Chester’s overwhelming defeat of the charter question 1,624 “no” to 795 “yes” on Nov. 5 produced some obvious and possibly remarkable conclusions. By more than 2-to-1, Chester voters rejected what some viewed as a bad form of government for a small town – a charter, while others rejected what they viewed as a bad charter.

The individuals who foisted the charter process or bad charter on a town of 3,700 obviously grossly miscalculated how voters would respond. They had told townsfolk and media they’d run an open process, and the charter would pass effortlessly.

Oops!

Now would be a good time for all of Chester – the yeas and the nays especially – to ask questions to better understand what the parties were thinking, who the parties actually were, and what was the end game of the pro-charter folks.

For example:

Who put up the money for the pro-charter effort, and who put up the money for the anti-charter effort?

What groups were involved, including the two major political parties, and what were their official and unofficial positions? What roles did they play directly and indirectly, including financially?

What town resources were used, including employee labor, facilities, funds, and other items of value, and were all state laws, including civil, election, and criminal, followed?

What town officials elected and appointed actively engaged in promoting or protesting the charter, and was their involvement both legal and ethically appropriate?

Who were the critical players out front and behind the scenes making the case for or against the charter, and why?

As noted above, what was the end game of the pro-charter people, who the ultimate vote of 1,624 against versus 795 in favor would indicate were sent a harsh rejection?

Chester deserves to know.

Joe Cohen

Chester