By Ryan Michaels | The Maine Mirror

The Town of Berwick recently held a public “budget chat” at the Berwick Public Library with Town Manager Arthur Capello. According to the Town’s official Facebook page, the discussion touched on issues many residents care deeply about — including roads, sidewalks, public safety costs, ambulance services, and the upcoming municipal budget.

Yet despite the importance of these issues, the Town later acknowledged that the event “drew one resident in person.”

(Screenshot of the official Town of Berwick Facebook post stating the budget discussion “drew one resident in person” while promoting the recorded video afterward.)

That statement immediately raises an important question:

How accessible was this “public discussion” to the broader public in the first place?

Prior to the May 14th meeting, I reached out directly to the Berwick Public Library to ask whether there would be a livestream, Zoom option, or any form of live virtual participation available for residents unable to attend in person.

My concern was straightforward and reasonable. Many residents face barriers that make physical attendance difficult, including:

• transportation limitations,
• disabilities,
• financial hardship,
• work schedules,
• childcare responsibilities,
• or other life circumstances.

For many people, meaningful civic participation depends on whether remote access is available.

Unfortunately, I did not receive a response until after the meeting had already taken place.

(Screenshot of the Facebook Messenger response from the Berwick Public Library acknowledging the delayed response and stating the event had only been recorded for later upload.)

The response informed me that the event had been filmed and would later be uploaded online. While I appreciate the effort to document public discussions, a recording uploaded afterward is not the same thing as meaningful public participation.

Watching a video after the fact allows residents to observe a discussion.

It does not allow them to:

• ask questions in real time,
• engage with town leadership,
• participate in the conversation,
• or respond while issues are actively being discussed.

That distinction matters.

After receiving the delayed response, I respectfully followed up with the library to explain why timely communication and remote participation options are important for residents who cannot easily attend in person.

(Screenshot of Ryan Michaels’ respectful Facebook Messenger response explaining that the delayed reply prevented meaningful participation and advocating for future livestream or Zoom access for residents facing transportation, disability, financial, or other barriers.)

To the library staff’s credit, the response was professional and understanding. Emma from the library acknowledged the importance of virtual participation and offered to pass my concerns along to Town Manager Arthur Capello.

(Screenshot of the Berwick Public Library’s follow-up response acknowledging the importance of virtual participation and providing Town Manager Arthur Capello’s contact information.)

Following that exchange, I emailed Town Manager Arthur Capello directly to respectfully raise broader concerns regarding accessibility and public engagement.

In that email, I emphasized that:

• virtual participation is increasingly important in modern civic life,
• many residents cannot easily attend evening meetings in person,
• and clear communication ahead of time regarding remote access options would significantly improve community engagement.

(Screenshot of Ryan Michaels’ email to Town Manager Arthur Capello respectfully requesting consideration of livestream or remote participation options for future public discussions.)

As of this writing, I have not received a response from the Town Manager.

What makes this situation particularly notable is the contrast between the Town’s public messaging and the actual accessibility of the event itself.

The Town publicly emphasized that only one resident attended the meeting in person.

At the same time:

• there appeared to be no livestream or live remote participation option,
• no timely response to accessibility inquiries before the event,
• and comments on certain official Town Facebook posts appear selectively disabled, limiting opportunities for public discussion and feedback.

Municipalities absolutely have the right to moderate online spaces. However, when comments are disabled on selective public-interest posts while officials simultaneously express concern about low participation, it can create the perception that engagement is being tightly controlled rather than openly encouraged.

This article is not intended as a personal attack on town officials or library staff. In fact, the library staff handled the exchange respectfully and professionally.

The issue here is larger than one meeting.

It is about what genuine civic accessibility and public participation should look like in 2025.

Technology has made remote participation easier and more affordable than ever before. Across Maine and throughout the country, towns, schools, nonprofits, and public organizations increasingly provide:

• livestreams,
• Zoom access,
• hybrid meetings,
• recorded archives,
• and digital participation tools.

Not because every resident prefers virtual attendance — but because accessibility matters.

A healthy democracy is not measured solely by whether meetings occur.

It is measured by whether residents are meaningfully able to participate in them.

If local governments truly want stronger public engagement, accessibility cannot remain an afterthought.

Public participation should not end at the library door.