Response to the move to overturn SB2 in Amherst to overturn SB2 in Amherst

Wednesday, March 3, 2010

To the Editor:

Dean Shalhoup’s article, in last Thursday’s Cabinet, covering the SB2 issue coming before both Mont Vernon and Amherst voters on March 9 was a comprehensive report on both sides of the issue. My comments are addressing the opinions voiced by Mr. Kunkle, interviewed for that article, regarding the Amherst SB2 matter, where he advocated the reversal of their SB2 now in place. He said it does not allow for quality conversation and discussion out of the town meeting format. Voters: SB2 law does dictate deliberative sessions before the polling vote, which is adequate opportunity for conversation and discussion.

It occurs to me that those who wish to go back to not having a full ballot box and absentee vote opportunity on matters affecting school and town decisions, and their pocketbook, are saying that it is all right to put limitations on a citizen’s right to vote in an equitable manner. How can that ever be a good thing! They want to discourage the opportunity for a fair and equal vote?

Mont Vernon attendees at the school board hearing at Mont Vernon Village School to discuss our pending vote to enact SB2 heard the same argument as embraced by Mr. Kunkle.

If applying that argument then you might as well say why not have “conversation and decision making” at a town meeting with a vote, at that limited meeting, for all local, state and yes, Presidential elections also? Is it any different, really? Would you accept that? I think not!

Without SB2 you get limited choice, with SB2 you get expanded choice.

NH law allows SB2 and how could they not? Without it that would be a case of taxation without the opportunity for full representation of all the people. It is simply not good common sense to agree to continue to limit or give back one’s voting rights. I ask Mont Vernon voters to go to their polling place on March 9 and vote yes for SB2 for Mont Vernon School District.

JAN MILLER

Mont Vernon