished 9-minute video advocating for Article 14. Featuring professional graphics, safety warnings, and financial breakdowns carefully scripted for favorable outcome, it concluded with an outright pitch for a “yes” vote.

Immediately following the video, town officials were given unlimited presentation time to further promote the plan. Select Board Member Maryanne LeBlanc Cummings described the benefits of the design and timelines. The Fire Chief talked about the critical operational and safety needs, and Select Board Chair Joe Previtera delivered a closing appeal on insurance ratings and paramedic recruitment.

By contrast, everyday residents with concerns or opposing viewpoints faced a large, intimidating three-minute timer displayed in front of them and were limited to speaking just once on the motion.

The fact that the town voters subsequently defeated that plan twice at the ballot box indicates how distorted the vote that night actually was.

We should all demand that the town provide equal, balanced time for both sides on these major financial decisions. This new plan carries real trade-offs and financial implications that deserve a fair presentation of the arguments.

Moreover, towns across the country routinely build functional fire stations without multi-phase marketing campaigns. After dozens of town-sponsored "information" sessions, one must ask: If this fire station plan is so good compared to alternative designs, why does the town need to spend tens of thousands of our tax dollars marketing it to us?

On Monday night, we deserve nothing less.