Franklin residents have spoken—twice. The second attempt at passing an override has failed, leaving our town facing significant financial cuts. The question now is not what happened, but where do we go from here?
Do we take the opportunity to bridge the divide, listening and learning from one another? Or do we succumb to finger-pointing, playing the blame game between YES and NO voters?
Less than 24 hours after the results were announced, frustration spilled onto social media. Comments emerged—“I hope you're happy! You caused over $4 million in cuts!” “You hurt our children. I hope you're proud.” Even at the polls, tensions ran high. One voter walked by and told opponents they should be embarrassed. At last night’s council meeting, department heads outlined the necessary cuts—yet even as that happened, YES voters took to Facebook, claiming that town officials were "reaming NO voters.”
Cuts were inevitable. Franklin’s financial challenges are not new, nor are they the fault of those who voted against the override. Some decisions, however, raise questions. For example, the town has stressed the need for more revenue—yet one of the cuts includes removing the third ambulance, a service that actually generates income. If revenue is the concern, why eliminate a funding source? That decision feels less like fiscal responsibility and more like a statement—one that many, YES and NO voters alike, perceive as a punishment.
Blaming voters—on either side—oversimplifies a complex issue. YES voters argue that NO voters caused harm to services. But had the override passed, struggling families would have faced rising costs, possibly forcing them out of Franklin altogether. Does that mean YES voters would have been responsible for that hardship? The truth is, this was a lose-lose vote, with consequences no matter the outcome.
Franklin’s financial struggles stem from more than inflation alone. Past decisions have played a role, and while some missteps are irreversible, acknowledging them is vital. Respect must remain at the core of this conversation—disagreeing does not mean dishonoring the dedication of town leaders or the sacrifices of residents.
At this moment, we as a town have a choice. We can cling to division—YES vs. NO, red vs. blue, town vs. schools—or we can rise above it. We can reject name-calling and vote-shaming, choosing instead to work together toward solutions.
No single person has all the answers. But one truth is clear: if Franklin continues to fight itself, we will never heal. We will never find lasting solutions. And we will watch our town falter.
Kindness does not belong only to those who share our views. It belongs to everyone. It is the foundation upon which Franklin must rebuild—not in spite of disagreement, but through it.
The future of Franklin depends on it.
Jane Callaway-Tripp
Franklin Voter
 |
Voices of Franklin: Jane Callaway-Tripp "Where do we go from here?"
|
