I’m not sure why there is a huge increased interest in the blog. I don’t see where anyone referenced it in today’s paper. Maybe people are just waiting for me to respond to the paper’s latest editorial. I don’t think I’m going to do that. It’s a sucker game. The editor wants to be both a participant in the debate and the moderator. I’ll let my criticisms stand unanswered and ignore the diversionary arguments.
There was a preview of the spin that we will get on the petition referendum questions. In the letter titled “Surveys can mislead” one reader believes question D is ambiguous. (Do you favor rehabilitation of Brewster Memorial Hall with private funds).
As far as I’m concerned, the question is moot if people indicate in question A that they support restoration of BMH for use as town offices. Otherwise, questions D and E (Sell it) are intended to get some sense of what other disposition voters might have in mind.
Anybody who believes there is some kind of potential for a “public/private partnership” just hasn’t been paying attention. How long are they going to dangle that carrot on a stick and expect us to keep plodding along.