Cape Elizabeth Land Trust

Land Trust Offers Perspective on Comprehensive Plan

The Cape Elizabeth Comprehensive Planning process began in December 2005 with a statistically significant town wide survey of residents. In that survey the Town of Cape Elizabeth sought to inform its decision-making process on important land use and municipal service policies to be addressed by the Comprehensive Plan.

With resounding clarity, the survey confirmed the importance of the natural environment to Cape residents. Specifically, the survey showed that fully 94% of residents listed the "natural environment" as an important benefit of living in Cape Elizabeth. Of those surveyed, 83% valued "protecting and preserving wetlands, ponds and wooded areas," while four out of five residents also valued "preserving the town's rural character" and "protecting farmland." By comparison, only 20% valued "attracting new commercial development."

Several sections of the Comprehensive Plan address these important community values. Unfortunately the recommended implementation steps to affirm these goals lack the teeth needed to assure their success.

Specifically, the Cape Elizabeth Land Trust (CELT) has identified the following issues and have provided related recommendations to re-dress current shortcomings in the Plan:

Issue 1. Comp Plan Goal # 1, implementation Step 48 calls for the "Purchase of land or conservation easements when there is an opportunity to preserve unique or significant open space, especially where it can be added to the Greenbelt Trail System". While this step specifies that the town should "purchase land or conservation easements," there is no funding mechanism available to affect such purchases. We understand that the residents of the Town of Cape Elizabeth generally wish to maintain the existing tax rate. However, there has been no specific determination of whether or not community residents would support a land bond to fund the purchase of important parcels or if such purchase would negatively affect the tax rate over the long-term. So that the Town will be in a position to make strategic purchases when opportunities present themselves we suggest adding an implementation step:

"Evaluate various funding methodologies - including an assessment of the viability and feasibility of a public land bond and its effect on the tax rate - to assure permanent protection of the unique land parcels in town that define the town's rural, community character."

Issue 2. Within the next five years, we anticipate many of our treasured land parcels - many of which we take for granted as permanent open space - will present themselves for sale. In fact, much of the present look and feel of the town derives from parcels that are unprotected. To assure that funding will be available when unique parcels of land present themselves for purchase or conservation easement, we recommend the following implementation step:

"Secure long-term financing via land bond, budget set asides or other proactive methods so that the Town is prepared to purchase land or conservation easements as strategic parcels and preservation opportunities are presented to the Council."

Issue 3. Discussions with the Town Manager and with Town Council relating to these recommendations have reflected a historical willingness by the Town to utilize all of the tools available to secure the acquisition of strategic land parcels. Yet, the current draft of the Plan lacks a specific commitment to use these tools in the future. To remedy this short-coming, CELT has asked that the preamble to the Recreation and Open Space section of the plan be amended by adding one sentence as follows:

From the preamble: "The open spaces and physical beauty of Cape Elizabeth are a major reason residents choose to live here (See Comprehensive Plan telephone survey). The Town has a long history of land conservation and an impressive record of funding the purchase of land for open space preservation and recreation. The Town maintains a Land Acquisition Fund and has supplemented this fund with bonding to purchase or partner to purchase land and easements. In 1985, the Town's efforts were supplemented with the establishment of the Cape Elizabeth Land Trust, which has partnered with the Town numerous times to preserve open space. The Town plans to continue to use this multifaceted approach to preserve unique or significant open space land parcels in Cape Elizabeth."

Issue 4. Implementation step 46 under Fiscal Capacity Goals recommends that the Town "Expand the tax base with appropriate businesses that are compatible with community character."

The presumption of step 46 is that by adding more commercial activity, the tax base will be enhanced relative to expenditures needed to support commercial entities in Town. Prior to implementing this step, CELT suggests the addition of another implementation step,

"Commission a study of the total cost of both commercial and residential development to determine their impact on the tax base as compared to the impact of preserving land permanently. Begin by evaluating the conclusions of local communities that have commissioned similar studies and build upon their analyses."

During Council discussions of this matter, Town Manager Michael McGovern offered his perspective on the relative cost of commercial and residential development. In effect, Mr. McGovern said, "Residential development is a net cost to the Town (meaning expenditures exceed tax receipts), while commercial development, as we envision it, is (economically) neutral to the Town."

What Mr. McGovern did not address is the cost (or benefit) to the Town of strategic land preservation. Discussions among some councilors seemed to indicate a general perception that land preservation is a net cost to the Town. In fact, just the opposite may be true - investments in strategic land preservation may actually produce a net economic benefit to the Town in the form of reduced, or at least stabilized, municipal expenditures and enhanced land values of adjacent, tax-generating parcels of land. Short of borrowing from studies conducted by other local communities (an approach that CELT would endorse), the only way to determine the relative benefit of land preservation as compared to residential or commercial development is to commission a study along the lines proposed above.