By Ryan Michaels | The Maine Mirror
The most revealing part of a story is often not what happened.
It’s when it happened.
In Berwick, Maine, a simple question about public participation was asked before a budget discussion. The answer did not arrive until after the discussion had ended, after residents had cast their votes, and after the opportunity for meaningful participation had already passed.
This article is not about assigning motives. It is not about attacking individuals. It is about examining a timeline and asking whether local government is doing enough to ensure that all residents can participate in the civic process.
The record speaks for itself.
A Simple Question Before a Public Budget Discussion
On May 9, the Berwick Public Library announced a public budget discussion with Town Manager Arthur Capello scheduled for May 14 at 6:00 PM.
(Image Description: Screenshot of a Berwick Public Library Facebook post announcing a public Budget Discussion with Town Manager Arthur Capello on May 14 at 6:00 PM. Highlighted sections show the event title, date, and a public comment from Ryan Michaels asking whether the event would be livestreamed or offer a Zoom option due to transportation barriers.)
When I saw the announcement, I asked a straightforward question in the comments:
“Will this be livestreamed with the option for Zoom? I currently don’t have means for transportation but would love to still participate.”
The question was not about convenience.
It was about access.
Like many residents, I face transportation challenges. If there were a livestream or Zoom option, I could participate in the discussion, ask questions, and hear answers before being asked to vote on the budget.
The timing matters.
The budget discussion was intended to inform the public before the budget vote. Meaningful participation can only occur before decisions are made—not after.
The Discussion Happened. The Answer Did Not.
The budget discussion proceeded on May 14.
No answer arrived beforehand.
No clarification was provided regarding whether remote participation would be available.
The event came and went.
Only afterward did I receive a response from the Library explaining that the discussion had been recorded and would be posted online.
(Image Description: Screenshot of a Facebook Messenger conversation between Ryan Michaels and the Berwick Public Library. The Library explains that the budget discussion was filmed and would be posted online after the event. Ryan responds by explaining that his original question was specifically about participating live through a livestream or Zoom option before the event occurred.)
I appreciated the response.
But a recording after the fact is not the same thing as participation.
Watching a discussion later does not allow a resident to ask questions.
It does not allow them to engage with elected officials.
And it does not allow them to influence their understanding before casting a vote.
That distinction is important.
Participation after the event is observation.
Participation during the event is civic engagement.
Those are not the same thing.
The Library Understood Immediately
After explaining the concern, I emphasized that virtual participation is important for residents who face transportation, disability, financial, work-schedule, or other barriers to attending in person.
The response from the Library was immediate and thoughtful.
(Image Description: Screenshot of a follow-up Facebook Messenger conversation in which Berwick Public Library staff member Emma states that they understand the importance of virtual participation, offers to forward the request to Town Manager Arthur Capello, and provides his direct contact information.)
The Library wrote:
“We certainly understand the importance of virtual participation.”
The message also provided the Town Manager’s direct contact information and offered to pass the concern along.
In other words, the Library immediately understood what the question was really about.
Not technology.
Not convenience.
Participation.
Access.
Inclusion.
Following that recommendation, I contacted the Town Manager directly.
I never received a response.
The Vote Came and Went
While the question remained unanswered, the budget process continued.
Residents were ultimately asked to vote on the budget.
The opportunity to participate in the discussion that was intended to inform that vote had already passed.
At that point, the issue was no longer whether a Zoom option existed.
The issue became whether residents who could not attend in person had been given a meaningful opportunity to participate before being asked to make an informed decision.
The Answer Finally Arrived
Weeks later, an answer finally came.
Not from the Town Manager.
Not from Town Hall.
But from the Town’s attorney.
(Image Description: Screenshot of an email from Berwick Town Attorney Matt Tarasevich responding to questions regarding virtual participation. The email states that the Town has no policy regarding virtual access to public informational meetings, that livestreaming was not considered for the May budget discussion, that virtual participation was not a topic of consideration, and that the Town is open to exploring such options in the future.)
The response contained four important admissions:
1. The Town has no policy regarding virtual participation for informational meetings and public discussions.
2. A livestream or remote participation option was not considered for the May budget discussion.
3. Virtual participation was “not a topic of consideration.”
4. The Town is open to exploring such options in the future, subject to budget and technological considerations.
The third statement is particularly noteworthy.
The issue was not evaluated and rejected.
It was not discussed and deemed impractical.
According to the Town’s response, it simply was not considered.
A Broader Question
This story is larger than one meeting.
It is larger than one resident.
It raises a broader question:
In 2026, should public discussions that help shape community decisions include some form of virtual access?
Many municipalities already livestream meetings.
Many organizations routinely use Zoom, Teams, Facebook Live, or YouTube Live.
The technology exists.
The question is whether there is sufficient commitment to using it.
The Town’s attorney indicated that Berwick currently lacks the ability to livestream events held outside of the municipal building.
Perhaps that is true.
But where there is a will, there is usually a way.
The Library immediately recognized the value of virtual participation.
The Town acknowledged that it is open to exploring the concept in the future.
Those are positive signs.
The challenge is that for the May budget discussion, that exploration came too late to help the residents who wanted to participate at the time.
Why This Matters
This article is not about whether Berwick intentionally excluded anyone.
There is no evidence of that.
What the record does show is something simpler:
A resident asked a question before an important public discussion.
The discussion occurred.
The vote occurred.
The answer arrived afterward.
And by then, the opportunity for meaningful participation had already passed.
That timeline is not a matter of opinion.
It is documented.
Whether that timeline reflects the level of accessibility and civic engagement our communities should strive for is a question each reader can answer for themselves.
Because sometimes the most important part of a story is not the answer.
It’s when the answer arrives.
Discover more from The Maine Mirror
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.