Why I love this community

This will no longer be the nor southeast corner of a 62,000 square foot commercial structure thanks to the very hard work and dedication of hundreds of Freeport residents who believe our town's rural character needn't be sacrificed while striving to be accommodating to Maine's most dynamic businesses. Our Council did the right thing last night in keeping their eye on the future.We are a growing community, with room for growth in areas that have the needed services that the commercial sector requires for their development. I am hopeful that Coastal Soccer will find a suitable place to site their business in our town, and confident that we can find a place for them as good neighbors.

Rules Seminar

Wikipedia:

A direct free kick is a method of restarting play in a game of association football following a foul. Unlike an indirect free kick, a goal may be scored directly against the opposing side without the ball having first touched another player. 

A direct free kick is awarded to the opposing team when a player commits a penalty foul, for example, pushing or tripping an opponent.[1] However, if the offence was committed by the defending team within their own penalty area, the kick becomes a penalty kick.

Steve Twombley, Paul Willis, and Mike Healy of Seacoast United Maine have complained in their recent letter to Freeporters that  "The anonymous people that claim we are getting 'a Free Kick' are making an intentional misrepresentation." Perhaps they don't understand that it's the Referees that award a Free Kick, and that the "anonymous people" on this Facebook page, 373 of whom have signed either this online petition or a hard copy of it,  are complaining about the award, not their taking advantage of it. Seacoast wants to site their 62,000 square foot industrial building that will serve as an indoor soccer stadium in a Rural Residential District where the use is not allowed.

The "anonymous people", unlike Seacoast in their mailer, have published their e-mail address and telephone number on every flyer they have distributed. In two separate votes by the Freeport Planning Board, Seacoast's request to change the zoning of the site in two different ways was turned down. Now they'd like the refs (the Town Council) to award them a third shot. The residents of Freeport have committed no penalty foul, yet are forced once again to ask the Town Council and Planning board to enforce our zoning ordinances. They do not allow Seacoast's project to be built as Seacoast likes where Seacoast likes it. Who, exactly, is misrepresenting what?

Musical Interlude

Read 'em and weep.

Chairman Cassida writes:

If you honestly believe that your opinion is representative of 70% of Freeporters I wish you could walk in my shoes for a couple of days.  There are a lot of opinions out there and finding the path that is best for the community is not easy when you actually give consideration to all the perspectives.  If I simply listened to my own thoughts or the thoughts of one individual or group I could do this job in my sleep.  Unfortunately that is not the case!

What I wrote:

It's too bad, and telling, that you think making a decision between protecting the residential investments of 70% of the town and the private wishes of one profit making enterprise's potential for gain is a difficult one. Seacoast can find properly zoned land for its building. They should be encouraged to do so. 

What I did not write:

I honestly believe that my opinion is representative of 70% of Freeporters. 

For the record, I honestly believe that my opinion is representative of me. I hope any doubt on the matter is now settled.

Credit when due

"It's never a good idea to have zoning come from projects," [Wendy] Caisse said.
http://www.pressherald.com/news/soccer-club-seeks-a-new-zoning-change_2012-02-03.html

She's catching on.