“Portland councilor wants to reconsider vote rejecting Munjoy Hill Historic District” (Feb. 18):

The watchword of this new presidential administration is not “equality” but “equity.” On the local level, let’s see what equity would look like if Munjoy Hill becomes a historic district.

This story is about four homeowners. Three of them are affluent; the fourth is hardworking, with a mortgage and tenants. The first three homeowners have no mortgage and can easily pay for maintenance and the surcharge that comes with being in a historic district. The fourth homeowner is challenged monthly with a mortgage payment, cost of upkeep and the surcharge of living in the district. His tenants are equally challenged by paying premium rent.

Now if we are striving for equity, the first three homeowners would be required to equalize the inequity among all of the homeowners by subsidizing the fourth homeowner (which would be a form of socialism, but I digress). What will happen is that as property values and taxes go up in a historic district, the three affluent homeowners will have no problem meeting costs and, in fact, may benefit from increasing home values, but the fourth homeowner may have to give up his home, as will his tenants. It will be purchased by another affluent buyer, further ensuring inequity.

What we should be striving for is equality on Munjoy Hill, one of the most sought-after and people-friendly locations in the country. The proposed historic district on Munjoy Hill should be soundly rejected in favor of social, cultural and economic diversity.

Anne Manganello
Portland