The Washington County Commissioners, the closest Trescott has to local representative government, spoke out last week against the controversial new state Land Use Regulatory Commission (LURC) plan intended to further curtail the local economy and private property for the sake of preservation in Maine's Unorganized Territory, including Trescott. Chris Gardner, Chairman of the County Commissioners, attended the LURC hearing in Machias on May 8 where he spoke against the plan and presented the Commission's longer written testimony (pdf) (also printed in the Downeast Coastal Press, May 13, 2008).

The changes to the LURC plan, now in draft form, are being written and implemented by the state commission without voter approval. Pressure groups with influence inside state government have sought for decades to change the purpose of LURC into a Greenline park agency imposing land use prohibitions on private property owners. LURC's traditional role since it was established in the 1970's has been as a state stand–in for local zoning in under–populated regions without local town government such as Trescott. Gardner focused on the lack of voter approval for a change in the purpose of LURC and the damage to the economy by preservationists over the last few decades, citing the trend in Trescott as an example.

“The purpose of LURC,” wrote Gardner,

“was to assist the people in seeing that the people’s wishes are adhered to in the use and development of LURC governed territories. Being that the public is in fact the owners of the business, they, and they alone, are the only ones who can alter LURC’s primary focus and purpose. It seems evident to us that this plan was written by LURC staffers who were unevenly influenced by environmental and conservational interests… These interests… can not arbitrarily be considered policy setting entities, nor representative majorities of the people’s interests… [But] residents do not vote on it, the full legislature does not debate it, we all simply get to abide by it. It is this reason that we as County Commissioners come out in such strong opposition… The conservational interests forced upon the people of Maine over the past three decades have successfully done one thing, locked up more of Maine’s opportunities and in turn made Maine less successful.”

Gardner cited Trescott in particular as an example of how advocates have misrepresented a claimed problem of an “alarming trend of sprawl” in the UT:

“When I saw that Trescott Township was listed by proponents of this revision as an example of ‘sprawl’, we laughed out loud. It was said that based upon the fact that it was averaging 5 new building permits per year it was indicative of the problem…

[A] gentleman stated if his little township in Northern Maine continued to grow at it’s present rate, by 2060 it would have the population it had in 1890. This made me wonder if this was an isolated incident or an ‘alarming trend’. So I checked into Edmunds Twp (my hometown) and Trescott Twp which represent two of our more populated UT’s here in Washington County.

What we found is very much in line with our friend to the north. Since 1900 Edmunds Twp population has gone from 492 to an estimated 350 in 2008 a decrease of roughly 30%. Trescott Twp. has gone from 463 to an estimated 325 in 2008 a decrease of also roughly 30%. If the population does in fact show an upward trend in the past 30 years as LURC staffers are fearful of, thank goodness. Hopefully it continues at a greater rate and hopefully it is not too late. And hopefully this 2008 Revision as drafted fails, because in it’s passage it will be only yet another example of what is wrong in the death by regulation approach of the past three decades in Maine.

Upon review of the plan we must say we are extremely concerned and disheartened by the approach that has been taken in this plan. This plan represents much of what is wrong with governmental oversight and per usual overreach. As the 2008 Revision is written, the Washington County Commissioners can not only fail to support it, but we must vehemently oppose it.”

Similar objections to the LURC plan were voiced in the other recent hearings around the state, particularly in the rural areas most affected.

Previous reports on this topic at THS:

“Anti-sprawl” Campaign Calls Trescott “Fast Growing” for
LURC Land Use Control Planning

“Big Changes to Invade Unorganized Territories”

Return to Trescott Historical Society HOME PAGE

Contact us

Last updated: 5/11/05

Copyright © 2008 Trescott Historical Society, All rights reserved