By Ray Gonda

The rules were changed from previous meetings to favor allowing the pro-F35 faction to testify first – allegedly legitimate according to Robert’s Rules of Order,  but unethical – a complete setup from start to finish. It turned out to be a charade.

It included the chair person, Joan Shannon, creating a flyer, a counter to a fact sheet of the F-35 opponents. Her flyer was full of inaccuracies and amateurish conclusions – almost all simply false. (Opponents stick to statements documented in or derived from the EIS to be factual and maintain credibility – so her counter assertions were false.) It was widely circulated at the 11th hour, posted on the “Green Ribbons for the F-35” website,  posted on several Burlington Front Porch Forums and provided to other councilors. All this was done the day before the meeting so F-35 opponents did not have a chance to respond.

About a week to two weeks before the council meeting the opponents of the F-35 appeared to have the majority vote. However, in the previous week it became clear that the Democratic Party machine and business community from the top down put pressure on individual council members (as related to me by one councilor and to other opponents by other councilors) to toe the party line.

These wavering councilors’ floor speeches indicated their opposition to the F-35 but they also included waffling statements to balance that. It gave a definite appearance of them voting against their consciences. That was accompanied by a few councilors who voted against the resolution watching the World Series on their laptop during testimony, which helped make a charade of the meeting.

The worst of it was the entire meeting was an exercise in political theatre with the VTANG members and friends marching into the meeting room (literally) in a double column and taking up most of the first floor seats in the lower level. There were about 200 of them and many were in uniform. Some seats were “saved” for the top brass all the way to General Cray himself. Those seats were saved for them while at the same time others not in uniform were turned away by police and had to sit upstairs. The VTANG brass sat closest to the council members facing them squarely and got a standing ovation from F-35 supporters. The supporters were almost all themselves guard members and their families or former guard members. None of the brass testified.

VTANG members testified about their lives and their jobs, the little league, their children and their local volunteer work, with lots of self-back-patting, with, in several cases the wife sitting next to them but not testifying. The PR officer for VTANG, in uniform testified about his family and activities – not about the F-35.

Other F-35 supporters in civilian clothes (they wore green ribbon shirts so it was easy to determine that) testified about VTANG generally and how VTANG would disappear if the F-35 didn’t come here – uniformly disingenuous statements.

In spite of all the above the opponents matched the proponents in testimony. Businessmen, airport officials, and former council presidents were given a privileged place in the speaking order and allowed to testify but the opponents counsel was not – the one person who had the legal insight necessary for basing such important decisions on. Our experts were not allowed to testify because they ended up at the end of waiting list and the council voted to cut off testimony, depriving the process of critical legal testimony – dirty politics at its finest.

In spite of the rigging by the council chair of the meeting the testimony was about 32 against the F-35 to 38 for it – a surprise to us given the obvious rigging done.

Not a single F35 supporter, in uniform or out, said a word about concern for the people whose lives are being harmed by warplanes here. Their testimony was all about them – their own lives – completely self interest. This politicalmilitary theatre was clearly stage-managed to intimidate the opponents and the council members and deprive the opponents’ experts the opportunity to testify.

It raises a very important question of the proper role of the military in civilian life and in the decision-making independence of local elected officials, about the influence of the military in our democratic processes.

Burlington has been known for its independent thinkers and progressive attitudes where the voices of people count and testimony is listened to and weighted. In other words it has been known for its tradition of true democracy. This event made a mockery of that tradition. If this kind of elected official’s behavior continues, that tradition may be a thing of the past.

When his miscarriage of the democratic process is added to the $20,000 plus spent to get F-35 friendly councilors elected in South Burlington, to reverse the earlier City Councils request to delay the bed-down of F35s here until many unanswered questions about it were answered, we can see a picture forming which should make any thoughtful Vermonter begin to worry about this new direction our state appears to be taking.

How long will it take for this way of conducting local business filter out into other Vermont cities and municipalities? Is this what Vermonters want?