On November 5, Scarborough will vote on a $6 million land bond. It is presented as a solution to galloping growth which a clear majority of residents vigorously oppose. Before voting on Question 3, it is important to understand what the land bond can and cannot do.

Scarborough is rich in natural resources and we all greatly appreciate them. Proponents of the land bond say it will “protect our lands and waters.” But what does this statement actually mean and how could it be achieved?

Prime parcels in Scarborough are now selling for up to $100,000 an acre. It is unrealistic to think that taxpayers can outbid developers for enough land to protect the quality of our land and water. The city and its taxpayers simply cannot afford to escape the spiral of unbridled growth created by city leaders.

A more practical solution would be for city leaders to take meaningful action to control growth and protect our natural environment.

Creating effective zoning and growth ordinances would be an obvious place to start. The city currently has 600 pages of zoning ordinances that painstakingly detail restrictions on topics like signage and parking. Our ordinances can and should be strengthened to protect our lands, waters, and incredible wetlands.

As part of a renewed commitment to retaining the best of Scarborough, our leaders must also learn to say no to developers. It doesn’t happen often enough anymore. City leaders must adopt an approach that prioritizes the preservation of our natural world over the desires of developers.

In addition to recognizing the critical need for stronger environmental leadership, voters should be aware of three other aspects of the proposed $6 million land bond.

First, taxpayer funding of conservation through land bonds is very rare in Maine. Over the past 28 years, only nine Maine municipalities have issued land bonds. And – with $7.5 million in previously issued land bonds – Scarborough is tied with Falmouth for the most bonds issued. Private donations to local land trusts are by far the most common method of funding local conservation efforts. Scarborough needs to join the mainstream and ease the financial burden on local taxpayers.

Second, the land bond can be used for several purposes other than conservation. Among others, they include “supporting recreation” and “expanding existing conservation or public areas.” These vague guidelines could allow the City Council, by majority vote, to make significant real estate purchases for decidedly non-conservation projects, such as new school sports fields or land for a community center/pool. Such purchases would not require voter approval as they otherwise would.

Finally, the proposed property bond requires all taxpayers to support a specific charitable cause over others they might prefer. While land conservation is a good cause, there are many others that individuals can choose to support – health, education, religious or civic organizations. This forced donation is particularly difficult for residents who cannot afford to donate. If Scarborough followed the model of the vast majority of other cities and towns in Maine and supported conservation through private donations and state grants Scarborough Land Trustthis problem would disappear.

We strongly support local conservation. But we, members of SMARTaxes (Scarborough Maine Advocates for Reasonable Taxes), believe the $6 million property bond is an impractical, ineffective and unfair approach. A strong leadership commitment to conservation, accompanied by robust and strictly enforced land use ordinances, will provide the most effective and affordable way to limit Scarborough’s growth and protect our lands and waters.

We are calling for a “no” vote on Question 3 on November 5.

Copy story link