Brownfield resident Jamie Riel speaks out at annual town meeting June 15 against a proposed short-term rental ordinance proposal as planning board chair Sonia Frye (left) listens. (DAYMOND STEER PHOTO)
Brownfield resident Jamie Riel speaks out at annual town meeting June 15 against a proposed short-term rental ordinance proposal as planning board chair Sonia Frye (left) listens. (DAYMOND STEER PHOTO)
BROWNFIELD, Maine — Voters at the June 14 town meeting ballot box rejected a proposed ordinance aimed at regulating short-term rentals.
The vote took place at Brownfield Community Center starting at around 7 p.m. The short-term rental article was No. 64, but residents voted to have the article dealt with first.
At least the voters in our neighboring town of Brownfield recognized that seeking to ban or unreasonably regulate STRs was a “solution looking for a problem”. Kudos.
At issue, of course, is the anti-STR mindset that if the voters vote against them, then they just need to return to the issue again, and again, and again until bans or overly zealous regulations finally are approved. To hell with the winning (opposing) vote..AND THE COURTS..…Let’s just continue wasting time and taxpayer funds until we prevail.
What I am saying is that the will of the voters does not matter with the anti-STR group..…unless it supports their willfully blind misinterpretation of the issue.
Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd,
racist or sexually-oriented language. PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK. Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another
person will not be tolerated. Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone
or anything. Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism
that is degrading to another person. Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on
each comment to let us know of abusive posts. Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness
accounts, the history behind an article.
(1) comment
At least the voters in our neighboring town of Brownfield recognized that seeking to ban or unreasonably regulate STRs was a “solution looking for a problem”. Kudos.
At issue, of course, is the anti-STR mindset that if the voters vote against them, then they just need to return to the issue again, and again, and again until bans or overly zealous regulations finally are approved. To hell with the winning (opposing) vote..AND THE COURTS..…Let’s just continue wasting time and taxpayer funds until we prevail.
What I am saying is that the will of the voters does not matter with the anti-STR group..…unless it supports their willfully blind misinterpretation of the issue.
Welcome to the discussion.
Log In
Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.