Via Community News Service, a University of Vermont journalism internship, on assignment for the Winooski News
Winooski residents voted 655 to 258 Tuesday in favor of an advisory ballot initiative requesting the city council to adopt a pledge that supports “freedom, justice, and equality for the Palestinian people” and ends all support for Israel’s “apartheid regime, settler colonialism, and military occupation.”
Before the Town Meeting Day vote was tallied, Winooski Mayor Kristine Lott noted the complexity of the issue.
“Winooski very strongly wants to be an inclusive and welcoming place. I do think that the nature of it, the petition, is intended to align with that, justice for Palestinians,” Lott said.
Lott continued: “I know some members of the Jewish community locally are aligned with it, and some are not, and have negative feelings about it, that it may be, like, antisemitic. So it’s interesting, because I think it walks both sides of the issue, though I do believe that the folks who put it forward did so in alignment with social justice in mind.”
Among those in favor of the pledge was Winooski resident Sarah Hotchkiss, who saw it as a necessary stance against injustice.
“Apartheid is a racist construct that is supported by the government,” she said. “Towns all across the country need to take a stand and say, ‘No, we do not support apartheid. We don’t support racism of any kind, and all of our citizens should be treated equally.’”
However, not everyone agreed that the pledge was the right way to address the issue.
Ken White, who voted no, expressed concerns about the nature of the ballot initiative.
“A ballot initiative isn’t a real conversation,” he said. “I definitely agree with the folks promoting it more than I disagree, but I think it oversimplifies the Middle East reality by making this blanket statement. I know from a number of my Jewish friends that it’s very hurtful and it’s scary in a country that is becoming increasingly antisemitic.”
For Hotchkiss, the pledge represented something greater than just a symbolic measure.
“Being able to know and declare that your town has taken the apartheid free pledge serves as a model for other towns to follow suit. The more of us that do it—it helps strengthen all of us,” Hotchkiss said.
Yet, White voted no because of the potential for division.
“The only thing it can do is divide us. It serves no functional purpose,” he explained. “If we were to come together in a genuine way, my guess would be that this town would affirm a number of principles behind this ordinance, but understand each other more deeply, and everybody would go away feeling heard instead of some subset of the people, which is what is going to happen. Some subset is going to be validated and some subset is going to be invalidated, right? That’s what a ballot initiative is. You win, you lose. And in authentic conversation, everybody gets to win.”
Despite his opposition, White acknowledged the dedication of those advocating for the pledge.
“I really respect the hearts and the intentions of the folks who are advocating for this initiative even though I am strongly opposed to how it is being done. I really respect the people out here spending their day supporting it and I think more respect in how we communicate would help us grow,” White said.
Emily Morton, who voted yes, viewed the pledge as an opportunity to encourage more discussion.
“We are such an open and safe community for so many other nationalities of people,” Morton said.
“If it passes it is more of an opportunity for conversation,” she added.
Lucas Collins, who voted no, had mixed feelings about the pledge.
“Yeah I had a really hard time with that one. Because I agree with it, but I don’t love the idea of a Winooski pledge. I don’t know, it just seems like something that Winooski isn’t really a, I don’t know, pledges are weird. So I ended up voting no on it. Not really because I oppose the sentiment, just because I didn’t like it as a Winooski ballot item.”
He also expressed concerns about how the vote might be interpreted.
“I worry that people will see the result as a decision about how Winooski residents feel about Israel and Palestine which I don’t think is really a fair way to do it,” Collins said. He’s worried some people might think this means “Winooski is aligned this way or that way, when that might not be what it’s really all about.”
Article 5 asks the city council to make a pledge. But Mayor Lott said she saw the nonbinding resolution as primarily an expression of opinion.
“There’s no action coming out of it. It’s more like a use of voice to share an opinion. And I can’t think of any tangible actions that the local Winooski city government could or would take. So I think the impact is more about community members being able to raise their voice on this issue,” she said.