Christopher Shipp

To the editor,

Once again, the town of Moultonborough is in a state of turmoil over consideration of SB-2. The papers have been inundated with letters on both sides of the issue, some filled with facts, many filled with propaganda and half-truths. Undoubtedly, the debate will continue until the last ballot is cast on March 10th. I myself am staunchly opposed to SB-2. I cannot support any policy that increases the number of voters while virtually assuring that those same voters will not be well informed on the very issues they are voting on. To me, 50 well informed voters provide a purer form of democracy than 500 uninformed voters.

I was not there, but I am pretty sure that when the town meeting form of government was established, it was never intended that every registered voter would be at town meeting. I would venture to guess that it was assumed that those that were in attendance would provide a cross section of voters demographically similar to that of the entire voting body. I find it almost humorous that many of the letters to the editor that are pro SB-2 seem to try to shed it in a positive light by highlighting its similarities to traditional town meeting. To me it begs the question; why change? That being said, I don’t expect to be able to sway any ones SB-2 vote simply by writing a letter to the editor. This letter was written to address a related issue that to me is of much graver concern for the people of Moultonborough, that issue is The Moultonborough Citizens Alliance.

I am not inherently opposed to the MCA. In fact when they first became politically active, I was glad to see that someone was taking notice of issues in town that I felt were being ignored. I respect many of the Alliances leaders as individuals. The problem I have is that an organization that once heralded itself as being an advocate for all citizens has morphed into what is blatantly nothing more than another special interest group. I am in my late thirties. I have two young children in what I believe to be an outstanding school district. I appreciate the importance of a well-funded recreation department. I understand that the basic economic principal of “you get what you pay for” applies to our town services as well as the private economic sector. I feel that all members of a community have a responsibility to properly fund a reasonable level of town services regardless of what suits them as individuals.

There are many residents of Moultonborough that are just like me, and the Moultonborough Citizens Alliance certainly has not had our best interests in mind. One look at their website makes that painfully obvious. The alliance accuses others of fear mongering but it is a tactic they repeatedly employ. They call for transparency in government, yet they are afraid to vote in public with their fellow citizens and their membership list is a well-guarded secret. They accuse others of bringing up issues that have been previously defeated yet their members hastily do the same (SB-2). They appear suspicious to the point of paranoia of almost every government agency. They tout the importance of free speech yet viciously trounce any opinion that is not their own. I guess I need to know exactly what citizens the alliance truly represents, because it appears it is not the average Moultonborough citizen. What I do believe is that the alliance is a vocal minority of people who are committed to blindly reducing our already low taxes at all costs with complete disregard for whatever repercussions will follow. It appears to me that they have not considered the consequences of their actions and lack any plan to affect truly positive change over a long term.

When I attended the recent “meet the candidates night” at the Moultonborough Lions Club, two of the four candidates for selectmen stated they were affiliated with the MCA. When asked what they would change about the town’s financial policies and procedures, neither of them gave an answer that had any substance to it whatsoever. Being so outwardly critical of our current elected leaders, one would think that the MCA candidates would have had a well thought out plan to rectify the many “problems” in our town. They don’t. So, what should they do? In my humble opinion, the Moultonborough Citizen’s Alliance has come to a fork in the road and they have two choices.

The first choice would be to take the high road and reassess their organization. They could become more neutral and work to further the interests of all citizens regardless of their political views, socioeconomic status, or stage of life. They could become more tolerant and realize that differing opinions are not precursors to an adversarial relationship. They could be what they claim to be, a true alliance of all citizens of Moultonborough.

Unfortunately, I predict they will take the low road and I think it will go something like this: if SB-2 fails, as I hope it will, they will blame it on the “super majority” that is required. They will continue to criticize our town leaders yet provide no solutions to their perceived problems. They will demand lower taxes yet provide no area where responsible cuts could be made. They will continue their alliances with other ultra-conservative, anti-government organizations. They will continue to “stack” there website with propaganda that furthers only their interests. They will continue to pretend to be what their name implies, “The Moultonborough Citizens Alliance”, which their actions show, they are clearly not.

If they take the low road, as I am 99-percent sure they will, I would urge them to at least rename their organization to accurately reflect what they have become. I would suggest “The Moultonborough Anti-Government, Kids Already Graduated, Disrespectful, Anti-Labor, I Could Do It Better, Anti-Community, Retired, Hooray For Me, Too Bad For You, Handful Of Unappreciative Citizens Alliance”.

Christopher Shipp

Moultonborough