Editor:

A funny thing happened at the Scarborough Town Council meeting last Wednesday. Well, not funny really. Grotesque is a more appropriate description.

Nearly 30 residents lined up to voice opposition to a council plan to give away a road that has served as a primary public access to the beach at Pine Point for at least the past 137 years.

And although Article 1, Section 2 of the Maine Constitution states, in part, “All power is inherent in the people…and instituted for their benefit.” And Section 15 of the same founding document goes on to say “That the people have a right to assemble…and to consult upon the common good, (and) to give instructions to their representatives…,” the council voted to ignore the instructions, and benefits that would continue to accrue to all citizens if the town retained ownership of Depot Street.

By their vote councilors Wood, Roy, Babine, Ahlquist and Sullivan thumbed their noses at the speakers and the scores more who signed petitions urging them not to hand over public property to private interests.

One is led to wonder what sort of private discussions might have taken place among involved parties because an analysis of public discussion would certainly indicate a different outcome.

But there is hope. Perhaps one or more of the fateful five will move for reconsideration of the vote at the next council meeting. Only then can the wrong that has been suffered upon the people of Scarborough be righted

George Pulkkinen

Scarborough

Editor:

On July 15, the Scarborough Town Council voted to give away a road that will become a motel parking lot. How important and valuable can that road be if the town is willing to give it away? This road is 50 feet wide and leads directly to Pine Point Beach – the largest beach access road in Pine Point. In return the town will get a 22-foot pedestrian path. The town council members who voted for this also felt this exchange had equal value – the town is receiving no compensation in this exchange. 

I would like to thank Councilors Rancourt and D’Andrea,who voted against the measure,  for wanting to study this issue a little more and look at other options before making a final decision. In my opinion, that is how the town council process should work. Councilors Roy and Sullivan have an opportunity to put the process back on track by putting it on the agenda again for a reconsideration vote. Hopefully, they will.

Elaine Richer

Editor:

I was stunned by the 4-3 vote in favor of the town's proposal last Wednesday night following the comments by Councilors Rancourt, Sullivan, Roy, and D'Andrea  during deliberation. We are giving up more land then we are getting in the land swap. No two-way traffic or a turnaround for adequate access to the beach down Depot Street. A large portion of the street would be limited to pedestrian traffic. Obviously the many presentations by the citizens and a petition signed by many asking the council to vote no on the proposal were unfortunately to no avail. Once the land is gone it’s gone. There is no opportunity to revisit this issue. Depot Street, which until a few years back was always open to the public, will no longer exist as we knew it. Certainly there is room for a more appropriate design that could be accomplished with further deliberation between both parties. One could get the impression that the majority of the council feels this has gone on long enough, and that the plan represents the best alternative for public use. I do not agree and urge councilors Sullivan or Roy to ask for reconsideration and a chance to return Depot Street to the public as it was for years in a more equitable manner.

Courtney Sargent Sr.

Scarborough

Editor:

This letter is concerning the land swap that just happened in Pine Point. The council voted 4-3 on July 15 to five a public road with beautiful views of the ocean to the Lighthouse Motel free of charge. It is unbelievable. I am writing the editor to publicly thank Councilors Rancourt, D'Andrea, Sullivan and Roy for expressing reservations and concerns about the land exchange plan. Their comments during the deliberation were very rational and based on their views that more information was needed. They appeared sensitive to the tremendous public objection to the plan presented to them. There are certainly better alternatives, one which was presented that called for a fair, even exchange. Instead, they gave away a 50-foot road for a 21-foot parking strip and closed the road. It is my understanding that Councilors Roy and Sullivan can request an agenda item for the council's Aug. 19th meeting, or if they are requested to add an agenda item by a member of the public (Council Rules 118.1).  I urge you both to do so and then make a motion to reconsider this item and cast your vote to oppose the plan.  If you do, it will demonstrate to the community that you, along with colleagues D'Andrea and Rancourt, truly believe in the purpose of a public hearing, acknowledge the great many legitimate citizens who signed the petition, and took the time to reflect on the 30 or more speakers' comments after the meeting.  Please do the right thing and prove government can work for the people.

Judy Shirk

Scarborough

Editor:

I am writing about the Scarborough Town Council's vote to forever close and give the end of the Pine Point Road at the beachfront to the owners of the seasonal Lighthouse Motel, free of charge. This absurd plan was initially crafted without any public notification or input. Twenty citizens addressed the council at its June meeting urging no action be taken until the as-yet unveiled plan was given a full public process. This is a 100-year-old historical road running to Pine Point beach. It is arguably the widest and most visible of all beach access points to any of Scarborough's shores. A public hearing was held July 15 where more than 30 articulate speakers spoke against the plan. One spoke in favor. A petition with more than 350 signatures of residents, taxpayers and others was presented but rejected out of hand by the council chairman as illegitimate. 

  Credit goes to town councilors Rancourt, D’Andrea, Sullivan and Roy for expressing reservations about the land exchange. Their comments during deliberation were rational and based on the general view the plan was incomplete. They appeared sensitive to the tremendous public objection to the plan presented. Sullivan and Roy ultimately voted with the majority but under the council's rules (section 118.1) they can request a reconsideration agenda item by Aug. 12. I urge both to do so and cast their vote to oppose the plan and undo this horrendous injustice to the people of Scarborough and our visitors. If they do, it will demonstrate to the community that they, along with councilor's D’Andrea and Rancourt, truly believe in the purpose of a public hearing, acknowledge the great many legitimate citizens who signed the petition, and that they took the time to reflect on the speakers’ comments after the meeting. Please do the right thing and prove government can work for the people.

John Thurlow

Scarborough