But they are also members of their community, appointed in part to be responsive to that community and, more importantly, because they know that community. Sometimes tension develops between what is right under the law and what appears to be right at that moment for that community. Sometimes, as in the McDonald's case, the citizen board can respond to objectors and still satisfy legal requirements. Other times, boards undoubtedly act contrary to law but in what they believe is the community's best interest. And if someone does object, and the board errs on the side of what they think is right for the community, presumably judges will correct the error on appeal.
Community is important in Vermont's capital city.
Perhaps because of the city's location in a tight valley in the middle of a small state, we try to get along with one another. We also struggle to hold on to what we have. Many people here, regardless of their feelings about McDonald's, feel embarrassed by the controversy, as though somehow a wrong's been committed. They wonder whether the law has been applied evenhandedly, and whether the city's been sufficiently welcoming at a time when newcomers are needed. I know it's just a coincidence, but today, across State Street from the vacant building which was to house McDonald's, you will find a new, small, slate-roofed building with Dutch doors.