This Op-Ed is in response to the BDN’s March 8 Editorial, “LURC Change Too Risky.” As a spokesperson and a fellow researcher for “Take America Back,” this immediately got my attention. Our research group has been on the front line on this issue so we felt this opinion needed a response based on research that average Maine citizens could do on their own to find the truth. Unfortunately, most people do not take the time to research, so they trust other people for their opinion.
First of all, the “Land Use Regulatory Commission Act” was passed in 1971. Maine was the first state in the union to remove the voters’ private property rights. It also affected those that worked or lived in the unorganized territories.
Since then, farms that grew livestock and fruits and vegetables, timber companies that raised and cut lumber for building and paper, fishing industries that harvested for local use and export became over regulated and over taxed. As a result, the majority of farms are only found on the pages of history books, paper industries gave up the expensive fight to run their mills and they sold all of their land, and fishing industries are a small percentage of what they were. All of these unfair regulations came slowly over the past 40 years from LURC and from legislators in Augusta, and of course, we all know who raised the taxes.
When things happen slowly, generations of people do not realize what had willfully and systematically happened to them and this is why research is needed to target what has gone wrong. With the present Legislature, we felt it was time to join forces with those who also wished to reverse the destruction of our working farms, timberland and fishing industry. We personally met with all county commissioners to see if they wanted back their responsibility and also to see if they were all right with giving the people their constitutional rights back.
We use the Constitution as a reference because the mandate of the U.S. and state governments are to protect the inalienable rights of all people, not just a small group of people who have an agenda or those national nongovernment organizations that lobby and control our naive Legislature.
We have placed in front of us a standard using the words of Frederic Bastiat who wrote “The Law: The Classic Blueprint for a Free Society.” He said: “See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong, then this is legal plunder.” He urgently asks readers to “abolish this law without delay, for it is evil itself.” He goes on to say “If such a law is not abolished immediately, it will spread, multiply and develop into a system.” This evil system has gone on since the onset of the LURC Act and many of those affected have labeled LURC as “The Beast.”
What is now being debated in the Legislature is no longer a constitutional rights bill that would repeal the LURC act, but now the legislators are deciding how to strengthen the existing law and to prevent any changes for another five years. This new bill will dash the hope of those who believe in private property rights.
Instead of the county commissioners’ direct ability to regulate their own counties for the people, this new stronger, more regulated LURC will have nine newly appointed board members who are beholden to no one. To add insult to injury, the same staff will maintain the same positions and they will be sent to classes and taught how to speak to those that they regulate.
The governor made a promise to Maine people that he would work to shut down LURC; where is he now? Many new legislators ran on the repeal of LURC and many incumbent legislators also knew the truth, too. Where are they now, what are they afraid of and why are all they hiding?
The committee that has given the green light to this reform bill was lobbied heavily and even those legislators who understood the need to repeal LURC have fallen in line with those who support the agenda of the national nongovernmental organizations that want to lock out jobs and industry in the unorganized territories. If this bill is not voted down, there will be less local control and less of local voices and there will be more red tape. Do not let anyone tell you differently, do not let them distract you from researching this on your own. The truth is at your fingertips.
Lastly, the final quote from Frederic Bastiat, a quote that personally drives me: “If this [information] is true, it is serious fact; and moral duty requires me to call the attention of my fellow citizens to it.”
Phil Merletti is an environmentalist and spokesperson for the research groups “Take America Back” and “Take Maine Back.” He lives in Lee.
Private ownership is a human invention, not something bestowed upon us by God, as Bastiat would have it. Government is another human invention. In Maine the democratically elected Legislature created the Land Use and Regulation Commission and “declar[ed] it to be in the public interest, for the public benefit , for the good order of the people of this State and for the benefit of the property owners and residents of the unorganized and deorganized townships of the State, to encourage the well-planned and well-managed multiple use of land and resources “. Seems like sound government to me.
Only good for the people that don’t live in or near the unorganized townships !!
That’s right, because town and city governments serve the same function for all others.
And in a just world, the counties would perform the functions for the UTs – not central command and control.
Isn’t that just precious… only the government knows what is in the publics best interest. What about the actual people that own the land….oh that’s right its only a human invention.
There is another name for that.
There is nothing wrong with private property ownership, so long as it doesn’t interefere with anyone else’s (ownership) rights, including the right to clean air, lakes, rivers and well-water.
How many other interests does the public (IE Government) have?
If it were limited to those things you mentioned I expect none of us would be having a problem.
Stop pretending that preservationist land use prohibitions are for “clean air and water”. You wouldn’t dare pull your tyrannical sophistry demanding that private property and local government across southern Maine be submissive to preservationist impositions from centralized state bureaucracy on behalf of massive Greenline park restrictions.
The principle of the rights of the individual is not an arbitrary human “invention”, as those who have suffered under regimes where they are not recognized know all too well. Our rights are a recognition of the fact that as human beings our survival requires thinking and acting on behalf of our own lives in order to live, the opposite of submission to the dictates of authority as a way of life. The purpose of government is to protect our rights, not abuse its power to trample them. We have property rights because we live in a material world, not as ghosts in the ether. Without property rights and government protection there are no rights and no freedom.
Statist government is not self-justifying and neither are collectivist slogans demanding that we surrender our rights and live for “the public interest”, i.e., the tribe. State planning of our lives denying our property rights on behalf of viro preservationists demanding control over “the environment”, i.e., their surroundings, i.e., everything — which includes other people — is radical statism, not “sound government”.
Thank-you Phil for taking the time and effort to set the record straight and to emphasize the important role our United States Constitution plays in each and every state. It is easy over time to succumb to emotions to let special interests sway legislative opinion – and in effect, enable a slow version of mob rule. The US Constitution was truly a work of the very best humans can be. It was a statement saying “there is a better way, and we are brave enough to do it.”
People easily forget at that time (1700’s) it was within the rule of law (i.e. whatever the King wished) to prevent free speech and worse, to arrest, torture, and brutally kill people who disagreed with the power du jour in this country and all over the world. Ignoring this document that changed human history for the better is done at our own peril. The Constitution is a political document: not for liberals or conservatives but FOR ALL OF US. The sooner all of us re-embrace our US Constitution and engage in civil tones with truthful statements, the better our Country and this world will be.
I yearn for the day when our legislators have the spinal fortitude to stand up the the enviroterrorist network that is destroying this state and this country.
But, alas….. I see none on the horizon.
Are “Take Maine Back” and “Take America Back” research groups? I hadn’t heard of them and wanted to learn more about them, so I did an internet search. The former appears to have no web presence and the latter looks like a conservative group with a blog that hasn’t been updated since April 2009: http://tabopenforum.blogspot.com/
What a waste of MHPC ink! It is not for the private individual that this editorial is advocating. It is for the deregulation of the state’s resources to allow corporations to reap huge profits without regard to how their actions will impact their neighbors
Pure hyperbole with no basis in fact.
You have no idea who the author is and no context to make that statement. If you knew, you would know the last thing the author is plugging for is big corporate ownership. Government ownership of industry in the history of civilization has accomplished significantly more damage (human and environmental) than any privately owned and operated enterprise could ever dream to cause.
Your hatred for “corporations” and private “profit” does not justify your demands to control us. You have no right to control everything around you that you don’t like.
As a life long policy analyst, policy builder but a complete outsider to the history you speak to looking at LURC for the first time in the context of recent bills it is clear that LURC brought thi s on itself by not advocating for and creating more opportunities for county and township involvement.
The legislation itself is biased against the counties affording municipalities with proper zoning and landuse capacity to “opt out” but not affording this same privelege to a county that has a professionla level planning enity ( I believe Hancock County, for example, alreday has that) . It is also absurd and unfair to ordinary homeowners and businesses in the UT that they have to apply to Augusta for ordinary routine permits required in the coures of ownership..a new wood shed, rebuilding the el, building a barn or garage, expanding the footprint of a local convenience store. My testimony on the LURC reform bill advocated for these changes. I am deeply sorry that it seems these changes will not be made. They are essential.
The same attitude is apparent in all the State offices who are governed by a top down “we know best” approach that never even considers rural communities in their own terms from the point of view of their own vision and their own possibiities. We all need to work to change this not only at LURC but in all the State agencies.
I was strongly opposed, though, to a version of the bill that sought to simply do away with the LURC and give those powers and functions back to couties whether or not they had professional level planning capacity and planning offices.
I share your disappointment in what appears to be the final outcome. It’s one of those compromises that gets the votes but ignores and fails to understand the underlying problem. We who live in rural Maine need to keep saying this and pointing to it every day bill by bill. We need to keep on keeping on with pushing for the fundamental changes that are needed in State Planning Office and the LURC to be more bottom up in their approach .
We who live in rural Maine will never be able to rely on the legislative process..we are too few and live lives too far from the majority to be heard via votes on the floor.
It is up to us to be our own advocates to reach beyond our own reps to the entire legsiature and to all the state agencies to make ourselves heard, respected and understood.
The oppression of a rural minority by wealthy, politically-connected preservationists influencing a legislative majority with no understanding or respect for the rights of their victims is not unique to Maine. It’s all over the country.
The Natural Resources Council of Maine, Aubudon, Maine Coast Heritage Trust and the rest of the lobbyists have money, connections and undue political influence that ordinary people can’t normally contend with. The pressure groups want the land and they don’t care what they do to people to get it. They don’t respect people and our rights because they don’t have to.
When I first moved to this island 12 years ago, that was the tone between our working waterfront,islanders descended from old families and the local conservancy. Very nasty name calling from the islanders. The conservancy just pressing on mystified and disappointed that their work wasn’t understood or appreciated.
And I think it was true back then that they weren’t taking local people into adequate account. Locals were very angry especially that the rich were taking huge chunks of land off the tax rolls with no public use, public benefit or public access. It was rough going and neither side trusted the other at first but now our conservancy serves the entire island making acquisitions that preserve traditional uses and access and which create public access. It now belongs to and serves the whole island and I believe has islanders on the Board.
None of these organizations are anti economic development or anti jobs. On many of the issues they have been active on in recent months, there were no jobs..only a false promise of jobs but there was a very real possibility not just of devastating natural resources but of public health hazards that would be with us for generations..mines, for example, emit mercury which is harmful at even tiny doses..especially to tiny people or little people awaiting birth.
They aren’t against workers and work. They are for a sensible and mindful partnership between industry and environmental protection. Look at the mill in Lincoln. There’s an example..a green company in a traditional local industry with an enthousiastic global market. The mill is side by side with a burgeoning recreation and tourist industry around a lake that was too foul for swimming when I was tiny.
Jobs and natural resouce protection are not natural enemies.
Invite those organizations into your community to meet with you & your neighbors..write to them..ask about their policies and procedures.
I have immense respect for each of the organizations you name and for the key staff people. They are all good folk to have on your team.
The Maine Coast Heritage Trust, TNC, Audubon and NRCM tried to get the Federal government to take over our land. MCHT continues to buy up land, partially using taxpayer subsides, to arrogantly tell people where they can’t live, while further creating the threat of flipping it to the Federal government to take out the rest where they couldn’t get it the first time. Audubon and NRCM are responsible for such scams as the ‘bird habit’ takings and have been opposing reforms against the tyranny of state agencies. They are not “good people”. They are arrogant power seekers who want control over the land.
MSSCV,
I have heard the anger and bitterness you so clearly express interwoven in all the issues I have taken up in recent months. I have been an activist and advocate mostly on non Maine issues for the last 12 years so I was not tuned in to the history you and so many others refer to. I do hope to learn about it though and catch up a little.
My advocacy on these Maine issues has mostly been about good government..about transparency and truth and hopefully about things that transcend party or upstate downstate.
But I also hope to become a more constructive and better informed voice on rural issues..on making sure our voices are heard and that we are supported in our local communities in building jobs and economic growth.
I hope the next time we blog together I will be better informed.
Lindsay, the history of the viro pressure groups attacking private property rights goes back for decades. It extends to the present as they try to block reform under the current administration and legislature of their abuses imposed as recently as a few years ago, like the infamous ‘bird habitat’ scam. These are not “good people”.
I don’t work form a place of judgement or condemnation or anger but I do believe that this kind of polarity can actually be a crucible for powerful change. We never get anywhere when we stay with people who share our ideology or our gripes. We only begin to get somewhere that is worth getting to when we sit down with “the despised”.
See you next time..and I will do my homework, I promise.
“Since then, farms that grew livestock and fruits and vegetables, timber companies that raised and cut lumber for building and paper, fishing industries that harvested for local use and export became over regulated and over taxed.”
Just to sort of flesh out that research you recommend, and to correct the misperception that your apparent inability to conduct such research has undoubtedly caused, LURC has exemptions for agriculture and farming. They are virtually unregulated, and LURC does not tax anyone or anything. LURC has nothing to do with fishing regulations – that’s IF&W territory. Timber harvesting is also virtually unregulated except in sensitive high-altitude areas.
This article is hogwash.
Your misrepresentation of the article is hogwash. Get your hands out of other people’s lives and you won’t have to worry about it.
Really? What are these draconian regulations on farming and fishing that LURC so arbitrarily and heavy-handedly imposes on the UT? There is not one word about fishing in the entirety of LURC regulation. If the author can’t even represent the right group of “oppressed UT-ers” affected by LURC, how much validity does that imply for his argument?
The author did not say that LURC is the only state agency oppressing people and it obviously is not. That was your invention to smear an author who rejects your agenda. The revolt against the trend in viro statism and the mentality behind it is against all of the viro agencies, with LURC especially a problem for people in the UT. That does not mean that LURC is responsible for all of it.