To the Editor:
I read JT Leonard’s article regarding concerns I have raised about the proposed train layover facility to be built in the Brunswick West neighborhood (“Gerzofsky says residents ‘abused’,” April 3, Page A1). I believe it is necessary to clarify my position on a few points to ensure my constituents are clear on where I stand:
First, I strongly support the Amtrak Downeaster’s expansion to Brunswick. I have lobbied for the expansion since 2000, and believe strongly that expanded passenger rail service benefits the area economically.
Second, I believe a layover facility should be built in Brunswick, but I do not believe this industrial-use facility is appropriate for a residential neighborhood. Brunswick residents proposed multiple viable alternatives in an effort to work with the stakeholders on this. These locations are more commercial and industrial in nature, and are more appropriate for a layover facility.
I was asked by my constituents to give them a voice, not an outcome. Because of that, there is going to now be a more thorough process of addressing environmental concerns, including air quality and noise.
I am disappointed that the Northern New England Passenger Rail Authority has chosen to attack the messenger rather than address the legitimate concerns of Brunswick residents. I urge them to reconsider their decision, and hope that we can all work together in a productive manner in our future endeavors.
The people who live in Brunswick and its neighboring communities deserve nothing less.
Sen. Stan Gerzofsky
Brunswick
Comments are not available on this story. Read more about why we allow commenting on some stories and not on others.
We believe it's important to offer commenting on certain stories as a benefit to our readers. At its best, our comments sections can be a productive platform for readers to engage with our journalism, offer thoughts on coverage and issues, and drive conversation in a respectful, solutions-based way. It's a form of open discourse that can be useful to our community, public officials, journalists and others.
We do not enable comments on everything — exceptions include most crime stories, and coverage involving personal tragedy or sensitive issues that invite personal attacks instead of thoughtful discussion.
You can read more here about our commenting policy and terms of use. More information is also found on our FAQs.
Show less