This week's Board of Selectmen meeting with the Municipal Building Committee reinforced a sense we have had for several weeks, that none of the players—Selectmen, Finance and Capital committees, Municipal Building Committee, project manager and architects—have had clear direction. With two selectmen wanting to limit the scope of the project to the current Town Hall footprint (or less) and others trying to match a building plan with current and anticipated needs looking out 20 years and more, it is hard to imagine how the committee and architects can integrate all the direction (and misdirection) they are getting.

Some believe the vote for Article 17 at last year's Town Meeting should guide the work, while others believe a "statement of intent," crafted outside the public process and with no public review, should determine the scope (and budget) for building plans.

At Town Meeting, it seemed like a good thing that the confrontation between last year's Municipal Buildings Committee and the Article 18 proponents—led by Selectmen Johnson and Ricci and supported by approximately 20 other petitioners—was averted. Instead, Article 18 was withdrawn and Article 17 was modified. Two words—"and expansion"—were removed in reference to Town Hall. The statement of intent was read but not discussed and was not part of the motion that voters approved.

The reality is, the fact that voters didn't get the chance to choose between articles 17 and 18, setting the direction for the project, has resulted in near paralysis. While the new building committee tries to carry out the article 17 mandate, some selectmen and capital committee members are trying to shackle the committee to a maintenance-only plan, with a budget pulled from snippets of the original report, but with no confirmation that the project will actually fit within the budget prematurely set by the capital committee.

Rather than waiting another three months for Town Meeting to decide whether to accept such a proposal, the project should be stopped. Don't waste any more of the money voted for schematics without confirming what voters want the scope to be. Call a special Town Meeting, put the question before the voters, and find out what the town wants to do.

If the process is allowed to continue without voter confirmation of direction, voters who came to last year's meeting prepared to support the building committee proposal may have no choice but to vote against this year's proposal, and hope to start over. At a minimum, if a Town Meeting vote to confirm direction isn't called now, two plans should be brought to Town Meeting, one responding to the demand to do the least possible (or less), and one fulfilling the need as determined by the building committee.

At the end of the day, voters will make the decision. Give them a real choice.