More discussion

From the Town Council Chairman to a citizen 12/15/11:

Council Leadership has met with them [Seacoast] informally to discuss their options and we are working very hard to find a solution that will keep this development in Freeport.  The Council is very sensitive to the concerns of residents in the project area and we will not make any final decisions without giving all a chance to weigh in on the matter.  There is just nothing concrete to discuss at this point as Seacoast is doing their investigation of options.  Once the Council has heard from them on the 17th we will be better able to assess next steps and build a process that is inclusive for all who would like to comment.

 From the Maine Municipal Association on Board Member Bias:

Maine courts have repeatedly recognized that the constitutional guarantee of procedural due process presupposes a fair and impartial decisionmaker. 

For example, in Mutton Hill Estates, Inc. v. Town of Oakland, 468 A.2d 989 (Me. 1983), the Law Court held that a planning board violated a developer's procedural due process rights when it invited the developer's opponents to assist in making factual findings sufficient to support the denial of the developer's proposal, without giving the developer notice or permitting the developer's representative to attend the meeting. The Law Court agreed with the Superior Court that "the findings of the Planning Board were irreversibly tainted by this procedural impropriety" and echoed the Superior Court's grave doubts that the developer could ever get "a fair, impartial, and expeditious hearing and decision from the Planning Board." Because of the irreversible bias, the Law Court removed the decision of whether to approve the developer's application from the Planning Board and authorized the Superior Court to make that decision for the board. Mutton Hill thus stands for the proposition that board member bias can so affect the fairness and impartiality of a municipal proceeding that a procedural due process violation results.

The Superior Court in Burns v. Town of Harpswell, No. CV-90-1083 (Me. Super. Ct. Cum. Cty., July 10, 1991) approached the issue of board member bias and procedural due process from a slightly different angle. In that case, a group of abutters successfully challenged a ZBA's action approving a special exception as violative of procedural due process by pointing out that one of the members of the ZBA was both an abutter and a friend of the applicant. Prior to the hearing, the board member's husband had written a letter in support of the special exception which was entered into the record. Although the board member abstained from voting, she participated in the ZBA's discussion of the application which was ultimately approved. The court found her abstention from voting insufficient to overcome the procedural due process error. It noted that "[g]enerally, due process requires neutrality of the decision-makers" and held that "[w]here a member's bias or conflict of interest is of sufficient magnitude to disqualify that person from voting, the member should not participate in debate or advocacy of the matter." The court therefore sustained the appeal on procedural due process grounds.

A similar result was reached in Sevigny v. City of Biddeford, 344 A.2d 34 (Me.1975). There, the Law Court held that procedural due process was violated by the participation of the mayor, as the presiding officer, in a city council hearing regarding the dismissal of another city official. The Law Court noted that because of his interest the mayor could not approach his duties with the "requisite freedom from bias and prejudgment." 

These cases demonstrate that a fair and impartial decision-maker is an integral component of procedural due process and that a decision made in the absence of this component may be constitutionally deficient.

When is a discussion not a discussion?

Hmm. Planning Board FAQ

How may I contact a Board member? The State of Maine's prohibition against Ex Parte communication requires Board members not to have private discussions about projects pending before the Board. Members of the public and applicants may contact the Board by writing them a letter and sending it to the Town Planner prior to the scheduled meeting. The Town Planner will make copies for all Board members and the letter will become part of the public record. Members of the public may also speak to the Board during a scheduled Public Hearing.

PB Minutes 11-2-11.doc

Sande Updegraph of FEDC explained that this project [Seacoast, ed.] was discussed at their last Board meeting. The Trustees took no action but asked her to convey their consensus that they view this field area as being in a buffer area. They are very concerned and very respectful of the abutting residents. They would not support contract zoning but they would give some consideration to an overlay district since it is a strong project, in the right place, provides a good tax base and traffic has been addressed. They would like to make an informal recommendation to this Board.

FEDC Board Meeting Minutes, October 25,2011

Seacoast Update Wendy Caisse said that the Planning Board is discussing a zoning amendment to allow the construction of a domed field. Contract zoning and a change of use in RR1 will likely not be considered but an overlay district is a possibility. The Planning Board will next meet on November 2. ACTION: Sande will draft a letter of support for the overlay option for Kate’s signature.

FREEPORT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
Wendy Caisse, Vice Pres.

PLANNING BOARD
Wendy Caisse, Chair

Another musical interlude

Suggested by a reader

Buy it on iTunes

What Atrios said.

here.

The problem isn't that people listen to political hacks, the problem is that they assume they're right. You know, "the politics of mortgage relief is bad" trumped "the politics of people being thrown out of their homes and the economy being horrible is bad" based on this kind of advice.

Protect your pet

Seriously.

January 28, 2012
SATURDAY, JANUARY 28, 2012, 9:00 AM – NOON
DOGS AND CATS ARE INVITED. $15.00 PER VACCINE. WE WILL BE REGISTERING DOGS DURING THE CLINIC.

A musical interlude

Laura Nyro is finally in the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. Long past time.

What the hell. Can't anybody just say this is heinous?

Freeport, Maine, home to outlet stores for many nationally known enterprises. Freeport, Maine, a pretty town of 7600, with woods and trails and good people, and home to one embittered person, whose poorly constructed and repulsive compendium of slander and disturbing images clipped from some of the darkest episodes of the American experience, is distributed weekly in the foyer of the Town Hall.

Strange fruit is being hung on Freeport’s Christmas tree in 2011 by some anonymous individual. He or she has been distributing the home-made publication “A Crow’s Nest” at various retail locations throughout town, as well as in the Town Hall foyer. Locations where the children and grandchildren of the people he or she slanders with false tales of unspeakable vileness may see their relatives unfairly and horribly pilloried. No one has acknowledged their authorship of what they call a “parody look at the news”. 

I've had it. I've refrained from posting the shit until now, but In their last effort, they actually had the brass to include a page that makes it look as if the owners of local businesses are supporting his “journalism” through advertising. A sample of their idea of humor is at the right.  Does anyone fucking care??

The Maine Attorney General’s office and the Freeport Police Department have been informed about this publication, and have advised that no actionable criminal offenses have been committed by the author in its production. Still, I doubt any decent citizen could view the images and language it contains speaks well of anyone associated with it. 

“A Crow’s Nest”,  is a heinous blot on the landscape of this town. Please do not let the good name of your business be tarnished by a false and improper association with the ravings of a seriously disturbed individual. Please speak out in any way you can. Silence is complicity.

Condemn portrayals of lynch mobs.

...we'll have to ask our attorney.

The Wayback Machine, or is it Groundhog Day?

Back in 1996, the voters of Freeport were asked for their opinions on Pay Per Bag trash disposal, whether to hire a single hauler for trash for the town, and this:

ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING ISSUANCE OF BONDS FOR THE PURPOSE OF PURCHASING AND DEVELOPING LAND TO PROVIDE FOR AN OUTDOOR RECREATIONAL FACILITY. THE TOWN OF FREEPORT HEREBY ORDAINS: That a sum not to exceed $450,000.00 is hereby appropriated for the purpose of purchasing and developing land to provide for an outdoor recreational facility. To meet said appropriation, the Chairperson of the Town Council and the Town Treasurer are authorized to issue general obligation securities of the Town of Freeport in a total principal amount not to exceed $450,000.00, and the discretion to fix the dates, maturities, denominations, interest rates, places of payment, forms, and other details of said securities, including execution and delivery on behalf of the Town of Freeport,· and to provide for the sale thereof, is delegated to the Chairperson of the Town Council and the Town Treasurer.

 We voted no on the first two, though like a bad penny pay per bag was back on the Council's agenda this year. We passed the bond authorization.

Back in the day, we had a Recreation Committee appointed by the Town Council whose responsibility it was to develop plans for municipal recreation facilities suitable for both the school system and town residents. Ball fields, tracks, trails, that sort of thing. At the time of the referendum, land on Upper Mast Landing Road was proposed as a potential site that "appear[ed] to satisfy many of the needs identified in the comprehensive plans, including hiking trails, picnic areas, conservation areas, open space for playing fields and could provide an all-season site accessible to a majority of Freeport residents." [emphasis added] In the event that parcel proved unsuitable, the Committee was directed to discover other parcels that might fit the bill.

The site proved unsuitable. The Committee identified another parcel located on the Pownal Road that would fit the bill in 1998. In a series of meetings throughout 1998 here, and here, the Committee explored possible options for this parcel, reporting their work and findings to the Town Council at the August 11, 1998 meeting. On February 11, 1999, the Committee recommended to the Town Council the property be purchased, and at their April 6, 1999 meeting, the Town Council unanimously voted to purchase what was then described as "an outstanding site [that] can be developed to meet the vision placed in front of the voters in '96".

This is the parcel now somewhat contentiously proposed to be delivered to a private enterprise for the construction of soccer fields and an indoor stadium the size of a supermarket.

The 12 years since the initial acquisition of the land saw the dissolution of the Recreation Committee as a committee of the Council. Further discussion of development of the land beyond the fields that were actually built there was carried on not by public committees with formal procedures and public input, but by interested individuals who saw potential in offering private interests a leading role in any future development. What started as clearly a municipal project for the benefit of Freeport residents and schoolchildren evolved into a project whose goal was attracting paying customers and visitors to town. In this evolution, precious little consensus building was done along the way with neighboring residents as to the changed vision for the property, which is located in a rural residential zone not suited to commercial activity. The vision placed in front of the voters in 1996 is unmet in the use of public land for private benefit.

Rosa Parks did good.

She kept her seat 56 years ago today.

Before Parks was arrested in 1955, she had a small episode on a bus in 1943. Parks was ordered to enter at the back of the bus. As she was heading to the back of the bus, the bus driver drove off without her. On that day, Parks promised herself that she would never again ride a bus driven by James F. Blake, the offending driver. On Thursday, December 1, 1955, Parks was sitting in the front-most row for black people. When a Caucasian man boarded the bus, the bus driver told everyone in her row to move back to create a new row for the whites. At that moment, Parks suddenly realized in horror that she was again on a bus driven by Blake. While all of the other black people in her row complied, Parks refused, and was arrested for failing to obey the driver's seat assignments, as city ordinances did not explicitly mandate segregation but did give the bus driver authority to assign seats. Found guilty on December 5,[7] Parks was fined $10 plus a court cost of $4[8], but she appealed. NAACP leader E.D. Nixon had been planning to start a boycott of this nature and used her arrest to trigger the Montgomery Bus Boycott. As a result, Rosa Parks is considered one of the pioneers of the civil rights movement.

You don't know what you've got til it's gone.

Earlier today while casting about for information on the town property where Seacoast United seeks to build its supermarket sized indoor soccer palace in an area not zoned for it, I came across this little tidbit (Word 2010 doc, PDF here) relating to the administration of the land abutting its proposed fiefdom: Hedgehog Mountain. The document is entitled "Hedgehog Hill Mountain Area Trails Maintenence and Management Plan". It was presented to the Conservation Commission at its November 15th meeting. It bears no date, and its authorship is unacknowledged, so its recommendations' source is impossible to determine. Commission members say it was presented by the Town planner, who has a vision apparently not entirely at all in accord with the Conservation Commission, whose remit by ordinance it is to act as custodian of this property on behalf of the town. Here is their plan, as adopted in 2004 (Word 2003 doc, PDF here). The former document would presumably replace the current one in force as the guiding plan for Hedgehog in the future. Some excerpts:

"The acquisition of the Hunter Rd property and the development of the athletic fields in 2011 creates a new opportunity to expand the existing trails to include this new property.  A small group of residents and trail enthusiast[s] that are very familiar with the property have developed a plan to maintain and upgrade some trails and to build new trails. 

So a "small group's" privately developed plan trumps that of the body charged by ordinance with developing such a plan with public input. For property acquired by the town through public bond issues for the expressed purpose of quiet enjoyment of open spaces by its users. Right. The small group's not through yet.

"The trails are currently managed and maintain by the volunteers of the Conservation Commission.The Conservation Commission is also responsible for managing and maintaining all of the other trails and woods owned by the Town.  Given the size and number of trails on this property, it is recommended that the responsibility of the land and trails on these properties not be that of the Conservation Commission.  This would require an amendment to the Conservation Commission Ordinance.

Instead a new committee such as the “Friends of Hedgehog Mountain Area” (FOHMA) be formed.[sic]  This group should be part of or at least very closely associated with any group that is formed to oversee the management and maintenance of the athletic fields on Hunter Road. The responsibilities and budget for that group are recommended to be the following:" [snip]

Read the whole thing to see what a new committee (presumably made up of the aforementioned "small group") has in mind.

This unsigned presentation on behalf of unidentified and non-public actors staging a power grab against a duly appointed Town commission established by ordinance is disturbing, to say the least. It seems some in town disagree with the Conservation Commission's understanding of the trust it is charged with. Fine. Let them present their views to the Commission for its consideration. It's rather unseemly to suggest that the right way forward if the Commission disagrees with one special group's outlook is to remove from the Commission's charge the care of the lands it was created to preserve for all of the Town's residents, regardless of that group's self-declared familiarity with the property. What's next? "Friends of Florida Lake"? "Pals of Wolfe Neck"? "Supporters of Sandy Beach"?  We need a Town Government that balances interests and builds consensus. Not one that throws out processes and ordinances because they don't accomodate the shiniest new toy on display.

Rumor has it this may be on the Council's December 6th agenda. If you can find a moment to speak out in favor of quiet enjoyment of our public spaces, come on down and tell the Council to let the Conservation Commission conserve our public lands.

A thought

You cannot play with the animal in you without becoming wholly animal, play with falsehood without forfeiting your right to truth, play with cruelty without losing your sensitivity of mind. He who wants to keep his garden tidy does not reserve a plot for weeds.
-Dag Hammarskjöld

Grateful

To live in a beautiful small town surrounded by helpful and friendly neighbors.
To have the spirit to stay involved in my community
To have work that suits my passions
To have the chance to correct my faults
For life
For friends
For small joys
For sorrows
For family
Thanks.

Act

Stand up.

Whereas lynching in an American tragedy and a crime of racial and ethnic hatred, and
Whereas treating images of lynching as a subject of humor invites its trivialization, and
Whereas the trivialization of violence inspired by hatred invites its perpetration, and
Whereas the author of The Crows Nest has seen fit to include hateful ethnic slurs, slanderous accusations, and depictions of racially motivated killing in his recent "parody" of Freeport Politics,
Be it therefore resolved that the Freeport Town Council deplores, in the strongest possible terms, the promulgation of publications making light of murder, attacking individual Freeport citizens and Town employees with threats and ethnic slurs.
Be it further resolved that the Town Council views collaboration in the conception, design, or production of such materials as detrimental to the public interest.
Be it ordered that all Town officers and staff ensure this publication or any other such publication is not distributed on Town property.

Pass it.

Lynching is not a joke.

Please let the town know. Who thinks it's funny? Who thinks it's OK to distribute pictures of the same at Town Hall? Tell them to stop letting Town Hall be a distribution point for hatred. [edit] I will not post a copy of "The Crows Nest". It is too vile. Why are copies of a  lynch mob picture and slanderous accusations against citizens and Town employees available in the Town Hall lobby?

E-mail all Town Councilors and the Manager

Sweet little lies

Stenographer Amy Anderson of the Falmouth Forecaster dutifully copies:

Edgar Leighton, a member of the first Town Council, said the new council members will not create a major shift in the direction the town takes, but the composition of four women will change the dynamic. He also said the council may now have more productive conversations. "It's my understanding that there were a lot of 5-2 votes and while that gets the job done, it's my sense that one of things that will change is that the meetings will move a little smoother," Leighton said. "There is always room for disagreement and there is nothing wrong with that, but when it is constant, that is not good."

On the 2010-2011 Council, there were exactly two 5-2 votes where Joe Migliaccio and Eric Pandora voted the same way in the minority. The first was on November 9, 2010, when both voted against Jim Cassida as Council Chair, the second on January 25, 2011, when both voted against an unenforceable and constitutionally suspect e-mail policy for the Town Council. If two out of 78 is "constant", I am Marie of Roumania. If the Forcaster and Mr. Leighton care to gain a deeper understanding of truth as opposed to hearsay, I've compiled the votes for them here. But sweet little lies are the comforting stories we like to tell ourselves, right?

Haters

Some civic minded individual is distributing pictures of lynchings and the klan as "parody". Doesn't tickle my funnybone much. How about you?

They write back

On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 7:51 AM, Jim Cassida wrote:

There are no minutes of the gathering.  The sole purpose was to pass out the council committee assignment and goal sheets and council contact form which I had forgotten to do before we closed the meeting.  I explained to everyone what the materials were and when they needed to be returned to Sara & I.  No agenda items were discussed, I simply explained the process for the new folks and handed out the materials.

James Cassida

---

Good morning, Jim-
Thank you for your prompt response to my request for information regarding the unannounced public meeting.
Steph (emphasis mine)

I write letters

Hello Jim and Sara-

Congratulations on your election to serve as Chair and Vice Chair of the Freeport Town Council for the coming year. I wish you all the best.

I hope the minutes of the impromptu meeting that Chairman Cassida called of the newly convened Town Council following the chips and dips this evening will be made available on the Town website. As I was leaving, I heard some discussion amongst yourselves and the Town Manager of possible agenda items for your next session. I believe it might be helpful for the public to be informed as to the nature of the discussion, as is required by statute. If there are no officially written minutes, perhaps you would be kind enough to divulge the nature of the conversation.

Respectfully,
Steph

Oz

Following on the last post, the rest of Freeport's business community's contribution to town revenues, if we accept FEDC's 30 percent figure, is $647,299, or 6.7% of the total. Town spending on promotion of that sector through contributions to FEDC, the Chamber of Commerce, and Freeport USA, which are all private corporations, was $115,000, or a little less than an 18% return on that investment tax rebate. Now that's smart business, for those on the inside. Whether it's smart for the rest of the taxpayers is another question.

A company town

When discussing the contribution of the business sector to the economy of Freeport, it's nice to remember that one company owns 51 parcels of land on the tax rolls: L. L. Bean. The real estate valuation on that property totals $140,750,380.00. If taxes on Bean's property is taxed at the town mil rate of $15.10 per thousand, that amounts to $2,132,368, or 38.7% of the total collected from property taxes, which The 2011 Town budget shows as $5,514,152. Total revenues in the 2011 budget are shown as $9,265,559. Bean's share of that is 23%. Don't forget, that does not include business fixtures taxed as property, which I reckon is quite a bit, and likely quite a bit more than any other business in town. L. L. Bean is also a major employer, providing jobs and income for many residents.

Sande Updegraph, the executive Director of FEDC tells us the business contribution to town revenues is 30%. By my back of the envelope calculation, Bean's share of that 30% is 76.7%. Just thought I'd illustrate in numbers just how big that Gorilla is, in case anyone had any doubt.

Freeport is fortunate as a town of 7,869 to be home to the second largest private employer in the state. As such, we enjoy substantial revenues provided by such a successful company's property taxes. We also incur additional costs other towns not similarly blessed needn't provide for in the form of additional fire and police protection to cover the needs and contingencies millions of customers and employees require in their daily visits to town.

That L.L. Bean is such a great company and responsible neighbor is a boon to our larger economy. Other businesses and residents alike should keep in mind the key role Bean plays in making Freeport the unique small Maine town it is. I added up the valuation based on the numbers presented here, linked to from the Town web site. The property owner to look up is BEAN LL INC. The 2011 Town Budget is here.

The results are in.

Election Day

Whatever happens, we'll keep playing.

Got that hour back.

Looks like a beautiful day to do something with it.

Always true to you, darlin' in my fashion.

Kate Arno apparently doesn't know what she's the President of. Here's a clue. It is a private corporation whose core constituency is business interests with no membership and a self selected board of directors. It is not a "Commission". Freudian slip, perhaps.


Freeport Economic Development CORPORATION.  Says so here too.

I do not belong to any organized party...

I am a Democrat. I am a liberal democrat. The kind that thinks sovereignty lies with the people. The type that believes people can work together for their mutual betterment. The sort that believes that to preserve my liberty, I must work to assure yours, and you must work to assure mine. The species that holds that that work requires a conversation. The ilk that believes that conversation requires listening. The faction that credits ordinary humans with the intelligence to form contracts and laws enforced mutually out of that conversation, by an agreed upon government, whose authority derives from themselves. I am a liberal democrat. I oppose the accretion of power by unelected and unaccountable groups, political or economic. I do not believe in kings and queens, either elected or self appointed. I believe in us.

I am a liberal democrat. I believe in a $48,000 appropriation from town funds to a library clerk Public Library before even discussing a $48,000 dollar appropriation to a businessman's club.

I am a liberal democrat. I believe in affording every individual their personal dignity in address and person, even LGBT creeps like me.

I am a liberal democrat. I believe that whispering campaigns conducted in the press through innuendo and false indignation are unseemly.

I want people in government who know they have a job to do that is not tied to shiny toys, but to things of substance to a community. Some of those people are unenrolled in any political party. Others are Republicans. Others are Democrats. Since I am a liberal democrat, and a lifelong Democrat, I'm going to work hard to see that people who, in my opinion, have demonstrated that they share my view of liberal democracy, are elected to office. This year, those people are Marie Gunning for Council at Large, Joe Migliaccio for District Three Council, and Eric Pandora for District Two Council.

edited for clarity 11/4/2011

Tell us how you really feel.

Maybe this is why people feel a wee bit put off by our town government. This at a Town Council meeting October 12, 2010.Taped and broadcast that night by the Town. The reaction? Make the microphone's default position off. Yeah, that's the ticket.

Watch it...

If Marie Gunning is a plant, she is a rose among the thorniest bunch of characters this side of Mr. MacGregor's briar patch. It's not easy giving your opinion when you know an ad hominem sidebar at the dais awaits if it's one contrary to some town official's.

This is a beautiful place.

See?

Somewhere

Up against the blue curtains!

How's it feel to be the man?

The odd man out in this motley crew is Alan Caron, founder of the anti-sprawl GrowSmart Maine and now director of Envision Maine, which bills itself as a non-partisan think tank interested in informing public policy makers. I’m sure Caron has moderated his political views since I first knew him as a prison reform activist in the 1970s, but unless he has changed his spots completely, he seems to be the token progressive on Team LePage.

A 2007 trip down memory lane from the Boston Phoenix. As Ben Folds sings, "first you wanted revolution, now you're the institution".

In one uendo and out the other

The verbal tricks of politics and the media run from shameless character assasination to titillation and back, sometimes a combination of the two. "Does candidate x blow goats? It would be irresponsible not to speculate" is a famous (in the lefty blogosphere, anyway) parody of the style Richard Hofstader famously labeled paranoid.

So we have an honored Solon of Freeport politics, one Ed Bonney, writing this:

"In every election a candidate can expect to lose some signs due to weather or vandalism, but this year the apparent [sic] organized effort to remove and destroy candidate signs is the worst I have ever seen."

Note the "apparent[ly] organized" bit. Dark forces. Not the candidates, mind, and surely not his candidates, but an apparently organized cadre of evil minions slashing and burning. Subverting the political process. Who are they? Do they blow goats? It would be irresponsible not to speculate.

This blog started with a report of the disappearance of signs belonging to a candidate Mr. Bonney does not support. Others he's not inclined to bless with his imprimatur have also lost signs. Is there a town-wide cadre of anti political sign zealots lurking in the mud of Freeport waiting to deprive its citizens of vital signage during a political campaign? Magic eight ball sez unlikely.

It's a damned shame when the election campaign in a town of 8500 winds up with paranoid McCarthyite tactics deployed by partisans, especially experienced activists like Ed. I guess paranoia makes for strange bedfellows.

Laugh about it, Shout about it

The Chamber Candidate's Forum is back on broadcast. Huzzah!

For Free

Buddy can you spare a quarter mil

I just looked up jerks in the dictionary. There was a picture of this law firm there.

Let me describe a few of the photos. In one, two Baum employees are dressed like homeless people. One is holding a bottle of liquor. The other has a sign around her neck that reads: “3rd party squatter. I lost my home and I was never served.” My source said that “I was never served” is meant to mock “the typical excuse” of the homeowner trying to evade a foreclosure proceeding.

Joe Nocera let NY Times readers in on the fun. HT Digby.

Unbroadcast News

Gee, who deep sixed the Chamber of Commerce candidate's forum on Freeport Public Cable? Unbroadcast at the scheduled times Thursday and Friday per the schedule provided by Rick Simard.You can find a list of cable board people and their contact info in this pdf. They are, according to the document:

Michael Reis, Chair
Edward Bonney
William Greene
Michael Ashby
STAFF PERSON: Rick Simard
rs@freeportmaine.com

Maybe they'll add a couple of replays to make up for the ones we missed.

Updated -
See the missing 11/5 airing? Cable 3 must be fully booked with notices about the dangers of lead paint and pancake breakfasts.

Dynamic Sideways Growth

From the Portland Press Herald, September 7, 2011:

Freeport retail is moving and shaking
Olympia Sports will relocate to a plaza that has been mostly vacant, and other openings are in the works...
Olympia's existing Freeport store -- in the Shaw's Shopping Plaza at 200 Lower Main St., near Exit 20 of Interstate 295 -- will close before the new store opens, said Olympia President Richard Coffey of Windham....

"Olympia is going to bring a lot of energy to the area north of L.L. Bean," [Freeport Economic Development Corporation executive director Sande] Updegraph said. "It will be a strong anchor for that complex."
emphasis added.

And another vacant space and energy suck for Shaw's Plaza. Woo hoo!

οἰκονομία oikonomia economics

The taxpayer funded unelected and self-appointed private Freeport Economic Development Corporation held a meeting (called a "hearing" by its president in her closing remarks) last night inviting the public to inform its betters as to what should be included in its "Vision 2025" strategic plan. Freeport's Very Smart People and Captains of Industry, whose "about us" page  references the residential part of the economy in only one of twenty one bullet points, thanked us for our input and assured us that they would be passing no ordinances. Great to know that an unelected body is not so empowered. We were all relieved to hear it. Still, Our Very Smart People put up hundred dollar signs all over town in pursuit of the 350 votes needed to attain the elected offices with the power to continue to siphon off tax money to pay for their business plans and pass actual ordinances.

A resident asked for my take on FEDC's Vision 2025 and contract zoning, an issue that has its own bullet point on the aforementioned page. Here's my response.

I believe that for far too long planning decisions that involve the spending of public resources of every kind have been proposed and fine tuned well before the public has had an opportunity to review and provide insight regarding their consequences. Part of the mechanism for that is the presence of FEDC, founded in 1980 by Mike Healy (now Seacoast United's spokesman and past president) and Ed Bonney to:
"advance and promote economic development in Freeport , Maine."

Some background:
The Articles of Incorporation are here
Their latest IRS filing that is available (2009) is here

I've shared them using Google Docs.

Here is the category Guidestar has them listed as:

Basic Org Information

NTEE Category:

S Community Improvement, Capacity Building 

S41 (Promotion of Business (Chambers of Commerce)) 

Year Founded:

2000 

Ruling Year:

2000 

As a private corporation, they are not covered under the Freedom of Access laws. Whether that status would hold up under a court challenge is a matter of some question. I am not a lawyer.

In any event, what they do is serve as a point of first contact for developers seeking to do business in Freeport. Sheltered from FOA, they can serve developers as a convenient and confidential liaison between the business and Town government, identifying properties, coaching on possible financing options as well as on logistical considerations a business might need to successfully move a project to approval by various Town boards. In itself, this function is not an unreasonable one in my opinion. It is troubling, though, that this function, while wholly publicly funded, is wholly privately controlled by a self appointed board whose members concurrently serve in important roles on publicly appointed or elected bodies which ultimately determine the fate of the projects they promote and shepherd through the permitting and approval process in town. It seems to me an invitation to disaster to lodge in a private corporation the power to shape the economic development of a town when properly public participation in any project can and will help to sharpen public understanding, consensus, and perhaps acceptance of major undertakings that require the use of public funds and/or resources.

With regard to the issue and meeting at hand, "Vision 2025", rather than challenging FEDC's legitimacy outright, I think focusing like a laser on what the project is and who it is for is the right approach. I think it is proper to ask the organization to clarify these issues for the public before the public provides input. After all, it doesn't make much sense for residents to provide an organization devoted to expanding business into primarily residential areas a road map for doing so. My questions would be these, in this order:

Who is FEDC?

How does FEDC understand the phrase "economic development"?

By what authority does FEDC convene this conference?

Who will produce the work product?

Who will approve the final product?

Who will be the consumers of the work product?

Who will pay for the work product?

Is it FEDC's intent that all or part the work document produced through this process become adopted as the Comprehensive Plan for the Town of Freeport?

Who will lobby for the implementation of its recommendations by the Town Council or other relevant town bodies?

I think it is important to get really solid answers to these questions before contributing to the project: especially the fundamental question as to whose project it is. If it is to be a project directed and edited by the board of FEDC,
I want to know if their vision encompasses something more than a vision of a town devoted to growth for growth's sake, or something more sustainable. I want to know if issues like public transportation  figure into their calculus as resourses for people as well as businesses. I want to know whether the protection of quiet open space undisturbed by commercial enterprise is a part of their vision of Freeport's economy. And I want to be assured that if the taxpayers are paying for this project, they have full and complete access to developing it at every step in its evolution.

As to contract zoning, here is a great summary provided by Orlando Delogu, a U Maine Law professor emeritus at a conference earlier this year.  Contract zoning is a tool that can be effective in fine tuning land use. Like any tool, it can be misapplied in the wrong hands, without proper public oversight. I am very much afraid that given the unwillingness of the public in Freeport to be protective of its rights until the last minute, the tool will be used unwisely by partisans of one shiny toy project or another until zoning becomes meaningless. There's lots of speculation about expanding commercial uses in the residential zones. There are no active projects I know of, but if somebody comes up with a shiny new toy that promises "growth"and "jobs", it is a tool that could be used to facilitate such a project, if its planning is done in the same fashion as other projects have been recently. That much advance planning and coaching of projects takes place with the cooperation of FEDC without public scrutiny or control, depending on the private corporation to make the right choice in recommending a contract zone for a particular project seems worrisome. Currently, contact zoning in Freeport is not permitted outside the commercial zones. I don't think it should be until we have a development process that is open and transparent to public view and participation. I don't think we have that now, but we should work hard to see that we do in the future. That's a worthy goal for Freeport 2025.

Last Kid Picked?

I guess that's how this candidate's supporter felt while placing his or her favorite's sign.

Really? Rich DeGrandpre has such awesomely cool superpowers that merely placing his sign in the right of way makes the two candidates' signs that were there before fly off into a ditch?

Again, I can't believe the candidates themselves are inspiring this expression of town juvenalia. Whoever is out there vandalizing signs, just stop.

Blocking up the scenery breaking my mind...

Look, I know people put a whole lot of energy into putting up campaign signs, and are naturally peeved when they mysteriously disappear. Anyone who'd spend their time ripping up signs because they don't like the candidate probably enjoyed ripping the wings off of flies in second grade. But to float rumors of lawsuits and bruit about accusations that the candidates themselves are engaging in such a pastime is really, really dumb. I know none of the folks I'm supporting are doing that.

Again, if anybody actually knows anything real about actual humans vandalizing signs, please let the authorities know.

It's been windy. The ground is damp. The weather doesn't favor anybody in particular. Leave it to the cops, and fuggedaboudit.

Signs of the Times

It seems some campaign signs are flying off Flying Point Road. If anybody knows why, please share the info.