Town Gets New Digital Movie Projector

Voting by paper ballot, Town of Woodstock approved spending 60K for a new digital movie projector. The vote came after extensive discussion and went to paper ballot at the request of Marian Koetsier.

7 responses to this post.

  1. Posted by ROBIN on March 2, 2013 at 19:13



  2. Posted by Paulette Osborne on March 2, 2013 at 23:31

    Excellent!! Happy to hear it.


  3. Vote was 121 for 31 against, or close to that. Considering most of the people at town meeting represented non-profits seeking government funds, gun control advocates or employees of the town or the school, you have to wonder if it would have passed had the Selectman left it to a town-wide vote on Tuesday. Hopefully when it comes to future $60,000 expenditures controlled by Village non-profits, they’ll let all of the people in on the vote. The main complaint I heard about this issue is that Pentangle made no effort to fundraise, but simply figured the town would cough up the bucks. They were right.


  4. Posted by vickie on March 4, 2013 at 08:53

    I was at the meeting from start to finish – had to have someone cover me at work so I could be there for the 7 hours of meeting and discussion. I would counter it was not, in fact, all nonprofits and gun control advocates – even if it had been – it is a great reminder if you want to participate in DEMOCRACY – you have to show up. Inconvenient – often, boring- sometimes, necessary – always! If all warned articles were voted on by Australian ballot there would be (rightly so) complaints there was not sufficient time for discussion and understanding of the issues. If there is an issue you care about show up state your case and participate in the process. There has been lots of discussion about the WUHS budget cuts in the community and on this blog – when the floor was opened to ask questions of the Superintendent and WUHS Board Treasurer – only one question was asked – how much more accessibility do we want? I wonder if you can’t be bothered to show up then don’t you give your “vote” over to those who do. The Town meeting is a rare chance to have direct access in the democratic process – what a great opportunity.


  5. I agree 100% with you, Vickie, despite what someone said about the meeting being well-attended, I thought there were very few regular citizens in the audience. Apathy is the death of democracy, and if people can’t find the time to participate, they deserve the government they get.


  6. Posted by Dave on March 4, 2013 at 21:57

    I was at Saturday’s meeting from start to finish with many of my fellow retirees, a plethora of white-haired Woodstockians, and a handful of other residents neither retired nor white-haired. Many other citizens did not attend and their voices were not heard. Their lack of participation only highlights their callous disinterest in their local government. I have no sympathy for these people who were so selfish that they would not give up a day’s wages to attend our town meeting. So cheap that they wouldn’t hire a babysitter. So foolish that they wouldn’t find another non-town person to take their shift at work for them. Those people get what they deserve, indeed: ever increasing taxes, something most of us secretly wanted in the first place. People who have to care for their children or who have to work during the day on a Saturday are just so inconsiderate and uncivic-minded.

    As it turns out, we didn’t need those people, thanks to the Select Board who stacked the voice vote deck in our favor. The 150 people in attendance clearly constituted a quorum (3000 plus residents, 150 meeting attendees: a little less than 5% of our town’s population). Articles I-XII passed without a hitch. Questions were few and primarily related to the sixty thousand ($60,000.00) dollars for Pentangle’s “onetime ask” for a new hi-tech movie projector. Although Pentangle knew long ago that the current projection system would become obsolete, according to its spokesperson, the organization took no steps to meet or to offset in any way any future financial obligations. Concerns were trifling. For some long-standing reason unknown to me, Pentangle is sacrosanct and needs our local government’s support and our tax dollars without any frivolous need for it to be fiscally responsible. Although Pentangle will be in charge of the new projector, it doesn’t even belong to this organization; it belongs to the people of Woodstock, a distinction that is somewhat fuzzy to me. At any rate, I am looking forward to paying for its inevitable numerous software updates and hardware repairs.


  7. Posted by Bob Pear on March 6, 2013 at 17:25

    While I agree with Dave’s comment about the non-participation and apathy toward our self-governance here in Vermont, the concern should not be limited to participation at the annual meeting. Most, (much less than the 5% at the annual), can’t seem to find the time or make the commitment to participate all year long in our democracy. We have 24 selectboard meetings and 12 trustee meetings a year, and rarely are more than a few citizens present to give input.


Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: