by Erica Walch

In his November 19, 2025 Commentary to the Brattleboro Reformer, Dan DeWalt states his belief that a “regressive mind-set seems to be  seem to be infecting some Vermonters’ attitude to Town Meeting” specifically that many people in Newfane objected to the inclusion of a ballot question asking the town to adopt a statement that “WE AFFIRM our commitment to freedom, justice, and equality for the Palestinian people and all people; WE OPPOSE all forms of racism, bigotry, discrimination, and oppression; and WE DECLARE ourselves an apartheid-free community and to that end, WE PLEDGE to join others in working to end all support to Israel’s apartheid regime, settler colonialism, and military occupation.” I have two points of response to Mr. DeWalt’s letter.

Mr. DeWalt spearheaded a petition of Newfane voters to add the above statement to the 2025 Town Meeting ballot (with capital letters and all), after having presented a similarly-focused question at the 2024 Town Meeting. Both times, discussion from the floor resulted in a modified statement condemning bad actions on both sides of the Israel-Gaza fighting. Curiously, neither statement from Newfane wound up ending the overseas conflict.

One might think that Mr. DeWalt came up with the statement that was included on the ballot because of his passion and independent spirit, but in fact, an organized political group called the “Vermont Coalition for Palestinian Liberation” (VTJP) put the statement together and engaged and directed community activists, such as Mr. DeWalt, to get the statement on the ballot in towns throughout Vermont.

“Who is this group?”, you may well ask.

While this reader could find no information at all about this group (in terms of having filed a tax return, being a registered business or 501(c)3 non-profit, or who the employees or board of directors are), a little digging turns up the fact that the group is widely celebrated by (and presumably funded or otherwise supported by) the American Friends Service Committee (AFSC), a well-funded left-wing international activist organization, which for some reason doesn’t file US tax returns, but whose 2024 Annual Report shows $41.1 million received last year.

Many on the left decry the entry of Americans for Prosperity (AFP) into Vermont politics. AFP sent postcards to some VT households asking them to read up on the Global Warming Solutions Act and learn the negative impacts of Act 18 if it was passed; there was no obfuscation  and it was clear that AFP sent these cards. As far as I know, AFP has not engaged, directed, or funded people in the community to get ballot items on their town’s warning and when they organize or sponsor an event, they widely publicize their involvement. This is a different magnitude of influence from VTJP and is quite public.

There is an organizing video available on the AFSC’ YouTube channel called “What can we do for Palestine” which cheers the good work being done in VT and British Columbia and which outlines  how to identify and approach individuals who seem likely to be convinced to push their pledge (the statement included on town meeting ballots), while the VTJP and AFSC people “stay in the background”. They state that they don’t want people to just attend a speech, but to “activate their networks” in a way to spread the word, spread the pledge, and “educate” the signers about the BDS (Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions” movement against Israel.

So what happens next after the pledge is signed? Well, the British Columbia group visited a restaurant that had signed their pledge and found items on the shelf that were on the boycott list, which showed the “need for more education.”

There is a shadowy international group behind Dan DeWalt’s proposed ballot items. Okay, but whether he created the statement himself or under the direction of a larger organization, what does it matter? If the citizens of a town want to put a political statement on the ballot, what’s the big deal?

Well, town meeting is supposed to be about town business, and Selectboards have the right to (and ought to) reject non-binding resolutions that are “useless, frivolous, or unlawful.” The Vermont League of Cities and Towns include a section in their guide to municipalities stating that, following a 2007 ruling from the VT Supreme Court, “If a voter-backed petition does not deal with a matter over which municipal voters have been given authority in statute, the legislative body may choose how to respond to that petition, including refusing to place it on the warning or placing it under the nonbinding, advisory section of the warning.”

Mr. DeWalt intimates that those of us who don’t think this type of question belongs on the ballot (despite it being settled law that such petitions do not have to be entertained by town government, no matter how many people signed a petition to put it on) are small-minded, opposed to free speech and basically dummies. In fact, those are useless and frivolous responses to what the opposition to bringing international political statements into Town Meeting is about. It’s not about the Palestinian issue, it’s about the correct venue for such a discussion.

If Mr. DeWalt and company wish to exercise their right to free speech and convene a public event, speech, consciousness-raising, debate, film screening, educating the public event, by all means, they should do so. They just shouldn’t do it at Town Meeting. I hope that Selectboards around the state will take to heart the VT Supreme Court’s ruling on what the scope of Town Meeting is and what the voters have the power to approve.