I’m voting NO on Question 3, because I’m for workforce housing in Rockport. Not just because the $51,891,708 bond will cost my business more annually.  Not just because I want our leaders to work with our neighbors. And not just because I’m bothered by the false implication that it would clean the harbor (when question 3 means no change to collection, just direction of flow).

I’m voting No because the development Question 3 encourages would change the character of our community and would result in less workforce housing.

I have been involved with efforts to foster workforce housing and will continue to pursue those ends. However, I am not optimistic inside Rockport. 

I don’t think coastal communities with great schools, good access to healthcare, and abundant natural beauty tend to become more affordable. As in southern New England, towns like ours tend to add infrastructure and thus cost, pushing workers inland. This is the future that I see envisioned for Rockport by our town government, though that vision has not been made transparent to the citizens.

Development (as on Route 90) will not lead to lower taxes and developers will tend to cater (naturally) to the highest value use. If we construct our stand-alone waste facility, we will increase monthly fees and existing housing is likely to turn over to a commercial strip. Effectively we will be pushing the affordable line further out, while making a slower commute for the workforce that lives in Warren, Waldoboro, South Hope, Union, and Washington.

The Town has not adequately done the municipal planning and communication of the growth it is promoting. To do so would require our long delayed Comprehensive Plan to be completed.

Rushing through our largest bond ever without good planning and without collaboration with Camden (and Rockland!) is unfair to our citizens and it is wasteful. I hope others will join me in voting No on 3.

Sam Temple lives in Rockport