Let’s put aside the fiction that Question 1 isn’t related to the new library for just a moment. Funding the new library was a bold, inspired investment in Greenfield’s future, the kind of action that a representative city government can and should be capable of taking on behalf of its citizens. This investment in our city’s future was also nearly undermined by a very small group of people — a very small group of people more concerned about getting what they wanted than whether the majority of their neighbors agreed with them.
There’s a common misconception in politics today that equates “my right to be heard” with “I get what I want.” The current referendum process, with its incredibly low threshold, only empowers these small special-interest groups to cause gridlock and sabotage the will of the majority. Even after the new library funding passed on the ballot two years ago, we continue to see frivolous court challenges, accusations of misleading voters, a sudden feigned interest in the fate of the fire station, all in the name of stopping the project.
What happened to the will of the majority who voted yes for the library? Here’s what we can look forward to if Question 1 doesn’t pass: every City Council decision petitioned, every project stalled and over budget, every opportunity squandered, every year wasted as Greenfield stagnates under yet another delay demanded by a group of citizens who offer nothing but “no.”
We deserve better, Greenfield. The 21st century will not be kind to communities that can’t act quickly or invest in themselves. Our future should not be held hostage by minority special-interest groups – especially those whose only claim to unfair treatment is that they didn’t get what they wanted. I’m voting Yes on Question 1 for the future of Greenfield.
Dave DeRicco
Greenfield