September 21, 2017
Contributors Latest News | Poll Questions | Opioid Epidemic | Hurricane Jose | Stephen King

Comments for: LURC reform: unorganized territories have right to self-determination

Guidelines for posting on bangordailynews.com

The Bangor Daily News and the Bangor Publishing Co. encourage comments about stories, but you must follow our terms of service.

  1. Keep it civil and stay on topic
  2. No vulgarity, racial slurs, name-calling or personal attacks.
  3. People who harass others or joke about tragedies will be blocked.
The primary rule here is pretty simple: Treat others with the same respect you'd want for yourself. Here are some guidelines (see more):

  • Anonymous

    The reactionary viros are doing everything they can to block reform of LURC, DEP and other centers of raw power imposing social controls on landowners.  The controversy they have manufactured over reform of LURC has openly revealed their hostility to self-government, local accountability and property rights.  These are fundamental concepts of a free society that we aren’t supposed to have to debate in this country.  The hostile obstruction and attacks on them by the viro pressure groups exercising undue influence over state government shows how badly reform is needed in both government and education.  The BDN editorial denouncing local self-government in the UT as “pandering to voters” should be an embarrassment to journalists everywhere.

    • Anonymous

      The BDN would excel as a tabloid newspaper in the UK.

      Here, it won’t even start a good fire.

  • Anonymous

    Somerset County can’t even run the Rockwood dump by themselves. If you really feel that the residents of the unorganized territory should be in charge of their own destiny let them elect their own representatives to the Commission.

    • Guest

      They can do a far better job than LURC

      • Anonymous

        I am not convinced that the counties have the best interests of the UT residents at heart either.

        • Guest

          A lot more than LURC

        • Anonymous

          “The counties” in this context means self-government accountable to the local voters.  You don’t get to decide what you claim is “the best interest” of someone else and bureaucratically impose it, not in a free society.

      • Anonymous

        And you base this on some specific example, right?

        • Guest

          We know the land, we arent controlled by the Nature Conservancy and most of all we have the will of the people that are taking real action against LURC and “any” politician that supports them…!

    • Anonymous

      They do now with the new charter, as a matter of fact they elect two now!  Dumphy is no longer your guy, you can thank god for that, now he sits on LERC God help us

  • Anonymous

    Well stated Sen. Whittemore.

     Every other community in our state has the power of LOCAL control through their LOCAL planning board.
     Appointed LOCALLY.
     Meeting LOCALLY.
     Deciding and administering LOCALLY.
     Living LOCALLY.

     It’s time for the counties with UTs in them to oversee these planning operations.

    • Anonymous

      County government in Maine has NO experience in land use issues.
      They have NO staff.
      There is TREMENDOUS potential for conflict of interest.
      Breakinig up LURC to seven county-level boards would create chaos, with seven different sets of rules.
      The UT towns do not have enough population to govern locally – that’s why they’re “unorganized”. County government in Maine is not set up to tend to the local needs of tiny towns over 100 miles from the county seat. The only thing that makes sense is to administer zoning and environmental issues at the state level, ensuring a uniform set of rules and policies. The counties can NOT handle it, and can NOT afford it.

      • Anonymous

        You’re grasping at straws.

        County government in Maine, as elected representatives, will not bow down to the environmental industry the way LURC has.
        Isn’t this what you really mean?

        Staff would probably be people that volunteer,same as the LOCAL planning board.

        We know perfectly well what conflict of intrest is after watching the environmental industry hijack and control LURC in order to steamroll the UTs with their wilderness agenda.

        No more chaos than the nearly 500 LOCAL planning boards in the state.

        Someone must be there, or there wouldn’t be any reason for oversight.

        • Guest

          LURC must go…!

        • Anonymous

          Do you mean bow down to the environmentalists in the way they approved the wind farm projects? Or in the way they approved the Plum Creek development?

          So you think you’re going to get volunteers to drive 100 miles one way out dirt roads to inspect stuff? Have you noticed how much gas costts these days?

          LURC is reviled by both the environmental extremists and by anti-government extremists like yourself. To me, that indicates they are steering as close to the middle of the road as they can on some very controversial issues.

          If local communities want out of LURC, they have always had the option to organise as a regular town, and do their own planning and zoning. But that costs money, and that means taxes. Without enough people to support local rule, the state has to run the show.

          • Anonymous

            Smearing people as “anti-government extremists” is not an argument against anything.  This country was founded on the principles of individual rights, self-government and accountability of government to the people.  The solution to unaccountable, centralized bureaucracy trampling people’s property rights and suppressing the economy is not another form of centralized bureaucracy in the name of some contrivance claimed to be an undefined “middle”.  “Moderate” statism is statism.  Anti-statism is not “anti-government”.  Upholding principles of individual rights is not “extremism”.  You use “the middle” and “extremism” as floating abstractions rationalizing whatever unprincipled mishmash you want while you smear those who reject your statism as “extremists” with no regard to the meaning of the concept.

        • Anonymous

          Viro activist Earthling3 is making up excuses all right, but he isn’t grasping at straws, he’s grasping for power.  Every dictator and colonial ruler has rationalized his power and his refusal to relinquish it the same way — the subjects are too ignorant and stupid to make their own decisions in their own lives, centralized planning and control are claimed to be more “efficient” (for what and by what standard?), a free society means “chaos”, citizens have a conflict of interest because they don’t voluntarily serve the “higher” ends of the State, etc.  These reactionary viros opposing reform are echoing the slogans of 1930s fascism and socialism — which is what they want to impose in the form of wilderness eco-socialism exploiting the raw power of government force.  They are a direct physical threat to all of us.

      • Guest

        “County government in Maine has NO experience in land use issues” They know a lot more than the past bunch of treehuggen liberal wack-jobs from away….

        • Anonymous

          Please enlighten me as to how zero experience is more than 40 years of experience. Also, I’d be curious to know about their understanding of things like shoreland zoning requirements and the Natural Resources Protection Act. And I’m sure they are all up on identifying wetlands and wildlife habitat, right?

          • Guest

            For years we have had many from away tell us what is best,,,,, thats over, get use to it..!

    • Guest

      Amen

  • Guest

    The two greatest threats to the Northern Woods- LURC & Quimby

    • Anonymous

      They represent, respectively, Greenline land use prohibitions under state authority and Federal acquisition and control.

You may also like