More than 70% of Harpswell voters backed a new Comprehensive Plan in a town referendum on Tuesday, Nov. 4. The count was 1,872 to 747.
The vote to adopt the plan follows four years of work by a town task force to develop it and win support from residents skeptical about recommendations to encourage affordable housing, among other issues. The task force removed its most ambitious recommendations for housing after encountering pushback at public hearings.
A Comprehensive Plan is a long-range plan for the future of a community. It collects data about the town and contains advice for town officials but does not have the force of law.
The Harpswell Select Board approved the creation of the task force in October 2021. The plan is Harpswell’s sixth and its first update in 20 years.
Voters also approved three town referendum questions that received less attention. Those votes clear the way for the town to accept funds for improvements to Trufant-Summerton Athletic Field, which may include a new playground; upgrade emergency communications infrastructure on Great Island; and install a dry hydrant on Bethel Point Road. They passed 2,427 to 292; 2,410 to 293; and 2,492 to 197, respectively.
On the state ballot, Harpswell voters weighed in on two citizen’s initiatives. Residents opposed Question 1, 1,933 to 819; and supported Question 2, 2,000 to 738.
Question 1 proposed to require photo ID at the polls and tighten rules for absentee voting. Maine voters rejected those changes.
Question 2 proposed a “red flag” law to restrict access to firearms when a court deems the owner a danger to themselves or others. Maine already has a “yellow flag” law, but the new law will allow family members to directly petition a court for a protection order.
Maine voters passed Question 2.
J.W. Oliver is the editor of the Harpswell Anchor. A former editor and reporter at The Lincoln County News, he was the Maine Press Association’s Journalist of the Year for 2017-18.
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