Pownal Act 46 merger vote recount reveals ‘no’ meant ‘no’

This article by Derek Carson originally appeared Monday in the Bennington Banner.

POWNAL — A re-count of votes in Pownal on whether or not to merge five local school districts confirmed the results reported earlier this month.

The re-count was initiated after Pownal Assistant Town Clerk Julie Weber received a written request from a resident within the 10-day deadline following the vote, which failed by a thin margin, 210-214. On Monday evening, after the manual re-count was completed the number of votes exactly matched the initial count.

While voters in Bennington and Shaftsbury overwhelmingly approved a merger of the Bennington, Shaftsbury, Pownal, Woodford, and Mount Anthony Union school districts on Nov. 7, at least three of the four towns involved had to vote in favor to form the regional district. Woodford’s vote also failed, 36-38. The merger was approved in total across the four communities, 1,533 to 766. Bennington voted 965 to 338 in favor and Shaftsbury voted 322 to 176 to approve the plan.

Rejection of the plan on Nov. 7 meant that the merger could not be approved through a re-vote before a Nov. 30 deadline set by the state in order to qualify for school tax reductions under the Act 46 process. Had the re-count reversed the result in either Pownal or Woodford, which recounted its votes last week, the merger would have been considered as being approved prior to the deadline. A re-vote could still occur in either town if warned by the school board or if petitioned by 5 percent of the registered voters of the town.

Read full article at the Bennington Banner.

(Fair use with permission from the New England Newspapers Inc.)

Image courtesy of town of Pownal

4 thoughts on “Pownal Act 46 merger vote recount reveals ‘no’ meant ‘no’

  1. This is so dishonest: “The merger was approved in total across the four communities, 1,533 to 766.” No, that did not happen. Each town voted separately, and the total across towns is irrelevant. One heavily populated town doesn’t get to vote to seize the assets of another town. You would think reporters could at least use some basic logic in their reporting…..you’d be wrong, but it seems like a reasonable assumption.

  2. Continuing to lament the results, and pointing to the popular vote including all four tons is a pretty poor way to convince me that regionalization is a good thing. This recount was courtesy of the same group who are promoting the model climate economy scam onto Pownal. They adamantly oppose any of that initiative going to the voters.

Comments are closed.