We sympathize with the Sherman Marsh property owners who are resisting the Maine Department of Transportation’s efforts to purchase – by eminent domain if necessary – conservation easements on parts of their land.
Some of these property owners blame the DOT for the failure of the dam in 2005 and the resulting transformation of their lakefront property into marshfront property.
Marshes are great, but when you buy property on a lake, you probably want to live on a lake, not on a marsh.
For the DOT to come back and tell these property owners they have to sell easements on their land or they will take them adds insult to injury for those who hold the DOT responsible for the loss of the lake.
There are other issues about this project that concern us.
The purpose of the project strikes us as too abstract to justify the use of – or threat to use – eminent domain. The government should reserve this tool for the most direct and pressing needs.
The conservation of a salt marsh to satisfy federal regulations and make up for adverse effects on wetlands elsewhere in the region does not, in our opinion, qualify as a direct and pressing need.
With all the private and public conservation projects we report on, it seems hard to believe the state cannot find another wetland where property owners would welcome its conservation.
The lack of transparency from the collection of bureaucrats who make up the “interagency review team,” which is refusing to attend a public meeting to field questions from property owners, also disturbs us.
The members of the team are public employees doing the public’s work with the public’s money. It is perfectly reasonable to expect the members of this team to answer questions in a public meeting.
It does not sound as if the DOT has any intention of reconsidering the project, although Newcastle town officials are doing an admirable job of supporting the property owners.
We do hope the DOT will continue to work toward compromise with the property owners.
The DOT has shown a commendable willingness to compromise and reach mutually beneficial solutions in the past, such as with the South Bristol bridge project.
If the Sherman Marsh project must go on, we hope the department can work with property owners to satisfy all reasonable concerns and fairly compensate them for the loss of their property rights.
