I am here to answer some frequently asked questions about the special meeting, currently scheduled for 4-22, on the topic of a new draft of a Gaza Ceasefire resolution. As always, I’m speaking for myself and not the board or town government. If after reading, you think passing a ceasefire resolution would be more valuable than harmful, please let the selectboard know at selectboard@hartford-vt.org and/or by showing up to the regular meeting 4-15. If you feel you’re in the majority with this view, make it known; otherwise the board is liable to assume you are the minority. Onward with the FAQ:

– “Should we have a special meeting about Gaza?” When hundreds of children keep getting killed and the last of the hospitals is nearly bombed out of existence (remember the uproar at the first hospital bombed?), not discussing Gaza was not on the table. With a special meeting, we can ensure that no time is taken away from the board’s duties to discuss our *SUPER* important normal town business. Also with a special meeting, individual board members can choose to not file for payment for that night if they wish. That said—I do not begrudge any board member from filing for payment, as it is work on the town’s behalf to hear from folks.

– “Is this town business?” Is making veterans feel welcome here town business? Is making queer people feel welcome here town business? Calling into question whether (or not) a statement on Gaza is town business feels a bit like a red herring. For those who feel that way, I would encourage you to think about whether you would be happy if we passed a resolution with content regarding your interests. As someone representing some swath of the public, I don’t abide by subterfuge. If you want to abolish all resolutions, then lobby the board for that. From where I’m standing, though, that doesn’t seem wise as we careen towards a more overt fascism. It makes sense we would want to retain the right to speak up for justice.

– “You (Brandon) pushed for the special meeting. Why?” Because the ceasefire didn’t hold, and we’re supplying weapons and political cover to Israel’s extermination campaign yet again. Because I don’t wish to remember my time on the board as having witnessed this and done nothing. Because the last Selectboard failed the several hundred Hartford residents who petitioned that board, by not passing the resolution. (I wish to do right by those residents.) And because there are still a few levers of power left to a national minority party. These are mentioned in the updated resolution, which was formed by a committee made up of most of the original resolution committee.

– “What are these potentially effective things? What could we possibly do from Hartford? Isn’t a local ceasefire resolution just empty ‘virtue-signalling?’” I share your ire against virtue-signalling, I assure you. The new resolution has three potentially-effective provisions: 1. It calls on our Congressional delegation to filibuster any legislation the Trump administration considers crucial until an arms embargo is placed on Israel; 2. It calls on the same delegation to block Trump nominees until an arms embargo; 3. It defines “antisemitism” for our town as the organization Jewish Voices for Peace defines it. This the definition I knew growing up, describing racial/ethnic discrimination. This ensures our town staff don’t follow the doctored definition that the Trump administration is using to try to deport people.

– “Are there more pressing things Palestine organizers are doing?” Yes! Our neighbors (like two Dartmouth grad students) are getting their visas revoked for standing up for Palestine. If legal residents are facing discrimination based on their views, then U.S. citizens are next. (Even if citizens never face this, it is capital-B bad.) But that’s defense. A ceasefire resolution is offense. Organizers seem to agree that a resolution is still worth passing. If we see something terrible being done with munitions made in VT and NH (they are), and paid for with our tax dollars (they are), and say nothing, then the perpetrators will—very logically—get the idea that they can keep it up. Because they faced no consequences.

– “This feels like a Selectboard-led initiative rather than a public-led one. Why should I support it?” It’s true that I pushed for a special meeting without being in direct contact with the group that made the prior resolution. This group effectively reconstituted itself once the board voted (6-0, with one member absent) to hold a special meeting. In so doing, this raised the possibility of a new resolution, and the group went to work. To me this feels like a natural progression.