Let me share a conversation I had with a co-worker who has lived in Gilford for many years and votes at each and every election. Gilford has been an SB2 town for quite awhile, and yet when I asked her about the deliberative session, she had no clue what I was talking about. I did my best to explain how SB2 worked as well as traditional town meeting and it was news to her. We then got to talking about voting. I asked about the controversial articles relating to zoning and agritourism. Her response was surprising: she did not know. She told me that there were 5 articles that she did not understand so she voted no on 4 of the 5 and thinks that agritourism was defeated. ( The outcome can be found here in the Laconia Daily Sun.) "It was so confusing, I wish I could have asked someone to explain it." I advised her that she could have done that over the previous month, but like most people, she just didn't have the time and got most of her information from the local papers. With that in mind. at least anecdotally, one has to give at least some credence to uniformed voters.
Here is the history of SB2 voting for the Moultonboro( town only) since 2007:
To pass, SB2 requires a 60% super majority. Of the four times it has been on the ballot for our town ( not including 2004 which also failed by a substantial margin) the SB2 question has gained a simple majority only once in 2008. Of the four votes, a total of 5,194 votes, just 44.6% voted in favor.
As some people have said following this past town meeting and the article 2 vote, the people have spoken. Shouldn't the same be true of SB2? The people have spoken and they spoke at the ballot box with all day voting.