Letters to the Editor: Jan. 9

Asylum seekers’ stories echo 300 years of U.S. immigrants’ stories

To the Editor:

Picture a young woman, 9 months pregnant, compelled by forces beyond her control to leave home and make an arduous journey with her betrothed to a foreign land, unsure of their welcome there.

At this time of year, most of us raised in the Christian tradition would pretty immediately, if unconsciously, imagine this young woman as Mary, “heavy with child,” compelled by a decree by Roman ruler, Caesar Augustus, to travel with Joseph to Bethlehem, to be counted in a compulsory census. Given the secularization of the Nativity story, even people of other faiths, or no faith at all, know Jesus’s birth story, if only through secular sources like Linus standing in the spotlight on stage to recite the story in the animated classic, “A Charlie Brown Christmas.”

But what if this story is not Biblical at all, but contemporary? In fact, this story is that of one of the asylum seekers who came to Vermont just a few years ago with her husband. She walked through the treacherous jungle of the Darien Gap that links South America to Central America and on to the U.S.-Mexico border, all while many months pregnant, to seek asylum from the violence and hopelessness of her native land. And what if you knew that this woman’s story, unlike Mary’s, is not at all unique, but far too common, and one that at times has resulted in the death of the mother and her unborn child, either due to the terrible conditions of the journey or her treatment at the border?

Since 2018, the nine community-based organizations that comprise the Vermont-New Hampshire Asylum Support Network have organized in their own backyards to offer welcome to strangers much like this pregnant woman and her husband. Residents of Vermont towns from Brattleboro to Burlington and St. Johnsbury to Rutland have banded together to provide asylum seekers with safe and warm places to stay and other assistance when little other help is available.

Stories of welcoming the stranger are not confined to one or another country or culture. Indeed, admonitions to welcome the stranger with extravagant hospitality abound in societies around the globe and across time lest the stranger turn out to be a friend, or perhaps an angel, an ancestor or even a savior.

One reason the value of welcoming the stranger has such universal power may be that so many of us, perhaps most of us, have at one time or another been “a stranger in a strange land.” Certainly, the vast majority of us Vermonters have ancestors who came to the United States at some point over the past three centuries looking for safety, opportunity and the freedom to pursue their dreams. The asylum seekers coming to Vermont right now are no different from our ancestors. They seek safety for themselves and their children. They yearn for the chance to live free of the threat of violence or persecution for who they are, the color of their skin, their religious beliefs or their political perspective. They are ready to work hard, contribute to their communities and live in peace with their neighbors.

In other words, they are just like the rest of us.

We in the Vermont-New Hampshire Asylum Support Network groups ask that each of us remember our own family’s “coming to America” story and greet the newest immigrants to our country, whether refugee, asylum seeker, migrant worker or some other designation with generosity of spirit and the understanding that we — or someone in our background — was also a stranger here once, too.

Christine James
East Burke

(Christine James is a board member of the Northeast Kingdom Asylum Seekers Assistance Network.)

Won’t be supporting this year’s school district budget

To the Editor:

To quickly review, I was banned from publishing on Front Porch Forum on Dec. 9 for violating their Terms of Use. Not worth discussing any more. So, I will not be appearing on the forum going forward. I agree with many of you that the forum is a poor choice for policy discussions, but it is quick. I put together this contact group “Hinesburg Education Finance Issues” to email updates, but if your name was included by mistake please let me know. Or, if you know of someone interested in being included let me know. But I thank all those who responded to my banishment updates, notifications and sent help and support.

The Champlain Valley School District superintendent and board plan on finalizing the FY26 school budget on Jan. 21, 2025, and publishing a warning by Feb. 2, 2025. Needless to say, not a great time to lose contact with Hinesburg taxpayers.

The only concern of mine is how best to get the message out about education finance related issues, especially property taxes. It appears this year, however, there is greater interest from the voters and legislators, and maybe less of a need to clarify some details. I’m pretty sure that most news outlets will be publishing frequent articles starting in January 2026 when the legislature begins work. Whether they will be reporting the complete truth and details remains to be seen.

As I stated in a previous forum post, I will not be supporting the FY26 CVSD school budget as proposed and suggest you don’t as well. The board is recommending a $103,020,140 budget that will come with another substantial property tax hike (likely more than 5.9 percent). The town of Hinesburg is also warning of a property tax hike. My answer to both administrations is to level-fund next year. We cannot take another year of 20 percent property tax increases. Although the Governor or Legislature may take steps next year to soften the blow, many education association members believe it will be revenue “juggling” and not the result of law changes.

Even if the Legislature and Commission on the Future of Public Education in Vermont can get their act together, which looks doubtful, there is little hope of finding an effective immediate cure. I have attended 24 of the 28 commission, subcommittee and public-input meetings. I think I have a pretty good understanding of how the discussion went and was more than a little disappointed that the commission chose to take no action toward their responsibility to recommend cost containment solutions. Honestly, based on the statements from some key players, it was hopeless from the start. 

The best long-term solution that I have seen is similar to what is being proposed by Senator Scott Beck, referred to as the foundation formula. Governor Scott believes it will satisfy the Brigham test. I attempted to write about this method but was banned by the forum.

John Clifford
Hinesburg

Don’t rush to restore resident vote for land-use regulation changes

To the Editor:

Respectfully, and somewhat hesitantly as I do not usually wade into these types of political matters in our community, I wonder about the concern and urgency of the petition restoring resident voting on land-use regulation changes. Yes, for now, the selectboard does have the authority to approve or reject proposed zoning regulations (“land-use regulations” in Charlotte parlance). This is no different than in many other Vermont communities. This approach does not inherently open the door to “widespread development” as some have suggested, nor have I seen any indication among this selectboard to support widespread development. If anything, the consistent theme in Charlotte has been just the opposite, with challenges to just about anything proposed upon the land.

Selectboards are elected to manage town affairs, including the creation of a wide array of governance policies (which can include land-use regulations). If thought better to require these to be subject to townwide vote, so be it. Just be aware that the other side of the coin is that it also makes it that much more complicated and far less timely to consider adopting what might be considered “good” regulations or important, desirable or required updates; it’s not just about the ability to vote down rules that might be considered unwise.

The process of proposing land-use regulations is complex in any form. I’ve worked under both systems (selectboard vote or townwide vote). The former is more efficient and allows important work to progress more timely, but does not inherently rush the process nor lead to undesirable outcomes; the latter slows the process significantly and does not inherently lead to better outcomes.

Know also that, even if the selectboard retains authority in this matter, there is still a petition process available to challenge a selectboard decision to approve or reject land-use regulations; that’s why these decisions do not become effective immediately. This check and balance exists in state statute.

In the end, both are lawful processes under current law, and the voters will get to decide if or when this petition succeeds.

That said, and importantly, if this petition succeeds locally, it might require the town to create or amend what’s known as a “charter.” Under state law, towns adopt a charter that gives them certain legal options or abilities that differ from standard state practice or requirements. If a charter is needed, it’s important to know that adopting or amending a town charter is its own complex process that must proceed according to strict rules and time frames. Charters must also be approved by the Legislature, and getting its attention and approval is not in any way guaranteed.

Thanks for listening. In writing this, I am not urging anyone to vote in any particular direction; rather, I hope to help illuminate more fully the matter before us, and to offer informed perspective from 35 years of public service in municipal government, much of which was related directly to land-use planning and regulation.

Lee Krohn
Charlotte