Welcome

A letter titled Admiring the finery, ignoring the supply written by Andy Cozzi, a retired geologist, raised the issue of unusually low water levels of Knickerbocker Lake

Finery is easily interpreted as the newly installed cultivated landscape at the Boothbay Center, bought and paid for by developer Paul Coulombe, who habitually shows no regard for environmental issues. The Center make-over is a visual extension of the Country Club. Later, Clifford Park added two large asphalt parking lots on the hilltop that slopes down into Adam’s Pond, the Town’s main water supply.

Google AI says, “Asphalt contaminates water through runoff, which can carry heavy metals and microplastics from roads and asphalt sealers into aquatic ecosystems. Additionally, the heat-absorbing properties of asphalt contribute to the urban heat island effect, further impacting air quality, which can carry heavy metals and microplastics from roads and asphalt sealers into aquatic ecosystems.”

An irrigated water system was installed under the Common so that it can retain its green color even during a drought. There is a high probability that there are water irrigation systems under the cultivated gardens and road decor installed announcing that you are leaving the natural environs and entering the wealth culture. It is also probable that Clifford Park, another gift from Paul Coulombe, has its own water irrigation as add-on finery, multiplying the asphalt effect of contaminated water flowing into Adam’s Pond. Should we be looking at gift horses in the mouth? Only if we have the opportunity to do so!

The Legislature enacts laws such as §5654. Conditional gifts to override the Home Rule amendment, permitting developers and government leaders to have their way with a community without the inhabitants having a say, while being relegated to pay ongoing expenses.

An odd article in the Boothbay Register tells of citizens who came to a Town meeting to testify in favor of the latest small business targeted by the Boothbay selectmen. However, the citizens never spoke at the meeting as they were anticipating that the subject would be called up as an agenda item, and that would be when they would testify in favor of the landowner.

Following the meeting, the Boothbay Register asked several residents why they attended and didn’t comment. Lisa Burnham, Nicholas Morley and Matthew Burnham said they wanted to support a resident’s right to private property. “Nobody spoke because we were waiting for it to come up on the agenda. We didn’t know we were suppose to speak during the public forums,” Lisa Burnham said.

Had they spoken, Lisa Burnham said the public would’ve spoken in favor of Robert Reed and Robbie Campbell whose West Road properties have received notice of violations. Campbell is working with town officials on rectifying his violations and is not, at this time, in danger of being fined. Boothbay selectmen will decide land use fine in September

What makes the story even stranger is that the Boothbay Register never identifies the business involved or the nature of the violations. A search for further stories produced the information that the Town was threatening the property owners with fines for not cleaning up their property, which, lacking sufficient information about what kind of business or what type of “clean up” it is, raises the question of what ordinance it is and when the ordinance was written and by whom the ordinance was written. Is it a local ordinance or a state-wide ordinance, unconstitutionally enacted? These are only questions because the reporting is so lacking that it feels like the powers that be are intentionally being non-transparent, begging the question that non-transparency always produces: Why are they being so non-transparent and suggesting that they are hiding something that they know isn’t right.

Traditionally, the Town leaders prioritize economic development over environmental issues despite the local water supply being rated as endangered by further development since the 80s.

The power elite of concentrated wealth develop narratives, usually proclaiming a benefit to the people, spining a web of deception over the steady and incremental downgrading of the standard of living of the people in exchange for increasing the power, glory, and might of concentrated wealth such as that poscessed by Mr Coulombe, high-end non-profits, and the Financial Authority of Maine- a state corporation arguably created in violation of Article IV Part Third Section 14of the Maine Constitution.

Maine Constitution: Section 14. Corporations, formed under general laws. Corporations shall be formed under general laws, and shall not be created by special Acts of the Legislature, except for municipal purposes, and in cases where the objects of the corporation cannot otherwise be attained; and, however formed, they shall forever be subject to the general laws of the State.

Maine Statutes: §964. Organization and responsibility

1. Finance Authority of Maine. The Finance Authority of Maine is established as a body corporate and politic and a public instrumentality of the State, and the exercise by the authority of the powers conferred by this chapter shall be deemed and held to be the performance of essential governmental functions.

One could argue that the object of centrally managing the economy can’t be attained without a central bank to concentrate and redistribute wealth, but then one must show that a centralized economy is consistent with the intent of the Maine Constitution, including Home Rule and Articles I3 Part Third Sections 13 & 14.

Today our economy has been managed by the state since 1976, and we are living in the advanced unfolding of what happens when the people dismiss their State Constitution and embrace a government by public-private relationships, seen through the narrative lens of the housing crisis

The Town leadership reflects the larger society, which at this grand historical moment is demanding a moral response if we want our democracy to continue. Are we reaching a similar reflection point environmentally on this Peninsula? Is the low water level on Knickerbocker Lake the first warning sign that we can’t continue to ignore the warnings? What would be the difference in development attitudes if the community took the warnings about our water supply seriously?

The community would not have invested millions of dollars in attaching water and sewage supply lines for a housing zone that is intended to be overcrowded with housing for a large new population.

What were the leaders thinking, if they were thinking? The information is available on the Boothaby Regional Development Corporation website for anyone to read. It is hard to say if the lack of unit sales after half a year is due to the character of the development or to the financial terms, which are the opposite of what “affordable housing” is supposed to mean. The condominiums are priced at the equivalent of the market rate for homes that include the land, the size of which was determined before HP1489 was enacted, bringing urban Industrial Revolution housing concentration to Maine for the first time.

Why did our leadership give public affordable housing dollars to a gigantic, overcrowded workforce housing project located on a Peninsula with an endangered water supply? The answer is simple. The board of BRDC knows how bowling pins work. First, you need the bowling ball, which is the initial investor – enter Mr Coulombe. Then you use the initial investment to get the Town to pitch in, then the other bowling pins fall, one after the other. The County invests because the Town invested, and the State follows suit because the bowling ball is implementing the plan as dictated in state-wide municipal ordinances. The only thing leadership needs to ask is, did the project get the initial investors? No need to read that information on the website.

And because the leaders do not incorporate any other considerations beyond financial economics into their thinking.

I have introduced an alternate plan called “Land to Individuals”

Land To Individuals will not need such large sums of money since it is not developing the land itself, but instead buying land and reselling it to individuals who will develop it as their own homes and/or businesses. Anyone can buy land and build more economically than the cost of some affordable housing developments, but the demographic that is 60% or below has scarce resources for purchasing land. By setting up a system that makes it financially possible for the 60% or below demographic to buy land and build their own, with or without a prefab kit, for an affordable monthly payment, affordable housing becomes affordable again. The hard sell is exposing the current narrative for what it is and identifying a new narrative. That is what I have been doing in this newsletter and will continue to do. It involves a lot of research as this letter demonstrates. It is only by absorbing what is in two related studies that one can see the reality behind the narrative.

There could be many small Land-to-Individuals organizations, each with its own focus. That is what is needed to humanize the state’s plan for Maine as a short-term rental campus with special overcrowded zones where the working people live.

Evidence that the plan is about expanding the short term rental or “seasonal homes” industry is found in the mathematics of the State of Maine Housing Production Needs Study where the state projects that 29800 to 35900 homes are needed in the workforce housing zones and 6500 to 7900 seasonal homes are needed to be built, which are not allowed in the workforce housing zones.

Why are second homes included in the projection for homes needed to be built to address a housing shortage crisis?

Share

There were two housing studies done or commissioned by the Maine Legislature. The first housing study resulted in the enactment of HP489, an act that creates state-wide municipal ordinances. The study, was done by private citizen developers granted a special status by the Maine Legislature to write their own legislative proposal without collecting supportive signatures of other citizens as provided by the Maine Constitution.

2. Referral to electors unless enacted by the Legislature without change; number of signatures necessary on direct initiative petitions; dating signatures on petitions; competing measures. For any measure thus proposed by electors, the number of signatures shall not be less than 10% of the total vote for Governor cast in the last gubernatorial election preceding the filing of such petition. …. The measure thus proposed, unless enacted without change by the Legislature at the session at which it is presented, shall be submitted to the electors together with any amended form, substitute, or recommendation of the Legislature, and in such manner that the people can choose between the competing measures or reject both. When there are competing bills and neither receives a majority of the votes given for or against both, the one receiving the most votes shall at the next statewide election to be held not less than 60 days after the first vote thereon be submitted by itself if it receives more than 1/3 of the votes given for and against both. If the measure initiated is enacted by the Legislature without change, it shall not go to a referendum vote unless in pursuance of a demand made in accordance with the preceding section. The Legislature may order a special election on any measure that is subject to a vote of the people.

One could argue that the commissioners did not petition the Legislature; the Legislature petitioned them. That is hard to believe in a government that operates as a public-private relationship. There were no competing petitions, as only the developer community was petitioned by the Legislature to submit legislation, despite it being commonplace in municipalities for developers’ plans to be at odds with other community interests.

In the first study (for hp1489), the developers acknowledge that short-term rentals were affecting the housing shortage before announcing that short-term rentals would not be included in the study and that the cause of the housing shortage would be attributed to the “underproduction of housing”.

• Short-term rentals: Short term rentals, such as Airbnb’s, are another area of concern that was raised but that the commission believes requires a more in-depth study. Commissioners noted that the rapid growth of short-term rentals in Maine has taken existing housing stock out of the year-round rental pool, putting pressure on rental rates throughout the State. Although long-term impacts may not yet be known, there is evidence that short-term rentals are impacting the housing market. Of particular concern is the rise of non-owner-occupied short-term rentals in strong housing markets. While owners who rent out their own units at times can supplement their household income, non-owner-occupied short-term rentals do not provide the same benefits and can essentially remove a housing unit from the market. While the commission has not made a formal recommendation, this may be a topic that deserves further study to assess the benefits and drawbacks of regulating short-term rentals. Commission members are particularly interested in ensuring that new housing units produced using the recommendations from this report are used primarily as permanent, year-round housing for Maine residents. Commission to Increase Housing Opportunities in Maine by Studying Zoning and Land Use Restrictions (empasis by author)

The first study concluded that another study should be done that includes short-term rentals.

The study that includes short-term rentals is the State of Maine Housing Production Needs Study but it is not written as a study with a foundational purpose of solving the housing crisis; and it does not assess the benefits and drawbacks of regulating short-term rentals.

The second study it is written as a plan for expanding the short-term rental industry in Maine, which is identified as a cause of the housing shortage in the first study, The first study suggested that there be another study on the short-term rental effect, which is the second study, that incudes the production of 7900 new “seasonal homes” a term that includes short-term rentals without saying so in so many words, but also a term signifying a second home, which is a luxury and not essential housing which is what the term “housing shortage” is understood to mean- a shortage in first homes, not a shortage of second homes.

The second study does not identify its purpose in a straightforward manner. The second study’s purpose is revealed in the inclusion of “seasonal homes” in housing production goals, despite also identifying that the direst need is in the 60% AMI category, a demographic that struggles to afford a first home, let alone a second one.

Everyone needs a first home, but a second home is not an essential “need”. The state study is billed as assessing a “housing shortage,” but it includes the perspective of a business assessing sales inventory, except that the state is assessing its sales tax revenue, which is a quantifiable 9% on short-term rentals and related services.

While spinning the need for mass production of new housing as a necessary response to a housing shortage emergency, HP 1489 allows that workforce housing can be at least 2.5 times the density of the surrounding area.

Roughly calculating by dividing 35900 (estimated workforce homes needed) by 2.5 density equals 14,360 seasonal homes that would occupy the same amount of space as 35900 workforce units. The state is planning on building up to 7900 seasonal homes, occupying approximately one-third of the total land designated for the housing shortage in the “underproduction of housing” narrative, a narrative that the state is exaggerating in the media by claiming the study says we need to build 70,000 to 80,000 homes, which is twice or more than the numbers of homes needed that are cited in the report.

What happens when you add the acreage the state is planning to use for new seasonal (STRS) homes to the amount of space allocated for overcrowded workforce housing zones? The housing for the workforce becomes a little more humane.

Why does the state need to project a number of seasonal homes to be built? The seasonal homes are inventory for the state’s industry in the form of tax revenue derived from STRs. To create more STR tax revenue, the state needs more STRS to be built. This may be even more lucrative for the state than income tax revenue from jobs created by subsidizing large corporations.

If the state is openly lying about one thing, what else is pure fabrication for the sake of a justifying narrative, a classic case of exploiting a crisis to serve an unrelated agenda, or worse, an agenda that is exacerbating and/or causing the crisis.

A second home is not an essential need; it is a luxury and is not the business of a state to provide for it.

The state is prioritizing the tax revenue it extracts from the STR industry over the welfare of “the workforce”, by which it means, the proletariat and only the proletariat, a term defined as workers who do not own the means of production. There is no housing in the state-wide municipal ordinances for any other kind of working-class housing. The workforce will be herded into overcrowded housing zones- spun as the saving grace of the crisis caused by the “underproduction of housing” in a crafty narrative that prioritizes the corporate states’ business interests over the interests of the people. The workforce housing needs to be moved out of the way of the short-term rental industry and to occupy as little land as possible, as Maine’s land is needed for the expansion of the “seasonal homes” industry.

This is a dystopian vision for Maine’s future. It will not change through the agency of the existing government. The people must initiate a movement to bring about change.

The people have the Maine Constitution on their side, but it is regarded as an old dusty thing to which no one pays attention. Still, the Maine Constitution represents the principles of government in Maine, under the rule of law.

The looming prognosis of a bleak dystopian future for the working classes in Maine calls for the people to fight back and defend the available assets. The Maine Constitution holds that municipal ordinances are the province of municipal governments, not that of the state, but there was no protest when, under HP1489, the state claimed the right to enact state-wide municipal ordinances. The Town leaders rolled over like a feather, without principles or courage.

The working classes have the Maine Constitution on their side, but it needs to be upheld, and our leadership has not been doing that. Under Title 20-A, §4706, it is required to teach the Constitutions of the United States and Maine in Maine public schools, but that is not being honored. Curriculum should be part of the public discussion on education, but curriculum is rarely mentioned.

Land to Individuals is one way to bring about change. It would eventually require municipal ordinances and Town leaders, and recognition of the need for more types of housing than “seasonal homes” and overcrowded housing zones.

There could be multiple “Land to Individuals” organizations, each with its own focus.

The project doesn’t have to start with a large plot of land. It could start with a plot that is divided into three subdivisions. A small project could be a pilot project. and subject of a promotional media story. What happens when you take three 60% or below AMI individuals or families and make it possible for them to buy a plot of land and build an affordable home themselves? Will it unfold as Claude described as having the potential to not only develop the property but to develop the skills of the inhabitants into a profession?

A small project could have a large impact through creative storytelling.

Our times call for decisive action and change, as much on the local level as on the national level. It’s not a Democrat or Republican problem. In Maine, the government is not there for us. We need new thinking and people who will act with creativity and spirit! Like Gavin Newsom, who took an unusual course and struck a nerve, and is being dubbed the joyful warrior,

What is most inspirational about Gavin Newsom is the balance he strikes between an emotional response and an intellectual one. With one hand, he holds a mirror up to Trump’s rhetoric and imagery, and with the other, he delivers a serious, powerful speech with precision focus on the call to action of this unique historical moment as Governor Newsome takes decisive action by signing redistricting legislation in California. That is what we need everywhere and in Maine.