Given all the trauma and tragedy in the world these days, I have to ask myself why I am bothering to write something in the Gazette about the downtown redo, but I realize it is because many of the same government questions are involved in different levels of conflict: the movement away from a “we the people” type of democratic government with openness and collaboration and towards a more authoritarian, top-down way of operating.

It can happen here as well as in so many other places … so I have four concerns.

My first is about the placement of the front-page glamorous article about the downtown renovation in Concord, New Hampshire [“Destination Downtown,” Gazette, Oct. 14]. Was that meant to be a news article or an editorial/opinion piece? From the couple of descriptions I could find about differentiating the two, this definitely seemed like an editorial/opinion piece. Yes, there was the requisite asking of an opponent, Judy Herrell, for her viewpoint, but this was an all-out sales promotion for the mayor’s plan. Why else would it have merited front-page, glitzy, above-the-fold placement?

Journalistic ethics is not my field, but I have to wonder … And to be clear, what I am writing is an opinion piece.

My second concern is a question to readers, wondering if many have ever been to Concord, New Hampshire, and thus know that comparing Northampton to Concord is much worse than apples to oranges. I lived there many years ago and had a job downtown, have gone back several times to visit the friends with whom I lived, have visited it for work a couple of times, and have worked in Keene, New Hampshire, for over 30 years so I am somewhat aware of “the vibe” about Concord from other southern New Hampshire folks.

In the last, say, 40-plus years, I don’t think Concord was ever “the place to be” as Northampton has been — no one would have called it “vibrant” or a destination, and thus their downtown makeover was probably necessary just so the town could survive.

Concord is also almost twice the size of Northampton with a less dense population, so those together make a difference in getting around and through it. It is a grid, as was pointed out in the article, and there are and remain many other ways to get through town. There is not a Main Street like what we have, Route 9, that funnels drivers from all around us through downtown Northampton.

As was said about Concord, “People who aren’t planning to visit downtown don’t stop here.” That fits for Concord! But in Northampton, people more or less have to drive through. It is kind of like the difference between the grid with lots of options in central Manhattan and the twisty, turning North End of Boston.

My third concern is that it really sounds like the Concord government truly worked with the business leaders, as is plainly stated in the article. Need I say more about differences here and there? In this article, the local mayor is described as “adamant,” which leaves a lot of questions about capacity to collaborate.

“Adamant” is not always synonymous with democratic government. We could all probably name democratic and non-democratic rulers who were adamant about some project or decision that crashed in flames, not to mention “adamant” urban planners, mentioned by other writers on this page, whose work took years for others to reverse the harm and destruction. (And I could write a whole paragraph about my attempts to communicate with our city government about this and another issue, and the lack of response) … Adamant? Backing off can be considered a rare and valuable strength.

My fourth concern about this front-page article, and why it should not be taken seriously, is the incredibly ageist statement at the end. Hard to believe that that remark got beyond the editor. Go read it for yourself if you don’t recall the malignant ageist gloating at the end. And was there ever an active outreach by the reporter to those “who strongly opposed the project” or are they silenced?

Does any of this mean that we cannot or should not do some kind of updating to our downtown? No, it doesn’t, but it means we should go about the process, from the very beginning until all voices are heard, and changes are truly understood and made where they can be made, with openness, integrity, a sense of collaboration, listening to differences, respecting each other, and confidence that we are still living in a democracy.

Lorraine Mangione lives in Florence.