I attended the May 25 public hearing in Thomaston and read the coverage of same on the front page of June 2’s Courier-Gazette. I was disappointed four pages later to see a Guest Commentary whose conceit, and font-popping headline, contradicted that factual and concise news coverage.

The writer, a member of Friends of the Thomaston Green, wrote, “I am not a lawyer,” but went on to state her belief that Article 4 could permit the construction of a fire station on the former state prison property.

At the public hearing, however, asked about that specifically, both the town attorney and the lawyer providing legal advice to the citizens’ initiative group replied, “No.” 

Article 4 says what it says. To imply otherwise is wishful thinking – at best. 

As a supporter of the from-the-beginning plan to include green, outdoor recreation space among the many uses of this more than 15 acres along Route 1, I could wish Article 3 included some wording about that. Nonetheless, Article 3 says what it says, and it is the way to keep our options — which could include the desperately needed new fire station, a community health center, some affordable housing and access to green space everyone wants — open. 

On June 14, I encourage my fellow and sister townsfolk to vote Yes on 3 and No on 4. 

Dagney C. Ernest lives in Thomaston