Tuesday, June 15, 2004

The Myth of Faction

It appears Norwich has reached that unhappy state where politics trumps good governance.

Some observers point to bloc voting in recent years as evidence of meaningful differences between two ideologically distinct factions. I simply don't see it.

Instead, I see two loose confederations of individuals, each united primarily in reaction to a perceived transgression by the other. Arguments as to how this all started -- who cast the first stone -- simply highlight the fact both sides feel abundantly provoked. An accumulation of slights have bred a series of personal animosities which now often cloud rational, thoughtful decision-making.

In my view, it is an open question whether the current Selectboard membership and their respective supporters can find a practical path away from the personality-driven politics of the present. Certainly, the path begins with a determination to place the good of the town ahead of the expediency of faction. This requires the discipline of tolerance to take seriously the concerns of those we dislike as legitimate concerns however illegitimately we may feel they have been expressed. It requires the humility to recognize our own proviniciality and seek to understand the views of our opponents for how they might illuminate our own blind spots. And it requires the practical sense to recognize today's slim majority does not further it's own interests by running roughshod over yesterday's slim majority. Finally, it requires the leadership to listen patiently to all sides and treat them all fairly as a good in itself.

The people of Norwich deserve the government we demand. Maybe it's time to ask for more?

Tuesday, June 1, 2004

Norwich Woes - (Valley News Op-Ed)

To The Editor:

Alex Hanson's May 27th article ("Norwich Couple's Complaint Brings Deeper Discord To Surface") asserts that "Norwich is sharply divided over issues of growth and development. For the last several years, that division has become increasingly personal." Mr. Hanson's attempt to place the town's factional nonsense within some kind of substantive context is understandable but doesn't bear scrutiny.

Town government in Norwich is indeed "sharply divided," but growth and development issues are simply the flavors of the month. Seven years ago, the divisions flared up over litigation with certain tax-exempt entities in town; five years ago it was Selectboard meeting times; three years ago it was police staffing and class four roads; this year it is the Planning Commission. The only consistent thread through these and myriad other recent conflicts in town has been the cast of characters arrayed on either side.

I have friends and acquaintances in both camps and I have yet to see any meaningful policy differences between the two. All I see are two camps, steeped in the politics of outrage; no longer able to recognize the provocations of their own conduct because they are so intent upon exposing the machinations of their opponents. It's all personal and putative policy differences are simply vehicles to whip up the troops for the next election. The important question Norwich residents should be asking themselves is: Where will it end?

On the one hand, Norwich voters have shown an increasing willingness to vote out incumbents from both factions. Perhaps the outrage is turning upon itself and will eventually consume its promoters. On the other hand, the political circus leaves little room for the soft-spoken. I hate to think the current volume and vitriol of town politics might become business as usual in Norwich. I hate to think a community such as ours would settle for government by the loudest especially when, if you dig beneath the demagoguery, there's so little to shout about.