AUBURN — It was clear following a legislative public hearing this week that Mayor Jason Levesque was unhappy.
Jason Levesque
He was surprised by testimony delivered by Lewiston officials, particularly Mayor Carl Sheline, that questioned legislation that would eliminate a long-held building restriction in Auburn’s agricultural zone.
Levesque’s view is it will increase housing options in a region that desperately needs them.
“Stay on your side of the river, last I heard you had your own set of problems that need your attention,” Levesque said at the end of a lengthy Facebook post.
Carl Sheline
During his testimony Monday on LD 1884, Sheline argued that the bill would lead to more development in the Lake Auburn watershed, potentially impacting water quality at the lake and possibly forcing the cities to build an expensive treatment plant.
Levesque’s public response to Sheline and Lewiston officials underscores years of friction between the two cities over costs associated with the lake, which is the drinking water source for both cities. And at home in Auburn, Levesque is already amid a heated process to update zoning standards that, Levesque contends, will encourage new housing for low- and moderate-income families.
The uproar over the legislation has brought those two fronts together.
Auburn officials hosted an informational meeting Wednesday night on proposed updates to watershed protections, including a new septic design standard. The meeting agenda also included discussion on LD 1884, as well as the recent recommendations from a state commission on housing that urged municipalities to revisit zoning laws.
Sheline told the Sun Journal on Wednesday that he and city staff are only concerned for the well-being of the lake, which utilizes a filtration waiver that keeps the two cities from having to build the costly filtration plant. He also disagrees that the bill could help in the effort to make housing more affordable for the majority of people.
“Lake Auburn provides the drinking water for both cities and as the mayor of Lewiston, I think it’s entirely reasonable and appropriate to respond to proposed state legislation that affects the lake and the surrounding watershed,” he said. “And judging from the testimony from Monday’s hearing, a majority of Auburn residents are concerned about the future of Lake Auburn, too.”
Sheline added that Auburn’s push for LD 1884 and new septic standards “point to an overriding focus of development for Lake Auburn. I think these efforts are misguided and the concern for water quality should be paramount.”
Levesque has argued that legislation aside, Auburn is conducting a transparent process to update archaic rules surrounding the watershed and the agricultural zone. He said while new septic standards may result in a small number of new homes being built, the overall result will be a healthier lake.
He touched on the water rate debate in his Facebook post Tuesday, stating, “You see every taxpayer in Auburn has been paying more in taxes (and rent) and on our water bills to subsidize Lewiston’s low rates.”
Last year, the back and forth over water rates continued with a formal complaint made to the Maine Public Utilities Commission. In the complaint, Auburn ratepayers said it’s unfair that the cities split the costs 50/50 while Lewiston uses roughly 60% of the water.
Regarding the agricultural zone legislation, the bill would make it illegal for municipalities to use income requirements as a condition for home construction — requirements Auburn has used in its agricultural zone since the 1960s. At the public hearing on Monday, several people argued that the income standard has been useful in limiting development to the urban core of the city, where there are services. New development in the rural areas would be costly and likely unaffordable, Sheline said.
But Levesque says they’re not seeing the entire picture, and that he’s been painted a villain by a small group of people for questioning a land use policy that he believes is discriminatory. The rule stipulates that in order to build a home in the zone, an individual must earn at least 30% of their income from agriculture.
In his Facebook post referring to LD 1884, Levesque said Sheline “seemingly thinks discrimination is OK as long as Lewiston doesn’t have to pay more for water.”
In response, Sheline said Wednesday, “Proponents of LD 1884 use highly charged language to describe their lofty goals for this bill when in reality this will likely result in development that will be anything but affordable.”
Levesque said Wednesday that Auburn and the region need more “attainable” housing options in the city. He said he doesn’t want to see the entire agricultural zone developed into single-family homes on big parcels.
“That’s the worst planning model in the world,” he said. “But they are preventing any meaningful dialogue or compromise on solutions that could better the city.”
The bill will soon see a work session in Augusta, after which the Labor and Housing Committee will make a recommendation.
In Auburn, the zoning discussions continue to play out between the Planning Board and City Council.
Comments are not available on this story.
Send questions/comments to the editors.
