Letters to the editor, Sept. 21

Public hearing on due process to be held in Saco

To the editor,

The citizens of Saco require an update on the Citizens’ Grievance Petition submitted on Friday, Aug. 11, to the City Clerk’s office.

Thanks to the advocacy by many residents, 172 registered Saco voters signed the petition to formalize their concerns regarding serious due process issues with the planning board’s May-June 2023 review steps, deliberations, and voting procedures related to the über-sized and incompatible development proposal, “Lincoln Village,” at 321 Lincoln St.

Citizens should mark their calendars: after much delay and inaction by cty officials, the l special Grievance Petition Public Hearing has been scheduled for Tuesday, Sept. 26, at 6:30 p.m. at Saco City Hall.

That evening, the hearing will be held before the full city council with the mayor aschair of the proceedings. All Saco residents, regardless of whether they signed the petition or not, will have the opportunity to listen and watch this unprecedented public hearing, and speak at the podium to voice their opinions and concerns about the planning board’s process regarding Lincoln Villagethat did not comply with our own city ordinances on several counts. Live streaming of the hearing will be on the city’s Facebook page.

While city officials dragged their feet on the scheduling of the special hearing, the city clerk had worked quickly and efficiently to verify the needed 50 signatures minimum to authorize the Grievance Hearing; signatures were submitted on Aug. 11 and the clerk finished her verification on Aug. 16.

Please attend the public hearing on Sept. 26 at 6:30 p.m.

Inga Sandvoss Browne
Saco

Lincoln Village final subdivision review should not be going forward

To the editor,

On Sept. 5, the Planning Board voted that Lincoln Village’s, 321 Lincoln St. Final Subdivision Application Checklist was complete.

As I personally believe in trust, but to verify with one’s own due diligence of checks and balances prior to making an informed decision, I disagree with the Planning Board’s Complete Application findings. As stated in the two-page checklist, “The final plan shall contain the following” upon which staff entered a Status ‘Checked and/or comment” and “Items Required from Preliminary Subdivision Review to be submitted before Final Subdivision
Review — all with a Staff checked status.

Upon my detailed review of each and every listed requirement (checked or not), I personally found this application is incomplete.

Planning Board discussion ensued.

I agree with Mr. Biggs questioning the Preliminary Review outstanding items. This meeting should not have been scheduled as some of the Required Preliminary items were not submitted before Final Subdivision Review.

I also agree that Mr. Grossman is correct that the Preliminary Review (6/20) failed in a 3-3 tie vote on two instances; therefore, this Final Subdivision Review checklist application or a Final Subdivision Review should not be going forward.

I do appreciate Mr. DiCianni for mentioning the TMP (MDOT) for the record.

Ignoring, circumventing, violating, and/or breaking State and/or Saco laws (ordinances) needs to stop. Staff is tentatively preparing to schedule the Final Public Hearing for Thursday, Oct. 5.

Sign In: