I was very disappointed that the Press Herald is supporting No on 2, that it called the Soul of Portland “off-base” and said it has “spun a false narrative” (“Our Position,” Oct. 27), since nothing is further from the truth.
To suggest that supporters of local Question 2 are selfish in their desire to preserve a magnificent public view and ensure responsible future development is ridiculous. Developers’ and city councilors’ positions are far more suspect: They desire free rein to develop property for major profit in a manner that obstructs public views but maintains them for the select few.
The coveted “open process” that doesn’t allow a small group to outweigh the city’s needs as a whole wasn’t in evidence when developers were, indeed, given a “blank check.” Zone changes were approved in the absence of even a basic plan for the proposed project.
Decisions at Tuesday’s Planning Board meeting (recommending that the developers be allowed to raze the Portland Co.’s Building 1) were essentially made to meet the needs of the developers themselves and surely were not made with historic preservation in mind. The way in which the Maine Historic Preservation Commission representative was treated was disgraceful.
As a lifelong resident of Munjoy Hill, I recall when “The Hill” was a questionable place to reside. However, my husband and I chose to remain and raise our children in this community because we knew those who held that opinion were misinformed.
It seems the misinformation continues today. Munjoy Hill is not yet a gentrified bastion of the wealthy. It remains a neighborhood of working-class families, some of whom have been here for generations.
We love our city and understand the asset Munjoy Hill is to Portland’s overall appeal. I want to protect that for all residents, visitors and future generations by voting YES on 2.
Send questions/comments to the editors.
