The Thatched Roof Party

NML051905-1

The Scarlet “V”

The results are in: and after a long and scientifically rigorous analysis of the raw data I feel comfortable in ignoring the facts and saying that the news is, well, confusing.
Nothing, it is abundantly clear, is abundantly clear. Or should I say that it is abundantly clear that nothing is abundantly clear?

Nevertheless, a lack of clarity has never stopped me before, so here are my observations:

The override referendum was soundly defeated
-but one of the leaders of the naysayers didn’t make the cut
Teacher’s jobs are still on the line
-but word from the State House is that more cash is on the way. How much is not, at least at this time, abundantly clear.
It is official; Town Meeting has decreed that the Selectmen are over-compensated for their efforts
-then again, later Town Meeting officially asserted that they are not; then again they are, then again..
It is not true –my sources indicate, that Dramamine is given out to all town meeting members.

Here are my conclusions:

Hey hey, hey ho, the status quo has got to go
-just not yet.
“Put it on the Ballot” failed as a campaign slogan
-but then, to be fair, it hasn’t been fully tested.

We need to have a ballot referendum on the question of whether voters approve of the concept of ‘Put It on the Ballot” and so I propose that we put it on the ballot and see what the people think.
Then again, what the average ‘pilgrim’ thinks is still not clear, given the fact that 75% of the town’s registered voters were too busy thatching their roofs on Election Day to make it to the polls.
My sources indicate however, that there is a disparity between the actual number of thatched roofs in town (which according to the Building Department is 12) and the number of voters who never made it off their ladders in time to vote.

Do the 25% of registered voters who did manage to cast a vote speak for the entire town?
If not, what part of the town do they speak for? (The thatched roof section?)
If so, they’re going to need to speak up: I can’t hear them way down here in the village of South Plymouth.

I propose that the town establish an award to be given to the ‘village’ with the highest turnout on Election Day (as a percentage of registered voters).
How embarrassing would it be if the model ‘village’ of Pinehills won that award?

I also propose that –in deference to our pilgrim forefathers, anyone who can’t manage to vote in a local election (or come up with a better excuse than that they were thatching their roof) should have to put on a long skirt or pumpkin pants, and a heavy polyester puffy shirt embroidered with a scarlet “V”, and climb up on one of those rickety wooden ladders so they can actually thatch some roofs –at the Plimoth Plantation, in late July.

Then again, maybe we should put that on the ballot.


(You know, come to think of it, maybe there should be some additional incentives to get people out to the polls. My family has always taken advantage of the fact that the Plimoth Plantation offers free admissions to residents of the town, and has politely declined when the Plantation asks us to make an additional donation. But I do appreciate the value of their presence in town. What if the Plantation were allowed to discriminate between town residents who vote, and those who don’t? What if they could charge an admission fee for residents who did not take their civic responsibility as seriously as others? It would seem to be a ‘lesson’ that could be incorporated in the Plantation’s educational mission. )